Revised Single-Case Design Procedures and Standards: Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) Review, 15221-15225 [2021-05840]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Notices
The meeting will be held on
Wednesday, June 9, 2021, from 8:30
a.m. to 6:00 p.m. EDT, and Thursday,
June 10, 2021, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. EDT.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held
via web conference.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Arielle Gatlin, Office of the Associate
Director for Policy and Strategy; Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention,
1600 Clifton Road NE, MS–V–25–5,
Atlanta, GA 30329, phone: (404)498–
4512, email: CPSTF@cdc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Meeting Accessibility: The CPSTF
meeting will be held virtually via web
conference.
CDC will send web conference
information to registrants upon receipt
of their registration. All meeting
attendees must register by June 2, 2021
to receive the web conference
information for the June meeting. CDC
will email web conference information
from the CPSTF@cdc.gov mailbox.
To register for the meeting,
individuals should send an email to
CPSTF@cdc.gov and include the
following information: name, title,
organization name, organization
address, phone, and email.
Public Comment: Individuals who
would like to make public comments
during the June meeting must state their
desire to do so with their registration
and provide their name and
organizational affiliation (if any) and the
topic to be addressed (if known). The
requestor will receive instructions for
the public comment process for this
virtual meeting after the request is
received. A public comment period
follows the CPSTF’s discussion of each
systematic review and will be limited,
up to three minutes per person. Public
comments will become part of the
meeting summary.
Background on the CPSTF: The
CPSTF is an independent, nonfederal
panel whose members are appointed by
the CDC Director. CPSTF members
represent a broad range of research,
practice, and policy expertise in
prevention, wellness, health promotion,
and public health. The CPSTF was
convened in 1996 by the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) to
identify community preventive
programs, services, and policies that
increase health, longevity, save lives
and dollars, and improve Americans’
quality of life. CDC is mandated to
provide ongoing administrative,
research, and technical support for the
operations of the CPSTF. During its
meetings, the CPSTF considers the
findings of systematic reviews of
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:46 Mar 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
existing research and practice-based
evidence and issues recommendations.
CPSTF recommendations are not
mandates for compliance or spending.
Instead, they provide information about
evidence-based options that decision
makers and stakeholders can consider
when they are determining what best
meets the specific needs, preferences,
available resources, and constraints of
their jurisdictions and constituents. The
CPSTF’s recommendations, along with
the systematic reviews of the evidence
on which they are based, are compiled
in the The Community Guide.
Matters proposed for discussion: The
agenda will consist of deliberation on
systematic reviews of literature and is
open to the public. Topics will include
HIV Prevention; Heart Disease and
Stroke Prevention; and Nutrition,
Physical Activity, and Obesity.
Information regarding the start and end
times for each day, and any updates to
agenda topics, will be available on the
Community Guide website
(www.thecommunityguide.org) closer to
the date of the meeting.
The meeting agenda is subject to
change without notice.
Dated: March 16, 2021.
Sandra Cashman,
Executive Secretary, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2021–05810 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
Revised Single-Case Design
Procedures and Standards: Home
Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness
(HomVEE) Review
Administration for Children
and Families, U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services.
ACTION: Request for public comment.
AGENCY:
The Administration for
Children and Families (ACF), within the
U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), oversees the Home
Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness
(HomVEE) review, which is proposing
to revise the procedures and standards
that guide its work with single-case
design (SCD) research. The current
Federal Register notice (FRN) seeks
comments on proposed changes related
to revised procedures and standards for
SCD research. Readers are referred to
the full version of the HomVEE Version
2 Handbook on the HomVEE website for
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15221
more details, particularly Appendix D
(https://homvee.acf.hhs.gov/
publications/methods-standards).
HomVEE will release an updated
Handbook (Version 2.1) after
consideration of public comments
received in response to this FRN.
DATES: Send comments on or before
April 19, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit questions,
comments, and supplementary
documents to HomVEE@acf.hhs.gov
with ‘‘HomVEE SCD procedures and
standards FRN comment’’ in the subject
line.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Invitation
to Comment: HHS invites comments
regarding this notice. To ensure that
your comments are clearly stated, please
identify the section of this notice that
your comments address.
1.0 Background
To help policymakers, program
administrators, model developers,
researchers, and the public identify
rigorous research and understand which
early childhood home visiting models
are effective, ACF’s Office of Planning,
Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) within
HHS oversees the HomVEE review, in
partnership with the Health Resources
and Services Administration (HRSA).
HomVEE’s mission is to conduct a
thorough and transparent review of
early childhood home visiting models
that serve pregnant women and children
from birth to kindergarten entry. The
review identifies well-designed, wellexecuted research, then extracts and
summarizes the findings from that
research.
One critical use of HomVEE’s results
is to determine which home visiting
models meet the HHS criteria for an
‘‘evidence-based early childhood home
visiting service delivery model’’ (see
Section 1.1 below), a key requirement of
eligibility for implementation of the
model with Maternal, Infant, and Early
Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV)
Program funding.
The MIECHV Program is administered
by HRSA in partnership with ACF.
Created in 2010, the MIECHV Program
provides funding to states, territories,
and tribal entities to implement home
visiting models. MIECHV awardees have
the flexibility to tailor the program to
serve the specific needs of their
communities. Through a needs
assessment, awardees identify at-risk
communities and select home visiting
service delivery models that best meet
state and/or local needs. In accordance
with MIECHV’s authorizing statute,
state and territory awardees must spend
the majority of their MIECHV Program
E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM
22MRN1
15222
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Notices
grants to implement evidence-based
home visiting models with up to 25
percent of funding available to
implement promising approaches that
will undergo rigorous evaluation.
In December 2020, HomVEE released
an updated Version 2 Handbook of
Procedures and Evidence Standards
(Sama-Miller et al. 2020). The updates
incorporated input from methodological
experts, other federal evidence reviews,
and public comments on two FRNs
released on August 5, 2020 (85 FR
47376 and 85 FR 47384). The HomVEE
Version 2 Handbook adopted the What
Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Version
4.1 Procedures and Standards
Handbooks (2020a and 2020b),
including revised SCD procedures and
standards.
This FRN proposes further changes to
the HomVEE Version 2 Handbook to
clarify how HomVEE would apply the
WWC 4.1 procedures and standards that
HomVEE already adopted. The
proposed changes focus exclusively on
SCD research, including:
(1) Requirements for considering SCD
research toward the HHS criteria for
evidence-based models (discussed in
Section 2 of the FRN).
(2) Flexibilities for applying certain
SCD standards (discussed in Section 3
of the FRN).
A work group consisting of federal
staff and HomVEE contractor staff,
including methodological and home
visiting experts, met to discuss and
develop the proposed changes outlined
in this FRN. Through this FRN, ACF
seeks to gather stakeholder input on
draft changes and to provide a
transparent account of how the review
operates. The remainder of Section 1
summarizes recent and current HomVEE
procedures and standards with respect
to SCD research.
After a period of public comment (and
consultation with selected experts
outside HomVEE), HomVEE will release
an updated Handbook (Version 2.1).
Section 5 of this FRN specifies where in
the updated Version 2.1 Handbook
HomVEE would insert the proposed
changes.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
1.1 HHS Criteria for an ‘‘EvidenceBased Early Childhood Home Visiting
Service Delivery Model’’
As described in Section 2 of this FRN,
HomVEE is proposing changes to
requirements for how SCD research
would be considered toward the HHS
criteria. However, HomVEE is not
proposing changes to the HHS criteria
themselves. To meet HHS criteria for an
‘‘evidence-based early childhood home
visiting service delivery model,’’ models
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:46 Mar 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
must meet at least one of the following
criteria:
(1) At least one high- or moderatequality impact study of the model finds
favorable, statistically significant
impacts in two or more of the eight
outcome domains.
(2) At least two high- or moderatequality impact studies of the model
using non-overlapping analytic study
samples find one or more favorable,
statistically significant impacts in the
same domain.
In both cases, the impacts must either
(1) be found in the full sample for the
study, or (2) if found for subgroups but
not for the full sample, be replicated in
the same domain in two or more studies
using non-overlapping analytic study
samples.
Additionally, following the MIECHV
authorizing statute, if the model meets
the above criteria based on findings
from randomized controlled trials only,
then two additional requirements apply.
First, one or more favorable (statistically
significant) impacts must be sustained
for at least one year after program
enrollment. Second, one or more
favorable (statistically significant)
impacts must be reported in a peerreviewed journal.
Since HomVEE’s inception, research
about SCD studies has had to satisfy
certain requirements before manuscripts
about those studies could be considered
toward the HHS criteria. These
requirements, known as the ‘‘5–3–20
rule,’’ are as follows:
(1) At least five studies examining the
intervention either met the WWC’s SCD
standards without reservations or met
those standards with reservations
(corresponding to a ‘‘high’’ or
‘‘moderate’’ rating in HomVEE,
respectively).
(2) The SCDs were conducted by at
least three research teams, with no
overlapping authorship at three
institutions.
(3) The combined number of cases
was at least 20.
Beyond the 5–3–20 rule, the question
of statistical significance is relevant to
findings from SCD research because the
HHS criteria focus on favorable,
statistically significant findings.
Authors of SCD manuscripts rarely
describe their findings in terms of
statistical significance, which HomVEE
needs to apply the HHS criteria.
However, the WWC Version 4.1
Procedures Handbook, adopted in the
HomVEE Version 2 Handbook,
introduces the design-comparable effect
size (D–CES), from which statistical
significance can be determined.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2.0 Proposed Changes to How SCD
Research Would Be Considered Toward
HHS Criteria for an ‘‘Evidence-Based
Early Childhood Home Visiting Service
Delivery Model’’
The HomVEE Version 2 Handbook
adopted the WWC Single-Case Design
Procedures and Standards (Version 4.1).
Therefore, the latest round of updates to
each of the WWC and HomVEE
procedures and standards included
three key complementary changes. The
changes, described in more detail in
Subsections 2.1 through 2.3, are as
follows:
(1) The WWC no longer uses the ‘‘5–
3–20’’ rule, which established
thresholds for when SCD research could
contribute to evidence ratings.
Consequently, HomVEE’s previous
requirements for SCD research about an
early childhood home visiting model to
be considered toward the HHS criteria
(see Section 1.1) no longer align with
current best practices for systematic
reviews.
(2) Under HomVEE’s new procedures
as defined in the Version 2 Handbook
and adopted from the WWC, it is now
possible to calculate effect sizes and
determine statistical significance for
SCD research using the D–CES.
Consequently, HomVEE proposes to
align the application of the HHS criteria
for SCD research to the procedures
already in effect for other eligible
research designs.
(3) Reviewers will query authors for
numerical data for calculating the D–
CES, a step that had not been relevant
under prior versions of procedures for
HomVEE (or the WWC). Because
calculation of the D–CES requires
numerical data from each time point,
HomVEE proposes to query authors, as
needed, for the information required to
calculate the D–CES.
2.1 The 5–3–20 Rule No Longer
Applies
Additional requirements for
considering results from SCD research
toward the HHS criteria (the 5–3–20
rule) have been in effect since
HomVEE’s inception; those
requirements were consistent with the
WWC’s then-current approach to SCD
research. The 5–3–20 rule provided a
threshold for determining when SCD
research could contribute toward a
decision about whether a model was
evidence-based. Specifically, for SCD
research to be considered toward the
HHS criteria, the model’s SCD research
has been required to consist of at least
five studies with high or moderate
internal validity, to be conducted by
three independent research teams, and
E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM
22MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Notices
to include at least 20 cases. To date, no
models reviewed by HomVEE have met
the requirements of the 5–3–20 rule.
The WWC Version 4.1 Procedures
Handbook removed the 5–3–20 rule.
Correspondingly, HomVEE now
proposes to remove the 5–3–20
requirement for SCD research to be
considered toward the HHS criteria.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
2.2 Effect Sizes and Statistical
Significance Can Now Be Computed
The HHS criteria for evidence-based
models require evidence of favorable,
statistically significant findings.
However, HomVEE’s procedures did not
previously specify how HomVEE would
apply the HHS criteria to SCD research,
for which researchers generally express
findings in terms of visual patterns
rather than statistical significance.
Advances in meta-analysis have made
it possible to calculate an effect size (the
D–CES) and determine associated
statistical significance for findings from
most SCD research. Therefore, under its
Version 4.1 procedures and standards,
the WWC calculates an effect size from
SCD studies, if feasible and appropriate,
which is then treated as any other effect
size when determining intervention
ratings. Consistent with the WWC, the
HomVEE Version 2 Handbook includes
an explanation of how the review will
calculate the D–CES for SCD findings.
The D–CES is comparable to a
standardized mean-difference effect size
and can be interpreted similarly to effect
sizes from group design impact studies,
such as randomized controlled trials,
regression discontinuity designs, and
non-experimental group designs.
Because HomVEE can calculate the D–
CES and then use the D–CES to
determine the statistical significance of
a finding for most SCDs, it is now
possible to align the application of the
HHS criteria for SCD research to group
design impact studies. HomVEE
proposes to align the application of HHS
criteria accordingly.
A D–CES can be computed for SCDs
using the following designs:
(1) Multiple baseline designs focused
on the same outcome across three or
more cases.
(2) Multiple probe designs focused on
the same outcome across three or more
cases.
(3) Reversal/withdrawal designs
focused on the same outcome across
three or more cases.
A D–CES cannot be computed for
SCDs using the following designs:
(1) Multiple baseline designs focused
on the same case across three or more
settings.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:46 Mar 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
(2) Multiple probe designs focused on
the same case across three or more
settings.
(3) Several reversal/withdrawal
designs focused on the same case.
HomVEE proposes to review all
eligible SCD manuscripts. HomVEE also
proposes to determine statistical
significance based on the D–CES for all
manuscripts for which a D–CES can be
calculated. For SCD manuscripts for
which a D–CES cannot be calculated, for
either design or data reasons, HomVEE
proposes to report on the rating of the
manuscript and the findings reported in
it. However, research for which a D–CES
cannot be calculated will not be
included in the summary of evidence
that contributes to the assessment of
whether a model meets HHS criteria.
Without a D–CES, HomVEE cannot
determine statistical significance of the
manuscript’s findings.
2.3 Proposed Changes to Author
Query Procedures
SCD manuscripts frequently include
graphical representation of data at each
time point. To calculate the D–CES
requires numerical data from each time
point. HomVEE proposes to request
numerical data via an author query, as
needed. If the author does not provide
the numerical data, then HomVEE
proposes to use a software package,
such as WebPlotDigitizer (Rohatgi
2020), to extract numerical data from
graphical presentations. This approach
is consistent with WWC procedures.
2.4 Summary of Proposed Changes to
Requirements for SCD Research To Be
Considered Toward the HHS Criteria
To account for the elimination of the
5–3–20 rule and to promote consistency
in how well-designed, well-executed
impact studies are considered toward
the HHS criteria, HomVEE proposes the
following updates:
(1) Eliminate the 5–3–20 additional
requirement that SCD research must
meet to be considered toward the HHS
criteria and instead consider SCD
research toward the HHS criteria in a
manner consistent with other designs.
(2) To support the use of SCD findings
toward the HHS criteria, implement
three procedural steps that align with
the Version 4.1 practices of the WWC,
as follows:
a. Request numerical data from
authors, if necessary.
b. Calculate the D–CES, if possible, for
those designs that are rated moderate or
high.
c. Calculate statistical significance for
the D–CES.
These proposed changes ensure that
any impact study with high or moderate
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15223
quality, as determined by the
application of HomVEE Version 2
standards, can contribute to the
determination of whether a model meets
the HHS criteria for an ‘‘evidence-based
early childhood home visiting service
deliver model.’’
3.0 Flexibilities for Applying Certain
SCD Standards
HomVEE proposes to clarify the
flexibilities related to the application of
certain SCD standards consistent with
current WWC practice. Such flexibilities
are intended to ensure that HomVEE
standards are not unnecessarily
stringent as more SCD manuscripts are
reviewed. HomVEE proposes to update
the HomVEE Version 2 Handbook text
to clarify how existing flexibilities may
be applied in the HomVEE review
process.
3.1. Flexibility Related to the Timing
of Probe Point Collection When a Case
Receives the Intervention
The first flexibility concerns the
collection of probe data points in a
multiple probe SCD. The current
standard is strict requiring that baseline
probes for cases without the
intervention be collected in the same
session when another case starts the
intervention. The purpose of the
baseline probe collection is to assess
whether cases not receiving the
intervention have changes in outcomes
prior to receiving the intervention.
HomVEE, and the WWC, recognize
the requirement that baseline probes for
cases with and without the intervention
take place in the exact same session may
be overly restrictive. The goal of the
requirement related to the timing of
baseline data collection for cases not yet
receiving the intervention is to provide
support that any change in outcomes in
the cases receiving the intervention is
likely due to the intervention and not
some external factor (internal validity).
In alignment with WWC procedures,
HomVEE currently grants exceptions to
this standard for individual manuscripts
or interventions in consultation with
subject matter experts. HomVEE
proposes making the requirement more
flexible by clarifying that baseline probe
points may be collected when the
intervention is introduced or in
subsequent baseline sessions.
3.2 Flexibilities Related to the
Minimum Number of Effects
Demonstrated or Data Points Required
The other flexibilities relate to the
demonstration of effects—either the
minimum number of effects
demonstrated or the data points
required to demonstrate an effect.
E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM
22MRN1
15224
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Notices
HomVEE currently allows exceptions to
each of these standards. These
flexibilities are needed to accommodate
possible nuances in outcomes that may
be examined in SCDs — for example,
outcomes that are challenging for
researchers to collect without burdening
families (such as outcomes based on
skills that may be frustrating to be tested
on repeatedly if they have not been
taught) or outcomes that are dangerous
to collect repeatedly without
intervening (such as some child
maltreatment outcomes).
To facilitate a transparent review,
HomVEE proposes to clarify the process
for granting and documenting the
application of these flexibilities.
Specifically, HomVEE proposes to
specify that, if warranted, the HomVEE
team can grant exceptions in
collaboration with subject matter
experts, and the exception (and its
rationale) will be documented clearly in
the review and related dissemination
efforts.
4.0 Timeline for HomVEE To Apply
New Procedures and Standards
HomVEE proposes to apply the new
procedures and standards for SCD
Topic
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
6.0
5.0 Summary of the Proposed Changes
and Placement in the Version 2
Handbook
Following the 2020 substantial update
to HomVEE procedures and standards,
HomVEE proposes additional changes
focused specifically on SCD research.
The table below summarizes the
proposed changes to be made to the
HomVEE Version 2 Handbook and the
relevant handbook section(s) that
HomVEE proposes to update.
Description of proposed change and relevant FRN section
Requirements for considering
SCD studies no longer have additional requirements to meet.
single-case design (SCD)
The statistical significance of a finding (based on a designresearch toward HHS cricomparable effect size, or D-CESCES) will be considered
teria for an ‘‘evidence-based
for SCD research when applying the HHS criteria. Manuearly childhood home visscripts for which the D-CESCES cannot be calculated will
iting service delivery model’’.
be reviewed and reported but will not contribute to summaries of evidence. (See Sections 2.1, 2.2, and 2.4 for
more details.).
Author queries for numerical
HomVEE will query authors for the numerical data underlying
data for SCD manuscripts.
graphical results in manuscripts, as needed. The numerical
data are necessary for calculating the D-CESCES, which
is used to determine statistical significance..
If the author does not provide numerical data, then HomVEE
proposes to use a software package to extract numerical
data from graphical representations. (See Section 2.3 for
more details.).
Additional baseline data point
HomVEE will require multiple probe designs to have baseline
requirements for multiple
data in the same or subsequent baseline session for cases
probe SCDs.
not receiving the intervention when a case starts the intervention. (See Section 3.1 for more details.).
Flexibility in the requirement
HomVEE may grant an exception to this requirement in confor demonstration of three
sultation with subject matter experts. If granted, it will be
attempts of intervention efdocumented in the review and related dissemination effects at three different
forts, including the rationale for the exception. (See Secpoints in time.
tion 3.2 for more details.).
Number of data points reHomVEE may grant an exception to this requirement in conquired.
sultation with subject matter experts. If granted, it will be
documented in the review and related dissemination efforts, including the rationale for the exception. (See Section 3.2 for more details.).
Request for Information (RFI)
Through this FRN, ACF is soliciting
information from a broad array of
stakeholders on the proposed revisions
to HomVEE’s procedures and standards
related to SCD research. Federal, state,
and local decision makers rely on
HomVEE to know which home visiting
models are effective. Applying the HHS
criteria to SCDs as they are applied to
other quasi-experimental designs or
randomized controlled trials means that
well-designed, well-executed SCD
research will be treated on par with
other forms of well-designed, wellexecuted impact studies.
Responses to this FRN will inform
ACF’s ongoing discussion about
HomVEE’s procedures and standards
VerDate Sep<11>2014
research beginning with the 2021
review.
18:46 Mar 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
with the aim of publishing a final
HomVEE Version 2.1 Handbook of
Procedures and Standards in 2021. This
RFI is for information and planning
purposes only and should not be
construed as a solicitation or as an
obligation on the part of ACF or HHS.
Authority: Social Security Act Title V
§ 511 [42 U.S.C. 711], as extended by the
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115–
123) through fiscal year 2022.
Naomi Goldstein,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning,
Research, and Evaluation, Administration for
Children and Families, U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services.
References
Rohatgi, A. WebPlotDigitizer, version 4.3.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Relevant HomVEE Version 2
Handbook section
Section B.2.c and Exhibit
II.11.
Section B.1.b.i Appendix D,
Section D.1..
Appendix D, Section B.5,
Footnote 80 and related
statement.
Appendix D, Section B.6,
Footnote 81.
Appendix D, Section B.6,
Footnotes 82 and 83.
2020. Available at https://automeris.io/
WebPlotDigitizer. Accessed February 26,
2021.
Sama-Miller, E., J. Lugo-Gil, J. Harding, L.
Akers, and R. Coughlin. Home Visiting
Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE)
Systematic Review: Handbook of
Procedures and Evidence Standards:
Version 2, December 2020. Available at
https://homvee.acf.hhs.gov/publications/
methods-standards. Accessed January 7,
2021.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of
Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance, What Works Clearinghouse.
What Works Clearinghouse Procedures
Handbook: Version 4.1., 2020a. Available
at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/
referenceresources/WWC-ProceduresHandbook-v4-1-508.pdf. Accessed June
19, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM
22MRN1
15225
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 53 / Monday, March 22, 2021 / Notices
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of
Education Sciences, National Center for
Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance, What Works Clearinghouse.
What Works Clearinghouse Standards
Handbook: Version 4.1., 2020b.
Available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/
Docs/referenceresources/WWCStandards-Handbook-v4-1-508.pdf.
Accessed June 19, 2020.
[FR Doc. 2021–05840 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–74–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
Submission for OMB Review; Runaway
and Homeless Youth Homeless
Management Information System
(RHY–HMIS; New Collection)
Family and Youth Services
Bureau (FYSB); Administration on
Children, Youth and Families (ACYF);
Administration for Children and
Families; HHS.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Request for Public Comment.
The Administration on
Children, Youth and Families (ACYF),
Family and Youth Services Bureau has
a legislative requirement to collect and
maintain client statistical records on the
numbers and the characteristics of
runaway and homeless youth, and
youth at risk of family separation, who
receive shelter and supportive services
through the Runaway and Homeless
Youth (RHY) Program funding. RHY
data collection is integrated with the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development’s (HUD) Homeless
Management Information System
(HMIS).
DATES: Comments due within 30 days of
publication. OMB is required to make a
decision concerning the collection of
information between 30 and 60 days
after publication of this document in the
Federal Register. Therefore, a comment
is best assured of having its full effect
if OMB receives it within 30 days of
publication.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
SUMMARY:
PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting
‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open
for Public Comments’’ or by using the
search function.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Description: The RHY Program has a
requirement to collect information from
all youth who receive shelter and
supportive services with RHY funding.
In April 2015, ACYF, through a formal
Memorandum of Understanding,
integrated the RHY data collection with
HUD’s HMIS and HUD’s data standards
along with other federal partners. HUD’s
data standards has its own OMB
clearance, but ACYF is requesting
approval for the RHY data collection
efforts as HUD’s will no longer include
all federal partners. The data collection
instrument includes universal data
elements, which are collected by all
federal partners and program specific
elements, which are tailored to each
program using HUD’s HMIS.
Respondents: Youth who receive
emergency and longer-term shelter and
supportive services under RHY funding.
RHY grantees who enter and upload
data.
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Total number
of respondents
Instrument
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
RHY–HMIS: Basic Center Program (Intake) .......................
RHY–HMIS: Basic Center Program (Exit) ...........................
RHY–HMIS: Transitional Living Program (including Maternity Group Home program and TLP Demonstration Programs; Intake) ..................................................................
RHY–HMIS: Transitional Living Program (including Maternity Group Home program and TLP Demonstration Programs; Exit) ......................................................................
RHY–HMIS: Street Outreach Program (Contact) ................
RHY–HMIS: Street Outreach Program (Engagement) ........
RHY Funded Grantees (data entry) ....................................
RHY Funded Grantees (data submission)—FY21 ..............
RHY Funded Grantees (data submission)—FY22 & FY23
Total number
of responses
per respondent
0.38
0.33
46,740
40,590
15,580
13,530
18,000
1
0.38
6,840
2,280
18,000
108,000
30,000
279,000
611
611
1
1
1
2
2
8
0.33
0.5
0.28
0.36
0.16
0.16
5,940
54,000
8,400
200,880
196
782
1,980
18,000
2,800
66,960
65
261
Mary B. Jones,
ACF/OPRE Certifying Officer.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as
amended, notice is hereby given of the
following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the
public in accordance with the
provisions set forth in sections
552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:46 Mar 19, 2021
Jkt 253001
National Institutes of Health
National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences; Notice of Closed
Meetings
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Annual burden
hours
1
1
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
BILLING CODE 4184–33–P
Total burden
hours
123,000
123,000
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 121,456.
Authority: Reconnecting Homeless
Youth Act of 2008 (Pub.L. 110–378)
through FY 2013 and more recently
reauthorized by the Juvenile Justice
Reform Act through FY 2019.
[FR Doc. 2021–05876 Filed 3–19–21; 8:45 am]
Average
burden hours
per response
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
as amended. The grant applications and
the discussions could disclose
confidential trade secrets or commercial
property such as patentable material,
and personal information concerning
individuals associated with the grant
applications, the disclosure of which
would constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy.
Name of Committee: National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences Special
Emphasis Panel; Research Career
Development of Scientists/Investigators in
the Environmental Health Sciences.
Date: April 8, 2021.
Time: 10:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
E:\FR\FM\22MRN1.SGM
22MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 53 (Monday, March 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15221-15225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05840]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
Revised Single-Case Design Procedures and Standards: Home
Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) Review
AGENCY: Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services.
ACTION: Request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), within the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), oversees the Home
Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) review, which is proposing
to revise the procedures and standards that guide its work with single-
case design (SCD) research. The current Federal Register notice (FRN)
seeks comments on proposed changes related to revised procedures and
standards for SCD research. Readers are referred to the full version of
the HomVEE Version 2 Handbook on the HomVEE website for more details,
particularly Appendix D (https://homvee.acf.hhs.gov/publications/methods-standards). HomVEE will release an updated Handbook (Version
2.1) after consideration of public comments received in response to
this FRN.
DATES: Send comments on or before April 19, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit questions, comments, and supplementary documents to
[email protected] with ``HomVEE SCD procedures and standards FRN
comment'' in the subject line.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Invitation to Comment: HHS invites comments
regarding this notice. To ensure that your comments are clearly stated,
please identify the section of this notice that your comments address.
1.0 Background
To help policymakers, program administrators, model developers,
researchers, and the public identify rigorous research and understand
which early childhood home visiting models are effective, ACF's Office
of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) within HHS oversees the
HomVEE review, in partnership with the Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA). HomVEE's mission is to conduct a thorough and
transparent review of early childhood home visiting models that serve
pregnant women and children from birth to kindergarten entry. The
review identifies well-designed, well-executed research, then extracts
and summarizes the findings from that research.
One critical use of HomVEE's results is to determine which home
visiting models meet the HHS criteria for an ``evidence-based early
childhood home visiting service delivery model'' (see Section 1.1
below), a key requirement of eligibility for implementation of the
model with Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV)
Program funding.
The MIECHV Program is administered by HRSA in partnership with ACF.
Created in 2010, the MIECHV Program provides funding to states,
territories, and tribal entities to implement home visiting models.
MIECHV awardees have the flexibility to tailor the program to serve the
specific needs of their communities. Through a needs assessment,
awardees identify at-risk communities and select home visiting service
delivery models that best meet state and/or local needs. In accordance
with MIECHV's authorizing statute, state and territory awardees must
spend the majority of their MIECHV Program
[[Page 15222]]
grants to implement evidence-based home visiting models with up to 25
percent of funding available to implement promising approaches that
will undergo rigorous evaluation.
In December 2020, HomVEE released an updated Version 2 Handbook of
Procedures and Evidence Standards (Sama-Miller et al. 2020). The
updates incorporated input from methodological experts, other federal
evidence reviews, and public comments on two FRNs released on August 5,
2020 (85 FR 47376 and 85 FR 47384). The HomVEE Version 2 Handbook
adopted the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Version 4.1 Procedures and
Standards Handbooks (2020a and 2020b), including revised SCD procedures
and standards.
This FRN proposes further changes to the HomVEE Version 2 Handbook
to clarify how HomVEE would apply the WWC 4.1 procedures and standards
that HomVEE already adopted. The proposed changes focus exclusively on
SCD research, including:
(1) Requirements for considering SCD research toward the HHS
criteria for evidence-based models (discussed in Section 2 of the FRN).
(2) Flexibilities for applying certain SCD standards (discussed in
Section 3 of the FRN).
A work group consisting of federal staff and HomVEE contractor
staff, including methodological and home visiting experts, met to
discuss and develop the proposed changes outlined in this FRN. Through
this FRN, ACF seeks to gather stakeholder input on draft changes and to
provide a transparent account of how the review operates. The remainder
of Section 1 summarizes recent and current HomVEE procedures and
standards with respect to SCD research.
After a period of public comment (and consultation with selected
experts outside HomVEE), HomVEE will release an updated Handbook
(Version 2.1). Section 5 of this FRN specifies where in the updated
Version 2.1 Handbook HomVEE would insert the proposed changes.
1.1 HHS Criteria for an ``Evidence-Based Early Childhood Home Visiting
Service Delivery Model''
As described in Section 2 of this FRN, HomVEE is proposing changes
to requirements for how SCD research would be considered toward the HHS
criteria. However, HomVEE is not proposing changes to the HHS criteria
themselves. To meet HHS criteria for an ``evidence-based early
childhood home visiting service delivery model,'' models must meet at
least one of the following criteria:
(1) At least one high- or moderate-quality impact study of the
model finds favorable, statistically significant impacts in two or more
of the eight outcome domains.
(2) At least two high- or moderate-quality impact studies of the
model using non-overlapping analytic study samples find one or more
favorable, statistically significant impacts in the same domain.
In both cases, the impacts must either (1) be found in the full
sample for the study, or (2) if found for subgroups but not for the
full sample, be replicated in the same domain in two or more studies
using non-overlapping analytic study samples.
Additionally, following the MIECHV authorizing statute, if the
model meets the above criteria based on findings from randomized
controlled trials only, then two additional requirements apply. First,
one or more favorable (statistically significant) impacts must be
sustained for at least one year after program enrollment. Second, one
or more favorable (statistically significant) impacts must be reported
in a peer-reviewed journal.
Since HomVEE's inception, research about SCD studies has had to
satisfy certain requirements before manuscripts about those studies
could be considered toward the HHS criteria. These requirements, known
as the ``5-3-20 rule,'' are as follows:
(1) At least five studies examining the intervention either met the
WWC's SCD standards without reservations or met those standards with
reservations (corresponding to a ``high'' or ``moderate'' rating in
HomVEE, respectively).
(2) The SCDs were conducted by at least three research teams, with
no overlapping authorship at three institutions.
(3) The combined number of cases was at least 20.
Beyond the 5-3-20 rule, the question of statistical significance is
relevant to findings from SCD research because the HHS criteria focus
on favorable, statistically significant findings. Authors of SCD
manuscripts rarely describe their findings in terms of statistical
significance, which HomVEE needs to apply the HHS criteria. However,
the WWC Version 4.1 Procedures Handbook, adopted in the HomVEE Version
2 Handbook, introduces the design-comparable effect size (D-CES), from
which statistical significance can be determined.
2.0 Proposed Changes to How SCD Research Would Be Considered Toward HHS
Criteria for an ``Evidence-Based Early Childhood Home Visiting Service
Delivery Model''
The HomVEE Version 2 Handbook adopted the WWC Single-Case Design
Procedures and Standards (Version 4.1). Therefore, the latest round of
updates to each of the WWC and HomVEE procedures and standards included
three key complementary changes. The changes, described in more detail
in Subsections 2.1 through 2.3, are as follows:
(1) The WWC no longer uses the ``5-3-20'' rule, which established
thresholds for when SCD research could contribute to evidence ratings.
Consequently, HomVEE's previous requirements for SCD research about an
early childhood home visiting model to be considered toward the HHS
criteria (see Section 1.1) no longer align with current best practices
for systematic reviews.
(2) Under HomVEE's new procedures as defined in the Version 2
Handbook and adopted from the WWC, it is now possible to calculate
effect sizes and determine statistical significance for SCD research
using the D-CES. Consequently, HomVEE proposes to align the application
of the HHS criteria for SCD research to the procedures already in
effect for other eligible research designs.
(3) Reviewers will query authors for numerical data for calculating
the D-CES, a step that had not been relevant under prior versions of
procedures for HomVEE (or the WWC). Because calculation of the D-CES
requires numerical data from each time point, HomVEE proposes to query
authors, as needed, for the information required to calculate the D-
CES.
2.1 The 5-3-20 Rule No Longer Applies
Additional requirements for considering results from SCD research
toward the HHS criteria (the 5-3-20 rule) have been in effect since
HomVEE's inception; those requirements were consistent with the WWC's
then-current approach to SCD research. The 5-3-20 rule provided a
threshold for determining when SCD research could contribute toward a
decision about whether a model was evidence-based. Specifically, for
SCD research to be considered toward the HHS criteria, the model's SCD
research has been required to consist of at least five studies with
high or moderate internal validity, to be conducted by three
independent research teams, and
[[Page 15223]]
to include at least 20 cases. To date, no models reviewed by HomVEE
have met the requirements of the 5-3-20 rule.
The WWC Version 4.1 Procedures Handbook removed the 5-3-20 rule.
Correspondingly, HomVEE now proposes to remove the 5-3-20 requirement
for SCD research to be considered toward the HHS criteria.
2.2 Effect Sizes and Statistical Significance Can Now Be Computed
The HHS criteria for evidence-based models require evidence of
favorable, statistically significant findings. However, HomVEE's
procedures did not previously specify how HomVEE would apply the HHS
criteria to SCD research, for which researchers generally express
findings in terms of visual patterns rather than statistical
significance.
Advances in meta-analysis have made it possible to calculate an
effect size (the D-CES) and determine associated statistical
significance for findings from most SCD research. Therefore, under its
Version 4.1 procedures and standards, the WWC calculates an effect size
from SCD studies, if feasible and appropriate, which is then treated as
any other effect size when determining intervention ratings. Consistent
with the WWC, the HomVEE Version 2 Handbook includes an explanation of
how the review will calculate the D-CES for SCD findings.
The D-CES is comparable to a standardized mean-difference effect
size and can be interpreted similarly to effect sizes from group design
impact studies, such as randomized controlled trials, regression
discontinuity designs, and non-experimental group designs. Because
HomVEE can calculate the D-CES and then use the D-CES to determine the
statistical significance of a finding for most SCDs, it is now possible
to align the application of the HHS criteria for SCD research to group
design impact studies. HomVEE proposes to align the application of HHS
criteria accordingly.
A D-CES can be computed for SCDs using the following designs:
(1) Multiple baseline designs focused on the same outcome across
three or more cases.
(2) Multiple probe designs focused on the same outcome across three
or more cases.
(3) Reversal/withdrawal designs focused on the same outcome across
three or more cases.
A D-CES cannot be computed for SCDs using the following designs:
(1) Multiple baseline designs focused on the same case across three
or more settings.
(2) Multiple probe designs focused on the same case across three or
more settings.
(3) Several reversal/withdrawal designs focused on the same case.
HomVEE proposes to review all eligible SCD manuscripts. HomVEE also
proposes to determine statistical significance based on the D-CES for
all manuscripts for which a D-CES can be calculated. For SCD
manuscripts for which a D-CES cannot be calculated, for either design
or data reasons, HomVEE proposes to report on the rating of the
manuscript and the findings reported in it. However, research for which
a D-CES cannot be calculated will not be included in the summary of
evidence that contributes to the assessment of whether a model meets
HHS criteria. Without a D-CES, HomVEE cannot determine statistical
significance of the manuscript's findings.
2.3 Proposed Changes to Author Query Procedures
SCD manuscripts frequently include graphical representation of data
at each time point. To calculate the D-CES requires numerical data from
each time point. HomVEE proposes to request numerical data via an
author query, as needed. If the author does not provide the numerical
data, then HomVEE proposes to use a software package, such as
WebPlotDigitizer (Rohatgi 2020), to extract numerical data from
graphical presentations. This approach is consistent with WWC
procedures.
2.4 Summary of Proposed Changes to Requirements for SCD Research To Be
Considered Toward the HHS Criteria
To account for the elimination of the 5-3-20 rule and to promote
consistency in how well-designed, well-executed impact studies are
considered toward the HHS criteria, HomVEE proposes the following
updates:
(1) Eliminate the 5-3-20 additional requirement that SCD research
must meet to be considered toward the HHS criteria and instead consider
SCD research toward the HHS criteria in a manner consistent with other
designs.
(2) To support the use of SCD findings toward the HHS criteria,
implement three procedural steps that align with the Version 4.1
practices of the WWC, as follows:
a. Request numerical data from authors, if necessary.
b. Calculate the D-CES, if possible, for those designs that are
rated moderate or high.
c. Calculate statistical significance for the D-CES.
These proposed changes ensure that any impact study with high or
moderate quality, as determined by the application of HomVEE Version 2
standards, can contribute to the determination of whether a model meets
the HHS criteria for an ``evidence-based early childhood home visiting
service deliver model.''
3.0 Flexibilities for Applying Certain SCD Standards
HomVEE proposes to clarify the flexibilities related to the
application of certain SCD standards consistent with current WWC
practice. Such flexibilities are intended to ensure that HomVEE
standards are not unnecessarily stringent as more SCD manuscripts are
reviewed. HomVEE proposes to update the HomVEE Version 2 Handbook text
to clarify how existing flexibilities may be applied in the HomVEE
review process.
3.1. Flexibility Related to the Timing of Probe Point Collection When a
Case Receives the Intervention
The first flexibility concerns the collection of probe data points
in a multiple probe SCD. The current standard is strict requiring that
baseline probes for cases without the intervention be collected in the
same session when another case starts the intervention. The purpose of
the baseline probe collection is to assess whether cases not receiving
the intervention have changes in outcomes prior to receiving the
intervention.
HomVEE, and the WWC, recognize the requirement that baseline probes
for cases with and without the intervention take place in the exact
same session may be overly restrictive. The goal of the requirement
related to the timing of baseline data collection for cases not yet
receiving the intervention is to provide support that any change in
outcomes in the cases receiving the intervention is likely due to the
intervention and not some external factor (internal validity).
In alignment with WWC procedures, HomVEE currently grants
exceptions to this standard for individual manuscripts or interventions
in consultation with subject matter experts. HomVEE proposes making the
requirement more flexible by clarifying that baseline probe points may
be collected when the intervention is introduced or in subsequent
baseline sessions.
3.2 Flexibilities Related to the Minimum Number of Effects Demonstrated
or Data Points Required
The other flexibilities relate to the demonstration of effects--
either the minimum number of effects demonstrated or the data points
required to demonstrate an effect.
[[Page 15224]]
HomVEE currently allows exceptions to each of these standards. These
flexibilities are needed to accommodate possible nuances in outcomes
that may be examined in SCDs -- for example, outcomes that are
challenging for researchers to collect without burdening families (such
as outcomes based on skills that may be frustrating to be tested on
repeatedly if they have not been taught) or outcomes that are dangerous
to collect repeatedly without intervening (such as some child
maltreatment outcomes).
To facilitate a transparent review, HomVEE proposes to clarify the
process for granting and documenting the application of these
flexibilities. Specifically, HomVEE proposes to specify that, if
warranted, the HomVEE team can grant exceptions in collaboration with
subject matter experts, and the exception (and its rationale) will be
documented clearly in the review and related dissemination efforts.
4.0 Timeline for HomVEE To Apply New Procedures and Standards
HomVEE proposes to apply the new procedures and standards for SCD
research beginning with the 2021 review.
5.0 Summary of the Proposed Changes and Placement in the Version 2
Handbook
Following the 2020 substantial update to HomVEE procedures and
standards, HomVEE proposes additional changes focused specifically on
SCD research. The table below summarizes the proposed changes to be
made to the HomVEE Version 2 Handbook and the relevant handbook
section(s) that HomVEE proposes to update.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of proposed
Topic change and relevant FRN Relevant HomVEE Version
section 2 Handbook section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................... Requirements for SCD studies no longer have Section B.2.c and
considering single-case additional requirements to Exhibit II.11.
design (SCD) research meet. The statistical
toward HHS criteria for significance of a finding
an ``evidence-based (based on a design-
early childhood home comparable effect size, or D-
visiting service CESCES) will be considered
delivery model''. for SCD research when
applying the HHS criteria.
Manuscripts for which the D-
CESCES cannot be calculated
will be reviewed and
reported but will not
contribute to summaries of
evidence. (See Sections 2.1,
2.2, and 2.4 for more
details.).
2........................... Author queries for HomVEE will query authors for Section B.1.b.i Appendix
numerical data for SCD the numerical data D, Section D.1..
manuscripts. underlying graphical results
in manuscripts, as needed.
The numerical data are
necessary for calculating
the D-CESCES, which is used
to determine statistical
significance..
If the author does not
provide numerical data, then
HomVEE proposes to use a
software package to extract
numerical data from
graphical representations.
(See Section 2.3 for more
details.).
3........................... Additional baseline data HomVEE will require multiple Appendix D, Section B.5,
point requirements for probe designs to have Footnote 80 and related
multiple probe SCDs. baseline data in the same or statement.
subsequent baseline session
for cases not receiving the
intervention when a case
starts the intervention.
(See Section 3.1 for more
details.).
4........................... Flexibility in the HomVEE may grant an exception Appendix D, Section B.6,
requirement for to this requirement in Footnote 81.
demonstration of three consultation with subject
attempts of intervention matter experts. If granted,
effects at three it will be documented in the
different points in time. review and related
dissemination efforts,
including the rationale for
the exception. (See Section
3.2 for more details.).
5........................... Number of data points HomVEE may grant an exception Appendix D, Section B.6,
required. to this requirement in Footnotes 82 and 83.
consultation with subject
matter experts. If granted,
it will be documented in the
review and related
dissemination efforts,
including the rationale for
the exception. (See Section
3.2 for more details.).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.0 Request for Information (RFI)
Through this FRN, ACF is soliciting information from a broad array
of stakeholders on the proposed revisions to HomVEE's procedures and
standards related to SCD research. Federal, state, and local decision
makers rely on HomVEE to know which home visiting models are effective.
Applying the HHS criteria to SCDs as they are applied to other quasi-
experimental designs or randomized controlled trials means that well-
designed, well-executed SCD research will be treated on par with other
forms of well-designed, well-executed impact studies.
Responses to this FRN will inform ACF's ongoing discussion about
HomVEE's procedures and standards with the aim of publishing a final
HomVEE Version 2.1 Handbook of Procedures and Standards in 2021. This
RFI is for information and planning purposes only and should not be
construed as a solicitation or as an obligation on the part of ACF or
HHS.
Authority: Social Security Act Title V Sec. 511 [42 U.S.C.
711], as extended by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-
123) through fiscal year 2022.
Naomi Goldstein,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning, Research, and Evaluation,
Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services.
References
Rohatgi, A. WebPlotDigitizer, version 4.3. 2020. Available at
https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer. Accessed February 26, 2021.
Sama-Miller, E., J. Lugo-Gil, J. Harding, L. Akers, and R. Coughlin.
Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) Systematic Review:
Handbook of Procedures and Evidence Standards: Version 2, December
2020. Available at https://homvee.acf.hhs.gov/publications/methods-standards. Accessed January 7, 2021.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences,
National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,
What Works Clearinghouse. What Works Clearinghouse Procedures
Handbook: Version 4.1., 2020a. Available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/WWC-Procedures-Handbook-v4-1-508.pdf.
Accessed June 19, 2020.
[[Page 15225]]
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences,
National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,
What Works Clearinghouse. What Works Clearinghouse Standards
Handbook: Version 4.1., 2020b. Available at https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/WWC-Standards-Handbook-v4-1-508.pdf.
Accessed June 19, 2020.
[FR Doc. 2021-05840 Filed 3-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-74-P