Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 46335-46338 [2013-18378]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2013 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Public Meeting of the Presidential
Commission for the Study of
Bioethical Issues
Presidential Commission for
the Study of Bioethical Issues, Office of
the Secretary, Department of Health and
Human Services.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
The Presidential Commission
for the Study of Bioethical Issues will
conduct its fourteenth meeting on
August 19–20, 2013. At this meeting,
the Bioethics Commission will continue
to discuss the ethical implications of
incidental findings. The Bioethics
Commission will also discuss the
BRAIN Initiative and ongoing work in
neuroscience.
SUMMARY:
The meeting will take place
Monday and Tuesday, August 19–20,
2013.
DATES:
Smilow Center for
Translational Research, Perelman
School of Medicine at the University of
Pennsylvania, Smilow Center for
Translational Research Commons, 3400
Civic Center Boulevard, Building 421,
Philadelphia, PA 19104.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hillary Wicai Viers, Communications
Director, Presidential Commission for
the Study of Bioethical Issues, 1425
New York Avenue NW., Suite C–100,
Washington, DC 20005. Telephone:
202–233–3960. Email: Hillary.Viers
@bioethics.gov. Additional information
may be obtained at www.bioethics.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to the Federal Advisory Committee Act
of 1972, Public Law 92–463, 5 U.S.C.
app. 2, notice is hereby given of the
fourteenth meeting of the Presidential
Commission for the Study of Bioethical
Issues (the Bioethics Commission). The
meeting will be held from 9 a.m. to
approximately 5 p.m. on Monday,
August 19, 2013, and from 9 a.m. to
approximately 1 p.m. on Tuesday,
August 20, 2013, in Philadelphia, PA.
The meeting will be open to the public
with attendance limited to space
available. The meeting will also be
webcast at www.bioethics.gov.
Under authority of Executive Order
13521, dated November 24, 2009, the
President established the Bioethics
Commission. The Bioethics Commission
is an advisory panel of the nation’s
leaders in medicine, science, ethics,
religion, law, and engineering. The
Bioethics Commission advises the
President on bioethical issues arising
from advances in biomedicine and
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:14 Jul 30, 2013
Jkt 229001
related areas of science and technology.
The Bioethics Commission seeks to
identify and promote policies and
practices that ensure scientific research,
health care delivery, and technological
innovation are conducted in a socially
and ethically responsible manner.
The main agenda item for the
Bioethics Commission’s fourteenth
meeting is to discuss the ethical
implications of incidental findings. The
Bioethics Commission will also discuss
the BRAIN Initiative and ongoing work
in neuroscience.
The draft meeting agenda and other
information about the Bioethics
Commission, including information
about access to the webcast, will be
available at www.bioethics.gov.
The Bioethics Commission welcomes
input from anyone wishing to provide
public comment on any issue before it.
Respectful debate of opposing views
and active participation by citizens in
public exchange of ideas enhances
overall public understanding of the
issues at hand and conclusions reached
by the Bioethics Commission. The
Bioethics Commission is particularly
interested in receiving comments and
questions during the meeting that are
responsive to specific sessions. Written
comments will be accepted at the
registration desk and comment forms
will be provided to members of the
public in order to write down questions
and comments for the Bioethics
Commission as they arise. To
accommodate as many individuals as
possible, the time for each question or
comment may be limited. If the number
of individuals wishing to pose a
question or make a comment is greater
than can reasonably be accommodated
during the scheduled meeting, the
Bioethics Commission may make a
random selection.
Written comments will also be
accepted in advance of the meeting and
are especially welcome. Please address
written comments by email to
info@bioethics.gov, or by mail to the
following address: Public Commentary,
Presidential Commission for the Study
of Bioethical Issues, 1425 New York
Ave. NW., Suite C–100, Washington, DC
20005. Comments will be publicly
available, including any personally
identifiable or confidential business
information that they contain. Trade
secrets should not be submitted.
Anyone planning to attend the
meeting who needs special assistance,
such as sign language interpretation or
other reasonable accommodations,
should notify Esther Yoo by telephone
at (202) 233–3960, or email at
Esther.Yoo@bioethics.gov in advance of
the meeting. The Bioethics Commission
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
46335
will make every effort to accommodate
persons who need special assistance.
Dated: July 10, 2013.
Lisa M. Lee,
Executive Director, Presidential Commission
for the Study of Bioethical Issues.
[FR Doc. 2013–18157 Filed 7–30–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4154–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces the
intention of the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approve the proposed
information collection project:
‘‘Evaluation of the Children’s Health
Insurance Program Reauthorization Act
of 2009 (CHIPRA) Quality
Demonstration Grant Program:
Qualitative Data Collection.’’ In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521,
AHRQ invites the public to comment on
this proposed information collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received by September 30, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by
email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
Copies of the proposed collection
plans, data collection instruments, and
specific details on the estimated burden
can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427–1477, or by
email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Proposed Project
Evaluation of the Children’s Health
Insurance Program Reauthorization Act
of 2009 (CHIPRA) Quality
Demonstration Grant Program:
Qualitative Data Collection
Section 401(a) of the Children’s
Health Insurance Program
Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA),
Public Law 111–3, amended the Social
Security Act (the Act) to enact section
1139A (42 U.S.C. 1320b–9a). AHRQ is
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
46336
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2013 / Notices
requesting approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for the
collection of qualitative data through
site visit interviews and focus groups to
support a comprehensive, mixedmethods evaluation of the quality
demonstration grants authorized under
section 1139A(d) of the Act. AHRQ’s
mission of improving the quality and
effectiveness of health care in the
United States aligns with evaluating
whether, and through what mechanism,
projects funded by the CHIPRA
demonstration grants improve the
quality of care received by children in
Medicaid and the Children’s Health
Insurance Program (CHIP).
CHIPRA included funding for fiveyear grants so that States can
experiment with and evaluate several
promising ideas related to improving
the quality of children’s health care in
Medicaid and CHIP. In February 2010,
the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services (CMS) announced the award of
10 demonstration grants to States that
convincingly articulated an achievable
vision of what they could accomplish by
the end of the five-year grant period,
described strategies they would use to
achieve the objectives, and explained
how the strategies would achieve the
objectives. Applicants were encouraged
by CMS to address multiple grant
categories (described below) and to
partner with other States in designing
and implementing their projects.
Of the 10 grantee States selected, six
are partnering with other States, for a
total of 18 demonstration States. The
demonstration States are: Colorado
(partnering with New Mexico); Florida
(with Illinois); Maine (with Vermont);
Maryland (with Wyoming and Georgia);
Massachusetts; North Carolina; Oregon
(with Alaska and West Virginia);
Pennsylvania; South Carolina; and Utah
(with Idaho). These demonstration
States have implemented 51 distinct
projects in at least one of five possible
grant categories, A to E. Category A
grantees are experimenting with and/or
evaluating the use of pediatric quality
measures, including those in the initial
core set of children’s health care quality
measures (a group of measures
developed for state Medicaid and CHIP
agencies to report in a standardized
fashion to CMS). Category B grantees are
promoting health information
technologies for improved care delivery
and patient outcomes. Category C
grantees are implementing the patientcentered medical home (PCMH) model
of primary care, working with schoolbased health centers (SBHCs) to
improve care, or using other providerbased service delivery models aimed at
improving care quality. Category D
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:14 Jul 30, 2013
Jkt 229001
grantees will evaluate the impact of a
model pediatric electronic health
record. Category E grantees are testing
other State-designed approaches to
quality improvement in Medicaid and
CHIP. This phase of the project will use
qualitative techniques such as in-depth
interviews and focus groups.
The first round of interviews for the
project was completed in an earlier
phase of the project in August of 2012
under an information collection request
approved by OMB on February 17th,
2012 (OMB Control No. 0935–0190).
While the first round of interviews
focused on demonstration goals and
early strategies, the second round of
interviews described in this information
collection request will focus on
demonstration outcomes and lessons
learned. These interviews are designed
to build on the information gathered in
the first round to develop a complete
picture of demonstration
implementation.
AHRQ’s goal in performing this
evaluation of the CHIPRA Quality
Demonstration Grant Program is to
produce insights into how best to
implement quality improvement
programs as well as information on how
successful programs can be replicated to
improve children’s health care quality
in Medicaid and CHIP. The specific
goals of this project are as follows:
1. Develop a deep, systematic
understanding of how CHIPRA
demonstration States carried out their grantfunded projects.
2. Understand why the CHIPRA
demonstration States pursued certain
strategies.
3. Understand whether and how the
CHIPRA demonstration States’ efforts
affected outcomes related to knowledge and
behavior change in targeted providers and/or
consumers of health care.
4. Identify CHIPRA State activities that
measurably improve the nation’s health care,
especially as it pertains to children.
This study is being conducted by
AHRQ through its contractor,
Mathematica Policy Research Inc., and
their subcontractors, the Urban Institute
and AcademyHealth, pursuant to
AHRQ’s statutory authority to conduct
and support research on health care and
on systems for the delivery of such care,
including activities with respect to the
quality, effectiveness, efficiency,
appropriateness and value of healthcare
services and with respect to quality
measurement and improvement. 42
U.S.C. 299a(a)(1) and (2).
Method of Collection
To meet the project goals AHRQ will
implement the following data
collections:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1. Key Staff Interviews—Key staff
members are staff directly involved in
the design and oversight of grant-funded
activities. The purpose of these
interviews is to gain insight into the
implementation of demonstration
projects, to understand contextual
factors, and to identify lessons and
implications for the broad application
and sustainability of projects. Semistructured interviews will be conducted
with up to 4 key staff members per state.
2. Implementation Staff Interviews—
Other implementation staff are staff
involved in the day-to-day
implementation of grant-funded
projects. These staff members include
state agency employees, provider
trainers or coaches, health IT vendors,
and/or project consultants. The purpose
of these interviews is to gain insight into
the opportunities and challenges related
to key technical aspects of project
implementation. Semi-structured
interviews will be conducted with up to
16 other implementation staff members
per state.
3. Stakeholder Interviews—External
stakeholders have a direct interest in
children’s care quality in Medicaid and
CHIP. Stakeholders include
representatives of managed care
organizations, state chapters of the
American Academy of Pediatrics,
advocacy organizations for children and
families, and social service agencies.
These stakeholders will be familiar with
the CHIPRA projects and may serve on
advisory panels or workgroups related
to one or more projects. The interviews
will gather insight into the
opportunities and challenges related to
project implementation, stakeholder
satisfaction with their project
involvement, and contextual factors.
Semi-structured interviews will be
conducted with up to 8 external
stakeholders per State.
4. Health Care Organization Staff
Interviews—Depending on the projects a
state is implementing, health care
organizations participating in
demonstration activities can include
private practices, public clinics,
federally qualified health centers, care
management entities, or school based
health centers. Interviews will capture
information about project-related
activities, staff perceptions of outcomes
and impacts, and the organizations
involvement in other qualityimprovement initiatives. Semistructured interviews will be conducted
with up to 12 staff members per state.
5. Parent Focus Groups—We will hold
in-person focus groups with parents,
guardians, or other caregivers of
children who are enrolled in Medicaid
or CHIP and are served by the medical
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
46337
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2013 / Notices
practices involved in the CHIPRA
demonstration. There will be four focus
groups in four of the twelve states
implementing patient-centered medical
home demonstration projects. The
number of participants per focus group
will range from 8 to 10, resulting in a
maximum of 160 adults participating.
They will be conducted in English, and
also in Spanish in states with high
proportions of Hispanic individuals
covered by Medicaid.
6. Adolescent Focus Groups—We will
hold in-person focus groups with
adolescents who are enrolled in
Medicaid or CHIP and are served by
school-based health centers involved in
the CHIPRA demonstration. There will
be four focus groups in one of the two
states implementing school-based health
center projects. The number of
participants per focus group will range
from 8 to 10, resulting in a maximum of
40 adolescents participating.
This evaluation is designed to
develop a rich understanding of States’
implementation activities (goal 1),
document the rationale for the selection
of particular strategies (goal 2),
document provider and parent reported
behavior change (goal 3), and assess the
perceived impact of those changes on
access, quality, and cost of care (goal 4).
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden
Exhibit 1 shows the estimated
annualized burden hours for the
respondents’ time to participate in this
evaluation. Key staff interviews will be
conducted with up to four persons from
each of the 18 CHIPRA demonstration
States (72 total) and will last for about
11⁄2 hours. Implementation staff
interviews will include up to 16 persons
from each of the 18 CHIPRA
demonstration States (288 total) and
take an hour to complete. Stakeholder
interviews will include up to 8 persons
from each of the 18 CHIPRA
demonstration States (144 total) and
also take an hour to complete. Health
care provider interviews will be
conducted with up to 12 persons from
each of the 18 CHIPRA demonstration
States and will last 45 minutes (216
total). About 229 parents will be
screened to get a maximum of 160
parents to participate in 16 focus groups
across 4 States implementing PCMHfocused demonstration projects. The
screener takes 25 minutes to complete
and the focus group will last one and a
half hours; the burden estimate of 2.5
hours includes one hour for travel time
to and from the focus group site. About
57 adolescents will be screened to get
up to 40 adolescents to participate in
four focus groups completed in one
State with SBHC demonstration
projects. The screener takes 25 minutes
to complete and the focus group will
last one and a half hours (travel time
does not apply because the focus groups
will be held on school premises). The
total burden for the qualitative
evaluation is estimated to be 1,281
hours.
EXHIBIT 1—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS
Number of
respondents*
Form name
Number of
responses per
respondent
Hours per
response
Total burden
hours
Key Staff Interviews .........................................................................................
Implementation Staff Interviews ......................................................................
Stakeholder Interviews ....................................................................................
Health Care Provider Interviews ......................................................................
Parent Focus Group Screener ........................................................................
Parent Focus Groups ......................................................................................
Adolescent Focus Group Screener .................................................................
Adolescent Focus Groups ...............................................................................
72
288
144
216
** 229
160
** 57
40
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.5
1
1
45/60
25/60
2.5
25/60
1.5
108
288
144
162
95
400
24
60
Total ..........................................................................................................
1,206
na
na
1,281
* The number of respondents that will be interviewed in each state will vary depending on the number, scope, complexity, and nature of the
projects implemented. This table reflects upper-bound estimates of total burden hours and the number of respondents per type per state.
** Based on an expected 70% screen-in rate
Exhibit 2 shows the estimated
annualized cost burden associated with
the respondent’s time to participate in
this evaluation. The total cost burden
for the interviews and focus groups is
estimated to be $43,303.
EXHIBIT 2—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST BURDEN
Number of
respondents
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Form name
Total burden
hours
Average
hourly wage
rate*
Total cost
burden
Key Staff Interviews .........................................................................................
Implementation Staff Interviews ......................................................................
Stakeholder Interviews ....................................................................................
Health Care Provider Interviews ......................................................................
Parent Focus Group Screener ........................................................................
Parent Focus Groups ......................................................................................
Adolescent Focus Group Screener .................................................................
Adolescent Focus Groups ...............................................................................
72
288
144
216
229
160
57
40
108
288
144
162
95
400
24
60
a $55.22
e0
$5,964
8,925
4,463
13,056
2,091
8,804
0.00
0.00
Total ..........................................................................................................
1,206
1,281
na
43,303
b 30.99
b30.99
c 80.59
d 22.01
d 22.01
e0
* National Compensation Survey: Occupational wages in the United States May 2012, ‘‘U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.’’
a Based on the mean wages for general and operations manager (11–1021)
b Based on the mean wages for social and community service managers (11–9151)
c Based on the mean wages for general pediatricians (29–1065)
d Based on the mean wages for all occupations
e Wage rates for adolescents are assumed to be zero.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:14 Jul 30, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
46338
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2013 / Notices
Request for Comments
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, comments on AHRQ’s
information collection are requested
with regard to any of the following: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of AHRQ health care
research and health care information
dissemination functions, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of
AHRQ’s estimate of burden (including
hours and costs) of the proposed
collection(s) 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 upon the
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and
included in the Agency’s subsequent
request for OMB approval of the
proposed information collection. All
comments will become a matter of
public record.
Dated: July 23, 2013.
Carolyn M. Clancy,
AHRQ Director.
[FR Doc. 2013–18378 Filed 7–30–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–90–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice announces the
intention of the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approve the proposed
information collection project:
‘‘Collection of Information for Agency
for Healthcare Research and Quality’s
(AHRQ) Hospital Survey on Patient
Safety Culture Comparative Database.’’
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3521,
AHRQ invites the public to comment on
this proposed information collection.
This proposed information collection
was previously published in the Federal
Register on May 16th, 2013 and allowed
60 days for public comment. No
comments were received. The purpose
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:14 Jul 30, 2013
Jkt 229001
of this notice is to allow an additional
30 days for public comment.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received by August 30, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted to: AHRQ’s OMB Desk
Officer by fax at (202) 395–6974
(attention: AHRQ’s desk officer) or by
email at
OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov
(attention: AHRQ’s desk officer).
Copies of the proposed collection
plans, data collection instruments, and
specific details on the estimated burden
can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427–1477, or by
email at doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Project
Collection of Information for Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality’s
(AHRQ) Hospital Survey on Patient
Safety Culture Comparative Database
Request for information collection
approval. The Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) requests
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) reapprove, under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
AHRQ’s collection of information for
the AHRQ Hospital Survey on Patient
Safety Culture (Hospital SOPS)
Comparative Database; OMB NO. 0935–
0162, last approved on May 5th, 2010.
The Hospital SOPS Comparative
Database consists of data from the
AHRQ Hospital Survey on Patient
Safety Culture. Hospitals in the U.S. are
asked to voluntarily submit data from
the survey to AHRQ. The database was
developed by AHRQ in 2006 in
response to requests from hospitals
interested in knowing how their patient
safety culture survey results compare to
those of other hospitals in their efforts
to improve patient safety.
Background on the Hospital SOPS. In
1999, the Institute of Medicine called
for health care organizations to develop
a ‘‘culture of safety’’ such that their
workforce and processes focus on
improving the reliability and safety of
care for patients (IOM, 1999; To Err is
Human: Building a Safer Health
System). To respond to the need for
tools to assess patient safety culture in
health care, AHRQ developed and pilot
tested the Hospital Survey on Patient
Safety Culture with OMB approval
(OMB NO. 0935–0115; Approved 2/4/
2003). The survey was designed to
enable hospitals to assess staff opinions
about patient safety issues, medical
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
error, and error reporting and includes
42 items that measure 12 dimensions of
patient safety culture. AHRQ released
the survey to the public along with a
Survey User’s Guide and other toolkit
materials in November 2004 on the
AHRQ Web site. Since its release, the
survey has been voluntarily used by
hundreds of hospitals in the U.S.
Rationale for the information
collection. The Hospital SOPS survey
and the Hospital SOPS Comparative
Database are supported by AHRQ to
meet its goals of promoting
improvements in the quality and safety
of health care in hospital settings. The
surveys, toolkit materials, and
comparative database results are all
made publicly available along with
technical assistance, provided by AHRQ
through its contractor at no charge to
hospitals, to facilitate the use of these
materials for hospital patient safety and
quality improvement.
This study is being conducted by
AHRQ through its contractor, Westat,
pursuant to AHRQ’s statutory authority
to conduct and support research on
healthcare and on systems for the
delivery of such care, including
activities with respect to: the quality,
effectiveness, efficiency,
appropriateness and value of healthcare
services; quality measurement and
improvement; and database
development. 42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(1), (2),
and (a)(8).
Method of Collection
All information collection for the
Hospital SOPS Comparative Database is
done electronically, except the Data Use
Agreement (DUA) that hospitals sign in
hard copy and fax or mail back.
Registration, submission of hospital
information, and data upload is handled
online through a secure Web site.
Delivery of confidential hospital survey
feedback reports is also done
electronically by having submitters
enter a username and password and
downloading their reports from a secure
Web site.
Survey data from the AHRQ Hospital
Survey on Patient Safety Culture is used
to produce three types of products: (1)
An annual Hospital SOPS Comparative
Database Report that is made publicly
available in the public domain; (2)
Individual Hospital Survey Feedback
Reports that are confidential,
customized reports produced for each
hospital that submits data to the
database; and (3) Research data sets of
individual-level and hospital-level deidentified data to enable researchers to
conduct analyses.
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 31, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46335-46338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18378]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the intention of the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request that the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approve the proposed information collection
project: ``Evaluation of the Children's Health Insurance Program
Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) Quality Demonstration Grant
Program: Qualitative Data Collection.'' In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, AHRQ invites the public
to comment on this proposed information collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by September 30, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by email at
doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
Copies of the proposed collection plans, data collection
instruments, and specific details on the estimated burden can be
obtained from the AHRQ Reports Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427-1477, or by email at
doris.lefkowitz@AHRQ.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Project
Evaluation of the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization
Act of 2009 (CHIPRA) Quality Demonstration Grant Program: Qualitative
Data Collection
Section 401(a) of the Children's Health Insurance Program
Reauthorization Act of 2009 (CHIPRA), Public Law 111-3, amended the
Social Security Act (the Act) to enact section 1139A (42 U.S.C. 1320b-
9a). AHRQ is
[[Page 46336]]
requesting approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
the collection of qualitative data through site visit interviews and
focus groups to support a comprehensive, mixed-methods evaluation of
the quality demonstration grants authorized under section 1139A(d) of
the Act. AHRQ's mission of improving the quality and effectiveness of
health care in the United States aligns with evaluating whether, and
through what mechanism, projects funded by the CHIPRA demonstration
grants improve the quality of care received by children in Medicaid and
the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
CHIPRA included funding for five-year grants so that States can
experiment with and evaluate several promising ideas related to
improving the quality of children's health care in Medicaid and CHIP.
In February 2010, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
announced the award of 10 demonstration grants to States that
convincingly articulated an achievable vision of what they could
accomplish by the end of the five-year grant period, described
strategies they would use to achieve the objectives, and explained how
the strategies would achieve the objectives. Applicants were encouraged
by CMS to address multiple grant categories (described below) and to
partner with other States in designing and implementing their projects.
Of the 10 grantee States selected, six are partnering with other
States, for a total of 18 demonstration States. The demonstration
States are: Colorado (partnering with New Mexico); Florida (with
Illinois); Maine (with Vermont); Maryland (with Wyoming and Georgia);
Massachusetts; North Carolina; Oregon (with Alaska and West Virginia);
Pennsylvania; South Carolina; and Utah (with Idaho). These
demonstration States have implemented 51 distinct projects in at least
one of five possible grant categories, A to E. Category A grantees are
experimenting with and/or evaluating the use of pediatric quality
measures, including those in the initial core set of children's health
care quality measures (a group of measures developed for state Medicaid
and CHIP agencies to report in a standardized fashion to CMS). Category
B grantees are promoting health information technologies for improved
care delivery and patient outcomes. Category C grantees are
implementing the patient-centered medical home (PCMH) model of primary
care, working with school-based health centers (SBHCs) to improve care,
or using other provider-based service delivery models aimed at
improving care quality. Category D grantees will evaluate the impact of
a model pediatric electronic health record. Category E grantees are
testing other State-designed approaches to quality improvement in
Medicaid and CHIP. This phase of the project will use qualitative
techniques such as in-depth interviews and focus groups.
The first round of interviews for the project was completed in an
earlier phase of the project in August of 2012 under an information
collection request approved by OMB on February 17th, 2012 (OMB Control
No. 0935-0190). While the first round of interviews focused on
demonstration goals and early strategies, the second round of
interviews described in this information collection request will focus
on demonstration outcomes and lessons learned. These interviews are
designed to build on the information gathered in the first round to
develop a complete picture of demonstration implementation.
AHRQ's goal in performing this evaluation of the CHIPRA Quality
Demonstration Grant Program is to produce insights into how best to
implement quality improvement programs as well as information on how
successful programs can be replicated to improve children's health care
quality in Medicaid and CHIP. The specific goals of this project are as
follows:
1. Develop a deep, systematic understanding of how CHIPRA
demonstration States carried out their grant-funded projects.
2. Understand why the CHIPRA demonstration States pursued
certain strategies.
3. Understand whether and how the CHIPRA demonstration States'
efforts affected outcomes related to knowledge and behavior change
in targeted providers and/or consumers of health care.
4. Identify CHIPRA State activities that measurably improve the
nation's health care, especially as it pertains to children.
This study is being conducted by AHRQ through its contractor,
Mathematica Policy Research Inc., and their subcontractors, the Urban
Institute and AcademyHealth, pursuant to AHRQ's statutory authority to
conduct and support research on health care and on systems for the
delivery of such care, including activities with respect to the
quality, effectiveness, efficiency, appropriateness and value of
healthcare services and with respect to quality measurement and
improvement. 42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(1) and (2).
Method of Collection
To meet the project goals AHRQ will implement the following data
collections:
1. Key Staff Interviews--Key staff members are staff directly
involved in the design and oversight of grant-funded activities. The
purpose of these interviews is to gain insight into the implementation
of demonstration projects, to understand contextual factors, and to
identify lessons and implications for the broad application and
sustainability of projects. Semi-structured interviews will be
conducted with up to 4 key staff members per state.
2. Implementation Staff Interviews--Other implementation staff are
staff involved in the day-to-day implementation of grant-funded
projects. These staff members include state agency employees, provider
trainers or coaches, health IT vendors, and/or project consultants. The
purpose of these interviews is to gain insight into the opportunities
and challenges related to key technical aspects of project
implementation. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with up to
16 other implementation staff members per state.
3. Stakeholder Interviews--External stakeholders have a direct
interest in children's care quality in Medicaid and CHIP. Stakeholders
include representatives of managed care organizations, state chapters
of the American Academy of Pediatrics, advocacy organizations for
children and families, and social service agencies. These stakeholders
will be familiar with the CHIPRA projects and may serve on advisory
panels or workgroups related to one or more projects. The interviews
will gather insight into the opportunities and challenges related to
project implementation, stakeholder satisfaction with their project
involvement, and contextual factors. Semi-structured interviews will be
conducted with up to 8 external stakeholders per State.
4. Health Care Organization Staff Interviews--Depending on the
projects a state is implementing, health care organizations
participating in demonstration activities can include private
practices, public clinics, federally qualified health centers, care
management entities, or school based health centers. Interviews will
capture information about project-related activities, staff perceptions
of outcomes and impacts, and the organizations involvement in other
quality-improvement initiatives. Semi-structured interviews will be
conducted with up to 12 staff members per state.
5. Parent Focus Groups--We will hold in-person focus groups with
parents, guardians, or other caregivers of children who are enrolled in
Medicaid or CHIP and are served by the medical
[[Page 46337]]
practices involved in the CHIPRA demonstration. There will be four
focus groups in four of the twelve states implementing patient-centered
medical home demonstration projects. The number of participants per
focus group will range from 8 to 10, resulting in a maximum of 160
adults participating. They will be conducted in English, and also in
Spanish in states with high proportions of Hispanic individuals covered
by Medicaid.
6. Adolescent Focus Groups--We will hold in-person focus groups
with adolescents who are enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP and are served by
school-based health centers involved in the CHIPRA demonstration. There
will be four focus groups in one of the two states implementing school-
based health center projects. The number of participants per focus
group will range from 8 to 10, resulting in a maximum of 40 adolescents
participating.
This evaluation is designed to develop a rich understanding of
States' implementation activities (goal 1), document the rationale for
the selection of particular strategies (goal 2), document provider and
parent reported behavior change (goal 3), and assess the perceived
impact of those changes on access, quality, and cost of care (goal 4).
Estimated Annual Respondent Burden
Exhibit 1 shows the estimated annualized burden hours for the
respondents' time to participate in this evaluation. Key staff
interviews will be conducted with up to four persons from each of the
18 CHIPRA demonstration States (72 total) and will last for about 1\1/
2\ hours. Implementation staff interviews will include up to 16 persons
from each of the 18 CHIPRA demonstration States (288 total) and take an
hour to complete. Stakeholder interviews will include up to 8 persons
from each of the 18 CHIPRA demonstration States (144 total) and also
take an hour to complete. Health care provider interviews will be
conducted with up to 12 persons from each of the 18 CHIPRA
demonstration States and will last 45 minutes (216 total). About 229
parents will be screened to get a maximum of 160 parents to participate
in 16 focus groups across 4 States implementing PCMH-focused
demonstration projects. The screener takes 25 minutes to complete and
the focus group will last one and a half hours; the burden estimate of
2.5 hours includes one hour for travel time to and from the focus group
site. About 57 adolescents will be screened to get up to 40 adolescents
to participate in four focus groups completed in one State with SBHC
demonstration projects. The screener takes 25 minutes to complete and
the focus group will last one and a half hours (travel time does not
apply because the focus groups will be held on school premises). The
total burden for the qualitative evaluation is estimated to be 1,281
hours.
Exhibit 1--Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Form name Number of responses per Hours per Total burden
respondents* respondent response hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key Staff Interviews............................ 72 1 1.5 108
Implementation Staff Interviews................. 288 1 1 288
Stakeholder Interviews.......................... 144 1 1 144
Health Care Provider Interviews................. 216 1 45/60 162
Parent Focus Group Screener..................... ** 229 1 25/60 95
Parent Focus Groups............................. 160 1 2.5 400
Adolescent Focus Group Screener................. ** 57 1 25/60 24
Adolescent Focus Groups......................... 40 1 1.5 60
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 1,206 na na 1,281
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The number of respondents that will be interviewed in each state will vary depending on the number, scope,
complexity, and nature of the projects implemented. This table reflects upper-bound estimates of total burden
hours and the number of respondents per type per state.
** Based on an expected 70% screen-in rate
Exhibit 2 shows the estimated annualized cost burden associated
with the respondent's time to participate in this evaluation. The total
cost burden for the interviews and focus groups is estimated to be
$43,303.
Exhibit 2--Estimated Annualized Cost Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Form name Number of Total burden hourly wage Total cost
respondents hours rate* burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key Staff Interviews............................. 72 108 a $55.22 $5,964
Implementation Staff Interviews.................. 288 288 b 30.99 8,925
Stakeholder Interviews........................... 144 144 b30.99 4,463
Health Care Provider Interviews.................. 216 162 c 80.59 13,056
Parent Focus Group Screener...................... 229 95 d 22.01 2,091
Parent Focus Groups.............................. 160 400 d 22.01 8,804
Adolescent Focus Group Screener.................. 57 24 e 0 0.00
Adolescent Focus Groups.......................... 40 60 e 0 0.00
--------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................................ 1,206 1,281 na 43,303
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Compensation Survey: Occupational wages in the United States May 2012, ``U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics.''
a Based on the mean wages for general and operations manager (11-1021)
b Based on the mean wages for social and community service managers (11-9151)
c Based on the mean wages for general pediatricians (29-1065)
d Based on the mean wages for all occupations
e Wage rates for adolescents are assumed to be zero.
[[Page 46338]]
Request for Comments
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on AHRQ's
information collection are requested with regard to any of the
following: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of AHRQ health care research and
health care information dissemination functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of AHRQ's
estimate of burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed
collection(s) 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 upon the
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized
and included in the Agency's subsequent request for OMB approval of the
proposed information collection. All comments will become a matter of
public record.
Dated: July 23, 2013.
Carolyn M. Clancy,
AHRQ Director.
[FR Doc. 2013-18378 Filed 7-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-90-P