Exchange Visitor Program-Secondary School Students, 45385-45387 [E9-21185]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules
exempt the majority of small businesses
from the survey. For most industries,
the size standard used by the Small
Business Administration (SBA) for
designating businesses as ‘‘small’’ is
based on receipts or employment. For
the industries designated as small based
on receipts, the SBA size standards, as
published in the Table of Small
Business Size Standards, are all
significantly below $60 million; it is
reasonable to assume that few, if any, of
the businesses in these industries would
have to file the BE–605. For industries
where the small business size standard
is based on employment, a direct
comparison with the BE–605 reporting
criteria is not possible because
employment is not used as a reporting
criterion and is not collected on the
survey. However, after examining the
employment-based standards, and
under the assumption they are roughly
comparable to the receipts-based
indicators in terms of the size of firm
that is to be designated as small, BEA
has concluded that it is unlikely that
many small businesses in these
industries would be required to file the
BE–605. For certain types of banking
and finance companies, the SBA size
standard is based on assets.
Approximately 20 small businesses in
these industries would be required to
file the BE–605. This number represents
a small percentage (0.5%) of the
expected total number of 4,000 filers of
the BE–605. Additionally, based on the
estimated average burden of one hour
per response per quarter, BEA estimates
the total respondent burden for the BE–
605 on these businesses would be only
80 hours annually, while the total
estimated respondent burden for all
companies is 16,000 hours.
Because few small businesses are
subject to the reporting requirements,
and because those small businesses that
are subject to reporting are subject to
minimal record keeping burdens, the
Chief Counsel for Regulation certifies
that this proposed rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 806
Economic statistics, Foreign
investment in the United States,
International transactions, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: July 30, 2009.
J. Steven Landefeld,
Director, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
For reasons set forth in the preamble,
BEA proposes to amend 15 CFR part 806
as follows:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:26 Sep 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
PART 806—DIRECT INVESTMENT
SURVEYS
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 806 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 22 U.S.C. 3101–
3108; E.O. 11961 (3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 86),
as amended by E.O. 12318 (3 CFR, 1981
Comp., p. 173), and E.O. 12518 (3 CFR, 1985
Comp., p. 348).
2. Section 806.15(h) is revised to read
as follows:
§ 806.15 Foreign direct investment in the
United States.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Quarterly report form. BE–605,
Quarterly Survey of Foreign Direct
Investment in the United States—
Transactions of U.S. Affiliate with
Foreign Parent: One report is required
for each U.S. affiliate exceeding an
exemption level of $60 million.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–21132 Filed 9–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 62
[Public Notice: 6749]
RIN 1400–AC56
Exchange Visitor Program—Secondary
School Students
Department of State.
Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM).
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department seeks
information on alternative and more
specific means of screening potential
families to host exchange visitors
participating in the Secondary School
Student category of the Exchange Visitor
Program. Current regulations allow
sponsors the flexibility to exercise their
independent judgment when evaluating
the financial resources, moral character,
and composition of potential host
families, as well as the suitability of
potential home environments. The
Department believes, however, that the
lack of specificity or industry standards
may have contributed to the recent
degradation of the appropriateness of
selected families, thereby putting at risk
the health, safety, and welfare of this
most vulnerable group of exchange
visitors.
DATES: The Department will accept
comments from the public up to October
2, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by any of the following
methods:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45385
E-mail: JExchanges@state.gov. You
must include the RIN in the subject line
of your message.
Mail (paper, disk, or CD–ROM
submissions): U.S. Department of State,
Office of Designation, SA–5, 5th Floor,
2200 C Street, NW., Washington, DC
20522–0505.
Fax: 202–632–2701.
Persons with access to the Internet
may also view this notice and provide
comments by going to the
regulations.gov Web site at: https://
www.regulations.gov/index.cfm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stanley S. Colvin, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Private Sector Exchanges,
U.S. Department of State, 2200 C Street,
NW., SA–5, 5th Floor, Washington, DC
20522–0505; or e-mail at
JExchanges@state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department of State (‘‘Department’’)
designates academic, government, and
private sector entities to conduct
educational and cultural exchange
programs pursuant to a broad grant of
authority provided by the Mutual
Educational and Cultural Exchange Act
of 1961, as amended. Under this
authority, some 1,450 program sponsors
facilitate the entry of more than 350,000
exchange participants each year.
Secondary school students—of which
there were nearly 30,000 for the 2008–
2009 academic year—have been a vital
component of these exchange activities
since 1956. This ANPRM is a general
solicitation of public comments that
seeks to gather input as to whether and,
if so, how the Department should
modify its regulations set forth in 22
CFR 62.25(j) (Host Family Selection) to
provide more specific guidance to
sponsors for screening and selecting
host families with whom they place
students attending high school in the
United States on the Exchange Visitor
Program.
The safety and security of these
exchange student participants are of
paramount importance to the
Department. Although these students
are generally 17 or even 18 years of age,
some are as young as 15 and often away
from home for the first time. Given the
vulnerable status of such a population,
most of whom are considered children
under the laws of the 50 States where
they are living and attending school, the
Department modified the regulations
governing this category of exchange in
2006. The Department adopted a
requirement that sponsors immediately
report to the Department any incident or
allegation involving the actual or
alleged sexual exploitation or abuse of
an exchange student participant.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
45386
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Sponsors were also required to report
such allegations pursuant to the local
mandatory child abuse and neglect
reporting laws all 50 States and the
District of Columbia adopted pursuant
to the Child Abuse Prevention and
Treatment Act, 42 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. In
addition, the Department adopted
regulations that required sponsors to vet
officers, employees, representatives,
agents, and volunteers acting on their
behalf who had direct personal contact
with exchange students and any
member of a potential host family
household 18 years or older through
criminal background checks.
The Department has now had three
years’ experience with host family
placements following the
implementation of these regulatory
modifications. Although complaints
about the inappropriate placement or
actual mistreatment of these young
participants represent the exception
rather than the rule, there have been a
sufficient number of incidents of such
severity that the Department has
determined that more specific guidance
for host family selection may be
appropriate. Current regulations set
forth the minimum steps that sponsors
must take to screen potential host
families. Among other things, sponsors
must utilize a standard application form
to collect broad categories of
information (22 CFR 62.25(j)(2)),
conduct an in-person interview of all
family members residing in the home
(22 CFR 62.25(j)(3)), and obtain two
personal character references from the
‘‘school or community’’ for each host
family. (22 CFR 62.25(j)(5)) They must
also ascertain whether potential host
families have adequate financial
resources to undertake the hosting
obligation (22 CFR 62.25(j)(6)), and they
must verify that each member of the
household 18 years or older has
undergone criminal background checks.
(22 CFR 62.25(j)(7)) Information
gathered from commenting parties
should allow the Department to
determine whether it should clarify or
strengthen these screening
requirements.
The current standard application form
must provide ‘‘a detailed summary’’ of
each family, its composition, and the
home and community environments. A
subjective verbal description of a
physical environment, however, may
not always present an accurate
depiction. The widespread availability
of digital camera technology (e.g., most
cell phones have cameras) and the
increased use of e-mail communications
make it possible to obtain objective
information about an exchange visitor’s
potential new home with great ease and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:26 Sep 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
little cost. Requiring photographs of the
interior and exterior of a potential
home, including the student’s bedroom
and the surrounding grounds, would
complement any verbal description of
the home and afford sponsors accurate
information to use in assessing the
suitability of the environment. The
Department seeks information on
whether sponsors’ field staffs have
access to the equipment and technology
necessary to photograph potential
residences and incorporate the images
into either hard copy or online host
family applications. In the alternative,
the Department asks commenting
parties to suggest other means of better
capturing and describing potential
homes.
The Department is aware that some
field staffs allow relatives of potential
host families to submit character
references. In some instances, field
staffs themselves serve as references. To
ensure that character references were
not biased, the Department recently
reminded the sponsor community that
the supplemental information
accompanying the adoption of
regulations governing secondary school
student exchange programs explained
that one potential host family reference
should be from a member of the school
community and the other, from the
potential host family’s social,
residential, or business community.
Many sponsors expressed concern that
some potential host families (e.g.,
‘‘empty nesters’’) were not known in
school communities, and that some
schools would not be willing to provide
such references. As a result, the
Department seeks information on how
better to identify neutral and
dependable persons to serve as
character references for potential host
families. Specifically, the Department
asks whether there are certain limiting
criteria (e.g., prohibiting local
coordinators, other agents of the
sponsors, or persons related to the host
families by blood or marriage from
serving as character references) or
defining criteria (e.g., knowing the
potential host families for a certain
number of years) that would provide the
most meaningful references for potential
host families. Sponsors may wish to
provide specific questions that they
have found to elicit particularly
insightful information about potential
host families or otherwise share their
‘‘best practices.’’
The Department has recently
reminded the sponsor community that
the public diplomacy underpinnings of
the Exchange Visitor Program make it
unacceptable for them to pay families to
host students. This restriction reflects
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the statutory basis on which the entire
program is founded. The Department is
authorized, pursuant to the Mutual
Educational and Cultural Exchange Act
of 1961, 22 U.S.C. 2451 et seq.,
(Fulbright-Hays Act) to facilitate and
direct educational and cultural
exchange activities to develop and
promote mutual understanding between
the people of the United States and
other countries of the world. Allowing
sponsors to pay host families introduces
an incentive that could replace the
current motivation of host families, i.e.,
to further international understanding,
to the potential detriment of the public
policy intent of the Exchange Visitor
Program. While this restriction may
deny caring families with limited
economic resources opportunities to
participate in the program, the
Department has steadfastly maintained
this caveat to stay true to the purpose of
the program as set forth in the FulbrightHays Act. As a result, sponsors must
rely solely upon families’ incomes when
assessing their financial eligibility to
host exchange students.
Determining whether families have
adequate financial resources to host is
not easy given the range of incomes of
families in the United States, cost of
living differences, and the inherently
subjective views individuals have of
what is a comfortable and nurturing
home environment. Unfortunately, the
Department has learned of situations in
which sponsors have placed exchange
visitors in unsuitable environments
such as unsanitary or condemned
homes and those without essential
utilities. As a result, the Department
seeks comment on how to objectively
measure the minimum financial
resources necessary for a family to host
an exchange student. The Department
asks sponsors to identify the singlepoint measures of income or series of
indicators they currently use to assess
financial eligibility of potential families.
They may wish also to provide data on
the percentage of their prior host
families whose incomes met or
exceeded such objective measures. The
Department also seeks
recommendations of alternative singlepoint measures or other accurate series
of income indicators they may wish to
adopt. Finally, the Department seeks
comment on the impact the adoption of
any of these objective measures might
have on the ability of sponsors to place
students.
The Department is also studying
whether we should adopt standards for
the criminal background checks that all
adult members of a potential host family
must undergo. Currently, the
Department has no specific requirement
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 169 / Wednesday, September 2, 2009 / Proposed Rules
with respect to this regulation. Instead,
we have left it to the individual
sponsors to exercise ‘‘those qualities of
attention, knowledge, intelligence and
judgment which society requires of its
members for the protection of their own
interest and the interests of others’’ (i.e.,
the ‘‘reasonable man’’ legal standard
that has developed under case law)
when deciding how much to spend for
each background check, which
commercial services to engage, or which
databases to query. Most importantly,
the Department does not dictate how
sponsors should evaluate the results of
these background checks, again
allowing sponsors to apply the
‘‘reasonable man’’ standard. The
proliferation of media reports of
American children being sexually
abused across the nation, however, has
escalated the Department’s concern that
sponsors may not be doing enough to
protect the foreign visitors entrusted to
their care.
Accordingly, the Department seeks
information on the standards that other
organizations use to deal with the safety
and oversight of children to assess the
suitability of volunteers or employees
and the problems or benefits associated
with adopting such practices. We also
seek information on the identity of the
service providers that current sponsors
use, as well as the level and cost of the
services obtained. Further, sponsors
specifically are requested to recommend
any Internet searches they may employ
to supplement the formal background
reports. Finally, we seek specific
information from sponsors regarding
their methods of evaluating the results
of these reports, including identifying
any acts that they believe render
potential host families ineligible.
Public Law 105–251, The Volunteers
for Children Act (‘‘Act’’), amended the
National Child Protection Act of 1993,
42 U.S.C. 5119a, to allow organizations
and businesses engaged in the care of
other peoples’ children to use national
fingerprint-based criminal history
checks to screen out volunteers and
employees with relevant criminal
records. The Department seeks
information on which, if any, State laws
would consider a host family to be a
‘‘qualified entity’’ as defined in the Act,
thereby requiring sponsors to request
national fingerprint-based checks of
such volunteers. We seek comment on
the costs and administrative effort that
would result from requiring sponsors to
vet adult members of potential host
families through the FBI’s national
fingerprint database and whether any
sponsors have been using this approach.
To the extent possible, parties should
comment on whether there is a
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:26 Sep 01, 2009
Jkt 217001
relationship between the cost of
criminal background checks and the
comprehensiveness and accuracy of the
resulting reports. Sponsors should also
provide information on the procedures
they employ to obtain criminal
background checks on adult members
who join a household or children who
turn 18 after an exchange visitor is
placed in the home. The Department
asks that sponsors also identify the
criteria they use to determine when a
frequent adult visitor in a home (e.g., a
college student, grown child, or
acquaintance of an adult family
member) should also be vetted through
the criminal background check process.
The regulations also require sponsors
to conduct an in-person interview with
all family members residing in the
home. The Department requests
comment from sponsors regarding how
they identify ‘‘all family members’’
residing in the home. They should
specify whether they interview every
adult who is vetted by a background
check and whether they conduct
multiple interviews if all family
members are not available at the same
time. Parties should comment on
whether they believe that requiring such
interviews to be conducted in the home
provides additional insight into the
family dynamic and its suitability to
host an exchange student.
The Department has never attempted
to define a ‘‘family’’ for purposes of
being eligible to host a foreign high
school student. We take notice,
however, of the fact that problematic
placements often occur in homes of
families that do not include a schoolaged child. As a result, we are
considering regulations that require host
families to be comprised of, at a
minimum, one adult and one schoolaged child (natural, adopted, or foster)
living in the home. Although this
configuration would eliminate from the
pool of host families a number of caring
single adults or couples, such as
‘‘empty-nesters,’’ the Department
believes that the presence of a schoolaged child in a home may provide
compensating advantages. The
Department seeks information from
sponsors on the configurations of
families that have provided either
successful or problematic placements in
the past. We ask the sponsor community
also to suggest alternative minimum
configurations or to recommend
extenuating circumstances under which
minimum configurations might not be
necessary to ensure appropriate
placements. The Department asks
parties to comment on the extent to
which imposing more specific
definitions of a family could impact the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45387
supply of potential host families and
whether the increased suitability of
selected families would compensate for
the smaller pool of eligible host
families.
Finally, the Department encourages
parties to comment on aspects of host
family screening and selecting in
addition to those specifically raised. For
example, sponsors may wish to share
the methods they use in identifying
potential host families. More
importantly, they may wish to
enumerate the methods that their
experiences have found to be
problematic or that they believe may
encourage inappropriate adults to agree
to host high school students. Sponsors
are especially encouraged to share their
best practices with the Department to
provide the entire industry with
guidance on how best to protect the
health, safety, and welfare of high
school-aged foreign exchange students.
Dated: August 27, 2009.
Stanley S. Colvin,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Private Sector
Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9–21185 Filed 9–1–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–05–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[Docket: R02–OAR–2009–0508; FRL–8952–
3]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Puerto Rico;
Guaynabo PM10 Limited Maintenance
Plan and Redesignation Request
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
the Limited Maintenance Plan for the
Municipality of Guaynabo
nonattainment area in Puerto Rico and
grant the request by the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico to redesignate the area
from nonattainment to attainment for
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal
to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10).
On March 31, 2009, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico submitted a Limited
Maintenance Plan for the Guaynabo
nonattainment area for approval and
concurrently requested that EPA
redesignate the Guaynabo
nonattainment area to attainment for
PM10.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 169 (Wednesday, September 2, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45385-45387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21185]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 62
[Public Notice: 6749]
RIN 1400-AC56
Exchange Visitor Program--Secondary School Students
AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department seeks information on alternative and more
specific means of screening potential families to host exchange
visitors participating in the Secondary School Student category of the
Exchange Visitor Program. Current regulations allow sponsors the
flexibility to exercise their independent judgment when evaluating the
financial resources, moral character, and composition of potential host
families, as well as the suitability of potential home environments.
The Department believes, however, that the lack of specificity or
industry standards may have contributed to the recent degradation of
the appropriateness of selected families, thereby putting at risk the
health, safety, and welfare of this most vulnerable group of exchange
visitors.
DATES: The Department will accept comments from the public up to
October 2, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by any of the following
methods:
E-mail: JExchanges@state.gov. You must include the RIN in the
subject line of your message.
Mail (paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions): U.S. Department of
State, Office of Designation, SA-5, 5th Floor, 2200 C Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20522-0505.
Fax: 202-632-2701.
Persons with access to the Internet may also view this notice and
provide comments by going to the regulations.gov Web site at: https://www.regulations.gov/index.cfm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley S. Colvin, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Private Sector Exchanges, U.S. Department of State, 2200
C Street, NW., SA-5, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20522-0505; or e-mail at
JExchanges@state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of State (``Department'')
designates academic, government, and private sector entities to conduct
educational and cultural exchange programs pursuant to a broad grant of
authority provided by the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act
of 1961, as amended. Under this authority, some 1,450 program sponsors
facilitate the entry of more than 350,000 exchange participants each
year. Secondary school students--of which there were nearly 30,000 for
the 2008-2009 academic year--have been a vital component of these
exchange activities since 1956. This ANPRM is a general solicitation of
public comments that seeks to gather input as to whether and, if so,
how the Department should modify its regulations set forth in 22 CFR
62.25(j) (Host Family Selection) to provide more specific guidance to
sponsors for screening and selecting host families with whom they place
students attending high school in the United States on the Exchange
Visitor Program.
The safety and security of these exchange student participants are
of paramount importance to the Department. Although these students are
generally 17 or even 18 years of age, some are as young as 15 and often
away from home for the first time. Given the vulnerable status of such
a population, most of whom are considered children under the laws of
the 50 States where they are living and attending school, the
Department modified the regulations governing this category of exchange
in 2006. The Department adopted a requirement that sponsors immediately
report to the Department any incident or allegation involving the
actual or alleged sexual exploitation or abuse of an exchange student
participant.
[[Page 45386]]
Sponsors were also required to report such allegations pursuant to the
local mandatory child abuse and neglect reporting laws all 50 States
and the District of Columbia adopted pursuant to the Child Abuse
Prevention and Treatment Act, 42 U.S.C. 5101 et seq. In addition, the
Department adopted regulations that required sponsors to vet officers,
employees, representatives, agents, and volunteers acting on their
behalf who had direct personal contact with exchange students and any
member of a potential host family household 18 years or older through
criminal background checks.
The Department has now had three years' experience with host family
placements following the implementation of these regulatory
modifications. Although complaints about the inappropriate placement or
actual mistreatment of these young participants represent the exception
rather than the rule, there have been a sufficient number of incidents
of such severity that the Department has determined that more specific
guidance for host family selection may be appropriate. Current
regulations set forth the minimum steps that sponsors must take to
screen potential host families. Among other things, sponsors must
utilize a standard application form to collect broad categories of
information (22 CFR 62.25(j)(2)), conduct an in-person interview of all
family members residing in the home (22 CFR 62.25(j)(3)), and obtain
two personal character references from the ``school or community'' for
each host family. (22 CFR 62.25(j)(5)) They must also ascertain whether
potential host families have adequate financial resources to undertake
the hosting obligation (22 CFR 62.25(j)(6)), and they must verify that
each member of the household 18 years or older has undergone criminal
background checks. (22 CFR 62.25(j)(7)) Information gathered from
commenting parties should allow the Department to determine whether it
should clarify or strengthen these screening requirements.
The current standard application form must provide ``a detailed
summary'' of each family, its composition, and the home and community
environments. A subjective verbal description of a physical
environment, however, may not always present an accurate depiction. The
widespread availability of digital camera technology (e.g., most cell
phones have cameras) and the increased use of e-mail communications
make it possible to obtain objective information about an exchange
visitor's potential new home with great ease and little cost. Requiring
photographs of the interior and exterior of a potential home, including
the student's bedroom and the surrounding grounds, would complement any
verbal description of the home and afford sponsors accurate information
to use in assessing the suitability of the environment. The Department
seeks information on whether sponsors' field staffs have access to the
equipment and technology necessary to photograph potential residences
and incorporate the images into either hard copy or online host family
applications. In the alternative, the Department asks commenting
parties to suggest other means of better capturing and describing
potential homes.
The Department is aware that some field staffs allow relatives of
potential host families to submit character references. In some
instances, field staffs themselves serve as references. To ensure that
character references were not biased, the Department recently reminded
the sponsor community that the supplemental information accompanying
the adoption of regulations governing secondary school student exchange
programs explained that one potential host family reference should be
from a member of the school community and the other, from the potential
host family's social, residential, or business community. Many sponsors
expressed concern that some potential host families (e.g., ``empty
nesters'') were not known in school communities, and that some schools
would not be willing to provide such references. As a result, the
Department seeks information on how better to identify neutral and
dependable persons to serve as character references for potential host
families. Specifically, the Department asks whether there are certain
limiting criteria (e.g., prohibiting local coordinators, other agents
of the sponsors, or persons related to the host families by blood or
marriage from serving as character references) or defining criteria
(e.g., knowing the potential host families for a certain number of
years) that would provide the most meaningful references for potential
host families. Sponsors may wish to provide specific questions that
they have found to elicit particularly insightful information about
potential host families or otherwise share their ``best practices.''
The Department has recently reminded the sponsor community that the
public diplomacy underpinnings of the Exchange Visitor Program make it
unacceptable for them to pay families to host students. This
restriction reflects the statutory basis on which the entire program is
founded. The Department is authorized, pursuant to the Mutual
Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, 22 U.S.C. 2451 et seq.,
(Fulbright-Hays Act) to facilitate and direct educational and cultural
exchange activities to develop and promote mutual understanding between
the people of the United States and other countries of the world.
Allowing sponsors to pay host families introduces an incentive that
could replace the current motivation of host families, i.e., to further
international understanding, to the potential detriment of the public
policy intent of the Exchange Visitor Program. While this restriction
may deny caring families with limited economic resources opportunities
to participate in the program, the Department has steadfastly
maintained this caveat to stay true to the purpose of the program as
set forth in the Fulbright-Hays Act. As a result, sponsors must rely
solely upon families' incomes when assessing their financial
eligibility to host exchange students.
Determining whether families have adequate financial resources to
host is not easy given the range of incomes of families in the United
States, cost of living differences, and the inherently subjective views
individuals have of what is a comfortable and nurturing home
environment. Unfortunately, the Department has learned of situations in
which sponsors have placed exchange visitors in unsuitable environments
such as unsanitary or condemned homes and those without essential
utilities. As a result, the Department seeks comment on how to
objectively measure the minimum financial resources necessary for a
family to host an exchange student. The Department asks sponsors to
identify the single-point measures of income or series of indicators
they currently use to assess financial eligibility of potential
families. They may wish also to provide data on the percentage of their
prior host families whose incomes met or exceeded such objective
measures. The Department also seeks recommendations of alternative
single-point measures or other accurate series of income indicators
they may wish to adopt. Finally, the Department seeks comment on the
impact the adoption of any of these objective measures might have on
the ability of sponsors to place students.
The Department is also studying whether we should adopt standards
for the criminal background checks that all adult members of a
potential host family must undergo. Currently, the Department has no
specific requirement
[[Page 45387]]
with respect to this regulation. Instead, we have left it to the
individual sponsors to exercise ``those qualities of attention,
knowledge, intelligence and judgment which society requires of its
members for the protection of their own interest and the interests of
others'' (i.e., the ``reasonable man'' legal standard that has
developed under case law) when deciding how much to spend for each
background check, which commercial services to engage, or which
databases to query. Most importantly, the Department does not dictate
how sponsors should evaluate the results of these background checks,
again allowing sponsors to apply the ``reasonable man'' standard. The
proliferation of media reports of American children being sexually
abused across the nation, however, has escalated the Department's
concern that sponsors may not be doing enough to protect the foreign
visitors entrusted to their care.
Accordingly, the Department seeks information on the standards that
other organizations use to deal with the safety and oversight of
children to assess the suitability of volunteers or employees and the
problems or benefits associated with adopting such practices. We also
seek information on the identity of the service providers that current
sponsors use, as well as the level and cost of the services obtained.
Further, sponsors specifically are requested to recommend any Internet
searches they may employ to supplement the formal background reports.
Finally, we seek specific information from sponsors regarding their
methods of evaluating the results of these reports, including
identifying any acts that they believe render potential host families
ineligible.
Public Law 105-251, The Volunteers for Children Act (``Act''),
amended the National Child Protection Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. 5119a, to
allow organizations and businesses engaged in the care of other
peoples' children to use national fingerprint-based criminal history
checks to screen out volunteers and employees with relevant criminal
records. The Department seeks information on which, if any, State laws
would consider a host family to be a ``qualified entity'' as defined in
the Act, thereby requiring sponsors to request national fingerprint-
based checks of such volunteers. We seek comment on the costs and
administrative effort that would result from requiring sponsors to vet
adult members of potential host families through the FBI's national
fingerprint database and whether any sponsors have been using this
approach. To the extent possible, parties should comment on whether
there is a relationship between the cost of criminal background checks
and the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the resulting reports.
Sponsors should also provide information on the procedures they employ
to obtain criminal background checks on adult members who join a
household or children who turn 18 after an exchange visitor is placed
in the home. The Department asks that sponsors also identify the
criteria they use to determine when a frequent adult visitor in a home
(e.g., a college student, grown child, or acquaintance of an adult
family member) should also be vetted through the criminal background
check process.
The regulations also require sponsors to conduct an in-person
interview with all family members residing in the home. The Department
requests comment from sponsors regarding how they identify ``all family
members'' residing in the home. They should specify whether they
interview every adult who is vetted by a background check and whether
they conduct multiple interviews if all family members are not
available at the same time. Parties should comment on whether they
believe that requiring such interviews to be conducted in the home
provides additional insight into the family dynamic and its suitability
to host an exchange student.
The Department has never attempted to define a ``family'' for
purposes of being eligible to host a foreign high school student. We
take notice, however, of the fact that problematic placements often
occur in homes of families that do not include a school-aged child. As
a result, we are considering regulations that require host families to
be comprised of, at a minimum, one adult and one school-aged child
(natural, adopted, or foster) living in the home. Although this
configuration would eliminate from the pool of host families a number
of caring single adults or couples, such as ``empty-nesters,'' the
Department believes that the presence of a school-aged child in a home
may provide compensating advantages. The Department seeks information
from sponsors on the configurations of families that have provided
either successful or problematic placements in the past. We ask the
sponsor community also to suggest alternative minimum configurations or
to recommend extenuating circumstances under which minimum
configurations might not be necessary to ensure appropriate placements.
The Department asks parties to comment on the extent to which imposing
more specific definitions of a family could impact the supply of
potential host families and whether the increased suitability of
selected families would compensate for the smaller pool of eligible
host families.
Finally, the Department encourages parties to comment on aspects of
host family screening and selecting in addition to those specifically
raised. For example, sponsors may wish to share the methods they use in
identifying potential host families. More importantly, they may wish to
enumerate the methods that their experiences have found to be
problematic or that they believe may encourage inappropriate adults to
agree to host high school students. Sponsors are especially encouraged
to share their best practices with the Department to provide the entire
industry with guidance on how best to protect the health, safety, and
welfare of high school-aged foreign exchange students.
Dated: August 27, 2009.
Stanley S. Colvin,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Private Sector Exchanges, Bureau of
Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-21185 Filed 9-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P