Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request-In-Depth Case Studies of Advanced Modernization Initiatives, 46899-46901 [2010-19074]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
46899
Notices
Federal Register
Vol. 75, No. 149
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains documents other than rules or
proposed rules that are applicable to the
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of
petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are
examples of documents appearing in this
section.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
July 30, 2010.
The Department of Agriculture has
submitted the following information
collection requirement(s) to OMB for
review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
Public Law 104–13. Comments
regarding (a) whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of burden including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
clarity of the information to be
collected; (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology should be addressed to: Desk
Officer for Agriculture, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB),
OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV or
fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental
Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail
Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250–
7602. Comments regarding these
information collections are best assured
of having their full effect if received
within 30 days of this notification.
Copies of the submission(s) may be
obtained by calling (202) 720–8681.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor a collection of information
unless the collection of information
displays a currently valid OMB control
number and the agency informs
potential persons who are to respond to
the collection of information that such
persons are not required to respond to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Aug 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
the collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Risk Management Agency
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request—In-Depth Case
Studies of Advanced Modernization
Initiatives
Title: Florida Agricultural Workers
Survey.
OMB Control Number: 0563–NEW.
Summary of Collection: The Risk
Management Agency (RMA) is
authorized under section 522(d) of the
Federal Crop Insurance Act to enter into
partnership agreements with public and
private organizations for the purpose of
increasing the availability of loss
mitigation, financial, and other risk
management tools for producers of
agricultural commodities. RMA intends
to collect information for purposes of
the development of risk management
tools to analyze producer risks
associated with the employment of
seasonal labor in the three Florida
selected specialty crops: citrus,
tomatoes, and strawberries. Collection
of information is necessary for a
research project under a USDA/RMA—
University of Florida (UF) partnership
agreement.
Need and Use of the Information: The
information collection will be
conducted primarily through in-person
surveys. USDA/RMA—UF will use the
information to describe the
demographic and employment
characteristics of Florida’s citrus,
tomato and strawberry workers. Results
of the survey will be used to develop the
risk management tools. The tools will
enable producers to determine the costs
and benefits of utilizing different mixes
of labor and capital, given changes in
wages and the supply of workers.
Description of Respondents: Farms.
Number of Respondents: 1,808.
Frequency of Responses: Reporting:
Other (one-time).
Total Burden Hours: 2,107.
Charlene Parker,
Departmental Information Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010–19134 Filed 8–3–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–08–P
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Food and Nutrition Service
Food and Nutrition Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice invites the general public and
other public agencies to comment on a
proposed information collection. This
proposed collection is for ‘‘In-Depth
Case Studies of Advanced Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
Modernization Initiatives’’ and is a
revision of a currently approved data
collection entitled ‘‘Enhancing Food
Stamp Certification: Food Stamp
Modernization Efforts.’’ The proposed
collection will build on the data
collection efforts of the currently
approved collection, which is a purely
descriptive study. This comprehensive
data collection will allow for the
analyses of the potential impact of
advanced modernization efforts on
Program outcomes in selected States.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before October 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection
of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
and (c) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Comments may be sent to: Steven
Carlson, Director, Office of Research and
Analysis, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service,
3101 Park Center Drive, Room 1014,
Alexandria, VA 22302. Comments may
also be submitted via fax to the attention
of Steven Carlson at 703–305–2576 or
via e-mail to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
46900
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 2010 / Notices
Steve.Carlson@fns.usda.gov. Comments
will also be accepted through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to
https://www.regulations.gov, and follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments electronically.
All written comments will be open for
public inspection at the office of the
Food and Nutrition Service during
regular business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5
p.m. Monday through Friday) at 3101
Park Center Drive, Room 1014,
Alexandria, Virginia 22302.
All responses to this notice will be
summarized and included in the request
for Office of Management and Budget
approval. All comments will be a matter
of public record.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of this information collection
should be directed to Steven Carlson at
703–305–2017.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: In-Depth Case Studies of
Advanced SNAP Modernization
Initiatives.
OMB Number: 0584–0547.
Form Number: N/A.
Expiration Date: April 30, 2011.
Type of Request: Revision of currently
approved data collection.
Abstract: The Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP) (formerly
known as the Food Stamp Program) is
a critical source of support for many
low-income families and individuals. In
recent years, States have implemented
new procedures and policies, commonly
referred to as modernization, that focus
on reducing SNAP administrative costs
while maintaining or improving
program access. Though State efforts
vary, common initiatives include
expanded use of technology,
partnerships with community
organizations, policy simplifications,
and administrative restructuring.
In order to examine how
modernization potentially affects key
outcome measures—efficiency, access,
and integrity—and establish if, and to
what extent, the goals of States were met
by their modernization efforts, six States
have been selected for comprehensive
case studies. The selection process
employed a modernization index
designed to identify States with the
most advanced modernization
initiatives. Florida, Georgia,
Massachusetts, Utah, Washington, and
Wisconsin were selected and have
agreed to participate in this study. The
study will ultimately yield a
comprehensive picture of each State’s
experiences with modernization and
assess the potential impacts of
modernization. Specifically, the study
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Aug 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
will identify the steps States have taken
to implement modernization changes,
the challenges States experienced, and
the perceptions of SNAP staff and
participants regarding the changes. This
information can be used by federal and
State policymakers to identify important
lessons. Project findings will help these
policymakers understand the
implications of modernization changes
and identify effective modernization
practices while avoiding
implementation pitfalls.
The project has seven research
objectives: (1) Update the existing State
profiles of modernization efforts and
identify the geographic and caseload
coverage affected by modernization
changes; (2) describe how key
certification, recertification, and case
management functions have changed;
(3) describe the current roles and
responsibilities of State and local SNAP
staff, vendors, and partners and how
they have changed; (4) document the
relationship between SNAP
modernization initiatives and
stakeholder satisfaction; (5) describe the
current performance of each State’s
modernization initiatives and the level
of outcome variability within each State;
(6) compare pre-, current, and postmodernization performance; and (7)
document the main takeaway points for
use by other States and for future study
consideration.
Data collection strategies include
multiple site visits, during which we
will conduct interviews of SNAP staff at
all levels, visit multiple local offices,
hold focus groups with current
participants and eligible
nonparticipants, and meet with
community-based partner organizations
and vendors that contract with State
SNAP agencies. Tailored protocols will
be used for the interviews. Members for
the SNAP participant focus groups will
be selected using State SNAP
administrative data for current
participants. Members of the eligible
nonparticipant focus groups will be
recruited at local food banks. Potential
focus group members will be offered
$25 for their participation and $5 for
transportation to and from the focus
group location. Working parents will be
offered an additional $15 for child care.
To examine how within-State
participation patterns vary with withinState differences in modernization, the
study will also collect and analyze
monthly State case record extant data.
Each of the six States will receive
remuneration of $75,000 to offset the
costs of participating in the study.
Interview and focus group questions
will be kept as simple and respondentfriendly as possible. Responses to all
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
questions will be voluntary. The
contractor will take the following steps
to treat the data provided in a
confidential manner: (1) No data will be
released in a form that identifies
individual respondents by name; and (2)
information collected through
interviews will be combined across
other respondents in the same category
and reported only in aggregate form.
Respondents will be notified of these
confidentiality measures during data
collection.
Affected Public: State, local or tribal
government; businesses or other forprofits; not-for-profit institutions;
individuals or households. Respondent
groups identified include: (1) SNAP
staff at the State, regional, and local
levels, including staff of call centers and
other specialized units; (2) staff from
community partners and vendors or
businesses assisting with modernization
efforts; and (3) current SNAP
participants and eligible nonparticipants.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
The study will collect data from a total
of 606 respondents across all States.
This number represents the sum of 33
State-level SNAP staff interviews; 84
district/county SNAP staff interviews;
21 interviews at SNAP call center staff
or other centralized operation units
staff; 154 local office SNAP staff
interviews; 14 interviews with vendors;
60 interviews with staff members from
community partners involved in
modernization; and 120 SNAP
participants and 120 eligible nonparticipants.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Respondent: 1.
Estimated Time per Response: For all
interviews of State SNAP staff, district/
county SNAP staff, SNAP call center
staff or centralized operation units staff,
local office SNAP staff, vendor staff, and
community partner staff, the burden
estimate is 1.5 hours and includes
respondents’ time to prepare for and
complete the interview. For all
participating members in the focus
groups, the burden estimate is 1.667
hours (100 minutes) and includes
respondents’ time to be screened,
receive a reminder call, read a reminder
letter, and to participate in the group.
For all persons who decline to
participate in the focus groups, the
burden estimate is .0835 hours (5
minutes) and includes the respondents’
time to be screened (see table below).
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents and Non-Responders:
Total of 1,009.1 hours, including: State
SNAP staff, 49.5 hours; district/county
SNAP staff, 126 hours; SNAP call center
staff or centralized operation units staff,
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
46901
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 2010 / Notices
31.5 hours; local office SNAP staff, 231
hours; vendor staff, 21 hours;
community partner staff, 90 hours;
SNAP participants, 200 hours; eligible
non-participants, 200 hours. In addition,
respondents who elect not to participate
Affected public
State, Local and Tribal
Agencies.
in the focus groups (refusers), the
estimated total burden is 60.1 hours.
The number of refusers is based on the
assumption that in order to have 240
respondents ultimately attend the focus
groups, 480 persons will need to be
Estimated
number
respondents
Respondent type
Responses
annually per
respondent
recruited. And in order for 480 persons
to be recruited, twice as many persons,
or 960, will need to be contacted
initially.
Total annual
responses
Estimated avg.
number of
hours per
response
Estimated total
hours
State SNAP staff ...............
33
1
33
1.5
49.5
District/County SNAP staff
Call Center staff or centralized operation unit staff.
Local office SNAP staff .....
84
21
1
1
84
21
1.5
1.5
126.0
31.5
154
1
154
1.5
231.0
Business (for and not-forprofit).
Vendor staff .......................
Community partner staff ....
14
60
1
1
14
60
1.5
1.5
21.0
90.0
Individuals & Households ..
SNAP participants* ............
SNAP eligible
nonparticipants*.
Non-Responders (Focus
group).
120
120
1
1
120
120
1.667
1.667
200.0
200.0
720
1
720
0.0835
60.1
1,326
........................
1,326
..........................
1,009.1
Total ............................
............................................
* Focus Group members will participate in a brief screening call or interview, participate in the focus group, and receive a reminder call and letter prior to the focus group.
** Focus Group refusers will participate in a brief screening call or interview.
Dated: July 23, 2010.
Julia Paradis,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
Treatments, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River
Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 207371231; (301) 734-0627.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2010–19074 Filed 8–3–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2008-0140]
Changes to Treatments for Sweet
Cherries from Australia and Irradiation
Dose for Mediterranean Fruit Fly
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of changes to
phytosanitary treatments.
AGENCY:
We are advising the public
that we are adding new approved
phytosanitary treatment schedules to
the Plant Protection and Quarantine
Treatment Manual for sweet cherries
imported from Australia into the United
States. We are also adding to the
treatment manual a new approved
irradiation dose for Mediterranean fruit
fly of 100 gray. These new treatments
will continue to prevent the
introduction or interstate movement of
quarantine pests in the United States.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Inder P.S. Gadh, Senior Risk Manager–
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:20 Aug 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
Background
The phytosanitary treatments
regulations contained in 7 CFR part 305
(referred to below as the regulations) set
out general requirements for conducting
treatments indicated in the Plant
Protection and Quarantine (PPQ)
Treatment Manual1 for fruits,
vegetables, and articles to prevent the
introduction or dissemination of plant
pests or noxious weeds into or through
the United States.
On October 19, 2009, we published in
the Federal Register (74 FR 5342453430, Docket No. APHIS-2008-0140) a
proposal2 to amend the regulations by
adding new treatment schedules for
sweet cherries and for certain species of
citrus fruit imported from Australia into
the United States.3 We also proposed to
1 The PPQ Treatment Manual can be viewed on
the Internet at (https://www.aphis.usda.gov/
import_export/plants/manuals/ports/
treatment.shtml).
2 To view the proposed rule, the comments we
received, and the treatment evaluation document,
go to (https://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/
component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS2008-0140).
3 The treatment schedules for citrus fruit from
Australia that we had proposed will be published
in the PPQ Treatment Manual at a later date. When
these schedules are published, we will publish a
notice of these changes in the Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
establish an approved irradiation dose
for Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly) of
100 gray. Our analysis of the efficacy of
the proposed treatments was presented
in a treatment evaluation document that
was made available with the proposed
rule.
We solicited comments concerning
our proposal for 60 days ending
December 18, 2009, and received five
comments by that date. They were from
a State plant protection official, a
research entomologist, a foreign national
plant protection organization
representative, and two students. We
have carefully considered the comments
we received. One commenter simply
pointed out a misspelling in a footnote.
The issues raised by the remaining
commenters are discussed below.
One commenter, while agreeing with
the changes we proposed, expressed
concern that the proposal mentioned no
requirement for field monitoring of fruit
flies or subsequent field treatment when
fruit fly populations exceed a defined
limit. The commenter added that even
if the treatments we propose achieve a
probit-9 level of efficacy, the possibility
remains that heavy infestations of fruit
flies could overwhelm the treatments.
The national plant protection
organization (NPPO) of Australia is a
signatory to the International Plant
Protection Convention (IPPC) and
therefore observes IPPC guidelines for
pest surveillance, monitoring, and
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46899-46901]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-19074]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request--In-Depth Case Studies of Advanced Modernization
Initiatives
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment
on a proposed information collection. This proposed collection is for
``In-Depth Case Studies of Advanced Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP) Modernization Initiatives'' and is a revision of a
currently approved data collection entitled ``Enhancing Food Stamp
Certification: Food Stamp Modernization Efforts.'' The proposed
collection will build on the data collection efforts of the currently
approved collection, which is a purely descriptive study. This
comprehensive data collection will allow for the analyses of the
potential impact of advanced modernization efforts on Program outcomes
in selected States.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; and (c) ways to minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
Comments may be sent to: Steven Carlson, Director, Office of
Research and Analysis, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Service, 3101 Park Center Drive, Room 1014, Alexandria, VA
22302. Comments may also be submitted via fax to the attention of
Steven Carlson at 703-305-2576 or via e-mail to
[[Page 46900]]
Steve.Carlson@fns.usda.gov. Comments will also be accepted through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to https://www.regulations.gov, and
follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically.
All written comments will be open for public inspection at the
office of the Food and Nutrition Service during regular business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday) at 3101 Park Center Drive,
Room 1014, Alexandria, Virginia 22302.
All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the
request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will
be a matter of public record.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of this information collection should be directed to Steven
Carlson at 703-305-2017.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: In-Depth Case Studies of Advanced SNAP Modernization
Initiatives.
OMB Number: 0584-0547.
Form Number: N/A.
Expiration Date: April 30, 2011.
Type of Request: Revision of currently approved data collection.
Abstract: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
(formerly known as the Food Stamp Program) is a critical source of
support for many low-income families and individuals. In recent years,
States have implemented new procedures and policies, commonly referred
to as modernization, that focus on reducing SNAP administrative costs
while maintaining or improving program access. Though State efforts
vary, common initiatives include expanded use of technology,
partnerships with community organizations, policy simplifications, and
administrative restructuring.
In order to examine how modernization potentially affects key
outcome measures--efficiency, access, and integrity--and establish if,
and to what extent, the goals of States were met by their modernization
efforts, six States have been selected for comprehensive case studies.
The selection process employed a modernization index designed to
identify States with the most advanced modernization initiatives.
Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin were
selected and have agreed to participate in this study. The study will
ultimately yield a comprehensive picture of each State's experiences
with modernization and assess the potential impacts of modernization.
Specifically, the study will identify the steps States have taken to
implement modernization changes, the challenges States experienced, and
the perceptions of SNAP staff and participants regarding the changes.
This information can be used by federal and State policymakers to
identify important lessons. Project findings will help these
policymakers understand the implications of modernization changes and
identify effective modernization practices while avoiding
implementation pitfalls.
The project has seven research objectives: (1) Update the existing
State profiles of modernization efforts and identify the geographic and
caseload coverage affected by modernization changes; (2) describe how
key certification, recertification, and case management functions have
changed; (3) describe the current roles and responsibilities of State
and local SNAP staff, vendors, and partners and how they have changed;
(4) document the relationship between SNAP modernization initiatives
and stakeholder satisfaction; (5) describe the current performance of
each State's modernization initiatives and the level of outcome
variability within each State; (6) compare pre-, current, and post-
modernization performance; and (7) document the main takeaway points
for use by other States and for future study consideration.
Data collection strategies include multiple site visits, during
which we will conduct interviews of SNAP staff at all levels, visit
multiple local offices, hold focus groups with current participants and
eligible nonparticipants, and meet with community-based partner
organizations and vendors that contract with State SNAP agencies.
Tailored protocols will be used for the interviews. Members for the
SNAP participant focus groups will be selected using State SNAP
administrative data for current participants. Members of the eligible
nonparticipant focus groups will be recruited at local food banks.
Potential focus group members will be offered $25 for their
participation and $5 for transportation to and from the focus group
location. Working parents will be offered an additional $15 for child
care. To examine how within-State participation patterns vary with
within-State differences in modernization, the study will also collect
and analyze monthly State case record extant data. Each of the six
States will receive remuneration of $75,000 to offset the costs of
participating in the study.
Interview and focus group questions will be kept as simple and
respondent-friendly as possible. Responses to all questions will be
voluntary. The contractor will take the following steps to treat the
data provided in a confidential manner: (1) No data will be released in
a form that identifies individual respondents by name; and (2)
information collected through interviews will be combined across other
respondents in the same category and reported only in aggregate form.
Respondents will be notified of these confidentiality measures during
data collection.
Affected Public: State, local or tribal government; businesses or
other for-profits; not-for-profit institutions; individuals or
households. Respondent groups identified include: (1) SNAP staff at the
State, regional, and local levels, including staff of call centers and
other specialized units; (2) staff from community partners and vendors
or businesses assisting with modernization efforts; and (3) current
SNAP participants and eligible non-participants.
Estimated Number of Respondents: The study will collect data from a
total of 606 respondents across all States. This number represents the
sum of 33 State-level SNAP staff interviews; 84 district/county SNAP
staff interviews; 21 interviews at SNAP call center staff or other
centralized operation units staff; 154 local office SNAP staff
interviews; 14 interviews with vendors; 60 interviews with staff
members from community partners involved in modernization; and 120 SNAP
participants and 120 eligible non-participants.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.
Estimated Time per Response: For all interviews of State SNAP
staff, district/county SNAP staff, SNAP call center staff or
centralized operation units staff, local office SNAP staff, vendor
staff, and community partner staff, the burden estimate is 1.5 hours
and includes respondents' time to prepare for and complete the
interview. For all participating members in the focus groups, the
burden estimate is 1.667 hours (100 minutes) and includes respondents'
time to be screened, receive a reminder call, read a reminder letter,
and to participate in the group. For all persons who decline to
participate in the focus groups, the burden estimate is .0835 hours (5
minutes) and includes the respondents' time to be screened (see table
below).
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents and Non-Responders:
Total of 1,009.1 hours, including: State SNAP staff, 49.5 hours;
district/county SNAP staff, 126 hours; SNAP call center staff or
centralized operation units staff,
[[Page 46901]]
31.5 hours; local office SNAP staff, 231 hours; vendor staff, 21 hours;
community partner staff, 90 hours; SNAP participants, 200 hours;
eligible non-participants, 200 hours. In addition, respondents who
elect not to participate in the focus groups (refusers), the estimated
total burden is 60.1 hours. The number of refusers is based on the
assumption that in order to have 240 respondents ultimately attend the
focus groups, 480 persons will need to be recruited. And in order for
480 persons to be recruited, twice as many persons, or 960, will need
to be contacted initially.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated avg.
Estimated Responses Total annual number of Estimated
Affected public Respondent type number annually per responses hours per total hours
respondents respondent response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Local and Tribal Agencies.......... State SNAP staff............ 33 1 33 1.5 49.5
District/County SNAP staff.. 84 1 84 1.5 126.0
Call Center staff or 21 1 21 1.5 31.5
centralized operation unit
staff.
Local office SNAP staff..... 154 1 154 1.5 231.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Business (for and not-for- Vendor staff................ 14 1 14 1.5 21.0
profit). Community partner staff..... 60 1 60 1.5 90.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individuals & Households.................. SNAP participants*.......... 120 1 120 1.667 200.0
SNAP eligible 120 1 120 1.667 200.0
nonparticipants*.
Non-Responders (Focus group) 720 1 720 0.0835 60.1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. ............................ 1,326 .............. 1,326 .............. 1,009.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Focus Group members will participate in a brief screening call or interview, participate in the focus group, and receive a reminder call and letter
prior to the focus group.
** Focus Group refusers will participate in a brief screening call or interview.
Dated: July 23, 2010.
Julia Paradis,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-19074 Filed 8-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
