Termination of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's Protection and Advocacy for Persons With Developmental Disabilities Award, 5555-5559 [2015-01857]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
• Administration for Community Living

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 21 (Monday, February 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5555-5559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-01857]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Community Living


Termination of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's Protection and 
Advocacy for Persons With Developmental Disabilities Award

AGENCY: Administration for Community Living, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of Hearing: Termination of PADD funding. Action to 
Terminate the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's Protection and Advocacy for 
Persons with Developmental Disabilities (PADD) Award.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to regulations at 45 CFR part 1386, subpart D, this 
notice announces an administrative hearing regarding termination of 
Federal funding (that is, ``the allotment'') for the Protection and 
Advocacy for Persons with Developmental Disabilities (PADD) Award to 
the designated Protection and Advocacy agency in the Commonwealth of 
Puerto Rico: Oficina del Procurador de las Personas con Impedimentos 
(OPPI) (Ombudsman for Persons with Disabilities). This notice includes 
the following information: Who will preside at the hearing, the 
organizations or entities that are parties to the hearing without 
making a specific request to participate, the due dates for those who 
are not parties as of right to file a petition to participate as a 
party or as an amicus curiae, the date and place of the hearing, how 
certain procedural provisions in the applicable regulations have been 
modified, and a description of the issues to be considered at the 
hearing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn Reines-Graubard, Director, 
Appellate Division, Departmental Appeals Board, Cohen Building, Rm. G-
644, MS 6127, 330 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20201, 202-565-
0116.
    Background: The Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of 
Rights Act of 2000 (DD Act) (codified at 42 U.S.C. 15001 et seq.) 
provides states and territories with federal money for the purpose of 
assuring that ``individuals with developmental disabilities and their 
families participate in the design of and have access to needed 
community services, individualized supports, and other forms of 
assistance that promote self-determination, independence, productivity, 
and integration and inclusion in all facets of community life, through 
culturally competent programs authorized'' by the Act. DD Act Sec.  
101(b) (42 U.S.C. 15001(b)). While a number of programs are authorized 
under the DD Act, the relevant program for this proceeding is the 
Protection and Advocacy (P&A) system, described in Subtitle C of Title 
I of the DD Act and, relatedly, the State Council on Developmental 
Disabilities (SCDD), described in Subtitle B of such Title.
    P&A systems are to ``protect the legal and human rights of 
individuals with developmental disabilities.'' DD Act Sec.  101(b)(2) 
(42 U.S.C. 15001(b)(2)). State Councils are to engage in ``advocacy, 
capacity building, and systemic change activities that are consistent 
with the purpose and policies of the Act,'' DD Act Sec.  101(b)(1)(A) 
(42 U.S.C. 15001(b)(1)(A)), and that ``contribute[] to a coordinated, 
consumer- and family-centered, consumer- and family-directed, 
comprehensive system that includes needed community services, 
individualized supports, and other forms of assistance that promote 
self-determination for individuals with developmental disabilities and 
their families.'' DD Act Sec.  101(b)(1)(B) (42 U.S.C. 15001(b)(1)(B)). 
As a condition of funding the SCDD, the State must establish a P&A 
system to ``to protect and advocate the rights of individuals with 
developmental disabilities.'' DD Act Sec.  143(a)(1) (42 U.S.C. 
15043(a)(1)).
    Under the DD Act, a P&A system must have certain powers. Such 
powers include, but are not limited to, the authority to ``pursue 
legal, administrative, and other appropriate remedies or approaches to 
ensure the protection of, and advocacy for, the rights of such 
individuals within the State who are or who may be eligible for 
treatment, services, or habilitation, or who are being considered for a 
change in living arrangements, with particular attention to members of 
ethnic and racial minority groups,'' as well as to ``investigate 
incidents of abuse and neglect . . . if the incidents are reported to 
the system or if there is probable cause to believe that the incidents 
occurred.'' DD Act Sec.  143(a)(2)(A)(i) and (B) (42 U.S.C. 
15043(a)(2)(A)(i) and (B)).
    Pertinent regulations implementing the DD Act are contained in 45 
CFR parts 1385 and 1386. Part 1385 includes general requirements 
applicable to most programs and projects authorized under the DD Act, 
including both the SCDDs and P&A systems. Part 1386 is specific to 
SCDDs and P&A systems. Subpart A of Part 1386 contains regulations 
applicable to both programs; Subpart B

[[Page 5556]]

is specific to P&A systems; Subpart C is specific to SCDDs, and Subpart 
D contains the practices and procedures for administrative hearings, 
such as the hearing in this proceeding.
    Designation of Presiding Officer: Section 1386.100(a) of 45 CFR 
states that the ``presiding officer at a hearing must be the Assistant 
Secretary''--defined in section 1386.80 as the Assistant Secretary for 
Children and Families--``or someone designated by the Assistant 
Secretary.'' In 2013, the Assistant Secretary for Children and Families 
delegated his authorities under the DD Act to the Administrator, 
Administration for Community Living (ACL). 78 FR 16510 (Mar. 15, 2013). 
The Administrator, ACL, has designated Leslie A. Sussan, a member of 
the Departmental Appeals Board (DAB), as the Presiding Officer at the 
hearing. The Presiding Officer will certify the entire record, 
including recommended findings and a proposed decision, to the 
Administrator, ACL, who will issue a decision in accordance with 45 CFR 
1386.111.
    Requests for Participation: Pursuant to 45 CFR 1386.94(a), the 
Administration for Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AIDD) 
within ACL; OPPI; the Puerto Rico Developmental Disabilities Council 
(PRDDC); and the Office of the Governor, on behalf of the Commonwealth 
of Puerto Rico, are parties to the hearing without making a specific 
request to participate. Any individual or group not a party as of right 
under section 1386.94(a) that wishes to participate as a party must 
file a petition containing the information required by section 
1386.94(b)(2)(i)-(iv) with the Presiding Officer no later than 15 days 
after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person or organization that wishes to participate as 
an amicus curiae must file a petition that contains the information 
required by section 1386.94(c)(1)(i)-(iii). The petition must also 
state whether the interested person or organization will submit a 
written statement of position prior to the hearing and whether it 
wishes to present a brief oral statement at the hearing and/or to 
submit a brief or written statement at such time as the parties submit 
briefs. The petition must be filed with the Presiding Officer at least 
15 days before the scheduled hearing date below in order to facilitate 
hearing arrangements.
    If the deadline for filing a petition falls on a federal non-
workday (a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, or a day which by statute 
or Executive Order is declared to be a non-workday for federal 
employees), the submission may be filed on the next federal workday.
    Effect of a Final Determination: The decision of the Presiding 
Officer will be reviewed by the Administrator of ACL, in accordance 
with 45 CFR 1386.111. If the Administrator reaches a final 
determination that OPPI does not comply with Federal requirements, and 
determines that Federal funding (i.e., allotments) will not be made 
pursuant to such decision, thus terminating the PADD grant, such 
decision will also terminate funding for the Commonwealth's SCDD in 
addition to the P&A. Pursuant to section 143(a) of the DD Act (42 
U.S.C. 15043(a)), as well as 45 CFR 1386.21(a), in order for a State to 
receive an allotment for its SCDD, the State must have in effect a P&A 
system meeting Federal requirements.
    Other HHS programs providing grants to P&A organizations 
incorporate the DD Act. These programs are:
    (a) The Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness 
(PAIMI) program. Specifically, 42 U.S.C. 10802(2) defines an eligible 
system as a system ``established in a State to protect and advocate the 
rights of persons with developmental disabilities under subtitle C of 
the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 
2000.''
    (b) The Protection and Advocacy for Voting Access (PAVA) program 
under the Help America Vote Act of 2002. Specifically, 42 U.S.C. 
15461(a) states that the Secretary of Health and Human Services ``shall 
pay the protection and advocacy system (as defined in section 15002 of 
this title) of each state . . . .''
    (c) The Protection and Advocacy for Traumatic Brain Injury (PATBI) 
program. Specifically, 42 U.S.C. 300d-53(m) defines a ``protection and 
advocacy system'' as a ``protection and advocacy system established 
under part C of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of 
Rights Act. . . .''
    Such programs either require the existence of a P&A under the DD 
Act or define the P&A with reference to such Act. Therefore, a final 
decision that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico does not have a system in 
effect to protect and advocate the rights of individuals with 
developmental disabilities because OPPI does not meet the statutory and 
regulatory requirements to serve as a P&A may also result in suspension 
or termination of grant funding under these programs based on 
ineligibility.
    Federal programs outside HHS (such as the Protection and Advocacy 
for Individual Rights (PAIR) program under section 509 of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794e)) also refer to 
the DD Act. However, this Notice does not address the effect of a final 
decision in this case on those programs.
    Date, Time and Place Of Hearing: Pursuant to 45 CFR 1386.84, the 
Administrator, ACL, modifies the requirements for the notice of hearing 
in section 1386.90 as follows, having determined that this modification 
will serve justice and will not unduly prejudice any party.
    Rather than setting an exact time and a specific calendar date for 
the hearing, this Notice announces that the hearing will commence 45 
days from the date this notice is published in the Federal Register (or 
the first federal workday thereafter, if the 45th day falls on a 
federal non-workday) at a time to be determined by the Presiding 
Officer. If the Presiding Officer reschedules the hearing pursuant to 
45 CFR 1386.101(a)(1), the Presiding Officer will notify all parties 
and amici curiae.
    The hearing is expected to be conducted using videoconference. A 
non-federal party (including a non-federal party under section 
1396.94(a)) that believes an in-person hearing is necessary because it 
is incapable of reasonably presenting its case by videoconference must 
submit a statement to that effect with supporting reasons no later than 
the date specified above for filing a petition to participate as a 
party. If the Presiding Officer determines that an in-person hearing is 
warranted, the Presiding Officer will notify the parties of the hearing 
location after consulting with the parties. Otherwise, the Departmental 
Appeals Board will arrange for appropriate videoconference facilities 
for the non-federal parties in Puerto Rico. Because it is based in 
Washington, DC, AIDD will participate in person, rather than by 
videoconference. A party may also request that an individual witness's 
testimony be taken by telephone if it is not feasible for the witness 
to appear by videoconference or in person.
    The Presiding Officer will schedule a pre-hearing conference after 
ruling on any petitions to participate as a party pursuant to section 
1386.94(b)(2). The pre-hearing conference will be held by 
teleconference or by videoconference.
    Filing and Service Requirements: Pursuant to 45 CFR 1386.84, the 
Administrator, ACL, modifies the requirements for filing and service of 
papers in section 1386.85 as follows, having determined that this 
modification will serve justice and will not unduly prejudice any 
party.
    Parties as of right under section 1386.94(a) are required to use 
the Departmental Appeals Board's

[[Page 5557]]

electronic filing system (DAB E-File) for all submissions. Instructions 
for using DAB E-File are at https://dab.efile.hhs.gov/appeals/Board/Appellate_Div_instructions. Any other party, as well as any amicus 
curiae, must file its petition to participate by paper and must use DAB 
E-File for all submissions that are filed after its petition to 
participate has been granted unless the party or amicus files with its 
petition an explanation of why it is unable to file submissions 
electronically and the Presiding Officer permits the party or amicus to 
file paper submissions.
    A submission will be deemed to have been filed with the Presiding 
Officer on a given day if it is uploaded to DAB E-File on or before 
11:59 p.m. eastern time of that day. A submission filed by paper will 
be deemed to have been filed with the Presiding Officer on the postmark 
date, the date sent by registered or certified mail, or the date 
deposited with a commercial delivery service. A party using DAB E-File 
must serve a paper copy of its submissions on any party or amicus 
curiae permitted by the Presiding Officer to file submissions by paper.
    All submissions should be addressed to Leslie A. Sussan, Presiding 
Officer. The mailing address for paper submissions to the Presiding 
Officer is Departmental Appeals Board, Appellate Division, Cohen 
Building, Room G-644, MS6127, 330 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 
20201.
    In order to facilitate compliance with section 1386.82 (providing 
that all documents filed are subject to public inspection), parties and 
amici curiae should redact all briefs, exhibits, and other written 
submissions in order to avoid the disclosure of any personally 
identifiable information (PII) and other information the disclosure of 
which might violate the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability 
Act (HIPAA), the Privacy Act of 1974, or State or other privacy or 
confidentiality requirements.
    Discovery Procedures: Pursuant to 45 CFR 1386.84, the 
Administrator, ACL, modifies the provisions for discovery in section 
1386.103 as follows, having determined that this modification will 
serve justice and will not unduly prejudice any party, as it conforms 
to the discovery procedures already used in other HHS administrative 
proceedings.
    AIDD and OPPI, as the parties named in the notice issued under 45 
CFR 1386.90, have the right to conduct discovery, but the Presiding 
Officer will not necessarily follow the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure, which do not by their own terms apply to administrative 
proceedings. Before filing a discovery motion, a party should seek 
voluntary production from the other party. Any motion should describe 
specifically the information sought and state how this information is 
relevant and necessary to the party's case. The Presiding Officer will 
order production of specific items of information if the Presiding 
Officer determines that the party needs that information to address a 
dispositive issue in the case. Neither interrogatories nor depositions 
will be permitted unless the Presiding Officer determines that these 
are the only means to adequately develop the record on a dispositive 
issue.
    Issues To Be Considered at the Hearing: The issues to be considered 
at the hearing are:
     Whether the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico has in effect a 
system to protect and advocate the rights of individuals with 
developmental disabilities that meets the definition in section 102 of 
the DD Act (42 U.S.C. 15002) and that complies with sections 143(a) and 
144 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 15043(a) and 15044), as well as regulations 
at 45 CFR part 1386, subpart B. It is the position of AIDD that OPPI 
has failed to demonstrate that OPPI, as the Commonwealth's designated 
P&A system, has sufficient operations, independence, staff, and 
expertise to exercise the authorities necessary and required under the 
DD Act to protect the legal and human rights of people with 
developmental disabilities. The following sub-issues are considered:
    [cir] Whether OPPI exercises the authorities of the P&A as required 
by sections 143(a)(2)(A) and (B) \1\ of the DD Act and 45 CFR 
1386.21(a)&(c). OPPI has failed to demonstrate that the P&A is pursuing 
legal, administrative, and other appropriate remedies or approaches, 
such as individual legal advocacy, individual case representation, and 
systemic litigation, to ensure the protection of, and advocacy for, the 
rights of individuals with developmental disabilities. OPPI 
documentation provides for an administrative hearing process, but not 
other litigation, legal action or advocacy that would ensure the 
protection and advocacy envisioned by the statute and regulations. 45 
CFR 1386.21(c) states that a P&A system ``shall not implement a policy 
or practice restricting the remedies which may be sought on behalf of 
the individuals with developmental disabilities or compromising the 
authority of the . . . P&A . . . system to pursue such remedies through 
litigation, legal action or other forms of advocacy.'' Because OPPI has 
a policy for only one type of remedy (an administrative remedy) and 
does not have policies regarding other types of legal remedies, OPPI 
has not provided sufficient assurances or evidence that the P&A is not 
de facto restricted from pursuing appropriate legal remedies to ensure 
the protection of, and advocacy for, the rights of individuals with 
developmental disabilities. OPPI also has failed to demonstrate that 
the P&A is providing information and referral services consistent with 
the DD Act. OPPI has an information and referral form to document the 
nature of an individual's disability, but it has not provided any other 
document, policy or evidence for how it carries out information and 
referral consistent with the requirements in the DD Act. OPPI has 
failed to demonstrate that the P&A is conducting investigations of 
incidents of abuse and neglect of individuals with developmental 
disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Although 45 CFR 1386.21(a) cites to section 142 of the DD 
Act, section 143 of DD Act of 2000 superseded such section. Section 
401 of the DD Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-402) repealed the prior 
version of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of 
Rights Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. 6000 et seq. System requirements 
for the P&A previously included in section 142 of the Act are now 
included in section 143 of the Act (compare 42 U.S.C. 6042 (1999) 
with 42 U.S.C. 15043 (2014)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    [cir] Whether OPPI, as a government agency, exercises the 
authorities of the P&A as required by sections 143(a)(2)(A), (B) and 
(G) of the DD Act and 45 CFR 1386.21(a)&(c). OPPI does not have 
sufficient independence from the Governor for the P&A to adequately 
pursue legal, administrative, and other appropriate remedies or 
approaches to ensure the protection of, and advocacy for, the rights of 
individuals with developmental disabilities. Specifically, OPPI lacks 
the financial, structural, and leadership independence necessary to 
adequately carry out the requirements of a P&A system. With respect to 
financial independence, OPPI is a government agency and subject to the 
budgeting priorities and processes of other government agencies. OPPI 
has repeatedly informed AIDD that it does not have access to PADD funds 
to hire new attorneys or to travel to receive training related to the 
PADD grant. With respect to structural independence, as a government 
agency, the P&A must follow certain requirements that interfere with 
its ability to carry out the functions of the DD Act, such as 
maintaining a minimum amount of administrative staff. Limits on 
financial and structural independence also result in OPPI not 
maintaining necessary staff. Currently, only two attorneys are employed 
by OPPI, and such attorneys

[[Page 5558]]

serve at the pleasure of the Governor; as state-funded employees, they 
are at risk of losing their positions, thus implicating the ability to 
truly investigate and bring cases against State-run institutions. With 
respect to independent leadership, both the OPPI Ombudsman, who is the 
Executive Director of the P&A, and the Advisory Council are appointed 
by the Governor, and the Ombudsman can be removed by the Governor. As 
such, OPPI fails to operate free of influence from the Governor. 
Section 143(a)(2)(G) requires that the P&A be independent of any agency 
that provides treatment, services, or habilitation to individuals with 
developmental disabilities. Act 78, Article 6 requires that the 
Advisory Council have members representing service-providing entities 
making it unclear whether this supports P&A independence as required in 
the DD Act.
    [cir] Whether OPPI maintains sufficient numbers and types of staff 
(qualified by training and experience) to carry out the P&A system's 
functions, as required by section 143(a)(2)(K) of the DD Act and 45 CFR 
1386.21(e), and is free from any State policies which prevent the P&A 
from carrying out its authorities and other mandates under the Act, 
including whether the P&A is exempt from hiring freezes, reductions in 
force, prohibitions on travel, or other policies to the staff of the 
system, to the extent that such policies would impact the staff or 
functions of the system funded with Federal funds or would prevent the 
system from carrying out the functions of the system, as required by 
section 143(a)(2)(K) of the DD Act and 45 CFR 1386.21(d). OPPI has only 
two attorneys on its staff of more than 70 employees. Neither attorney 
is authorized to practice before the Federal courts in the 
Commonwealth. This is a barrier to the P&A being able to preserve and 
exercise its authority to pursue legal, administrative, and other 
appropriate remedies or approaches authorized under the DD act, as 
cases invoking the authority of a Federal statute would be brought in 
Federal court. Further, two attorneys is an insufficient number for a 
P&A to preserve and exercise its authority to pursue legal, 
administrative, and other appropriate remedies or approaches. The P&A 
has an administrative staff of over 50 people; however, it is unclear 
what role and activities this staff is performing related to the PADD 
grant. All P&A staff are subjected to state hiring practices, including 
hiring freezes, which prevents the P&A from obtaining appropriate 
staffing to carry out its mandates, and in violation of the above-cited 
regulations (45 CFR 1386.21(d) and (e)). The P&A lost advocate 
positions under the re-organization plan implemented in 2012 and was 
not able to replace those positions. OPPI has repeatedly informed AIDD 
that it does not have access to PADD funds to hire new attorneys or to 
travel to receive training related to the PADD grant.
    [cir] Whether the individuals served by the P&A are individuals 
with developmental disabilities as defined in section 102(8) and 
whether the P&A takes action with regard to goals and priorities, 
developed through data driven strategic planning, for the system's 
activities as required by section 143(a)(1) and (a)(2)(C) and (D) of 
the DD Act and in keeping with 45 CFR 1386.21(c) and 45 CFR 1386.23. 
OPPI has a form to determine eligibility for the PADD program; however, 
the 2012 AIDD Monitoring and Technical Assistance Review System (MTARS) 
report states that OPPI had a poor understanding of the difference 
between developmental disabilities and other disabilities and seemed 
unclear about which clients of the P&A qualify for PADD funding. 
Therefore, this form does not provide adequate assurances that the 
people served with PADD funding are people with developmental 
disabilities. Furthermore, this form does not include information about 
whether the individual's issues fall within the P&A's priorities. The 
2012 MTARS report states: ``OPPI receives all complaints that include 
people with disabilities, regardless of the relativity of the 
complaint. Based on the limited resources available, OPPI is unable to 
handle every meritorious complaint. Therefore, OPPI needs to clarify 
the organizational structure and framework, then redevelop and apply 
the Goals and Priorities to determine which cases they may take, and 
which to refer out.'' OPPI has not presented evidence that it has a 
statement of goals and priorities (SGP) unique to the PADD program or 
that anticipates priorities for selecting specific cases or determining 
an individual advocacy caseload, systemic advocacy work and training 
activities, and outcomes it wishes to accomplish. OPPI submitted a 
Fiscal Year 2014 SGP to AIDD. However, the AIDD review of the SGP found 
it to be inadequate, as it was not based on any public comment, as 
required under the DD Act, and its goals lacked the specificity 
necessary to provide meaningful direction for the use of PADD funds and 
PADD case selection. As a result, AIDD did not approve the SGP. OPPI 
took minimal action to correct the SGP by submitting commentary on its 
goal setting process, but it did not change the goals, or provide 
record of public comment. AIDD determined OPPI's minimal action was not 
sufficient to address the deficiencies. Failure to have an adequate SGP 
in place to guide the P&A activities means that OPPI is likely failing 
to meet the necessary priorities and mandates of the DD Act.
    [cir] Whether the P&A exercises the authority to access all records 
and individuals with developmental disabilities as required by Section 
143(a)(2)(H-J) of the DD Act and 45 CFR 1386.22. The 2012 MTARS 
identified that OPPI has the authority to access and conduct on-site 
monitoring visits of any individual with a developmental disability in 
Puerto Rico where services are provided. However, OPPI staff is 
generally unaware of their authority to access residential facilities 
and community settings. Therefore OPPI did not exercise this authority. 
Without fully exercising the P&A access authority, OPPI cannot fulfill 
its statutory mandate to protect the legal and human rights of 
individuals with developmental disabilities, in accordance with the 
purposes of the DD Act (section 101(b)(2) of the DD Act). The P&A is 
limited in its ability to carry out the legal, administrative, and 
other appropriate remedies in accordance with sections 143(a)(1) and 
(a)(2)(A) of the DD Act, if it does not demonstrate that it accesses 
records and/or individuals in accordance with sections 143(a)(2)(H)-(J) 
and 45 CFR 1386.22.
    [cir] Whether the P&A meets the requirements in Section 144(a)(5) 
that the majority of the members of an advisory council shall be 
individuals with disabilities, including individuals with developmental 
disabilities who are eligible for, have received or are receiving 
services through the system; or parents, family members, guardians, 
advocates, or authorized representatives of such individuals. Act 78, 
Article 6 requires that the Advisory Council have 9 members: 1 person 
with a disability; 1 parent of a person with a disability; 1 legal 
advisor with experience in the field of disability rights; 1 vocational 
rehabilitation professional; 1 special education professional; 1 
healthcare professional; and 2 people committed to fulfilling the 
principles outlined in the law creating OPPI. This does not guarantee 
that the Advisory Council meets the majority requirements in the DD 
Act.
    [cir] Whether the P&A is conducting PADD activities since they have 
not utilized FY2014 funds. The PADD grant to OPPI is classified as high 
risk with restrictions on the funds. Payment is

[[Page 5559]]

made to OPPI on a reimbursement basis. OPPI has not submitted a request 
for reimbursement under the FY 2014 PADD grant award leaving the entire 
amount of the award unspent. It is unclear, then, how OPPI is 
exercising the P&A authorities and conducting P&A activities without 
utilizing the federal financial assistance.

    Dated: January 27, 2015.
Kathy Greenlee,
Administrator and Assistant Secretary for Aging.
[FR Doc. 2015-01857 Filed 1-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4154-01-P