Proposed Data Collections Submitted for Public Comment and Recommendations, 61413-61415 [2012-24754]
Download as PDF
61413
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Notices
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Type of respondents
Average
burden per
response
(in hours)
Total burden
(in hours)
Weekly Reporting
States ...............................................................................................................
Territories .........................................................................................................
Cities ................................................................................................................
50
5
2
52
52
52
3
1.5
3
7,800
390
312
States ...............................................................................................................
Territories .........................................................................................................
Cities ................................................................................................................
50
5
2
1
1
1
16
10
16
800
50
32
Total ..........................................................................................................
........................
........................
........................
9,384
Annual Reporting
Dated: October 2, 2012.
Ron A. Otten,
Director, Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI),
Office of the Associate Director for Science
(OADS), Office of the Director, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2012–24756 Filed 10–5–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
[60-Day–13–0941]
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Data Collections Submitted
for Public Comment and
Recommendations
In compliance with the requirement
of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for
opportunity for public comment on
proposed data collection projects, the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic
summaries of proposed projects. To
request more information on the
proposed projects or to obtain a copy of
the data collection plans and
instruments, call 404–639–7570 or send
comments to Ron Otten, at 1600 Clifton
Road, MS–D74, Atlanta, GA 30333 or
send an email to omb@cdc.gov.
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; (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
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
15:28 Oct 05, 2012
Jkt 229001
Proposed Project
Evaluation of Dating Matters:
Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen
RelationshipsTM (0920–0941, Expiration
6/13/2015)—REVISION—National
Center for Injury Prevention and Control
(NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC).
Background and Brief Description
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
VerDate Mar<15>2010
technology. Written comments should
be received within 60 days of this
notice.
Dating Matters: Strategies to Promote
Healthy Teen RelationshipsTM is the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention’s new teen dating violence
prevention initiative.
To address the gaps in research and
practice, CDC has developed Dating
Matters, teen dating violence prevention
program that includes programming for
students, parents, educators, as well as
policy development. Dating Matters is
based on the current evidence about
what works in prevention and focuses
on high-risk, urban communities where
participants include: middle school
students age 11 to 14 years; middle
school parents; brand ambassadors;
educators; school leadership; program
implementers; community
representatives; and local health
department representatives in the
following communities: Alameda
County, California; Baltimore,
Maryland; Broward County, Florida;
and Chicago, Illinois.
The primary goal of the current
proposal is to expand and add
instruments to the approved outcome
and implementation evaluation of
Dating Matters in the four metropolitan
cities to determine its feasibility, cost,
and effectiveness. In the evaluation, a
standard model of TDV prevention (Safe
Dates administered in 8th grade) will be
compared to a comprehensive model
(programs administered in 6th, 7th, and
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
8th grade as well as parent, educator,
policy, and communications
interventions).
Population. The study population
includes students in 6th, 7th and 8th
grades at 44 schools in the four
participating sites. At most, schools are
expected to have 6 classrooms per
grade, with an average of 30 students
per classroom yielding a population of
23,760 students (44 schools × 3 grades
× 6 classrooms per grade × 30 students
per classroom). All student evaluation
activities will take place during the
school year. The sampling frame for
parents, given that we would only
include one parent per student, is also
23,760 for the three years of data
collection covered by this package. If we
assume 40 educators per school, the
sampling frame for the educator sample
is 1,760.
Students: In each year of data
collection, we will recruit 11,880
students (30 students per classroom × 3
classrooms per grade × 3 grades × 44
schools). We assume a 95%
participation rate (n = 11,286) for the
baseline student survey and 90%
participation rate (n = 10,692) at followup survey. In this revision, we request
to drop the mid-term survey to reduce
burden on schools.
Parents: We will recruit a sample of
2,020 parents. We expect that 95% of
the 2,020 parents will agree to
participate at baseline (n = 1,919) and
90% will participate in the follow-up
survey (n = 1,818) parents.
Educators: We will attempt to recruit
all educators in each school (44 schools
× 40 educators per school = 1,760). We
expect a 95% participation rate for an
estimated sample of 1,672 educators at
baseline and 90% participation rate at
follow-up for an estimated sample of
1,584.
School data extractors: We will
attempt to recruit one data extractor per
44 schools to extract school data to be
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
61414
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Notices
used in conjunction with the outcome
data for the students. Data extractors in
each school will access individual
school-level data for those students in
their school who consented and
participated in the baseline student
survey (3 × 4 × 30 × 95% = 342).
Implementation Evaluation
For the student focus groups, we will
recruit groups of 10 students per group.
Two groups will be held per each of the
4 sites (10 × 2 × 4 = 80 total student
participants).
Student implementer focus groups
will be organized by site, with two
annual focus groups per site with 10
implementers in each group (10 × 2 × 4
= 80 total student program implementer
participants).
Communications focus groups will be
organized by site with up to four groups
per site (4 × 4 × 6 = 96 total student
participants).
Parent program implementer focus
groups will be organized by site, with
two annual focus groups per site with
10 implementers in each group (10 × 2
× 4 = 80 total parent program
implementer participants).
School leadership: based on the
predicted number of two school
leadership per comprehensive school
(21 schools), the number of respondents
will be 42.
Local Health Department
representative: based on the predicted
number of four communities/sites and
four local health department
representatives working on Dating
Matters per community, the number of
respondents will be 16.
Community Advisory Board
Representative: based on the predicted
number of 20 community
representatives per 4 communities/sites,
the number of respondents will be 80.
Parent Program Manager: With a
maximum of one parent program
manager per community/site, the
number of program manager
respondents will be 4. It is anticipated
that they will receive up to 50 TA
requests per year and complete the form
50 times.
Student Program Master Trainer TA
Form: With a maximum of 3 master
trainers per community. There will be
12 master trainers. It is anticipated that
they will receive up to 50 TA requests
per year and complete the form 50
times.
Parent Curricula Implementers: it is
expected that each school implementing
the comprehensive approach (n = 21)
will have two implementers (or 42
parent program implementer
respondents). Please note that on the
burden table the number of respondents
is multiplied by the number of sessions
in each parent program.
Student Curricula Implementers:
based on the predicted number of 20
student curricula implementers per
grade per site that will be completing
fidelity instruments, the total number of
respondents will be 80 per grade (20 ×
4).
Brand Ambassadors: The Brand
Ambassador Implementation Survey
will be provided to each brand
ambassador (n = 20) in each community
with a maximum of 80 brand
ambassadors.
Communications Implementers
(‘‘Brand Ambassador Coordinators’’):
The Communications Campaign
Tracking form will be provided to each
brand ambassador coordinator in each
community. With a maximum of one
brand ambassador coordinator per
community (n = 4), the feedback form
will be collected from a total of 4 brand
ambassador coordinators.
Parent Program Participants: The 6th
and 7th grade parent satisfaction
questionnaires will be completed by
parent participating in the parent
program in each community. There is a
maximum number of parent
respondents of 1,890 (18 × 5 × 21) for
the 6th grade satisfaction questionnaire
and 1,890 for the 7th grade satisfaction
questionnaire.
There are no costs to respondents
other than their time.
ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN
Form name
Student Program Participant.
Student Program Participant.
School data extractor ....
Parent Program Participant.
Parent Program Participant.
Educator ........................
Student Outcome Survey Baseline—Attachment
D.
Student Outcome Survey Follow-up—Attachment E.
School Indicators—Attachment G .......................
Parent Outcome Baseline Survey—Attachment
H.
Parent Outcome Follow-up Survey—Attachment
EEEE.
Educator Outcome Survey (baseline)—Attachment I.
Brand Ambassador Implementation Survey—Attachment J.
School Leadership Capacity and Readiness
Survey—Attachment K.
Parent Program Fidelity 6th Grade Session 1–
Session 6—Attachment L–Q.
Parent Program Fidelity 7th Grade Session 1, 3,
5—Attachment R–T.
Student Program Fidelity 6th Grade Session 1–
Session 6—Attachment U–Z.
Student Program Fidelity 7th Grade Session 1–
Session 7—Attachment AA–GG.
Student Program Fidelity 8th Grade Session 1–
Session 10 (comprehensive)—Attachment
HH–QQ.
Communications Campaign Tracking—Attachment RR.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Student Brand ambassador.
School leadership ..........
Parent Curricula Implementer.
Parent Curricula Implementer.
Student Curricula Implementer.
Student Curricula Implementer.
Student Curricula Implementer.
Communications Coordinator.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:28 Oct 05, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Type of respondent
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Average
burden per
response
(hours)
Total burden
(hours)
11,286
1
45/60
8465
10,692
1
45/60
8019
44
1,919
342
1
15/60
1
3762
1919
1,818
1
1
1818
1,672
1
30/60
836
80
2
20/60
53
42
1
1
42
210
3
15/60
158
126
3
15/60
95
480
1
15/60
120
560
1
15/60
140
800
1
15/60
200
4
4
20/60
5
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
61415
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 9, 2012 / Notices
ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN—Continued
Form name
Local Health Department
Representative.
Student Program Participant.
Student Curricula Implementer.
Parent Curricula Implementer.
Student Curricula Implementer.
Student Master Trainer ..
Local Health Department Capacity and Readiness—Attachment SS.
Student participant focus group guide (time
spent in focus group)—Attachment ZZ.
Student curricula implementer focus group guide
(time spent in focus group)—Attachment AAA.
Parent curricula implementer focus group guide
(time spent in focus group)—Attachment BBB.
Safe Dates 8th Grade Session 1–Session 10
(standard)—Attachment CCC–LLL.
Student program master trainer TA form—Attachment DDDD.
Educator Outcome Survey (follow-up)—Attachment IIII.
Community Capacity/Readiness Assessment—
Attachment JJJJ.
Communications Focus Groups—Attachment
KKKK.
Parent Program Manager TA Tracking Form—
Attachment LLLL.
6th Grade Curricula Parent Satisfaction Questionnaire—Attachment MMMM.
7th Grade Curricula Parent Satisfaction Questionnaire—Attachment NNNN.
Educator ........................
Community Advisory
Board Member.
Students .........................
Parent Program Manager.
Parent Program Participant.
Parent Program Participant.
Total ........................
..............................................................................
Dated: October 2, 2012.
Ron A. Otten,
Director, Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI),
Office of the Associate Director for Science
(OADS), Office of the Director, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2012–24754 Filed 10–5–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Type of respondent
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
[30-Day–13–12QI]
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork
Reduction Act Review
The Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of
information collection requests under
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). To request a copy of these
requests, call (404) 639–7570 or send an
email to omb@cdc.gov. Send written
comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington,
DC or by fax to (202) 395–5806. Written
comments should be received within 30
days of this notice.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:28 Oct 05, 2012
Jkt 229001
1
2
32
80
1
1.5
120
80
1
1
80
80
1
1
80
800
1
15/60
200
12
50
10/60
100
1584
1
30/60
792
80
1
1
80
96
1
1.5
144
4
50
10/60
33
1890
1
10/60
315
1890
1
10/60
315
........................
........................
........................
27923
Proposed Project
EHS-Net National Voluntary
Environmental Assessment Information
System (NVEAIS)—New—National
Center for Environmental Health
(NCEH), Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC).
The CDC is requesting OMB approval
for a National Voluntary Environmental
Assessment Information System to
collect data from foodborne illness
outbreak environmental assessments
routinely conducted by local, state,
territorial, or tribal food safety programs
during outbreak investigations.
Environmental assessment data are not
currently collected at the national level.
The data reported through this
information system will provide timely
data on the causes of outbreaks,
including environmental factors
associated with outbreaks, and are
essential to environmental public health
regulators’ efforts to respond more
effectively to outbreaks and prevent
future, similar outbreaks.
The information system was
developed by the Environmental Health
Specialists Network (EHS-Net), a
collaborative project of federal and state
public health agencies. The EHS-Net has
developed a standardized instrument for
reporting data relevant to foodborne
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Total burden
(hours)
16
Background and Brief Description
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Average
burden per
response
(hours)
Sfmt 4703
illness outbreak environmental
assessments.
State, local, tribal, and territorial food
safety programs are the respondents for
this data collection. Although it is not
possible to determine how many
programs will choose to participate, as
NVEAIS is voluntary, the maximum
potential number of program
respondents is approximately 3,000.
These programs will be reporting data
on outbreaks, not their programs or
personnel. It is not possible to
determine exactly how many outbreaks
will occur in the future, nor where they
will occur. However, we can estimate,
based on existing data, that a maximum
of 1,400 foodborne illness outbreaks
will occur annually. Only programs in
the jurisdictions in which these
outbreaks occur would report to
NVEAIS. Consequently, we have based
our respondent burden estimate on the
number of outbreaks likely to occur
each year. Assuming each outbreak
occurs in a different jurisdiction, there
will be one respondent per outbreak.
There are three activities associated
with NVEAIS that require a burden
estimate. The first activity is the
manager interview that will be
conducted at each establishment
associated with an outbreak. Most
outbreaks are associated with only one
establishment; however, some are
associated with multiple
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61413-61415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24754]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
[60-Day-13-0941]
Proposed Data Collections Submitted for Public Comment and
Recommendations
In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for opportunity for public comment on
proposed data collection projects, the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects.
To request more information on the proposed projects or to obtain a
copy of the data collection plans and instruments, call 404-639-7570 or
send comments to Ron Otten, at 1600 Clifton Road, MS-D74, Atlanta, GA
30333 or send an email to omb@cdc.gov.
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; (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 on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Written comments should be received
within 60 days of this notice.
Proposed Project
Evaluation of Dating Matters: Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen
Relationships\TM\ (0920-0941, Expiration 6/13/2015)--REVISION--National
Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC).
Background and Brief Description
Dating Matters: Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen
Relationships\TM\ is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's
new teen dating violence prevention initiative.
To address the gaps in research and practice, CDC has developed
Dating Matters, teen dating violence prevention program that includes
programming for students, parents, educators, as well as policy
development. Dating Matters is based on the current evidence about what
works in prevention and focuses on high-risk, urban communities where
participants include: middle school students age 11 to 14 years; middle
school parents; brand ambassadors; educators; school leadership;
program implementers; community representatives; and local health
department representatives in the following communities: Alameda
County, California; Baltimore, Maryland; Broward County, Florida; and
Chicago, Illinois.
The primary goal of the current proposal is to expand and add
instruments to the approved outcome and implementation evaluation of
Dating Matters in the four metropolitan cities to determine its
feasibility, cost, and effectiveness. In the evaluation, a standard
model of TDV prevention (Safe Dates administered in 8th grade) will be
compared to a comprehensive model (programs administered in 6th, 7th,
and 8th grade as well as parent, educator, policy, and communications
interventions).
Population. The study population includes students in 6th, 7th and
8th grades at 44 schools in the four participating sites. At most,
schools are expected to have 6 classrooms per grade, with an average of
30 students per classroom yielding a population of 23,760 students (44
schools x 3 grades x 6 classrooms per grade x 30 students per
classroom). All student evaluation activities will take place during
the school year. The sampling frame for parents, given that we would
only include one parent per student, is also 23,760 for the three years
of data collection covered by this package. If we assume 40 educators
per school, the sampling frame for the educator sample is 1,760.
Students: In each year of data collection, we will recruit 11,880
students (30 students per classroom x 3 classrooms per grade x 3 grades
x 44 schools). We assume a 95% participation rate (n = 11,286) for the
baseline student survey and 90% participation rate (n = 10,692) at
follow-up survey. In this revision, we request to drop the mid-term
survey to reduce burden on schools.
Parents: We will recruit a sample of 2,020 parents. We expect that
95% of the 2,020 parents will agree to participate at baseline (n =
1,919) and 90% will participate in the follow-up survey (n = 1,818)
parents.
Educators: We will attempt to recruit all educators in each school
(44 schools x 40 educators per school = 1,760). We expect a 95%
participation rate for an estimated sample of 1,672 educators at
baseline and 90% participation rate at follow-up for an estimated
sample of 1,584.
School data extractors: We will attempt to recruit one data
extractor per 44 schools to extract school data to be
[[Page 61414]]
used in conjunction with the outcome data for the students. Data
extractors in each school will access individual school-level data for
those students in their school who consented and participated in the
baseline student survey (3 x 4 x 30 x 95% = 342).
Implementation Evaluation
For the student focus groups, we will recruit groups of 10 students
per group. Two groups will be held per each of the 4 sites (10 x 2 x 4
= 80 total student participants).
Student implementer focus groups will be organized by site, with
two annual focus groups per site with 10 implementers in each group (10
x 2 x 4 = 80 total student program implementer participants).
Communications focus groups will be organized by site with up to
four groups per site (4 x 4 x 6 = 96 total student participants).
Parent program implementer focus groups will be organized by site,
with two annual focus groups per site with 10 implementers in each
group (10 x 2 x 4 = 80 total parent program implementer participants).
School leadership: based on the predicted number of two school
leadership per comprehensive school (21 schools), the number of
respondents will be 42.
Local Health Department representative: based on the predicted
number of four communities/sites and four local health department
representatives working on Dating Matters per community, the number of
respondents will be 16.
Community Advisory Board Representative: based on the predicted
number of 20 community representatives per 4 communities/sites, the
number of respondents will be 80.
Parent Program Manager: With a maximum of one parent program
manager per community/site, the number of program manager respondents
will be 4. It is anticipated that they will receive up to 50 TA
requests per year and complete the form 50 times.
Student Program Master Trainer TA Form: With a maximum of 3 master
trainers per community. There will be 12 master trainers. It is
anticipated that they will receive up to 50 TA requests per year and
complete the form 50 times.
Parent Curricula Implementers: it is expected that each school
implementing the comprehensive approach (n = 21) will have two
implementers (or 42 parent program implementer respondents). Please
note that on the burden table the number of respondents is multiplied
by the number of sessions in each parent program.
Student Curricula Implementers: based on the predicted number of 20
student curricula implementers per grade per site that will be
completing fidelity instruments, the total number of respondents will
be 80 per grade (20 x 4).
Brand Ambassadors: The Brand Ambassador Implementation Survey will
be provided to each brand ambassador (n = 20) in each community with a
maximum of 80 brand ambassadors.
Communications Implementers (``Brand Ambassador Coordinators''):
The Communications Campaign Tracking form will be provided to each
brand ambassador coordinator in each community. With a maximum of one
brand ambassador coordinator per community (n = 4), the feedback form
will be collected from a total of 4 brand ambassador coordinators.
Parent Program Participants: The 6th and 7th grade parent
satisfaction questionnaires will be completed by parent participating
in the parent program in each community. There is a maximum number of
parent respondents of 1,890 (18 x 5 x 21) for the 6th grade
satisfaction questionnaire and 1,890 for the 7th grade satisfaction
questionnaire.
There are no costs to respondents other than their time.
Estimated Annualized Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Average burden
Type of respondent Form name Number of responses per per response Total burden
respondents respondent (hours) (hours)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Student Program Participant.................... Student Outcome Survey Baseline-- 11,286 1 45/60 8465
Attachment D.
Student Program Participant.................... Student Outcome Survey Follow-up-- 10,692 1 45/60 8019
Attachment E.
School data extractor.......................... School Indicators--Attachment G........ 44 342 15/60 3762
Parent Program Participant..................... Parent Outcome Baseline Survey-- 1,919 1 1 1919
Attachment H.
Parent Program Participant..................... Parent Outcome Follow-up Survey-- 1,818 1 1 1818
Attachment EEEE.
Educator....................................... Educator Outcome Survey (baseline)-- 1,672 1 30/60 836
Attachment I.
Student Brand ambassador....................... Brand Ambassador Implementation Survey-- 80 2 20/60 53
Attachment J.
School leadership.............................. School Leadership Capacity and 42 1 1 42
Readiness Survey--Attachment K.
Parent Curricula Implementer................... Parent Program Fidelity 6th Grade 210 3 15/60 158
Session 1-Session 6--Attachment L-Q.
Parent Curricula Implementer................... Parent Program Fidelity 7th Grade 126 3 15/60 95
Session 1, 3, 5--Attachment R-T.
Student Curricula Implementer.................. Student Program Fidelity 6th Grade 480 1 15/60 120
Session 1-Session 6--Attachment U-Z.
Student Curricula Implementer.................. Student Program Fidelity 7th Grade 560 1 15/60 140
Session 1-Session 7--Attachment AA-GG.
Student Curricula Implementer.................. Student Program Fidelity 8th Grade 800 1 15/60 200
Session 1-Session 10 (comprehensive)--
Attachment HH-QQ.
Communications Coordinator..................... Communications Campaign Tracking-- 4 4 20/60 5
Attachment RR.
[[Page 61415]]
Local Health Department Representative......... Local Health Department Capacity and 16 1 2 32
Readiness--Attachment SS.
Student Program Participant.................... Student participant focus group guide 80 1 1.5 120
(time spent in focus group)--
Attachment ZZ.
Student Curricula Implementer.................. Student curricula implementer focus 80 1 1 80
group guide (time spent in focus
group)--Attachment AAA.
Parent Curricula Implementer................... Parent curricula implementer focus 80 1 1 80
group guide (time spent in focus
group)--Attachment BBB.
Student Curricula Implementer.................. Safe Dates 8th Grade Session 1-Session 800 1 15/60 200
10 (standard)--Attachment CCC-LLL.
Student Master Trainer......................... Student program master trainer TA form-- 12 50 10/60 100
Attachment DDDD.
Educator....................................... Educator Outcome Survey (follow-up)-- 1584 1 30/60 792
Attachment IIII.
Community Advisory Board Member................ Community Capacity/Readiness 80 1 1 80
Assessment--Attachment JJJJ.
Students....................................... Communications Focus Groups--Attachment 96 1 1.5 144
KKKK.
Parent Program Manager......................... Parent Program Manager TA Tracking 4 50 10/60 33
Form--Attachment LLLL.
Parent Program Participant..................... 6th Grade Curricula Parent Satisfaction 1890 1 10/60 315
Questionnaire--Attachment MMMM.
Parent Program Participant..................... 7th Grade Curricula Parent Satisfaction 1890 1 10/60 315
Questionnaire--Attachment NNNN.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... ....................................... .............. .............. .............. 27923
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: October 2, 2012.
Ron A. Otten,
Director, Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI), Office of the Associate
Director for Science (OADS), Office of the Director, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2012-24754 Filed 10-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P