Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests, 25575-25577 [E6-6526]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 83 (Monday, May 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25575-25577]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6526]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests

AGENCY: Department of Education.

SUMMARY: The Director, Regulatory Information Management Services, 
Office of Management, invites comments on the proposed information 
collection requests as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before 
June 30, 2006.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an 
early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB 
may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the 
extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat 
the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal 
law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform 
its statutory obligations. The Director, Regulatory Information 
Management Services, Office of Management, publishes that notice 
containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission 
of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped 
by office, contains the following: (1) Type of review requested, e.g. 
new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) 
Summary of the collection; (4) Description of the need for, and 
proposed use of, the information; (5) Respondents and frequency of 
collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites 
public comment.
    The Department of Education is especially interested in public 
comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection 
necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this 
information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the 
estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the 
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and 
(5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on 
the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

    Dated: April 25, 2006.
Jeanne Van Vlandren,
Director, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of 
Management.

Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development.

    Type of Review: Regular.
    Title: Annual Mandatory Collection of Elementary and Secondary 
Education Data for the Education Data Exchange Network (EDEN).
    Frequency: Annually.

[[Page 25576]]

    Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs.
    Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:
     Responses: 6,052.
     Burden Hours: 476,234.
    Abstract: The Education Data Exchange Network (EDEN) is in the 
implementation phase of a multiple year effort to consolidate the 
collection of education information about States, Districts, and 
Schools in a way that improves data quality and reduces paperwork 
burden for all of the national education partners. To minimize the 
burden on the data providers, EDEN seeks the transfer of the proposed 
data as soon as it has been processed for State, District, and School 
use. These data will then be stored in EDEN and accessed by federal 
education program managers and analysts as needed to make program 
management decisions. This process will eliminate redundant data 
collections while providing for the timeliness of data submission and 
use.
    Additional Information: The Department of Education (ED) is 
specifically requesting the data providers in each the State Education 
Agency (SEA) to review the proposed data elements to determine which of 
these data can be provided for the upcoming 2006-2007 school year and 
which data would be available in later years (2007-2008 or 2008-2009) 
and which data, if any, is never expected to be available from the SEA. 
If information for a data group is not available, please provide 
information beyond the fact that it is not available. Are there 
specific impediments to providing this data that you can describe? Is 
the definition for the data group unclear or ambiguous? Do the 
requested code sets not align with the way your state collects the 
data? This is very important information because ED intends to make the 
collection of these data mandatory. ED also seeks to know if the SEA 
data definitions are consistent and compatible with the EDEN 
definitions and accurately reflect the way data is stored and used for 
education by the States, Districts, and Schools. The answers to these 
questions by the data providers will influence the timing and content 
of the final EDEN proposal for the collection of this elementary and 
secondary data. In addition to overall public comments, ED would also 
like state education data providers to consider and respond to a number 
of specific questions that were developed during the recent data 
definition cycle for EDEN 2006-07 data. While most of these questions 
address the ability of states to provide information, some speak to the 
potential burden on states associated with overall changes in EDEN. 
When responding to these questions, please include the question number 
in your response.
    1. Some of the EDEN data groups require additional information in 
order to interpret it properly; this is loosely described as metadata. 
For example, state proficiency levels and the levels that make up 
proficient and higher differ from one state to the next. Similarly, 
there are numerous data groups that collect information on state-
defined items such as truants, persistently dangerous schools, and 
definition of school year. For all of these examples, additional 
information is needed in order to fully understand the reported data as 
well as to understand whether comparisons across the state are (or are 
not) appropriate. We are currently considering several ways to collect 
this information including web-based forms and a separate state-level 
submission file. What would be the most convenient way for your state 
to initially provide and subsequently update this information?
    2. As EDEN matures, we are weighing the costs/benefits of 
standardizing the naming conventions of the data groups in order to 
align them more closely with the Federal Enterprise Architecture. We 
anticipate this effort would result in changes to approximately \1/3\ 
of data group names and we would provide a crosswalk between the old 
name and the new name of each data group. The numbers assigned to the 
data groups would not change. What impact would data group name changes 
have on the burden associated with producing and submitting EDEN data 
files in your state? If we do elect to make these changes, what tools 
can ED provide to you to lessen your paperwork burden?
    3. For the 2006-07 EDEN data set, we added a new topic area: 
Finance. This change was based on an understanding that in many states, 
data for files that include financial information come from a source 
that is separate from the rest of the EDEN data files. So far, we have 
moved the following data groups to this new topic area: 574--Federal 
Funding Allocation Table, 614--REAP Alternative Funding Indicator, 
615--RLIS Program Table, 616--Transfer Funds Indicator, plus the two 
new data groups: Funds Spent on Supplemental Services and Funds Spent 
on School Choice. Is this conceptual change helpful in your state? Are 
there other data groups that you recommend that we move to this new 
topic area?
    4. As part of the merge between NCES' Common Core of Data (CCD) and 
EDEN, we would like to modify the way the CCD ID code for schools and 
districts are submitted in EDEN data files. The CCD ID code is made up 
of 3 components (a 2 digit FIPS code, a 5 digit district ID code, and a 
5 digit school ID code). CCD collects all 3 of these components 
separately meaning that for schools, there are 3 ID codes that, 
together, make a unique identifier. EDEN collects a single 7 digit CCD 
District ID (FIPS thru District) and a single 12 digit CCD school ID 
(FIPS thru District thru School). What impact would there be on your 
state's ability to provide EDEN data files if EDEN changed to the CCD 
methodology for NCES IDs?
    5. For Magnet School Status (at the school level) CCD collects only 
(1) Yes and (2) No. EDEN is set up to collect 4 categories of 
information regarding Magnet Schools: (1) Magnet All Students, (2) 
Magnet Not All Students, (3) Not Magnet, and (4) Not Collected by 
State. At what level of detail does your state collect information on 
Magnet Schools? What is the burden to your state to provide the data 
EDEN is requesting?
    6. OSEP has historically collected placement information for school 
age children by age ranges (6-11, 12-17, and 18-21). For 2006-07, USED 
is proposing to collect this information using discrete ages (instead 
of the previously used age ranges). This change would take place in 
EDEN data group 74, Children with Disabilities (IDEA), in the 
category set that now contains Educational Environment (IDEA), 
Disability Category (IDEA), and Age Group (Placement). The comparable 
data group for early childhood (Data Group 613) already 
collects placement information by discrete age. How does this change 
affect your state's reporting ability and burden?
    7. How do states track dropouts within each state? Would states be 
able to report dropout data by age or is this information only 
available by grade?
    8. EDEN currently collects dropout data by grade for students in 
grades 7-12 but will be adding ungraded as an option for the 2006-07 
reporting year. Does your state have a significant number of dropouts 
in grades other than 7-12 (e.g., a student in grade 6 who reaches the 
age where dropping out is an option)? Can you report this count as a 
single number (e.g., total dropouts below 7th grade)?
    9. Please examine the two new data groups--Funds Spent on 
Supplemental Services and Funds Spent on School Choice. What 
information does your state ask LEAs to report on this subject? Can you 
provide the information requested? If you cannot provide data for these 
new data groups for 2006-07,

[[Page 25577]]

when will you be able to provide this data?
    Requests for copies of the proposed information collection request 
may be accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the ``Browse 
Pending Collections'' link and by clicking on link number 03017. When 
you access the information collection, click on ``Download 
Attachments'' to view. Written requests for information should be 
addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 
Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also 
be electronically mailed to IC--DocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202-245-
6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection 
when making your request.
    Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity 
requirements should be electronically mailed to IC--DocketMgr@ed.gov. 
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may 
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

 [FR Doc. E6-6526 Filed 4-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-P