Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review, 42079-42080 [2013-16772]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
42079
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
[30Day–13–0861]
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.
Proposed Project
A Controlled Evaluation of Expect
Respect Support Groups (ERSG):
Preventing and Interrupting Teen Dating
Violence among At-Risk Middle and
High School Students (0920–0861,
Expiration 8/31/2013)—Extension—
National Center for Injury Prevention
and Control (NCIPC), Division of
Violence Prevention (DVP), Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Background and Brief Description
The prevalence and consequences of
teen dating violence make it a public
health concern that requires early and
effective prevention. To date, only three
prevention strategies—Safe Dates, the
Youth Relationships Project, and 4th
R—have demonstrated reductions in
dating violence behaviors in rigorous,
controlled evaluations. In order to
protect young people and build an
evidence-base of effective prevention
strategies, evaluation of additional
programs is needed, including those
programs currently in the field. The
Expect Respect Support Groups (ERSG;
provided by SafePlace) program is
currently being implemented in the
in which no dating violence prevention
services are available. We will recruit
1,800 students (300 per year from
intervention schools and 300 per year
from control schools) over three waves
of data collection. Of the 1,800 students
recruited, we anticipate 1,200 will have
complete data at the end of the study
period. Control schools have been
selected that have characteristics (e.g.,
risk status, socio-economic status)
similar to the Austin Independent
School District intervention schools.
Survey items collect information
about emotional, physical, and sexual
peer and dating violence victimization
and perpetration, use of healthy
relationship skills, relationships
characteristics, peer relationships,
demographics, and use of other teen
dating violence prevention services,
social desirability, and attitudes toward
dating violence. These measures were
developed in collaboration with
scientists at the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention and (1) are
adapted from validated measures of teen
dating violence, and (2) reflect the
behaviors of interest and theory of
change of Expect Respect. The Reactive
Proactive Questionnaire (Raine et al.,
2006) has also been included in the
instrument packet and will be used to
determine if subtype of aggression
moderates response to intervention.
Participation in this study is
voluntary and intrusions to the
participants’ sense of privacy will be
minimized by only using data collected
from students who have agreed for us to
do so (through student assent and
signed distribution of passive parental
consent forms) and having the data
coded in such a way to protect subjects’
privacy.
Finally, ERSG facilitators will take
part in qualitative interviews planned
for the middle (December) and end
(May) of the second and third years of
data collection. The goal of these
interviews is to better understand the
implementation process for ERSG.
There are no costs to respondents
other than their time.
Austin Independent School District and
demonstrated promising results in an
uncontrolled program evaluation,
suggesting a controlled evaluation is
warranted to more rigorously examine
program effects.
This extension request is the
controlled evaluation of ERSG, which
began in September 2010; it has one
primary aim and two exploratory aims.
The primary aim is to evaluate the
effectiveness of ERSG to prevent and
reduce teen dating violence and
increase healthy conflict resolution
skills reported by at-risk male and
female middle and high school students
compared to at-risk students in control
schools who do not receive ERSG. The
exploratory aims are: (1) To evaluate
whether or not the effectiveness of
ERSG is enhanced by the presence of a
universal, school-wide prevention
programs, and (2) To examine
moderators and mediators of targeted
and universal teen dating violence
interventions, such as biological sex and
history of abuse at intake. Completion of
this study and examination of the
primary and exploratory aims associated
with it will help to fill a research gap
by adding results to the evidence base
regarding whether ERSG is a promising
program for reducing the prevalence of
teen dating violence and increasing
knowledge of healthy relationship
skills.
The purpose of this request is to
obtain Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approval to extend the
data collection for A Controlled
Evaluation of Expect Respect Support
Groups (ERSG): Preventing and
Interrupting Teen Dating Violence
among At-Risk Middle and High School
Students (OMB No.0920–0861,
Expiration 8/31/2013). CDC seeks a
three-year approval to continue the
ERSG project. The ongoing evaluation
employs a quasi-experimental/nonrandomized design in which a
convenience sample of participants in
schools receiving universal and/or
targeted prevention services are
compared to students in control schools
ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Form name
Intervention and Control Schools ......
Intake assessment ...........................
Baseline Survey ...............................
Completion Survey ..........................
Follow-up Survey 1 (12 month) .......
ERSG Facilitator Program Implementation Fidelity Measure.
ERSG Observational Program Implementation Fidelity Measure.
ERSG Facilitator ................................
ERSG Facilitator Supervisor .............
ERSG Facilitator ................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:55 Jul 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Type of respondent
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Response
burden
(hours)
Total
burden
hours
800
600
400
400
8
1
1
1
1
2
15/60
1
1
1
15/60
200
600
400
400
4
1
16
15/60
4
E:\FR\FM\15JYN1.SGM
15JYN1
42080
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 135 / Monday, July 15, 2013 / Notices
ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS—Continued
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Response
burden
(hours)
Total
burden
hours
Type of respondent
Form name
ERSG Facilitator ................................
Mid-Year Qualitative Interview with
ERSG Facilitators.
End of Year Qualitative Interview
with ERSG Facilitators.
8
1
45/60
6
8
1
1
8
..........................................................
........................
........................
........................
1,622
Total ...........................................
Leroy A. Richardson,
Chief, Information Collection Review Office,
Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the
Associate Director for Science, Office of the
Director, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2013–16772 Filed 7–12–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
Privacy Act of 1974; CMS Computer
Match No. 2013–07; HHS Computer
Match No. 1303; DoD–DMDC Match No.
18
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice of Computer Matching
Program (CMP).
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974,
as amended, this notice announces the
establishment of a CMP that CMS plans
to conduct with the Department of
Defense (DoD), Defense Manpower Data
Center (DMDC). We have provided
background information about the
proposed matching program in the
‘‘Supplementary Information’’ section
below. Although the Privacy Act
requires only that CMS provide an
opportunity for interested persons to
comment on the proposed matching
program, CMS invites comments on all
portions of this notice. See ‘‘Effective
Dates’’ section below for comment
period.
SUMMARY:
Effective Dates: Public comments
are due 30 days after publication. The
matching program shall become
effective no sooner than 40 days after
the report of the Matching Program is
sent to OMB and Congress, or 30 days
after publication in the Federal
Register, whichever is later.
ADDRESSES: The public should send
comments to: CMS Privacy Officer,
Division of Privacy Policy, Privacy
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:53 Jul 12, 2013
Jkt 229001
Policy and Compliance Group, Office of
E-Health Standards & Services, Offices
of Enterprise Management, CMS, Room
S2–24–25, 7500 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, Maryland 21244–1850.
Comments received will be available for
review at this location, by appointment,
during regular business hours, Monday
through Friday from 9:00 a.m.–3:00
p.m., Eastern Time zone.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Aaron Wesolowski, Director,
Verifications Policy & Operations
Branch, Division of Eligibility and
Enrollment Policy and Operations,
Center for Consumer Information and
Insurance Oversight, CMS, 7501
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD
20814, Office Phone: (301) 492–4416,
Facsimile: (443) 380–5531, Email:
Aaron.Wesolowski@cms.hhs.gov.
4. Notify applicants and beneficiaries
that the records are subject to matching;
and,
5. Verify match findings before
reducing, suspending, terminating, or
denying an individual’s benefits or
payments.
B. CMS Computer Matches Subject to
the Privacy Act
CMS has taken action to ensure that
all CMPs that this Agency participates
in comply with the requirements of the
Privacy Act of 1974, as amended.
Dated: July 6, 2013.
Michelle Snyder,
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Medicare
& Medicaid Services.
CMS Computer Match No. 2013–07
HHS Computer Match No. 1303
DoD–DMDC Match No. 18
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Description of the Matching Program
A. General
The Computer Matching and Privacy
Protection Act of 1988 (Public Law
(Pub. L.) 101–503), amended the Privacy
Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) by describing the
manner in which computer matching
involving Federal agencies could be
performed and adding certain
protections for individuals applying for
and receiving Federal benefits. Section
7201 of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–
508) further amended the Privacy Act
regarding protections for such
individuals. The Privacy Act, as
amended, regulates the use of computer
matching by Federal agencies when
records in a system of records are
matched with other Federal, state, or
local government records. It requires
Federal agencies involved in computer
matching programs to:
1. Negotiate written agreements with
the other agencies participating in the
matching programs;
2. Obtain the Data Integrity Board
approval of the match agreements;
3. Furnish detailed reports about
matching programs to Congress and
OMB;
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NAME:
‘‘Computer Matching Agreement
between the Department of Health and
Human Services, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services and the Department
of Defense, Defense Manpower Data
Center for the Determination of
Eligibility for the Advance Premium Tax
Credit and Cost Sharing Reductions
under the Affordable Care Act.’’
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:
Unclassified.
PARTICIPATING AGENCIES:
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), and
Department of Defense (DoD), Defense
Manpower Data Center (DMDC).
AUTHORITY FOR CONDUCTING MATCHING
PROGRAM:
This Computer Matching Program
(CMP) is executed to comply with the
provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5
U.S.C. 552a), as amended, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A–130 entitled, ‘‘Management
of Federal Information Resources,’’ at 61
FR 6428–6435 (February 20, 1996), and
OMB guidelines pertaining to computer
E:\FR\FM\15JYN1.SGM
15JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42079-42080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16772]
[[Page 42079]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
[30Day-13-0861]
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.
Proposed Project
A Controlled Evaluation of Expect Respect Support Groups (ERSG):
Preventing and Interrupting Teen Dating Violence among At-Risk Middle
and High School Students (0920-0861, Expiration 8/31/2013)--Extension--
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Division of
Violence Prevention (DVP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC).
Background and Brief Description
The prevalence and consequences of teen dating violence make it a
public health concern that requires early and effective prevention. To
date, only three prevention strategies--Safe Dates, the Youth
Relationships Project, and 4th R--have demonstrated reductions in
dating violence behaviors in rigorous, controlled evaluations. In order
to protect young people and build an evidence-base of effective
prevention strategies, evaluation of additional programs is needed,
including those programs currently in the field. The Expect Respect
Support Groups (ERSG; provided by SafePlace) program is currently being
implemented in the Austin Independent School District and demonstrated
promising results in an uncontrolled program evaluation, suggesting a
controlled evaluation is warranted to more rigorously examine program
effects.
This extension request is the controlled evaluation of ERSG, which
began in September 2010; it has one primary aim and two exploratory
aims. The primary aim is to evaluate the effectiveness of ERSG to
prevent and reduce teen dating violence and increase healthy conflict
resolution skills reported by at-risk male and female middle and high
school students compared to at-risk students in control schools who do
not receive ERSG. The exploratory aims are: (1) To evaluate whether or
not the effectiveness of ERSG is enhanced by the presence of a
universal, school-wide prevention programs, and (2) To examine
moderators and mediators of targeted and universal teen dating violence
interventions, such as biological sex and history of abuse at intake.
Completion of this study and examination of the primary and exploratory
aims associated with it will help to fill a research gap by adding
results to the evidence base regarding whether ERSG is a promising
program for reducing the prevalence of teen dating violence and
increasing knowledge of healthy relationship skills.
The purpose of this request is to obtain Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approval to extend the data collection for A Controlled
Evaluation of Expect Respect Support Groups (ERSG): Preventing and
Interrupting Teen Dating Violence among At-Risk Middle and High School
Students (OMB No.0920-0861, Expiration 8/31/2013). CDC seeks a three-
year approval to continue the ERSG project. The ongoing evaluation
employs a quasi-experimental/non-randomized design in which a
convenience sample of participants in schools receiving universal and/
or targeted prevention services are compared to students in control
schools in which no dating violence prevention services are available.
We will recruit 1,800 students (300 per year from intervention schools
and 300 per year from control schools) over three waves of data
collection. Of the 1,800 students recruited, we anticipate 1,200 will
have complete data at the end of the study period. Control schools have
been selected that have characteristics (e.g., risk status, socio-
economic status) similar to the Austin Independent School District
intervention schools.
Survey items collect information about emotional, physical, and
sexual peer and dating violence victimization and perpetration, use of
healthy relationship skills, relationships characteristics, peer
relationships, demographics, and use of other teen dating violence
prevention services, social desirability, and attitudes toward dating
violence. These measures were developed in collaboration with
scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and (1)
are adapted from validated measures of teen dating violence, and (2)
reflect the behaviors of interest and theory of change of Expect
Respect. The Reactive Proactive Questionnaire (Raine et al., 2006) has
also been included in the instrument packet and will be used to
determine if subtype of aggression moderates response to intervention.
Participation in this study is voluntary and intrusions to the
participants' sense of privacy will be minimized by only using data
collected from students who have agreed for us to do so (through
student assent and signed distribution of passive parental consent
forms) and having the data coded in such a way to protect subjects'
privacy.
Finally, ERSG facilitators will take part in qualitative interviews
planned for the middle (December) and end (May) of the second and third
years of data collection. The goal of these interviews is to better
understand the implementation process for ERSG.
There are no costs to respondents other than their time.
Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Response
Type of respondent Form name Number of responses per burden Total burden
respondents respondent (hours) hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intervention and Control Schools............... Intake assessment...................... 800 1 15/60 200
Baseline Survey........................ 600 1 1 600
Completion Survey...................... 400 1 1 400
Follow-up Survey 1 (12 month).......... 400 1 1 400
ERSG Facilitator............................... ERSG Facilitator Program Implementation 8 2 15/60 4
Fidelity Measure.
ERSG Facilitator Supervisor.................... ERSG Observational Program 1 16 15/60 4
ERSG Facilitator............................... Implementation Fidelity Measure.
[[Page 42080]]
ERSG Facilitator............................... Mid-Year Qualitative Interview with 8 1 45/60 6
ERSG Facilitators.
End of Year Qualitative Interview with 8 1 1 8
ERSG Facilitators.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... ....................................... .............. .............. .............. 1,622
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leroy A. Richardson,
Chief, Information Collection Review Office, Office of Scientific
Integrity, Office of the Associate Director for Science, Office of the
Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2013-16772 Filed 7-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
