Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 62327-62329 [E9-28210]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 227 / Friday, November 27, 2009 / Notices
recommends that providers contact
relevant agencies as described in
Section VII of ‘‘Screening Framework
Guidance for Synthetic Nucleic Acid
Providers.’’
Dated: November 19, 2009.
Nicole Lurie,
Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and
Response.
[FR Doc. E9–28328 Filed 11–25–09; 8:45 am]
Customer and Sequence Screening
Software and Expertise
BILLING CODE 4150–37–P
Providers should be aware that
commercially available customer
screening software packages may not
necessarily address all aspects of
customer screening recommended by
the U.S. Government.
The U.S. Government recommends
that:
• Synthetic nucleic acid providers
select a sequence screening software
tool that utilizes both a global and local
sequence alignment technique.
• Synthetic nucleic acid providers
have the necessary expertise in-house to
perform the sequence screenings,
analyze the results, and conduct the
appropriate follow-up research to
evaluate the significance of dubious
sequence matches.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
country is permitted, and, if not
permitted, obtain any appropriate
export licenses or other U.S.
government permissions prior to
exporting any product to sanctioned
countries.
• According to U.S. regulations, no
U.S. persons or entities may conduct
business transactions with individuals
and entities on the SDN List without a
license from OFAC.13
• According to U.S. regulations, no
U.S. persons or entities may conduct
business transactions with individuals
sanctioned by the Department of State
for engaging in proliferation activities.14
• The Export Administration
Regulations (EAR) require that providers
have an export license from BIS prior to
exporting a synthetic nucleic acid that
is controlled by an Export Control
Classification Number (ECCN) and is
capable of encoding a protein.15
• U.S. persons or entities may not
export, reexport, or transfer (in-country)
an item subject to the EAR without a
license if, at the time of export, reexport,
or transfer (in-country) the exporter
knows that the item will be used in the
design, development, production,
stockpiling, or use of biological
weapons in or by any country or
destination, worldwide.15
• In accordance with the EAR,
providers must not conduct business
with persons and entities on the DPL.15
• In accordance with the EAR,
exports to persons or entities on the
Entity List are subject to licensing
requirements and policies in addition to
those elsewhere in the EAR.15
• The presence of a party on the UL
in a transaction is a ‘‘red flag’’ that
should be resolved before proceeding
with the transaction.15
In order to avoid violating U.S. laws
and regulations, providers are
encouraged to check the individual
placing the order and the individual’s
affiliated institution (when applicable)
against the most recent versions of these
lists of proscribed entities before filling
each order.
The U.S. Government recommends
that providers utilize a ‘‘Best Match’’
approach to identify sequences of
pathogens and toxins on the Commerce
Control List for international orders.
This screen is in addition to the ‘‘Best
Match’’ sequence screen for Select
Agent and Toxin sequences.
The U.S. Government recommends
that:
• Companies retain electronic copies
of customer orders for at least eight
years based on the statute of limitations
set forth by U.S. Code Title 18 Section
3286.18 The following information
should be archived: Customer (and enduser, if different) information (name,
organization, address, and phone
number), order sequence information,
and order information (date placed and
shipped, shipping address, and receiver
name).
• Providers develop, maintain, and
document their sequence screening
protocols within company records.
• Providers develop, maintain, and
document protocols to determine if a
sequence hit qualifies as a true sequence
of concern.
• Providers keep records of hits that
required follow-up screening, even if
the order was ultimately filled.
If an order involves an export,
according to the EAR, both the provider
and customer are required to maintain
documentary evidence of the
transaction and are prohibited from
misrepresenting or concealing material
facts in licensing processes and all
export control documents.15
Contacting the U.S. Government
In cases where follow-up screening
cannot resolve concerns raised by
customer screening or sequence
screening, or when providers are
otherwise unsure about whether to fill
an order, the U.S. Government
18 Section 3286 specifies that no person shall be
prosecuted, tried, or punished for any noncapital
offense involving certain violations unless the
indictment is found or the information is instituted
within 8 years after the offense was committed.
This statute of limitations applies to Title 18
Section 175(b) (possession of biological agents with
no reasonable justification).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:08 Nov 25, 2009
Jkt 220001
62327
Records Retention
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This notice announces the
intention of the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approve the proposed
information collection project:
‘‘Evaluation of the GuideLines Into
Decision Support (GLIDES).’’ In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A), AHRQ invites the public
to comment on this proposed
information collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received by January 26, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
Copies of the proposed collection
plans, data collection instruments, and
specific details on the estimated burden
can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427–1477, or by
e-mail at
doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Project
Evaluation of the GuideLines Into
Decision Support (GLIDES)
With this project AHRQ proposes to
evaluate how the translation of clinical
knowledge into clinical decision
support can be routinized in practice
and taken to scale in ways that improve
the quality of healthcare delivery for
children in the U.S. Previously in the
GLIDES project, AHRQ designed and
implemented decision support tools
based on guidelines for the prevention
of pediatric overweight and obesity and
the management of chronic asthma in
E:\FR\FM\27NON1.SGM
27NON1
62328
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 227 / Friday, November 27, 2009 / Notices
the pediatric population (publication
forthcoming). In this phase of the
project, conducted for AHRQ through a
contract with Yale University and
Nemours, physicians will be surveyed
about their experiences with the
decision support tools developed in the
previous phase. The participating study
institutions (Yale University and
Nemours) are geographically and
organizationally diverse, and include a
wide range of patients from a variety of
social, economic and ethnic
backgrounds. This project directly
addresses AHRQ’s mission of improving
health systems practices, in particular
for priority populations, including lowincome groups, minority groups,
women, children, and individuals with
chronic diseases. See 42 U.S.C.
299(c)(1)(B).
The evaluation plan includes a
physician survey component and an
extraction of electronic medical record
data. Participating physicians will be
surveyed about their experiences with
the decision support tools developed for
this project. This will allow AHRQ to
evaluate the fulfillment of knowledge
transformation goals and the
effectiveness of the decision support
tools in improving the quality of health
care at the chosen sites. Without such
an evaluation, it would be difficult to
determine whether this project has met
AHRQ’s goals of enhancing the ‘‘quality,
appropriateness and effectiveness of
health services.’’ See 42 U.S.C. 299(b);
42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(1). Consequently, it is
necessary to collect this information to
fulfill AHRQ’s mission.
Method of Collection
Self-administered questionnaires will
be used to elicit physicians’ general
opinions of guideline-based care and
clinical decision support tools on a five
point Likert-type scale. Results from
low-utilizing physicians will be
compared to high-utilizing physicians to
determine whether general opinions of
guidelines and technology correlate
with actual practice. Results will also be
analyzed by demographic characteristics
included in the survey questionnaire to
determine whether opinions vary by
age, degree of computer experience and
skill, level of training and professional
degree. These analyses will be
important to future studies and decision
support designers because they will
help us understand whether
interventions need to be targeted
differently to different audiences. For
example, senior level specialists may
have less desire or need for clinical
decision support tools than novice
generalists have. In-person qualitative
interviews lasting approximately 30
minutes will be conducted with key
personnel at each site (including
physicians, nurse practitioners, and
respiratory therapists). Participants will
remain anonymous in the transcribed
interviews. The interviews will be
analyzed using standard qualitative
techniques to explore barriers and
facilitators to using the clinical decision
support tool. The Human Investigation
Committee (HIC) at Yale University has
reviewed this protocol. The HIC found
the survey study to be exempt from
review under 45 CFR 46.101(b)(2). The
HIC approved the interview study and
required signed informed consent from
participants.
Electronic medical record data will be
extracted into an electronic spreadsheet
for analysis. This extraction will occur
at regular intervals to ensure continued
maintenance and uptake of the tool.
Utilization of the decision support tools
at the provider and site level will be
assessed based on the rate of electronic
chart documentation. This is important
to determine the rate of uptake of the
intervention, as well as to determine
whether there are any flaws in the
design of the tool. Congruence of actual
practice with guideline
recommendations will be assessed
based on automatically generated
disagreement flags in the electronic
medical record as well as by manual
chart review. This data collection,
including the manual chart review, will
be performed by project staff and will
not impose a burden on the
participating sites. In addition, project
staff will directly observe a random
sampling of clinicians using the tool in
clinical settings to determine how the
tool affects workflow. These
observations will not require any effort,
time or action on the part of the
clinicians themselves and will not
impose a burden on the participating
sites. Signed informed consent will be
obtained prior to any observations. The
Human Investigation Committee at Yale
University has reviewed this protocol. It
approved the medical record review,
approved direct observation of
clinicians and interviews of clinicians,
required signed informed consent from
clinicians, granted a waiver of informed
consent from patients per 45 CFR
46.116(d), and granted a waiver of
HIPAA authorization.
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden
Exhibit 1 shows the estimated
annualized burden hours for the
respondents’ time to participate in this
research. The Asthma Management and
Clinical Decision Support System
Usability and User Satisfaction Survey
(asthma questionnaire) will be
completed by 172 health care
professionals across 3 sites and is
expected to require about 6 minutes to
complete. The Obesity Prevention and
Clinical Decision Support System
Usability and User Satisfaction Survey
(obesity questionnaire) will be
completed by 82 health care
professionals across 2 sites and is
expected to require about 6 minutes to
complete. The in-person interviews will
be conducted with a total of 50
clinicians at 3 sites and are expected to
last 30 minutes each. The total burden
is estimated to be 51 hours.
Exhibit 2 shows the estimated
annualized cost burden associated with
the respondents’ time to participate in
this research. The total cost burden is
estimated to be $2,781.
EXHIBIT 1—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Number of
responses per
site
Number of
sites
Form name
Hours per
response
Total burden
hours
Asthma questionnaire—Yale ...........................................................................
Asthma questionnaire—Nemours ....................................................................
Obesity questionnaire—Yale ...........................................................................
Obesity questionnaire—Nemours ....................................................................
In-person interviews—Yale ..............................................................................
In-person interviews—Nemours .......................................................................
2
1
1
1
2
1
31
110
57
25
15
20
6/60
6/60
6/60
6/60
30/60
30/60
6
11
6
3
15
10
Total ..........................................................................................................
5
na
na
51
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:08 Nov 25, 2009
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27NON1.SGM
27NON1
62329
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 227 / Friday, November 27, 2009 / Notices
EXHIBIT 2—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST BURDEN
Number of
sites
Form name
Average
hourly
wage rate *
Total burden
Hours
Total cost
burden
Asthma questionnaire—Yale ...........................................................................
Asthma questionnaire—Nemours ....................................................................
Obesity questionnaire—Yale ...........................................................................
Obesity questionnaire—Nemours ....................................................................
Interviews—Yale ..............................................................................................
Interviews—Nemours .......................................................................................
2
1
1
1
1
1
6
11
6
3
15
10
$59.83
59.83
47.25
47.25
53.54
53.54
$359
658
284
142
803
535
Total ..........................................................................................................
5
51
na
2,781
* Based upon the mean of the average wages for other physicians and surgeons, general pediatricians, and pediatric trainees (asthma questionnaire), and general pediatricians and pediatric trainees (obesity questionnaire), National Compensation Survey: Occupational wages in the
United States 2008, ‘‘U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,’’ and Yale Pediatric Residency Program, 2008.
Estimated Annual Costs to the Federal
Government
Exhibit 3 shows the total and
annualized cost for this research. Since
this project will not exceed one year the
total and annualized costs are identical.
The total cost is estimated to be $5,703.
EXHIBIT 3—ESTIMATED TOTAL AND ANNUALIZED COST
Cost component
Total cost
Annualized cost
Project Development ...............................................................................................................
Data Collection Activities .........................................................................................................
Data Processing and Analysis .................................................................................................
Publication of Results ..............................................................................................................
Project Management ................................................................................................................
Overhead .................................................................................................................................
$1,406
416
780
1,601
200
1,299
$1,406
416
780
1,601
200
1,299
Total ..................................................................................................................................
5,703
5,703
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Request for Comments
In accordance with the above-cited
Paperwork Reduction Act legislation,
comments on AHRQ’s information
collection are requested with regard to
any of the following: (a) Whether the
proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of
AHRQ health care research, quality
improvement and information
dissemination functions, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
AHRQ’ s estimate of burden (including
hours and costs) of the proposed
collection(s) 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 upon the
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and
included in the Agency’s subsequent
request for OMB approval of the
proposed information collection. All
comments will become a matter of
public record.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:08 Nov 25, 2009
Jkt 220001
Dated: November 16 2009.
Carolyn M. Clancy,
Director.
[FR Doc. E9–28210 Filed 11–25–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–90–M
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2009–D–0563]
Draft Guidance for Industry and Food
and Drug Administration Staff;
Preliminary Timetable for the Review
of Applications for Modified Risk
Tobacco Products Under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act;
Availability
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a draft guidance entitled
‘‘Preliminary Timetable for the Review
of Applications for Modified Risk
Tobacco Products under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.’’ This
guidance is intended for manufacturers,
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
retailers, importers, and FDA staff. The
guidance describes FDA’s current
thinking regarding the appropriate
preliminary timetable for its review of
applications for Modified Risk Tobacco
Products (MRTPs) under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act),
as modified by the Federal Smoking
Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
(Tobacco Control Act).
DATES: Although you can comment on
any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the agency
considers your comment on this draft
guidance before it begins work on the
final version of the guidance, submit
written or electronic comments on the
draft guidance by February 25, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for
single copies of the draft guidance
document entitled ‘‘Preliminary
Timetable for the Review of
Applications for Modified Risk Tobacco
Products under the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act’’ to the Center for
Tobacco Products, Food and Drug
Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd.,
Rockville, MD 20850–3229. Send one
self-addressed adhesive label to assist
that office in processing your request or
include a fax number to which the draft
guidance document may be sent. See the
E:\FR\FM\27NON1.SGM
27NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 227 (Friday, November 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62327-62329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-28210]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the intention of the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approve the proposed information collection
project: ``Evaluation of the GuideLines Into Decision Support
(GLIDES).'' In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), AHRQ invites the public to comment on this
proposed information collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by January 26, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by e-mail at
doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
Copies of the proposed collection plans, data collection
instruments, and specific details on the estimated burden can be
obtained from the AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427-1477, or by e-mail at
doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Project
Evaluation of the GuideLines Into Decision Support (GLIDES)
With this project AHRQ proposes to evaluate how the translation of
clinical knowledge into clinical decision support can be routinized in
practice and taken to scale in ways that improve the quality of
healthcare delivery for children in the U.S. Previously in the GLIDES
project, AHRQ designed and implemented decision support tools based on
guidelines for the prevention of pediatric overweight and obesity and
the management of chronic asthma in
[[Page 62328]]
the pediatric population (publication forthcoming). In this phase of
the project, conducted for AHRQ through a contract with Yale University
and Nemours, physicians will be surveyed about their experiences with
the decision support tools developed in the previous phase. The
participating study institutions (Yale University and Nemours) are
geographically and organizationally diverse, and include a wide range
of patients from a variety of social, economic and ethnic backgrounds.
This project directly addresses AHRQ's mission of improving health
systems practices, in particular for priority populations, including
low-income groups, minority groups, women, children, and individuals
with chronic diseases. See 42 U.S.C. 299(c)(1)(B).
The evaluation plan includes a physician survey component and an
extraction of electronic medical record data. Participating physicians
will be surveyed about their experiences with the decision support
tools developed for this project. This will allow AHRQ to evaluate the
fulfillment of knowledge transformation goals and the effectiveness of
the decision support tools in improving the quality of health care at
the chosen sites. Without such an evaluation, it would be difficult to
determine whether this project has met AHRQ's goals of enhancing the
``quality, appropriateness and effectiveness of health services.'' See
42 U.S.C. 299(b); 42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(1). Consequently, it is necessary
to collect this information to fulfill AHRQ's mission.
Method of Collection
Self-administered questionnaires will be used to elicit physicians'
general opinions of guideline-based care and clinical decision support
tools on a five point Likert-type scale. Results from low-utilizing
physicians will be compared to high-utilizing physicians to determine
whether general opinions of guidelines and technology correlate with
actual practice. Results will also be analyzed by demographic
characteristics included in the survey questionnaire to determine
whether opinions vary by age, degree of computer experience and skill,
level of training and professional degree. These analyses will be
important to future studies and decision support designers because they
will help us understand whether interventions need to be targeted
differently to different audiences. For example, senior level
specialists may have less desire or need for clinical decision support
tools than novice generalists have. In-person qualitative interviews
lasting approximately 30 minutes will be conducted with key personnel
at each site (including physicians, nurse practitioners, and
respiratory therapists). Participants will remain anonymous in the
transcribed interviews. The interviews will be analyzed using standard
qualitative techniques to explore barriers and facilitators to using
the clinical decision support tool. The Human Investigation Committee
(HIC) at Yale University has reviewed this protocol. The HIC found the
survey study to be exempt from review under 45 CFR 46.101(b)(2). The
HIC approved the interview study and required signed informed consent
from participants.
Electronic medical record data will be extracted into an electronic
spreadsheet for analysis. This extraction will occur at regular
intervals to ensure continued maintenance and uptake of the tool.
Utilization of the decision support tools at the provider and site
level will be assessed based on the rate of electronic chart
documentation. This is important to determine the rate of uptake of the
intervention, as well as to determine whether there are any flaws in
the design of the tool. Congruence of actual practice with guideline
recommendations will be assessed based on automatically generated
disagreement flags in the electronic medical record as well as by
manual chart review. This data collection, including the manual chart
review, will be performed by project staff and will not impose a burden
on the participating sites. In addition, project staff will directly
observe a random sampling of clinicians using the tool in clinical
settings to determine how the tool affects workflow. These observations
will not require any effort, time or action on the part of the
clinicians themselves and will not impose a burden on the participating
sites. Signed informed consent will be obtained prior to any
observations. The Human Investigation Committee at Yale University has
reviewed this protocol. It approved the medical record review, approved
direct observation of clinicians and interviews of clinicians, required
signed informed consent from clinicians, granted a waiver of informed
consent from patients per 45 CFR 46.116(d), and granted a waiver of
HIPAA authorization.
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden
Exhibit 1 shows the estimated annualized burden hours for the
respondents' time to participate in this research. The Asthma
Management and Clinical Decision Support System Usability and User
Satisfaction Survey (asthma questionnaire) will be completed by 172
health care professionals across 3 sites and is expected to require
about 6 minutes to complete. The Obesity Prevention and Clinical
Decision Support System Usability and User Satisfaction Survey (obesity
questionnaire) will be completed by 82 health care professionals across
2 sites and is expected to require about 6 minutes to complete. The in-
person interviews will be conducted with a total of 50 clinicians at 3
sites and are expected to last 30 minutes each. The total burden is
estimated to be 51 hours.
Exhibit 2 shows the estimated annualized cost burden associated
with the respondents' time to participate in this research. The total
cost burden is estimated to be $2,781.
Exhibit 1--Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Form name Number of responses per Hours per Total burden
sites site response hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asthma questionnaire--Yale...................... 2 31 6/60 6
Asthma questionnaire--Nemours................... 1 110 6/60 11
Obesity questionnaire--Yale..................... 1 57 6/60 6
Obesity questionnaire--Nemours.................. 1 25 6/60 3
In-person interviews--Yale...................... 2 15 30/60 15
In-person interviews--Nemours................... 1 20 30/60 10
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 5 na na 51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62329]]
Exhibit 2--Estimated Annualized Cost Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Form name Number of Total burden hourly wage Total cost
sites Hours rate \*\ burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asthma questionnaire--Yale...................... 2 6 $59.83 $359
Asthma questionnaire--Nemours................... 1 11 59.83 658
Obesity questionnaire--Yale..................... 1 6 47.25 284
Obesity questionnaire--Nemours.................. 1 3 47.25 142
Interviews--Yale................................ 1 15 53.54 803
Interviews--Nemours............................. 1 10 53.54 535
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 5 51 na 2,781
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Based upon the mean of the average wages for other physicians and surgeons, general pediatricians, and
pediatric trainees (asthma questionnaire), and general pediatricians and pediatric trainees (obesity
questionnaire), National Compensation Survey: Occupational wages in the United States 2008, ``U.S. Department
of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,'' and Yale Pediatric Residency Program, 2008.
Estimated Annual Costs to the Federal Government
Exhibit 3 shows the total and annualized cost for this research.
Since this project will not exceed one year the total and annualized
costs are identical. The total cost is estimated to be $5,703.
Exhibit 3--Estimated Total and Annualized Cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost component Total cost Annualized cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Development........................................... $1,406 $1,406
Data Collection Activities.................................... 416 416
Data Processing and Analysis.................................. 780 780
Publication of Results........................................ 1,601 1,601
Project Management............................................ 200 200
Overhead...................................................... 1,299 1,299
-------------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 5,703 5,703
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request for Comments
In accordance with the above-cited Paperwork Reduction Act
legislation, comments on AHRQ's information collection are requested
with regard to any of the following: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
AHRQ health care research, quality improvement and information
dissemination functions, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of AHRQ' s estimate of burden
(including hours and costs) of the proposed collection(s) 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 upon the respondents, including the use
of automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the
proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of
public record.
Dated: November 16 2009.
Carolyn M. Clancy,
Director.
[FR Doc. E9-28210 Filed 11-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-90-M
