Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 1545-1548 [E6-95]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2006 / Notices
development through collaborative
research opportunities with the
inventors.
A Knockout Mouse for Transcription
Factor Nurr1
Dr. Vera Nikodem (NIDDK)
HHS Reference No. E–024–1999/0—
Research Tool
Licensing Contact: Marlene ShinnAstor; 301/435–4426;
shinnm@mail.nih.gov
Transcriptional factor Nurr1 is an
obligatory factor for neurotransmitter
dopamine biosynthesis only in ventral
midbrain as demonstrated by the Nurr1
genomic locus inactivation using
homologous recombination.
From a neurological and clinical
perspective, it suggests an entirely new
mechanism for dopamine depletion in a
region where dopamine is known to be
involved in Parkinson’s disease.
Clinically, our findings indicate that
activation of Nurr1 may be
therapeutically useful for Parkinson’s
disease patients; therefore, the mice
would be useful in Parkinson’s disease
research.
Dated: January 3, 2006.
Steven M. Ferguson,
Director, Division of Technology Development
and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer,
National Institutes of Health.
[FR Doc. E6–86 Filed 1–9–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health
Prospective Grant of Exclusive
License: Anthrax Lethal Factor Is a
MAPK Kinase Protease
National Institutes of Health,
Public Health Service, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This is notice, in accordance
with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR
404.7(a)(1)(i), that the National
Institutes of Health (NIH), Department
of Health and Human Services, is
contemplating the grant of an exclusive
license to practice the inventions
embodied in U.S. Patent Nos. 6,485,925
B1, issued November 26, 2002,
6,893,835 B2, issued May 17, 2005, and
6,911,203 B1, issued June 28, 2005, and
U.S. Patent App. No. 11/112,137, filed
April 22, 2005 and published on
September 8, 2005 as U.S. Pat. Pub. No.
2005/0196822 A1, all titled ‘‘Lethal
Factor is a MAPK Kinase Protease’’
(HHS Ref. Nos. E–066–1998/0–US–06,
–07, –08, and –10) to Van Andel
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:09 Jan 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
Research Institute, of Grand Rapids,
Michigan. The patent rights in these
inventions have been assigned to the
Government of the United States.
The prospective exclusive license
territory will be worldwide. The field of
use may be limited to the development
and sale of Anthrax lethal factor, a
MAPK kinase protease, as a therapeutic
agent for the treatment of cancer.
DATES: Only license applications which
are received by the National Institutes of
Health on or before March 13, 2006 will
be considered.
ADDRESSES: Requests for information,
inquiries, comments, and other
materials relating to the contemplated
co-exclusive license should be directed
to: Thomas P. Clouse, Office of
Technology Transfer, National Institutes
of Health, 6011 Executive Boulevard,
Suite 325, Rockville, MD 20852–3804;
Telephone: 301–435–4076; Facsimile:
301–402–0220; E-mail:
clouset@mail.nih.gov. Copies of the U.S.
patent publications can be obtained
from https://www.uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
above-identified patents relates to the
discovery that Mitogen Activated
Protein Kinase (MAPK) signal
transduction pathway is an
evolutionarily conserved pathway for
effecting gene regulation that controls
cell proliferation and differentiation in
response to extracellular signals and
also plays a crucial role in regulating
oocyte meiotic maturation. The aboveidentified patent discloses in vitro and
in vivo methods of screening for
modulators, homologues, and mimetics
of LF mitogen activated protein kinase
kinase (MAPKK) protease activity. Mos
(i.e., an oncogene first identified as the
transforming determinant of Moloney
Murine Sarcoma Virus) is a serine/
threonine kinase which phosphorylates
and activates MAPK1 kinase which in
turn phosphorylates and activates
MAPK. The patent also discloses that LF
prevents activation of MAPK in oocytes
of Xenopus laevis and tumor derived
NIH3T3 (490) cells expressing an
effector domain mutant form of the
human V12HaRas oncogene. The tumor
derived NIH3T3 cells reverted to a more
normal morphology after LF treatment.
Therefore, LF directly inhibits the Mos/
MAPK pathway. Tumor cells utilize
MAPK kinases in a different way than
normal cells as in tumor cells there is
a constitutive MAPK kinase activity.
Additionally, MAPKK1 was found to be
a proteolytic substrate for the
metalloprotease LF. By analysis of
MAPKK2, a consensus sequence for LF
activity was found. The disclosure is
claimed in the above-identified patent
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1545
and other patents in the same patent
family.
The prospective exclusive license will
be royalty-bearing and will comply with
the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C.
209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective
exclusive license may be granted unless
within sixty (60) days from the date of
this published notice, the NIH receives
written evidence and argument that
establish that the grant of the license
would not be consistent with the
requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37
CFR 404.7.
Applications for a license in the field
of use filed in response to this notice
will be treated as objections to the grant
of the contemplated exclusive license.
Comments and objections submitted to
this notice will not be made available
for public inspection and, to the extent
permitted by law, will not be released
under the Freedom of Information Act,
5 U.S.C. 552.
Dated: January 3, 2006.
Steven M. Ferguson,
Director, Division of Technology Development
and Transfer, Office of Technology Transfer,
National Institutes of Health.
[FR Doc. E6–89 Filed 1–9–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
In compliance with Section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 concerning
opportunity for public comment on
proposed collections of information, the
Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration will publish
periodic summaries of proposed
projects. To request more information
on the proposed projects or to obtain a
copy of the information collection
plans, call the SAMHSA Reports
Clearance Officer on (240) 276–1243.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collections of information
are necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection
of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
1546
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2006 / Notices
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Proposed Project: Strategic Prevention
Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF
SIG) Program—NEW
The Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration’s
(SAMHSA) Center for Substance Abuse
Prevention (CSAP) is responsible for the
Evaluation of the Strategic Prevention
Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF
SIG) Program. The program is a major
national initiative designed to: (1)
Prevent the onset and reduce the
progression of substance abuse,
including childhood and underage
drinking; (2) reduce substance abuserelated problems in communities; and,
(3) build prevention capacity and
infrastructure at the State/territory and
community levels.
Five steps comprise the SPF:
• Step 1: Profile population needs,
resources, and readiness to address
needs and gaps.
• Step 2: Mobilize and/or build
capacity to address needs.
• Step 3: Develop a comprehensive
strategic plan.
• Step 4: Implement evidence-based
prevention programs, policies, and
practices.
• Step 5: Monitor, evaluate, sustain,
and improve or replace those that fail.
Under a contract with CSAP, an
evaluation team will implement a multimethod quasi-experimental evaluation
at national, State, and community
levels. Evaluation data will be collected
from 26 states receiving grants in 2004
and 2005 and as many as 32 non-grantee
states that will serve as a comparison
group. The primary evaluation objective
is to determine the impact of SPF SIG
on the SAMHSA National Outcome
Measures (NOMs).
This notice invites comment on statelevel and community-level data
collection instruments. The instruments
for assessing state-level change will be
included in an OMB review package
submitted immediately after the
expiration of the comment period and
are the main focus of this
announcement. These instruments will
be reviewed first by OMB to ensure that
state-level data collection occurs as
specified in the evaluation plan (on or
before June 30, 2006). Because the states
have not awarded community-level
funding, the evaluators will not initiate
community-level data collection until
late in 2006. Thus, the community-level
survey will be submitted as an
addendum approximately one month
after the comment period expires.
However, the instrument is described in
this notice and comments on the
instrument are invited.
State-Level Data Collection
Two instruments were developed for
assessing state-level effects. Both
instruments are guides for telephone
interviews that will be conducted by
trained interviewers three to four times
over the life of the SPF SIG award. The
Strategic Prevention Framework Index
will be used to assess the relationship
between SPF implementation and
change in the national outcome
measures. The State Infrastructure
Index will capture data to assess
infrastructure change and to test the
relationship of this change to outcomes.
Prevention infrastructure refers to the
organizational features of the system
that delivers prevention services,
including all procedures related to
planning, data management systems,
workforce development, intervention
implementation, evaluation and
monitoring, financial management, and
sustainability. The estimated annual
burden for state-level data collection is
displayed below in the table.
STATE LEVEL BURDEN ESTIMATE
Interview guide
Number of respondents
Content description
Number of responses
Hourly burden
per response
Total hourly
burden
Year 1
SPF Implementation Index ...............
26
1
3
78
State Infrastructure Index .................
SEW activities, indicators for each
SPF step, including cultural competence throughout all five steps.
Assessment of a state’s progress
over time toward the implementation of these best practices.
26
1
6
156
Total State Level Year 1 Burden
...........................................................
........................
2
9
234
Year 2
SPF Implementation Index ...............
26
1
3
78
State Infrastructure Index .................
SEW activities, indicators for each
SPF step, including cultural competence throughout all five steps.
Assessment of a state’s progress
over time toward the implementation of these best practices.
26
1
6
156
Total State Level Year 2 Burden
...........................................................
........................
2
9
234
Year 3
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
SPF Implementation Index ...............
26
1
3
78
State Infrastructure Index .................
SEW activities, indicators for each
SPF step, including cultural competence throughout all five steps.
Assessment of a state’s progress
over time toward the implementation of these best practices.
26
1
6
156
Total State Level Year 3 Burden
...........................................................
........................
2
9
234
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:09 Jan 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
1547
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2006 / Notices
STATE LEVEL BURDEN ESTIMATE—Continued
Content description
Number of respondents
Number of responses
Hourly burden
per response
...........................................................
........................
2
9
Interview guide
Average Annual State Burden.
Community-level Data Collection
The Community Level Index is a twopart, web-based survey for capturing
information about SPF SIG
implementation at the community level.
Part 1 of the survey focuses on the five
SPF SIG steps and efforts to ensure
cultural competency throughout the SPF
SIG process. Part 2 will capture data on
the specific intervention(s)
implemented at the community level
including both individual-focused and
environmental prevention strategies.
Community partners receiving SPF SIG
awards will be required to complete the
survey every six months, using a secure
password system. The survey data will
be analyzed in conjunction with state
and community outcome data to
determine the relationship, if any,
between the SPF process and substance
use outcomes. This survey will be
submitted as an addendum to the
forthcoming OMB package
approximately one month after the
expiration of the comment period. The
estimated annual burden for
community-level data collection is
displayed below. Note that the total
burden assumes an average of 15
community-level sub-grantees per state
(a total of 390 respondents) and two
Total hourly
burden
234
survey administrations per year. Note
also that some questions will be
addressed only once and the responses
will be used to pre-fill subsequent
surveys. In addition, as community
partners work through the SPF steps,
they will report only on step-related
activities. For example, needs
assessment activities will likely precede
monitoring and evaluation activities.
Thus, respondents will answer
questions related to needs assessment in
the first few reports but will not need to
address monitoring and evaluation
items until later in the implementation
process.
COMMUNITY LEVEL SURVEY BURDEN ESTIMATE
Survey section
Number of respondents
Content description
Number of responses
Hourly burden/
response
Total hourly
burden
390
1
0.2
78
Year 1
Part I, 1–10 .......................................
11–19 ................................................
20–26 ................................................
27–47 ................................................
48–137 ..............................................
138–155 ............................................
172–178 ............................................
Sub-form 179–191 ............................
Part II 1–52 .......................................
Review of past responses ................
Total Community Level Year 1
Burden.
Contact Information and Reporting
Period.
Organization Type and Funding ......
Cultural Competence, Sustainability
and Framework Progress.
Needs and Resources Assessments
Capacity Building Activities ..............
Strategic Plan Development ............
Contextual Factors and Closing
Questions.
Coalition Organizational Information
Intervention Specific Information and
Adaptations.
...........................................................
390
390
1
2
0.2
0.1
78
78
390
390
390
390
1
2
1
2
0.5
1.7
1.0
1.0
195
1,326
390
780
390
390
1
3
1.0
2.0
390
2,340
390
2
1.0
780
...........................................................
........................
16
8.6
6,435
390
2
0.1
78
390
390
2
2
1.7
1.0
1,326
780
390
3
2.0
2,340
390
390
390
6
6
2
1.0
1.0
1.0
2,340
2,340
780
........................
23
7.8
9,984
390
2
0.1
78
390
390
1
2
1.7
0.1
1,326
78
Year 2
Part I, 20–26 .....................................
48–137 ..............................................
172–178 ............................................
Part II 1–52 .......................................
53–60 ................................................
Sub-forms ..........................................
Review of past responses ................
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Total Community Level Year 2
Burden.
Cultural Competence, Sustainability
and Framework Progress.
Capacity Building Activities ..............
Contextual Factors and Closing
Questions.
Intervention Specific Information and
Adaptations.
Intervention Outcomes .....................
Intervention Component Information
...........................................................
...........................................................
Year 3
Part I, 20–26 .....................................
48–137 ..............................................
156–160 ............................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:09 Jan 09, 2006
Cultural Competence, Sustainability
and Framework Progress.
Capacity Building Activities ..............
Intervention Implementation .............
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
1548
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 10, 2006 / Notices
COMMUNITY LEVEL SURVEY BURDEN ESTIMATE—Continued
Number of respondents
Number of responses
Hourly burden/
response
Contextual Factors and Closing
Questions.
Intervention Specific Information and
Adaptations.
Intervention Outcomes .....................
Intervention Component Information
...........................................................
390
2
1.0
780
390
3
2.0
2,340
390
390
390
6
6
2
1.0
1.0
1.0
2,340
2,340
780
Total Community Level Year 3
Burden.
...........................................................
........................
24
7.9
10,062
Average Annual
Burden.
...........................................................
........................
21
8.1
8,827
Survey section
Content description
172–178 ............................................
Part II, 1–52 ......................................
53–60 ................................................
Sub-forms ..........................................
Review of past responses ................
Community
Send comments to Summer King,
SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer,
Room 71–1044, One Choke Cherry
Road, Rockville, MD 20857. Written
comments should be received within 60
days of this notice.
Dated: December 30, 2005.
Anna Marsh,
Director, Office of Program Services.
[FR Doc. E6–95 Filed 1–9–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162–20–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration
Current List of Laboratories Which
Meet Minimum Standards To Engage in
Urine Drug Testing for Federal
Agencies
Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration, HHS.
AGENCY:
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) notifies Federal
agencies of the laboratories currently
certified to meet the standards of
Subpart C of the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs (Mandatory Guidelines). The
Mandatory Guidelines were first
published in the Federal Register on
April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11970), and
subsequently revised in the Federal
Register on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908),
on September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118),
and on April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644).
A notice listing all currently certified
laboratories is published in the Federal
Register during the first week of each
month. If any laboratory’s certification
is suspended or revoked, the laboratory
will be omitted from subsequent lists
until such time as it is restored to full
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:09 Jan 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
certification under the Mandatory
Guidelines.
If any laboratory has withdrawn from
the HHS National Laboratory
Certification Program (NLCP) during the
past month, it will be listed at the end,
and will be omitted from the monthly
listing thereafter.
This notice is also available on the
Internet at https://workplace.samhsa.gov
and https://www.drugfreeworkplace.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs.
Giselle Hersh or Dr. Walter Vogl,
Division of Workplace Programs,
SAMHSA/CSAP, Room 2–1035, 1 Choke
Cherry Road, Rockville, Maryland
20857; 240–276–2600 (voice), 240–276–
2610 (fax).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Mandatory Guidelines were developed
in accordance with Executive Order
12564 and section 503 of Public Law
100–71. Subpart C of the Mandatory
Guidelines, ‘‘Certification of
Laboratories Engaged in Urine Drug
Testing for Federal Agencies,’’ sets strict
standards that laboratories must meet in
order to conduct drug and specimen
validity tests on urine specimens for
Federal agencies. To become certified,
an applicant laboratory must undergo
three rounds of performance testing plus
an on-site inspection. To maintain that
certification, a laboratory must
participate in a quarterly performance
testing program plus undergo periodic,
on-site inspections.
Laboratories which claim to be in the
applicant stage of certification are not to
be considered as meeting the minimum
requirements described in the HHS
Mandatory Guidelines. A laboratory
must have its letter of certification from
HHS/SAMHSA (formerly: HHS/NIDA)
which attests that it has met minimum
standards.
In accordance with Subpart C of the
Mandatory Guidelines dated April 13,
2004 (69 FR 19644), the following
laboratories meet the minimum
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Total hourly
burden
standards to conduct drug and specimen
validity tests on urine specimens:
ACL Laboratories, 8901 W. Lincoln
Ave., West Allis, WI 53227. 414–328–
7840/800–877–7016. (Formerly:
Bayshore Clinical Laboratory).
ACM Medical Laboratory, Inc., 160
Elmgrove Park, Rochester, NY 14624.
585–429–2264.
Advanced Toxicology Network, 3560
Air Center Cove, Suite 101, Memphis,
TN 38118. 901–794–5770/888–290–
1150.
Aegis Analytical Laboratories, Inc., 345
Hill Ave., Nashville, TN 37210. 615–
255–2400.
Baptist Medical Center-Toxicology
Laboratory, 9601 I–630, Exit 7, Little
Rock, AR 72205–7299. 501–202–2783.
(Formerly: Forensic Toxicology
Laboratory Baptist Medical Center).
Clinical Reference Lab, 8433 Quivira
Road, Lenexa, KS 66215–2802. 800–
445–6917.
Diagnostic Services, Inc., dba DSI,
12700 Westlinks Drive, Fort Myers,
FL 33913. 239–561–8200/800–735–
5416.
Doctors Laboratory, Inc., 2906 Julia
Drive, Valdosta, GA 31602. 229–671–
2281.
DrugScan, Inc., P.O. Box 2969, 1119
Mearns Road, Warminster, PA 18974.
215–674–9310.
Dynacare Kasper Medical Laboratories,*
10150–102 St., Suite 200, Edmonton,
Alberta, Canada T5J 5E2. 780–451–
3702/800–661–9876.
ElSohly Laboratories, Inc., 5 Industrial
Park Drive, Oxford, MS 38655. 662–
236–2609.
Express Analytical Labs, 3405 7th Ave.,
Suite 106, Marion, IA 52302. 319–
377–0500.
Gamma-Dynacare Medical
Laboratories,* A Division of the
Gamma-Dynacare, Laboratory
Partnership, 245 Pall Mall Street,
London, ONT, Canada N6A 1P4. 519–
679–1630.
E:\FR\FM\10JAN1.SGM
10JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1545-1548]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-95]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 concerning opportunity for public comment on proposed
collections of information, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration will publish periodic summaries of proposed
projects. To request more information on the proposed projects or to
obtain a copy of the information collection plans, call the SAMHSA
Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276-1243.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
[[Page 1546]]
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
Proposed Project: Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant
(SPF SIG) Program--NEW
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's
(SAMHSA) Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) is responsible
for the Evaluation of the Strategic Prevention Framework State
Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) Program. The program is a major national
initiative designed to: (1) Prevent the onset and reduce the
progression of substance abuse, including childhood and underage
drinking; (2) reduce substance abuse-related problems in communities;
and, (3) build prevention capacity and infrastructure at the State/
territory and community levels.
Five steps comprise the SPF:
Step 1: Profile population needs, resources, and readiness
to address needs and gaps.
Step 2: Mobilize and/or build capacity to address needs.
Step 3: Develop a comprehensive strategic plan.
Step 4: Implement evidence-based prevention programs,
policies, and practices.
Step 5: Monitor, evaluate, sustain, and improve or replace
those that fail.
Under a contract with CSAP, an evaluation team will implement a
multi-method quasi-experimental evaluation at national, State, and
community levels. Evaluation data will be collected from 26 states
receiving grants in 2004 and 2005 and as many as 32 non-grantee states
that will serve as a comparison group. The primary evaluation objective
is to determine the impact of SPF SIG on the SAMHSA National Outcome
Measures (NOMs).
This notice invites comment on state-level and community-level data
collection instruments. The instruments for assessing state-level
change will be included in an OMB review package submitted immediately
after the expiration of the comment period and are the main focus of
this announcement. These instruments will be reviewed first by OMB to
ensure that state-level data collection occurs as specified in the
evaluation plan (on or before June 30, 2006). Because the states have
not awarded community-level funding, the evaluators will not initiate
community-level data collection until late in 2006. Thus, the
community-level survey will be submitted as an addendum approximately
one month after the comment period expires. However, the instrument is
described in this notice and comments on the instrument are invited.
State-Level Data Collection
Two instruments were developed for assessing state-level effects.
Both instruments are guides for telephone interviews that will be
conducted by trained interviewers three to four times over the life of
the SPF SIG award. The Strategic Prevention Framework Index will be
used to assess the relationship between SPF implementation and change
in the national outcome measures. The State Infrastructure Index will
capture data to assess infrastructure change and to test the
relationship of this change to outcomes. Prevention infrastructure
refers to the organizational features of the system that delivers
prevention services, including all procedures related to planning, data
management systems, workforce development, intervention implementation,
evaluation and monitoring, financial management, and sustainability.
The estimated annual burden for state-level data collection is
displayed below in the table.
State Level Burden Estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content Number of Number of Hourly burden Total hourly
Interview guide description respondents responses per response burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPF Implementation Index...... SEW activities, 26 1 3 78
indicators for
each SPF step,
including
cultural
competence
throughout all
five steps.
State Infrastructure Index.... Assessment of a 26 1 6 156
state's
progress over
time toward the
implementation
of these best
practices.
-----------------
Total State Level Year 1 ................ .............. 2 9 234
Burden.
-------------------------------
Year 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPF Implementation Index...... SEW activities, 26 1 3 78
indicators for
each SPF step,
including
cultural
competence
throughout all
five steps.
State Infrastructure Index.... Assessment of a 26 1 6 156
state's
progress over
time toward the
implementation
of these best
practices.
-----------------
Total State Level Year 2 ................ .............. 2 9 234
Burden.
-------------------------------
Year 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPF Implementation Index...... SEW activities, 26 1 3 78
indicators for
each SPF step,
including
cultural
competence
throughout all
five steps.
State Infrastructure Index.... Assessment of a 26 1 6 156
state's
progress over
time toward the
implementation
of these best
practices.
-----------------
Total State Level Year 3 ................ .............. 2 9 234
Burden.
-----------------
[[Page 1547]]
Average Annual State ................ .............. 2 9 234
Burden.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community-level Data Collection
The Community Level Index is a two-part, web-based survey for
capturing information about SPF SIG implementation at the community
level. Part 1 of the survey focuses on the five SPF SIG steps and
efforts to ensure cultural competency throughout the SPF SIG process.
Part 2 will capture data on the specific intervention(s) implemented at
the community level including both individual-focused and environmental
prevention strategies. Community partners receiving SPF SIG awards will
be required to complete the survey every six months, using a secure
password system. The survey data will be analyzed in conjunction with
state and community outcome data to determine the relationship, if any,
between the SPF process and substance use outcomes. This survey will be
submitted as an addendum to the forthcoming OMB package approximately
one month after the expiration of the comment period. The estimated
annual burden for community-level data collection is displayed below.
Note that the total burden assumes an average of 15 community-level
sub-grantees per state (a total of 390 respondents) and two survey
administrations per year. Note also that some questions will be
addressed only once and the responses will be used to pre-fill
subsequent surveys. In addition, as community partners work through the
SPF steps, they will report only on step-related activities. For
example, needs assessment activities will likely precede monitoring and
evaluation activities. Thus, respondents will answer questions related
to needs assessment in the first few reports but will not need to
address monitoring and evaluation items until later in the
implementation process.
Community Level Survey Burden Estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content Number of Number of Hourly burden/ Total hourly
Survey section description respondents responses response burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I, 1-10.................. Contact 390 1 0.2 78
Information and
Reporting
Period.
11-19......................... Organization 390 1 0.2 78
Type and
Funding.
20-26......................... Cultural 390 2 0.1 78
Competence,
Sustainability
and Framework
Progress.
27-47......................... Needs and 390 1 0.5 195
Resources
Assessments.
48-137........................ Capacity 390 2 1.7 1,326
Building
Activities.
138-155....................... Strategic Plan 390 1 1.0 390
Development.
172-178....................... Contextual 390 2 1.0 780
Factors and
Closing
Questions.
Sub-form 179-191.............. Coalition 390 1 1.0 390
Organizational
Information.
Part II 1-52.................. Intervention 390 3 2.0 2,340
Specific
Information and
Adaptations.
Review of past responses...... ................ 390 2 1.0 780
-----------------
Total Community Level Year ................ .............. 16 8.6 6,435
1 Burden.
-------------------------------
Year 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I, 20-26................. Cultural 390 2 0.1 78
Competence,
Sustainability
and Framework
Progress.
48-137........................ Capacity 390 2 1.7 1,326
Building
Activities.
172-178....................... Contextual 390 2 1.0 780
Factors and
Closing
Questions.
Part II 1-52.................. Intervention 390 3 2.0 2,340
Specific
Information and
Adaptations.
53-60......................... Intervention 390 6 1.0 2,340
Outcomes.
Sub-forms..................... Intervention 390 6 1.0 2,340
Component
Information.
Review of past responses...... ................ 390 2 1.0 780
-----------------
Total Community Level Year ................ .............. 23 7.8 9,984
2 Burden.
-------------------------------
Year 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part I, 20-26................. Cultural 390 2 0.1 78
Competence,
Sustainability
and Framework
Progress.
48-137........................ Capacity 390 1 1.7 1,326
Building
Activities.
156-160....................... Intervention 390 2 0.1 78
Implementation.
[[Page 1548]]
172-178....................... Contextual 390 2 1.0 780
Factors and
Closing
Questions.
Part II, 1-52................. Intervention 390 3 2.0 2,340
Specific
Information and
Adaptations.
53-60......................... Intervention 390 6 1.0 2,340
Outcomes.
Sub-forms..................... Intervention 390 6 1.0 2,340
Component
Information.
Review of past responses...... ................ 390 2 1.0 780
-----------------
Total Community Level Year ................ .............. 24 7.9 10,062
3 Burden.
-----------------
Average Annual Community ................ .............. 21 8.1 8,827
Burden.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Send comments to Summer King, SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer,
Room 71-1044, One Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857. Written
comments should be received within 60 days of this notice.
Dated: December 30, 2005.
Anna Marsh,
Director, Office of Program Services.
[FR Doc. E6-95 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162-20-P
