Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review, 64651-64652 [E7-22419]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
64651
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices
Dated: Novmeber 9, 2007.
Maryam I. Daneshvar,
Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Office of
the Chief Science Officer, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. E7–22418 Filed 11–15–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
[30-Day–08–07AF]
Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork
Reduction Act Review
The Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of
information collection requests under
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). To request a copy of these
requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance
Officer at (404) 639–5960 or send an email to omb@cdc.gov. Send written
comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington,
DC or by fax to (202) 395–6974. Written
comments should be received within 30
days of this notice.
Proposed Project
Evaluation of the Safe Dates Project—
New—National Center for Injury
Prevention and Control (NCIPC),
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC).
Background and brief description of
the proposed project: The specific aims
of this study are to describe the
implementation and drivers of
implementation of the Safe Dates
program (implementation evaluation); to
evaluate its impact on desired
outcomes, including prevention of and
reduction in dating violence
victimization and perpetration
(including psychological abuse,
stalking, physical violence, and sexual
violence) among ninth-grade students
(experimental effectiveness evaluation);
and to evaluate its cost-effectiveness,
including cost-utility (cost evaluation).
The evaluation will require
participation from staff and students at
54 schools (18 treatment schools
receiving the Safe Dates program with
teacher training and observation, 18
treatment schools receiving the Safe
Dates program without teacher training
and observation, and 18 control schools
not receiving the Safe Dates program).
Implementation evaluation data will
be collected primarily through Web
questionnaires completed by principals,
school prevention coordinators, and
teachers delivering the program;
effectiveness evaluation data will be
collected via classroom scannable forms
with ninth-graders who attend treatment
or control schools; and cost evaluation
data will be collected via a Web survey
of teachers delivering the program who
receive training and observation. High
schools that agree to participation will
be matched into sets of three.
Characteristics that will be considered
in the matching process include
demographics and urban/rural county
type. Large schools will be given the
option to invite a census of ninth grade
students to participate in the study or to
invite a subset of ninth grade students
(in certain classes) to participate.
Schools within a set of three will be
matched on census versus subset
selection of ninth graders to ensure that
all schools in a set use the same
selection process. Eighteen matched sets
of three schools will be selected. One
school from each matched set will be
assigned randomly either to receive the
Safe Dates program with teacher
training and observation, to receive the
Safe Dates program without teacher
training and observation, or to serve as
a control group.
Approximately 10,158 students at the
54 schools will complete a baseline
effectiveness evaluation scannable
survey. During the classroomadministered survey, information will
be collected from students about how
they feel about dating, communicating
with a dating partner, and attitudes and
behaviors related to violence, including
violence between preteen and teen
dating couples. Informed written
consent from parents for their child’s
participation and informed written
consent from ninth graders for their own
participation will be obtained. During
Web surveys, school staff will be asked
about implementation and costs of the
Safe Dates program.
Effectiveness evaluation baseline data
collection will span the period from
October to November 2007, and followup data collection will occur during
January and February 2009. Assuming
an 80 percent response rate at followup, it is anticipated that a total of 8,126
students will complete follow-up
effectiveness evaluation surveys.
To evaluate the implementation and
implementation drivers of the program,
principals and prevention coordinators
at all 54 schools will be asked to
complete a series of Web surveys from
October 2007 to February 2009.
Assuming a 91 percent response rate for
all school staff surveys, it is anticipated
that 48 principals and 48 prevention
coordinators will complete baseline
implementation questionnaires, 32
principals and 32 prevention
coordinators at treatment schools will
complete mid-implementation
questionnaires, 49 principals will
complete end-of-school year
implementation questionnaires, and 49
prevention coordinators will complete
follow-up implementation
questionnaires. In addition, 98 teachers
at treatment schools will complete Web
baseline implementation questionnaires,
49 teachers at treatment schools
receiving training and observation will
complete cost questionnaires, and 98
teachers at treatment schools will
complete two mid-implementation
questionnaires each. Students at
treatment schools (n= 4,515) will also
complete two mid-implementation
questionnaires each.
It is anticipated that study results will
be used to determine the Safe Dates
program’s effectiveness, economic and
time costs, cost-effectiveness, costutility, feasibility of implementation,
dissemination facilitators, and needed
improvements for implementation with
fidelity.
There are no costs to respondents
except their time to participate in the
interview. The total estimated
annualized burden hours are 14,112.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN
Type of respondent
Instrument name
Student ................
Effectiveness baseline survey ....................................................................
First mid-implementation survey ................................................................
Second mid-implementation survey ...........................................................
Effectiveness follow-up survey ...................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:48 Nov 15, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Number of
respondents
Sfmt 4703
10,158
3,612
3,612
8,126
E:\FR\FM\16NON1.SGM
16NON1
Number of responses per
respondent
1
1
1
1
Average
burden per
respondent
(in hours)
35/60
25/60
25/60
35/60
64652
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 221 / Friday, November 16, 2007 / Notices
ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN—Continued
Average
burden per
respondent
(in hours)
Instrument name
Principal ..............
Baseline implementation survey ................................................................
Mid-implementation survey ........................................................................
End-of-school-year implementation survey ................................................
Baseline implementation survey ................................................................
49
32
49
49
1
1
1
1
15/60
15/60
15/60
15/60
Mid-implementation survey ........................................................................
End-of-school-year implementation survey ................................................
Follow-up implementation survey ..............................................................
Baseline implementation survey ................................................................
Cost survey ................................................................................................
Fifth session mid-implementation survey ...................................................
Ninth session mid-implementation survey .................................................
32
49
49
98
49
98
98
1
1
1
1
11
2
2
15/60
15/60
5/60
15/60
20/60
25/60
25/60
Prevention coordinator.
Teacher ...............
Dated: November 9, 2007.
Maryam I. Daneshvar,
Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Office of
the Chief Science Officer.
[FR Doc. E7–22419 Filed 11–15–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
Proposed Data Collections Submitted
for Public Comment and
Recommendations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
In compliance with the requirement
of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for
opportunity for public comment on
proposed data collection projects, the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic
summaries of proposed projects. To
request more information on the
proposed projects or to obtain a copy of
the data collection plans and
instruments, call 404–639–5960 and
send comments to Maryam I. Daneshvar,
CDC Acting Reports Clearance Officer,
1600 Clifton Road, MS–D74, Atlanta,
GA 30333 or send an e-mail to
omb@cdc.gov.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
21:48 Nov 15, 2007
Jkt 214001
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 respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology. Written comments should
be received within 60 days of this
notice.
Proposed Project
[60Day–08–08AC]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Number of
respondents
Number of responses per
respondent
Type of respondent
Racial and Ethnic Approaches to
Community Health (REACH) U.S.
Evaluation—New—National Center for
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Background and Brief Description
REACH U.S. is an effort to meet the
Healthy People 2010 goal of eliminating
health disparities in the health status of
racial and ethnic minorities. After initial
review of the national data, a study
approach was adopted on the statistical
techniques of ‘‘excess deaths’’ to define
the difference in minority health in
relation to non-minority health. The
analysis of excess deaths revealed that
several specific health areas accounted
for the majority of the higher annual
proportion of minority deaths. Because
of these sobering statistics, and the
overarching goals of Healthy People
2010, REACH U.S. is being launched as
a national multi-level community
intervention program that serves
communities with African American,
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
American Indian, Hispanic American,
Asian American, and Pacific Islander
citizens. The REACH U.S. program
supports community coalitions in
designing, implementing, and
evaluating community-driven strategies
to eliminate health disparities in several
priority areas: Cardiovascular diseases,
diabetes, asthma, infant mortality, breast
and cervical cancer screening and
management, and adult immunization.
As part of the evaluation of the
REACH U.S. initiative, CDC proposes to
conduct risk factor surveys by
computer-assisted telephone interview
(CATI) in 29 communities participating
in REACH U.S. activities. Surveys will
be available in English, Spanish,
Vietnamese, Khmer, and Mandarin
Chinese. The target number of surveys
for each community is 900 adults, aged
18 and older, who belong to the racial/
ethnic group served by the communitybased program intervention. In
communities that focus on breast and
cervical cancer interventions,
approximately 250 of the 900 interviews
will involve women aged 40–64 years.
Respondents will be identified through
list-assisted random-digit dialing
methods. The surveys will help to
assess the prevalence of various risk
factors associated with chronic diseases,
deficits in breast and cervical cancer
screening and management, and deficits
in adult immunizations. The surveys
will also assess progress towards the
national goal of eliminating health
disparities within the communities.
There are no costs to respondents
other than their time.
E:\FR\FM\16NON1.SGM
16NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 221 (Friday, November 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64651-64652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-22419]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
[30-Day-08-07AF]
Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publishes a
list of information collection requests under review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of these requests, call
the CDC Reports Clearance Officer at (404) 639-5960 or send an e-mail
to omb@cdc.gov. Send written comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington, DC or by fax to (202) 395-6974.
Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.
Proposed Project
Evaluation of the Safe Dates Project--New--National Center for
Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC).
Background and brief description of the proposed project: The
specific aims of this study are to describe the implementation and
drivers of implementation of the Safe Dates program (implementation
evaluation); to evaluate its impact on desired outcomes, including
prevention of and reduction in dating violence victimization and
perpetration (including psychological abuse, stalking, physical
violence, and sexual violence) among ninth-grade students (experimental
effectiveness evaluation); and to evaluate its cost-effectiveness,
including cost-utility (cost evaluation). The evaluation will require
participation from staff and students at 54 schools (18 treatment
schools receiving the Safe Dates program with teacher training and
observation, 18 treatment schools receiving the Safe Dates program
without teacher training and observation, and 18 control schools not
receiving the Safe Dates program).
Implementation evaluation data will be collected primarily through
Web questionnaires completed by principals, school prevention
coordinators, and teachers delivering the program; effectiveness
evaluation data will be collected via classroom scannable forms with
ninth-graders who attend treatment or control schools; and cost
evaluation data will be collected via a Web survey of teachers
delivering the program who receive training and observation. High
schools that agree to participation will be matched into sets of three.
Characteristics that will be considered in the matching process
include demographics and urban/rural county type. Large schools will be
given the option to invite a census of ninth grade students to
participate in the study or to invite a subset of ninth grade students
(in certain classes) to participate. Schools within a set of three will
be matched on census versus subset selection of ninth graders to ensure
that all schools in a set use the same selection process. Eighteen
matched sets of three schools will be selected. One school from each
matched set will be assigned randomly either to receive the Safe Dates
program with teacher training and observation, to receive the Safe
Dates program without teacher training and observation, or to serve as
a control group.
Approximately 10,158 students at the 54 schools will complete a
baseline effectiveness evaluation scannable survey. During the
classroom-administered survey, information will be collected from
students about how they feel about dating, communicating with a dating
partner, and attitudes and behaviors related to violence, including
violence between preteen and teen dating couples. Informed written
consent from parents for their child's participation and informed
written consent from ninth graders for their own participation will be
obtained. During Web surveys, school staff will be asked about
implementation and costs of the Safe Dates program.
Effectiveness evaluation baseline data collection will span the
period from October to November 2007, and follow-up data collection
will occur during January and February 2009. Assuming an 80 percent
response rate at follow-up, it is anticipated that a total of 8,126
students will complete follow-up effectiveness evaluation surveys.
To evaluate the implementation and implementation drivers of the
program, principals and prevention coordinators at all 54 schools will
be asked to complete a series of Web surveys from October 2007 to
February 2009. Assuming a 91 percent response rate for all school staff
surveys, it is anticipated that 48 principals and 48 prevention
coordinators will complete baseline implementation questionnaires, 32
principals and 32 prevention coordinators at treatment schools will
complete mid-implementation questionnaires, 49 principals will complete
end-of-school year implementation questionnaires, and 49 prevention
coordinators will complete follow-up implementation questionnaires. In
addition, 98 teachers at treatment schools will complete Web baseline
implementation questionnaires, 49 teachers at treatment schools
receiving training and observation will complete cost questionnaires,
and 98 teachers at treatment schools will complete two mid-
implementation questionnaires each. Students at treatment schools (n=
4,515) will also complete two mid-implementation questionnaires each.
It is anticipated that study results will be used to determine the
Safe Dates program's effectiveness, economic and time costs, cost-
effectiveness, cost-utility, feasibility of implementation,
dissemination facilitators, and needed improvements for implementation
with fidelity.
There are no costs to respondents except their time to participate
in the interview. The total estimated annualized burden hours are
14,112.
Estimated Annualized Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Number of Number of burden per
Type of respondent Instrument name respondents responses per respondent (in
respondent hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Student............................ Effectiveness baseline 10,158 1 35/60
survey.
First mid-implementation 3,612 1 25/60
survey.
Second mid-implementation 3,612 1 25/60
survey.
Effectiveness follow-up 8,126 1 35/60
survey.
[[Page 64652]]
Principal.......................... Baseline implementation 49 1 15/60
survey.
Mid-implementation survey.. 32 1 15/60
End-of-school-year 49 1 15/60
implementation survey.
Prevention coordinator............. Baseline implementation 49 1 15/60
survey.
Mid-implementation survey.. 32 1 15/60
End-of-school-year 49 1 15/60
implementation survey.
Follow-up implementation 49 1 5/60
survey.
Teacher............................ Baseline implementation 98 1 15/60
survey.
Cost survey................ 49 11 20/60
Fifth session mid- 98 2 25/60
implementation survey.
Ninth session mid- 98 2 25/60
implementation survey.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: November 9, 2007.
Maryam I. Daneshvar,
Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief Science Officer.
[FR Doc. E7-22419 Filed 11-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
