Emergency Food Assistance Program; Allocation Formula, 60312-60314 [E7-20963]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
60312
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Notices
indicate those needs at the time of
registration.
Dated: October 16, 2007.
Jeremy Stump,
Senior Advisor for International and
Homeland Security Affairs and
Biotechnology.
[FR Doc. E7–20914 Filed 10–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–03–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Farm Service Agency
Emergency Conservation Program;
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement
Farm Service Agency, USDA.
Notice of intent; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Farm Service Agency
(FSA) announces its intention to
prepare a Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement (SEIS) for the
Emergency Conservation Program (ECP).
The SEIS will assess the potential
environmental impacts of alternatives
for administration and implementation
of the ECP. FSA administers this
program and is now conducting a
comprehensive review of its current
policies, achievements, and potential
future program changes. FSA will be
analyzing a range of ECP program
alternatives. The SEIS also provides a
means for the public to have
opportunities to voice any opinions they
may have about the program, and any
ideas for improving it in the future. This
Notice of Intent (NOI) informs the
public that FSA is requesting public
comment and describes in general the
description of preliminary ECP
Alternatives that will be analyzed in the
Draft SEIS.
DATES: To ensure that the full range of
issues and alternatives related to the
ECP are addressed, FSA invites
comments. Comments should be
submitted by close of business on
December 24, 2007, to ensure full
consideration. Comments submitted
after this date will be considered to the
extent possible.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the
scope of the Draft SEIS and requests for
copies of should be directed to ECP
SEIS, Geo-Marine Incorporated, 2713
Magruder Blvd., Suite D, Hampton, VA
23666–1572; or by logging on to
https://public.geo-marine.com to obtain
state specific public scoping meetings
dates, locations, directions, and
comment forms.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Matthew T. Ponish, National
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:33 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
Environmental Compliance Manager,
USDA/FSA/CEPD/Stop 0513, 1400
Independence Ave., SW., Washington,
DC 20250–0513, (202) 720–6853, or
e-mail at:
Matthew.Ponish@wdc.usda.gov. More
detailed information on ECP may be
obtained from FSA’s Web site:
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp
?area=home&subject=copr&topic=ecp.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SEIS
is being prepared on the ECP to provide
FSA decision makers and the public
with an analysis that evaluates program
effects in appropriate contexts,
describes the intensity of adverse as
well as beneficial impacts, and
addresses cumulative impacts of ECP.
Title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act of
1978, as amended (codified at 16 U.S.C.
2201–2205) authorized the ECP, which
provides emergency funding for farmers
and ranchers to rehabilitate farmland
damaged by wind erosion, floods,
hurricanes, or other natural disasters,
and for carrying out emergency water
conservation measures during periods of
severe drought. Conservation problems
existing prior to the disaster involved
are not eligible for cost-sharing
assistance. ECP is administered by FSA
State and county committees. The SEIS
will help FSA to review potential
environmental impacts resulting from
this program and the results will be
used in implementing and modifying
ECP administration and funding. The
Record of Decision resulting from the
SEIS will serve as guidance to FSA
program decision makers when
considering future ECP changes.
Public Participation
The public is urged to participate in
helping to define the scope of the
proposed Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement. In addition to
allowing the opportunity to comment
via mail and e-mail at the addresses
listed previously, FSA plans to hold ten
public scoping meetings to provide
information and opportunities for
discussing the issues and alternatives to
be covered in the Draft SEIS and to
receive oral and written comments. The
meetings will be held in AL, CA, GA,
FL, LA, MO, and TX. Each scoping
meeting will be conducted in the
evening to allow the greatest
opportunity for public input. Please
check https://public.geo-marine.com for
meeting locations, times, directions, and
comment forms.
Description of Preliminary SEIS
Alternatives
FSA has developed a set of
preliminary alternatives to be studied in
the draft SEIS to initiate the process.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The alternatives will be amended, as
appropriate, based on input by the
public and agencies during the public
scoping process. The SEIS will address
the following alternatives, which
include recommended changes to the
program.
Action (baseline)
Under this alternative, ECP would
continue as it is currently administered
with no substantive changes.
Alternative A
This alternative would consider
changes to land eligibility that would
make ECP available for assistance on
farmlands other than cropland,
pastureland, and hayland.
Alternative B
This alternative would make current
ECP available only in those counties
where disasters designated by the
President or Secretary of Agriculture
have occurred.
Alternative C
Alternative C would be a combination
of Alternatives A and B. Under this
alternative, farmlands, other than
cropland, pastureland and hayland, in
counties designated as disasters by the
President or Secretary of Agriculture
would be eligible for participation in
ECP.
Signed in Washington, DC, on October 4,
2007.
Teresa C. Lasseter,
Administrator, Farm Service Agency.
[FR Doc. E7–20961 Filed 10–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–05–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Emergency Food Assistance Program;
Allocation Formula
Food and Nutrition Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice invites State and
local agencies involved in the
administration of The Emergency Food
Assistance Program (TEFAP) and the
general public to comment on the intent
of the Department to modify the data
sources used to calculate the formula for
allocating TEFAP commodities and
administrative funds among State
agencies. Data sources currently used to
allocate these resources have been used
for a number of years. However, more
accurate, reliable, and up-to-date data
sources for gauging poverty and
unemployment and, ultimately, each
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Notices
State’s need for TEFAP commodities
and administrative funds, are now
available. Therefore, unless comments
reveal a significant disadvantage to
implementing these changes, the
Department intends to allocate TEFAP
commodities and administrative funds
for fiscal year 2008 using these new data
sources.
DATES: To be assured of consideration,
comments must be received on or before
November 23, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition
Service (FNS) invites interested persons
to submit comments on this Notice. You
may submit comments by any of the
following methods:
• Fax: Submit comments by facsimile
transmission to (703) 305–2420.
• Disk or CD–ROM: Submit comments
on disk to Lillie F. Ragan, Assistant
Branch Chief, Policy Branch, Food
Distribution Division, Food and
Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 3101 Park Center Drive,
Room 506, Alexandria, Virginia 22302–
1594.
• Mail: Send comment to Lillie F.
Ragan at the above address.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
comments to the above address.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
Comments submitted in response to this
Notice will be included in the record
and will be made available to the
public. Please be advised that the
substance of the comments and the
identity of the individuals or entities
submitting the comments will be subject
to public disclosure. All written
submissions will be available for public
inspection at the address above during
regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:30
p.m.), Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lillie Ragan at (703) 305–2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
purpose of TEFAP is to provide
nutrition assistance to those with the
greatest and most immediate need. To
accomplish this purpose, the Emergency
Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C.
7501, et seq. (the Act)) requires that
TEFAP commodities and administrative
funds be allocated among States
according to a formula that accounts for
poverty and unemployment levels
within each State. Section 214(a)(1) of
the Act (7 U.S.C. 7515(a)(1)) requires
that 60 percent of each State’s allocation
be equal to the percentage of the
nation’s persons in poverty within that
State; and Section 214(a)(2) (7 U.S.C.
7515(a)(2)) requires that the remaining
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:33 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
40 percent be equal to the percentage of
the nation’s unemployed persons within
that State.
The Act also requires that data from
the Census Bureau be used to determine
the poverty line (7 U.S.C. 7501(7) citing
42 U.S.C. 9902(2)); data from the Bureau
of Labor Statistics (BLS) be used to
determine the number of unemployed
persons; that the number of unemployed
persons be calculated as a monthly
average; and that the data used to
calculate that average originate from the
most recent fiscal year for which
information is available (7 U.S.C.
7501(2)). Aside from these
requirements, the Act places no
restrictions on the data sources or
methodology used to calculate the
formula.
The Department intends to use data
sources that are more accurate, reliable,
and up-to-date than our current sources
to calculate the TEFAP allocation
formula. This will provide a more
accurate gauge of poverty and
unemployment levels within the States,
thus targeting program resources to
those States most in need.
The poverty portion of the formula is
currently updated annually, using data
from the Annual Social and Economic
Supplement to the Current Population
Survey (CPS), an annual survey
administered by the Census Bureau to
approximately 100,000 households.
This data is provided as a 3-year rolling
average, and is comprised of data
collected during the three calendar
years preceding a given fiscal year.
Thus, the poverty portion of the formula
is actually calculated from data obtained
from 300,000 households over a period
of three years. The unemployment
portion of the formula is updated
annually, using data provided to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) by the
States. Currently, a 3-month average
based on the number of unemployed
persons in each State during May, June,
and July is used.
These data sources are deficient
because they are not the most accurate,
timely, and reliable sources available,
and therefore limit the Department’s
ability to fulfill the purpose of the Act.
The poverty portion of the formula is
deficient because it is calculated using
a 3-year rolling average. This means that
60% of each State’s annual TEFAP
allocation is based primarily on data
that is two or three years old, which
provides an untimely and potentially
inaccurate reflection of current poverty
levels within each State. For example, if
State A has historically had a small
number of people in poverty, but suffers
a disaster—such as a flood or
hurricane—that casts a large number of
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60313
people into poverty during a given
calendar year, continued use of the 3year rolling poverty average would
require the Department to use two- and
three-year old data, which would not
adequately recognize the current need
for nutrition assistance in the State, to
calculate the poverty portion of State
A’s TEFAP allocation.
The 3-month unemployment average
is deficient because each month
represents one-third of the data used to
calculate the unemployment portion of
its annual TEFAP allocation. Thus, a 3month average is highly susceptible to
variations caused by reporting errors or
anomalous economic conditions which
may occur in any given month, but
which are not necessarily representative
of employment conditions within a
State. For example, State B has
historically had high levels of
unemployment, but reports unusually
low unemployment levels for May,
perhaps due to a reporting error, a
failure of many persons to report their
unemployment status for extraneous
reasons (such as a natural disaster), or
a one-time employment increase (such
as hosting a major convention or
sporting event). As a result, one-third of
the data used to calculate the
unemployment portion of State B’s
TEFAP allocation would be based on
data that does not reflect actual
employment conditions in that State
during most of the year.
To redress these deficiencies, the
Department intends, consistent with the
Act, to use data from the Census
Bureau’s American Community Survey
(ACS) rather than CPS data to calculate
the poverty portion of the formula, and
a 10-month average rather than a 3month average to calculate the
unemployment portion.
ACS, which became fully operational
in calendar year 2005, produces data
that is superior to CPS data in several
respects. Among these is the fact that
ACS has a much larger sample size.
While ACS is administered to
approximately 2.5 percent of American
households, or (currently) 3,000,000
households, per year, CPS is
administered to only 100,000
households per year. ACS poverty
statistics are also timelier. Unlike CPS
statistics, which are based on data
collected during the three calendar
years preceding a given fiscal year, ACS
statistics are based on data collected
during the single calendar year
preceding a given fiscal year. Lastly,
unlike participation in CPS,
participation in ACS is mandatory,
which will result in higher response
rates. Individuals over the age of 18 who
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
60314
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 205 / Wednesday, October 24, 2007 / Notices
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
decline to participate are subject to
penalties.
As to the unemployment portion of
the formula, a 10-month unemployment
average is more accurate than a 3-month
average because it dampens the effect
that atypical employment conditions
and reporting errors in any month can
have on a State’s average. While a 12month average would be the most ideal,
BLS’ reporting schedule is such that
only 10 months of data are available at
the time that TEFAP allocations would
have to be calculated.
Because ACS poverty-data is single
year data, the poverty portion of a
State’s allocation index may be more
likely to vary from year-to-year.
However, because the intent of TEFAP
is to address the most immediate and
current need, such variations actually
serve the purpose of the program.
Moreover, it is worth noting that yearto-year allocations have also varied
widely using the current data sources.
For example, of the 55 States and
territories (i.e., States) operating TEFAP
in fiscal year 2006, 5 had increases in
their allocations of 10 percent or greater,
22 had increases of 0 to 9.9 percent, 27
had decreases of 0 to 9.9 percent, and
1 had a decrease greater than 10 percent
from fiscal year 2005 to 2006. In fiscal
year 2007, 5 States had increases of 10
percent or greater, 25 States had
increases of 0 to 9.9 percent, 23 States
had decreases of 0 to 9.9 percent, and
2 States had decreases greater than 10
percent. In contrast, if the proposed
changes had been implemented prior to
allocating 2007 resources, the number
and size of increases and decreases that
would have resulted are very similar to
those that actually occurred.
Specifically, 8 States would have
received increases of 10 percent or
greater, 18 States would have received
increases of 0 to 9.9 percent, 27 States
would have decreases of 0 to 9.9
percent, and 2 States would have had
decreases greater than 10 percent.
Therefore, unless comments reveal a
significant disadvantage to
implementing these changes, the
Department intends to allocate TEFAP
commodities and administrative funds
for fiscal year 2008 using these new data
sources without further notification.
Dated: October 18, 2007.
Gloria Gutierrez,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7–20963 Filed 10–23–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–30–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:33 Oct 23, 2007
Jkt 214001
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Information Collection; Social and
Cultural Structure of Private Forestry
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice; request for comment.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Forest Service is seeking comments
from all interested individuals and
organizations on the new information
collection; Social and Cultural Structure
of Private Forestry.
DATES: Comments must be received in
writing on or before December 24, 2007
to be assured of consideration.
Comments received after that date will
be considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Comments concerning this
notice should be addressed to John
Schelhas, Southern Research Station,
USDA Forest Service, 112 Campbell
Hall, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL
36088.
Comments also may be submitted via
facsimile to (334) 724–4451 or by e-mail
to: jschelhas@fs.fed.us.
The public may inspect comments
received at 204 Campbell Hall, Tuskegee
University, Tuskegee, AL during normal
business hours. Visitors are encouraged
to call ahead to (334) 727–8131 to
facilitate entry to the building.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Schelhas, Southern Research Station,
USDA Forest Service, 334–727–8131.
Individuals who use TDD may call the
Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1–800–
877–8339, 24 hours a day, every day of
the year, including holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Social and Cultural Structure of
Private Forestry
OMB Number: 0596–NEW.
Expiration Date of Approval:
Type of Request: New.
Abstract: Non-industrial private
forests constitute the majority of the
forest in the South, and provide many
important public and private benefits.
These benefits are enhanced when
landowners receive professional forestry
assistance, though very few landowners
seek assistance or have written
management plans for their forests. This
problem is particularly acute for
minority forest landowners. This study
will use ethnographic methods to learn
about social and cultural aspects of
forest landowner decision-making; in
particular, forest values and identities,
social networks for information flows,
and actual forest management practices.
The information gathered will
contribute to scientific papers presented
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
at professional meetings and in
publications. The data will also assist in
the development of new materials and
techniques for outreach to forest
managers by government, nonprofit, and
private forester and natural resource
managers.
Face-to-face interviews with 200
forest landowners (100 per year) will
occur at three sites in the South. A team
of researchers from the Southern
Research Station, USDA Forest Service
and the College of Agricultural,
Environmental, and Natural Sciences,
Tuskegee University will conduct the
interviews and analyze the data
collected. The information collected
includes: (1) Responses to ‘‘twenty
statements test’’ to measure identity; (2)
social networks utilized to acquire forest
management information; (3) life
histories with regard to land ownership
and forest management; (4)
demographic data; and (5) land use and
forest management practices.
The information will be collected
only once from each landowner. If the
information is not collected, federal,
state, and private efforts to promote
improved forest management to provide
benefits for landowners and society will
be less successful.
Estimate of Annual Burden: 2 hours.
Type of Respondents: Forest
landowners.
Estimated Annual Number of
Respondents: 100.
Estimated Annual Number of
Responses per Respondent: Once.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: 200 hours.
Comment is invited on: (1) Whether
this collection of information is
necessary for the stated purposes and
the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the
information will have practical or
scientific utility; (2) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including the use of
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology.
All comments received in response to
this notice, including names and
addresses when provided, will be a
matter of public record. Comments will
be summarized and included in the
request for Office of Management and
Budget approval.
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 24, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60312-60314]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-20963]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Emergency Food Assistance Program; Allocation Formula
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice invites State and local agencies involved in the
administration of The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) and the
general public to comment on the intent of the Department to modify the
data sources used to calculate the formula for allocating TEFAP
commodities and administrative funds among State agencies. Data sources
currently used to allocate these resources have been used for a number
of years. However, more accurate, reliable, and up-to-date data sources
for gauging poverty and unemployment and, ultimately, each
[[Page 60313]]
State's need for TEFAP commodities and administrative funds, are now
available. Therefore, unless comments reveal a significant disadvantage
to implementing these changes, the Department intends to allocate TEFAP
commodities and administrative funds for fiscal year 2008 using these
new data sources.
DATES: To be assured of consideration, comments must be received on or
before November 23, 2007.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) invites interested
persons to submit comments on this Notice. You may submit comments by
any of the following methods:
Fax: Submit comments by facsimile transmission to (703)
305-2420.
Disk or CD-ROM: Submit comments on disk to Lillie F.
Ragan, Assistant Branch Chief, Policy Branch, Food Distribution
Division, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
3101 Park Center Drive, Room 506, Alexandria, Virginia 22302-1594.
Mail: Send comment to Lillie F. Ragan at the above
address.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver comments to the above
address.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Comments submitted in response to this Notice will be included in the
record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that
the substance of the comments and the identity of the individuals or
entities submitting the comments will be subject to public disclosure.
All written submissions will be available for public inspection at the
address above during regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.),
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lillie Ragan at (703) 305-2662.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of TEFAP is to provide nutrition
assistance to those with the greatest and most immediate need. To
accomplish this purpose, the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (7
U.S.C. 7501, et seq. (the Act)) requires that TEFAP commodities and
administrative funds be allocated among States according to a formula
that accounts for poverty and unemployment levels within each State.
Section 214(a)(1) of the Act (7 U.S.C. 7515(a)(1)) requires that 60
percent of each State's allocation be equal to the percentage of the
nation's persons in poverty within that State; and Section 214(a)(2) (7
U.S.C. 7515(a)(2)) requires that the remaining 40 percent be equal to
the percentage of the nation's unemployed persons within that State.
The Act also requires that data from the Census Bureau be used to
determine the poverty line (7 U.S.C. 7501(7) citing 42 U.S.C. 9902(2));
data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) be used to determine the
number of unemployed persons; that the number of unemployed persons be
calculated as a monthly average; and that the data used to calculate
that average originate from the most recent fiscal year for which
information is available (7 U.S.C. 7501(2)). Aside from these
requirements, the Act places no restrictions on the data sources or
methodology used to calculate the formula.
The Department intends to use data sources that are more accurate,
reliable, and up-to-date than our current sources to calculate the
TEFAP allocation formula. This will provide a more accurate gauge of
poverty and unemployment levels within the States, thus targeting
program resources to those States most in need.
The poverty portion of the formula is currently updated annually,
using data from the Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the
Current Population Survey (CPS), an annual survey administered by the
Census Bureau to approximately 100,000 households. This data is
provided as a 3-year rolling average, and is comprised of data
collected during the three calendar years preceding a given fiscal
year. Thus, the poverty portion of the formula is actually calculated
from data obtained from 300,000 households over a period of three
years. The unemployment portion of the formula is updated annually,
using data provided to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) by the
States. Currently, a 3-month average based on the number of unemployed
persons in each State during May, June, and July is used.
These data sources are deficient because they are not the most
accurate, timely, and reliable sources available, and therefore limit
the Department's ability to fulfill the purpose of the Act.
The poverty portion of the formula is deficient because it is
calculated using a 3-year rolling average. This means that 60% of each
State's annual TEFAP allocation is based primarily on data that is two
or three years old, which provides an untimely and potentially
inaccurate reflection of current poverty levels within each State. For
example, if State A has historically had a small number of people in
poverty, but suffers a disaster--such as a flood or hurricane--that
casts a large number of people into poverty during a given calendar
year, continued use of the 3-year rolling poverty average would require
the Department to use two- and three-year old data, which would not
adequately recognize the current need for nutrition assistance in the
State, to calculate the poverty portion of State A's TEFAP allocation.
The 3-month unemployment average is deficient because each month
represents one-third of the data used to calculate the unemployment
portion of its annual TEFAP allocation. Thus, a 3-month average is
highly susceptible to variations caused by reporting errors or
anomalous economic conditions which may occur in any given month, but
which are not necessarily representative of employment conditions
within a State. For example, State B has historically had high levels
of unemployment, but reports unusually low unemployment levels for May,
perhaps due to a reporting error, a failure of many persons to report
their unemployment status for extraneous reasons (such as a natural
disaster), or a one-time employment increase (such as hosting a major
convention or sporting event). As a result, one-third of the data used
to calculate the unemployment portion of State B's TEFAP allocation
would be based on data that does not reflect actual employment
conditions in that State during most of the year.
To redress these deficiencies, the Department intends, consistent
with the Act, to use data from the Census Bureau's American Community
Survey (ACS) rather than CPS data to calculate the poverty portion of
the formula, and a 10-month average rather than a 3-month average to
calculate the unemployment portion.
ACS, which became fully operational in calendar year 2005, produces
data that is superior to CPS data in several respects. Among these is
the fact that ACS has a much larger sample size. While ACS is
administered to approximately 2.5 percent of American households, or
(currently) 3,000,000 households, per year, CPS is administered to only
100,000 households per year. ACS poverty statistics are also timelier.
Unlike CPS statistics, which are based on data collected during the
three calendar years preceding a given fiscal year, ACS statistics are
based on data collected during the single calendar year preceding a
given fiscal year. Lastly, unlike participation in CPS, participation
in ACS is mandatory, which will result in higher response rates.
Individuals over the age of 18 who
[[Page 60314]]
decline to participate are subject to penalties.
As to the unemployment portion of the formula, a 10-month
unemployment average is more accurate than a 3-month average because it
dampens the effect that atypical employment conditions and reporting
errors in any month can have on a State's average. While a 12-month
average would be the most ideal, BLS' reporting schedule is such that
only 10 months of data are available at the time that TEFAP allocations
would have to be calculated.
Because ACS poverty-data is single year data, the poverty portion
of a State's allocation index may be more likely to vary from year-to-
year. However, because the intent of TEFAP is to address the most
immediate and current need, such variations actually serve the purpose
of the program. Moreover, it is worth noting that year-to-year
allocations have also varied widely using the current data sources. For
example, of the 55 States and territories (i.e., States) operating
TEFAP in fiscal year 2006, 5 had increases in their allocations of 10
percent or greater, 22 had increases of 0 to 9.9 percent, 27 had
decreases of 0 to 9.9 percent, and 1 had a decrease greater than 10
percent from fiscal year 2005 to 2006. In fiscal year 2007, 5 States
had increases of 10 percent or greater, 25 States had increases of 0 to
9.9 percent, 23 States had decreases of 0 to 9.9 percent, and 2 States
had decreases greater than 10 percent. In contrast, if the proposed
changes had been implemented prior to allocating 2007 resources, the
number and size of increases and decreases that would have resulted are
very similar to those that actually occurred. Specifically, 8 States
would have received increases of 10 percent or greater, 18 States would
have received increases of 0 to 9.9 percent, 27 States would have
decreases of 0 to 9.9 percent, and 2 States would have had decreases
greater than 10 percent. Therefore, unless comments reveal a
significant disadvantage to implementing these changes, the Department
intends to allocate TEFAP commodities and administrative funds for
fiscal year 2008 using these new data sources without further
notification.
Dated: October 18, 2007.
Gloria Gutierrez,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7-20963 Filed 10-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
