Report on the Selection of Eligible Countries for Fiscal Year 2010, 66379-66380 [E9-29941]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 15, 2009 / Notices
https://www.tricare.mil/ocfo/mcfs/ubo/
mhs_rates.cfm.
approximately ten minutes per
respondent for Phase One and five
minutes per tool commented on in
Phase Two.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anthony D. Dais, Designated Project
Officer, Office of Workforce Investment
at (202) 693–2784; or e-mail
DOL.Challenge@dol.gov.
Signed: at Washington, DC this 9th day of
December 2009.
Jane Oates,
Assistant Secretary for Employment and
Training.
[FR Doc. E9–29831 Filed 12–11–09; 11:15
am]
Peter R. Orszag,
Director.
[FR Doc. E9–29801 Filed 12–14–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE
CORPORATION
[MCC FR 10–03]
Report on the Selection of Eligible
Countries for Fiscal Year 2010
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
AGENCY: Millennium Challenge
Corporation.
ACTION: Notice.
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
Fiscal Year 2008 Cost of Outpatient
Medical, Dental, and Cosmetic Surgery
Services Furnished by Department of
Defense Medical Treatment Facilities;
Certain Rates Regarding Recovery
From Tortiously Liable Third Persons
This report is provided in
accordance with section 608(d)(1) of the
Millennium Challenge Act of 2003,
Public Law 108–199, Division D (the
‘‘Act’’), 22 U.S.C. 7708(d)(1).
Dated: December 11, 2009.
Henry C. Pitney,
(Acting) Vice President and General Counsel,
Millennium Challenge Corporation.
SUMMARY:
Report on the Selection of Eligible Countries
for Fiscal Year 2010
Office of Management and
Budget, Executive Office of the
President.
AGENCY:
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: By virtue of the authority
vested in the President by section 2(a)
of Public Law 87–603 (76 Stat. 593; 42
U.S.C. 2652), and delegated to the
Director of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) by the President
through Executive Order No. 11541 of
July 1, 1970, the rates referenced below
are hereby established. These rates are
for use in connection with the recovery
from tortiously liable third persons for
the cost of outpatient medical, dental
and cosmetic surgery services furnished
by military treatment facilities through
the Department of Defense (DoD). The
rates were established in accordance
with the requirements of OMB Circular
A–25, requiring reimbursement of the
full cost of all services provided. The
outpatient medical and dental rates
referenced are effective upon
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register and will remain in effect until
further notice. Pharmacy rates are
updated periodically. The inpatient
rates, published on January 15, 2009,
remain in effect until further notice. A
full analysis of the rates is posted at the
DoD’s Uniform Business Office Web
site: https://www.tricare.mil/ocfo/_docs/
2009_MedDenCS_Rates%206_25_
09.pdf. The rates can be found at:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:23 Dec 14, 2009
Jkt 220001
Summary
This report is provided in accordance with
section 608(d)(1) of the Millennium
Challenge Act of 2003, Public Law 108–199,
Division D (the ‘‘Act’’), 22 U.S.C. 7708(d)(1).
The Act authorizes the provision of
Millennium Challenge Account (‘‘MCA’’)
assistance under section 605 of the Act to
countries that enter into compacts with the
United States to support policies and
programs that advance the progress of such
countries in achieving lasting economic
growth and poverty reduction, and are in
furtherance of the Act. The Act requires the
Millennium Challenge Corporation (‘‘MCC’’)
to determine the countries that will be
eligible to receive MCA assistance during the
fiscal year, based on their demonstrated
commitment to just and democratic
governance, economic freedom, and
investing in their people, as well as on the
opportunity to reduce poverty and generate
economic growth in the country. The Act
also requires the submission of reports to
appropriate congressional committees and
the publication of notices in the Federal
Register that identify, among other things:
1. The countries that are ‘‘candidate
countries’’ for MCA assistance during fiscal
year 2010 (FY10) based on their per-capita
income levels and their eligibility to receive
assistance under U.S. law, and countries that
would be candidate countries but for
specified legal prohibitions on assistance
(section 608(a) of the Act; 22 U.S.C. 7708(a));
2. The criteria and methodology that the
Board of Directors of MCC (‘‘the Board’’) will
use to measure and evaluate the relative
policy performance of the ‘‘candidate
countries’’ consistent with the requirements
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
66379
of section 607 of the Act in order to select
‘‘MCA eligible countries’’ from among the
‘‘candidate countries’’ (section 608(b) of the
Act, 22 U.S.C. 7708(b)); and
3. The list of countries determined by the
Board to be ‘‘MCA eligible countries’’ for
FY10, with justification for eligibility
determination and selection for compact
negotiation, including which of the MCA
eligible countries the Board will seek to enter
into MCA compacts (section 608(d) of the
Act, 22 U.S.C. 7708(d)).
This is the third of the above-described
reports by MCC for FY10. It identifies
countries determined by the Board to be
eligible under section 607 of the Act for FY10
(22 U.S.C. 7706) and countries with which
the Board will seek to enter into compacts
under section 609 of the Act, as well as the
justification for such decisions.
Eligible Countries
The Board met on December 9, 2009 to
select countries that will be eligible for MCA
compact assistance under section 607 of the
Act for FY10. The Board selected the
following countries as eligible for such
assistance for FY10: Cape Verde, Indonesia,
Jordan, Malawi, Moldova, the Philippines,
and Zambia.
In accordance with the Act and with the
‘‘Report on the Criteria and Methodology for
Determining the Eligibility of Candidate
Countries for Millennium Challenge Account
Assistance in Fiscal Year 2010’’ submitted to
the Congress on September 11, 2009,
selection was based primarily on a country’s
overall performance in three broad policy
categories: (1) ‘‘Ruling Justly’’; (2)
‘‘Encouraging Economic Freedom’’; and (3)
‘‘Investing in People.’’ As a basis for
determining which countries would be
eligible for MCA compact assistance, the
Board relied upon 17 transparent and
independent indicators to assess, to the
maximum extent possible, countries’ policy
performance and demonstrated commitment
in these three broad policy areas. In
determining eligibility, the Board compared
countries’ performance on the indicators
relative to their income-level peers,
evaluating them in comparison to either the
group of low income countries (LIC) or the
group of lower-middle income countries
(LMIC). In particular, the Board considered if
a country performed above the median in
relation to its peers on at least half of the
indicators in the Ruling Justly and Economic
Freedom policy categories, above the median
on at least three of five indicators in the
Investing in People policy category, and
above the median on the ‘‘Control of
Corruption’’ indicator. The Board also took
into account whether the country performed
substantially below the median on any
indictor, and if so, whether the country is
taking appropriate action to address the
shortcomings. Scorecards reflecting each
country’s performance on the indicators are
available on MCC’s Web site at https://
www.mcc.gov.
The Board also considered whether any
adjustments should be made for data gaps,
data lags, or recent events since the
indicators were published, as well as
strengths or weaknesses in particular
E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
15DEN1
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
66380
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 15, 2009 / Notices
indicators. Where appropriate, the Board
took into account additional quantitative and
qualitative information, such as evidence of
a country’s commitment to fighting
corruption and promoting democratic
governance, and its effective protection of
human rights. For countries that graduated
from the LIC group to the LMIC group in
FY10 due to an increase in their per capita
gross national income, the Board also took
into account supplemental information that
showed how the new LMIC country would
have performed in comparison to the LIC
group. In addition, the Board considered the
opportunity to reduce poverty and promote
economic growth in a country, in light of the
overall context of the information available,
as well as the availability of appropriated
funds.
This was the first year the Board
considered countries for eligibility for second
compacts, which is permissible under section
609(k) of the Act. In determining second
compact eligibility, the Board considered—in
addition to the criteria outlined above—the
country’s performance implementing its first
compact, including the nature of the country
partnership with MCC, the degree to which
the country has demonstrated a commitment
and capacity to achieve program results, and
the degree to which the country has
implemented the compact in accordance
with MCC’s core policies and standards.
There were no countries selected as
eligible for the first time in FY10. However,
Cape Verde, an LMIC, was selected as eligible
for MCA assistance for a second compact
under section 606(b) (22 U.S.C. 7705(b)) of
the Act.
Cape Verde meets MCC’s indicator criteria
this year for the first time since it advanced
from the LIC group to the LMIC group four
years ago. Cape Verde has been an economic
reformer over the past two decades and has
consistently displayed good economic and
political governance. Since becoming an
LMIC, the Government of Cape Verde has
worked hard to raise its indicator
performance to meet the standards of its
more competitive peer group. It has worked
over the past four years on ongoing reforms
to streamline business registration, as well as
on efforts to improve the accuracy of its
indicator data. These efforts are now
reflected on Cape Verde’s MCC scorecard.
Cape Verde’s current compact is due to
conclude in October 2010. Cape Verde
corrected some early compact
implementation difficulties and is now a
relatively strong performer on the
implementation of its compact.
Country partners that are developing or
implementing compacts must also show a
commitment to maintaining and improving
their policy performance. While MCC’s
indicators work well as a transparent way of
identifying those countries that are most
committed to sound development policies
and for discerning trends over the mediumterm, they are not as well-suited for tracking
incremental progress from year-to-year.
Countries may be generally maintaining
performance but not meet the criteria in a
given year due to factors such as:
• Graduation from the LIC category to the
LMIC category,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:23 Dec 14, 2009
Jkt 220001
• Data improvements or revisions,
• MCC’s introduction of two new
indicators in fiscal year 2008 and the
accompanying requirement that countries
pass three of the five indicators in the
Investing in People category,
• Increases in peer-group medians, and
• Slight declines in performance.
Six countries selected as eligible for MCA
assistance in FY10 were previously selected
as eligible in at least one prior fiscal year.
Because they have not yet signed a compact
agreement, they needed to be reselected as
eligible for FY10 funds to continue compact
development. Three of these countries are in
the LIC category: Malawi, Moldova, and
Zambia. Three countries, Indonesia, Jordan,
and the Philippines, are in the LMIC
category.
The Board reselected these countries based
on their continued performance since their
prior selection. The Board determined that
no material change has occurred in their
performance on the indicator criteria since
the fiscal year 2009 selection that indicates
a serious decline in policy performance.
While two of the countries—Indonesia and
the Philippines—graduated to the more
competitive LMIC category this year and fare
less well against the higher standards, both
countries would have met MCC’s indicator
criteria as LICs.
The Board also reviewed the policy
performance of countries that are
implementing compacts. However, these
countries do not need to be reselected each
year in order to continue implementation.
Once MCC makes a commitment to a country
through a compact agreement, MCC will not
consider the country for reselection on an
annual basis during the term of its compact.
MCC will continue to work with a country—
even if it does not meet the indicator criteria
each year—as long as the country has not
demonstrated a pattern of actions
inconsistent with the eligibility criteria. If it
is determined that a country has
demonstrated a significant policy reversal,
the Board can hold it accountable by
applying MCC’s Suspension and Termination
Policy.
For those countries that have not
demonstrated a significant policy reversal but
do not meet the indicator criteria, MCC will
invite these countries to participate or
continue their participation in MCC’s policy
improvement process. Countries
participating in the policy improvement
process are asked to develop and implement
a forward-looking action plan that outlines
the steps they plan to take to improve
performance on certain policy criteria. They
then periodically report on progress made on
the plan.
Finally, a number of countries that
performed well on the quantitative elements
of the selection criteria (i.e., on the policy
indicators) were not chosen as eligible
countries for FY10. As discussed above, the
Board considered a variety of factors in
addition to the country’s performance on the
policy indicators in determining whether it
was an appropriate candidate for assistance
(e.g., the country’s commitment to fighting
corruption and promoting democratic
governance; the availability of appropriated
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
funds; and where MCC would likely have the
best opportunity to reduce poverty and
generate economic growth).
Selection To Initiate the Compact Process
The Board also authorized MCC to invite
Cape Verde to submit a proposal for a second
compact, as described in section 609 of the
Act (22 U.S.C. 7708) (previously eligible
countries that were reselected but have not
yet signed a compact will not be asked to
submit another proposal for FY10 assistance).
Submission of a proposal is not a guarantee
that MCC will finalize a compact with an
eligible country. Any MCA assistance
provided under section 605 of the Act will
be contingent on the successful negotiation of
a mutually agreeable compact between the
eligible country and MCC, approval of the
compact by the Board, and the availability of
funds.
[FR Doc. E9–29941 Filed 12–11–09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 9211–03–P
NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE
ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES
National Endowment for the Arts;
Determination of the Chairperson of
the National Endowment for the Arts
Regarding Potential Closure of
Portions of Meetings of the National
Council on the Arts
Section 20 U.S.C. 955(f) of the
National Foundation on the Arts and the
Humanities Act of 1965, as amended (20
U.S.C. 951 et seq.) authorizes the
National Council on the Arts to review
applications for financial assistance to
the National Endowment for the Arts
and make recommendations to the
Chairperson.
The Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), as amended (Pub. L. 92–463),
governs the formation, use, conduct,
management, and accessibility to the
public of committees formed to advise
and assist the Federal Government.
Section 10 of that Act directs meetings
of advisory committees to be open to the
public, except where the head of the
agency to which the advisory committee
reports determines in writing that a
portion of a meeting may be closed to
the public consistent with subsection (c)
of section 552b of Title 5, United States
Code (the Government in the Sunshine
Act).
It is the policy of the National
Endowment for the Arts that meetings of
the National Council on the Arts be
conducted in open session including
those parts during which
recommendations for funding are
considered. However, in recognition
that the Endowment is required to
consider the artistic excellence and
artistic merit of applications for
financial assistance and that
E:\FR\FM\15DEN1.SGM
15DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66379-66380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29941]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORPORATION
[MCC FR 10-03]
Report on the Selection of Eligible Countries for Fiscal Year
2010
AGENCY: Millennium Challenge Corporation.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This report is provided in accordance with section 608(d)(1)
of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, Public Law 108-199, Division D
(the ``Act''), 22 U.S.C. 7708(d)(1).
Dated: December 11, 2009.
Henry C. Pitney,
(Acting) Vice President and General Counsel, Millennium Challenge
Corporation.
Report on the Selection of Eligible Countries for Fiscal Year 2010
Summary
This report is provided in accordance with section 608(d)(1) of
the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, Public Law 108-199, Division D
(the ``Act''), 22 U.S.C. 7708(d)(1).
The Act authorizes the provision of Millennium Challenge Account
(``MCA'') assistance under section 605 of the Act to countries that
enter into compacts with the United States to support policies and
programs that advance the progress of such countries in achieving
lasting economic growth and poverty reduction, and are in
furtherance of the Act. The Act requires the Millennium Challenge
Corporation (``MCC'') to determine the countries that will be
eligible to receive MCA assistance during the fiscal year, based on
their demonstrated commitment to just and democratic governance,
economic freedom, and investing in their people, as well as on the
opportunity to reduce poverty and generate economic growth in the
country. The Act also requires the submission of reports to
appropriate congressional committees and the publication of notices
in the Federal Register that identify, among other things:
1. The countries that are ``candidate countries'' for MCA
assistance during fiscal year 2010 (FY10) based on their per-capita
income levels and their eligibility to receive assistance under U.S.
law, and countries that would be candidate countries but for
specified legal prohibitions on assistance (section 608(a) of the
Act; 22 U.S.C. 7708(a));
2. The criteria and methodology that the Board of Directors of
MCC (``the Board'') will use to measure and evaluate the relative
policy performance of the ``candidate countries'' consistent with
the requirements of section 607 of the Act in order to select ``MCA
eligible countries'' from among the ``candidate countries'' (section
608(b) of the Act, 22 U.S.C. 7708(b)); and
3. The list of countries determined by the Board to be ``MCA
eligible countries'' for FY10, with justification for eligibility
determination and selection for compact negotiation, including which
of the MCA eligible countries the Board will seek to enter into MCA
compacts (section 608(d) of the Act, 22 U.S.C. 7708(d)).
This is the third of the above-described reports by MCC for
FY10. It identifies countries determined by the Board to be eligible
under section 607 of the Act for FY10 (22 U.S.C. 7706) and countries
with which the Board will seek to enter into compacts under section
609 of the Act, as well as the justification for such decisions.
Eligible Countries
The Board met on December 9, 2009 to select countries that will
be eligible for MCA compact assistance under section 607 of the Act
for FY10. The Board selected the following countries as eligible for
such assistance for FY10: Cape Verde, Indonesia, Jordan, Malawi,
Moldova, the Philippines, and Zambia.
In accordance with the Act and with the ``Report on the Criteria
and Methodology for Determining the Eligibility of Candidate
Countries for Millennium Challenge Account Assistance in Fiscal Year
2010'' submitted to the Congress on September 11, 2009, selection
was based primarily on a country's overall performance in three
broad policy categories: (1) ``Ruling Justly''; (2) ``Encouraging
Economic Freedom''; and (3) ``Investing in People.'' As a basis for
determining which countries would be eligible for MCA compact
assistance, the Board relied upon 17 transparent and independent
indicators to assess, to the maximum extent possible, countries'
policy performance and demonstrated commitment in these three broad
policy areas. In determining eligibility, the Board compared
countries' performance on the indicators relative to their income-
level peers, evaluating them in comparison to either the group of
low income countries (LIC) or the group of lower-middle income
countries (LMIC). In particular, the Board considered if a country
performed above the median in relation to its peers on at least half
of the indicators in the Ruling Justly and Economic Freedom policy
categories, above the median on at least three of five indicators in
the Investing in People policy category, and above the median on the
``Control of Corruption'' indicator. The Board also took into
account whether the country performed substantially below the median
on any indictor, and if so, whether the country is taking
appropriate action to address the shortcomings. Scorecards
reflecting each country's performance on the indicators are
available on MCC's Web site at https://www.mcc.gov.
The Board also considered whether any adjustments should be made
for data gaps, data lags, or recent events since the indicators were
published, as well as strengths or weaknesses in particular
[[Page 66380]]
indicators. Where appropriate, the Board took into account
additional quantitative and qualitative information, such as
evidence of a country's commitment to fighting corruption and
promoting democratic governance, and its effective protection of
human rights. For countries that graduated from the LIC group to the
LMIC group in FY10 due to an increase in their per capita gross
national income, the Board also took into account supplemental
information that showed how the new LMIC country would have
performed in comparison to the LIC group. In addition, the Board
considered the opportunity to reduce poverty and promote economic
growth in a country, in light of the overall context of the
information available, as well as the availability of appropriated
funds.
This was the first year the Board considered countries for
eligibility for second compacts, which is permissible under section
609(k) of the Act. In determining second compact eligibility, the
Board considered--in addition to the criteria outlined above--the
country's performance implementing its first compact, including the
nature of the country partnership with MCC, the degree to which the
country has demonstrated a commitment and capacity to achieve
program results, and the degree to which the country has implemented
the compact in accordance with MCC's core policies and standards.
There were no countries selected as eligible for the first time
in FY10. However, Cape Verde, an LMIC, was selected as eligible for
MCA assistance for a second compact under section 606(b) (22 U.S.C.
7705(b)) of the Act.
Cape Verde meets MCC's indicator criteria this year for the
first time since it advanced from the LIC group to the LMIC group
four years ago. Cape Verde has been an economic reformer over the
past two decades and has consistently displayed good economic and
political governance. Since becoming an LMIC, the Government of Cape
Verde has worked hard to raise its indicator performance to meet the
standards of its more competitive peer group. It has worked over the
past four years on ongoing reforms to streamline business
registration, as well as on efforts to improve the accuracy of its
indicator data. These efforts are now reflected on Cape Verde's MCC
scorecard. Cape Verde's current compact is due to conclude in
October 2010. Cape Verde corrected some early compact implementation
difficulties and is now a relatively strong performer on the
implementation of its compact.
Country partners that are developing or implementing compacts
must also show a commitment to maintaining and improving their
policy performance. While MCC's indicators work well as a
transparent way of identifying those countries that are most
committed to sound development policies and for discerning trends
over the medium-term, they are not as well-suited for tracking
incremental progress from year-to-year. Countries may be generally
maintaining performance but not meet the criteria in a given year
due to factors such as:
Graduation from the LIC category to the LMIC category,
Data improvements or revisions,
MCC's introduction of two new indicators in fiscal year
2008 and the accompanying requirement that countries pass three of
the five indicators in the Investing in People category,
Increases in peer-group medians, and
Slight declines in performance.
Six countries selected as eligible for MCA assistance in FY10
were previously selected as eligible in at least one prior fiscal
year. Because they have not yet signed a compact agreement, they
needed to be reselected as eligible for FY10 funds to continue
compact development. Three of these countries are in the LIC
category: Malawi, Moldova, and Zambia. Three countries, Indonesia,
Jordan, and the Philippines, are in the LMIC category.
The Board reselected these countries based on their continued
performance since their prior selection. The Board determined that
no material change has occurred in their performance on the
indicator criteria since the fiscal year 2009 selection that
indicates a serious decline in policy performance. While two of the
countries--Indonesia and the Philippines--graduated to the more
competitive LMIC category this year and fare less well against the
higher standards, both countries would have met MCC's indicator
criteria as LICs.
The Board also reviewed the policy performance of countries that
are implementing compacts. However, these countries do not need to
be reselected each year in order to continue implementation. Once
MCC makes a commitment to a country through a compact agreement, MCC
will not consider the country for reselection on an annual basis
during the term of its compact. MCC will continue to work with a
country--even if it does not meet the indicator criteria each year--
as long as the country has not demonstrated a pattern of actions
inconsistent with the eligibility criteria. If it is determined that
a country has demonstrated a significant policy reversal, the Board
can hold it accountable by applying MCC's Suspension and Termination
Policy.
For those countries that have not demonstrated a significant
policy reversal but do not meet the indicator criteria, MCC will
invite these countries to participate or continue their
participation in MCC's policy improvement process. Countries
participating in the policy improvement process are asked to develop
and implement a forward-looking action plan that outlines the steps
they plan to take to improve performance on certain policy criteria.
They then periodically report on progress made on the plan.
Finally, a number of countries that performed well on the
quantitative elements of the selection criteria (i.e., on the policy
indicators) were not chosen as eligible countries for FY10. As
discussed above, the Board considered a variety of factors in
addition to the country's performance on the policy indicators in
determining whether it was an appropriate candidate for assistance
(e.g., the country's commitment to fighting corruption and promoting
democratic governance; the availability of appropriated funds; and
where MCC would likely have the best opportunity to reduce poverty
and generate economic growth).
Selection To Initiate the Compact Process
The Board also authorized MCC to invite Cape Verde to submit a
proposal for a second compact, as described in section 609 of the
Act (22 U.S.C. 7708) (previously eligible countries that were
reselected but have not yet signed a compact will not be asked to
submit another proposal for FY10 assistance). Submission of a
proposal is not a guarantee that MCC will finalize a compact with an
eligible country. Any MCA assistance provided under section 605 of
the Act will be contingent on the successful negotiation of a
mutually agreeable compact between the eligible country and MCC,
approval of the compact by the Board, and the availability of funds.
[FR Doc. E9-29941 Filed 12-11-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 9211-03-P