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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.