Submission for OMB Review; Data Collection for a National Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan, 22726-22727 [2024-06913]

Download as PDF 22726 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 2, 2024 / Notices clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. All comments will become a matter of public record. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Dated at Washington, DC, March 27, 2024. James P. Sheesley, Assistant Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2024–06881 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714–01–P FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION [Docket No. 24–17] Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Complainant v. Orient Overseas Container Line Limited and OOCL (Europe) Limited, Respondents; Notice of Filing of Complaint and Assignment khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Served: March 28, 2024. Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) by Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (the ‘‘Complainant’’) against Orient Overseas Container Line Limited and OOCL (Europe) Limited (the ‘‘Respondents’’). Complainant states that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction over this complaint pursuant to the Shipping Act of 1984, as amended, 46 U.S.C. 40101 et seq. and personal jurisdiction over the Respondents as common carriers and as vessel-operating ocean common carriers as these terms are defined in 46 U.S.C. 40102. Complainant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York with a principal place of business in Ridgefield Park, New Jersey. Complainant identifies Respondent Orient Overseas Container Line Limited as a company existing under the laws of Hong Kong with its principal place of business in Wanchai, Hong Kong whose agent in the United States is OOCL (USA) Inc. with its principal place of business in South Jordan, Utah. Complainant identifies Respondent OOCL (Europe) Limited as a company existing under the laws of United Kingdom with its principal place of business in Levington, Suffolk, United Kingdom whose agent in the United States is OOCL (USA) Inc. with its principal place of business in South Jordan, Utah. Complainant alleges that Respondents violated 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) and (d), and 41104(a)(3), (10), (14), and (15); and 46 CFR 545.4 and 545.5. Complainant VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Apr 01, 2024 Jkt 262001 alleges these violations arose from a failure to perform and a delay in performance of inland transportation obligations on ‘‘store door’’ shipments, and other acts and omissions of the Respondents, that resulted in damages, such as unreasonable costs, demurrage and detention charges, and delay. An answer to the complaint must be filed with the Commission within 25 days after the date of service. The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission’s electronic Reading Room at https://www2.fmc.gov/ readingroom/proceeding/24-17/. This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative Law Judges. The initial decision of the presiding judge shall be issued by March 28, 2025, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by October 14, 2025. David Eng, Secretary. CFR 545.4 and 545.5. Complainant alleges these violations arose from a failure to perform and a delay in performance of inland transportation obligations on ‘‘store door’’ shipments, and other acts and omissions of the Respondent, that resulted in damages, such as unreasonable costs, demurrage and detention charges, and delay. An answer to the complaint must be filed with the Commission within 25 days after the date of service. The full text of the complaint can be found in the Commission’s electronic Reading Room at https://www2.fmc.gov/ readingroom/proceeding/24-16/. This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative Law Judges. The initial decision of the presiding judge shall be issued by March 28, 2025, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by October 14, 2025. [FR Doc. 2024–06925 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am] David Eng, Secretary. BILLING CODE 6730–02–P [FR Doc. 2024–06936 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730–02–P FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION [Docket No. 24–16] Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Complainant, v. COSCO Shipping Lines Co., Ltd., Respondent; Notice of Filing of Complaint and Assignment Served: March 28, 2024. Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) by Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (the ‘‘Complainant’’) against COSCO Shipping Lines Co., Ltd. (the ‘‘Respondent’’). Complainant states that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction over this complaint pursuant to the Shipping Act of 1984, 46 U.S.C. 40101, et seq. and personal jurisdiction over the Respondent as a common carrier and as a vesseloperating ocean common carrier as these terms are defined in 46 U.S.C. 40102. Complainant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New York with a principal place of business in Ridgefield Park, New Jersey. Complainant identifies Respondent as a global ocean carrier with its corporate office in Shanghai, China who conducts business in the United States under COSCO Shipping (North America) Inc. with its principal corporate office in Secaucus, New Jersey. Complainant alleges that Respondent violated 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) and (d), and 41104(a)(3), (10), (14), and (15); and 46 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 3090–XXXX; Docket No. 2023–0001; Sequence No. 8] Submission for OMB Review; Data Collection for a National Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan Office of Evaluation Sciences; General Services Administration (GSA). ACTION: Notice of request for comments regarding a request for a new OMB clearance. AGENCY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, OES is proposing new data collection activities conducted for the National Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan (ARP). The objective of this project is to provide a systematic look at the contributions of selected ARP-funded programs toward achieving equitable outcomes to inform program design and delivery across the Federal Government. The project will include in-depth, cross-cutting evaluations and data analysis of selected ARP programs, especially those with shared outcomes, common approaches, or overlapping recipient communities; and targeted, program-specific analyses to fill critical gaps in evidence needs. DATES: Submit comments on or before May 2, 2024. ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for this information collection should be sent within 30 days SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM 02APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 2, 2024 / Notices of publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or by using the search function. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Martin, Program Manager, 267–455–8556 at arp.national.evaluation@gsa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES A. Purpose The goal of this study is to look systematically across the selected subset of ARP programs, to provide an integrated account of whether, how, and to what extent their implementation served to achieve their intended outcomes, particularly with respect to advancing equity. More specifically, the study aims to learn how lessons from examination of ARP programs and interventions with shared outcomes, common approaches, or overlapping recipient communities may inform equitable program design and delivery across the Federal Government. The study aims to address these overarching evaluation questions: • To what extent did ARP investments and policy interventions advance equitable outcomes for those they were designed to serve? • What strategies contributed to the successes, and where are different strategies needed? • Where multiple ARP programs aim to reach similar outcomes, especially among a shared population: Æ To what extent is there coordination across programs in their administration, customer experience strategies, or performance or outcome measurement practices? Æ To what extent are there collective impacts that could be attributed to more than one program? What kinds of impacts, if any, are observed? Æ What kinds of secondary effects are observed that may not be captured in targeted outcome measures? The list of 32 programs covered in the May 2022 White House report ‘‘Advancing Equity through the American Rescue Plan’’ provided the scope of programs included in the National Evaluation. A partnership between the Office of Management and Budget Evidence Team and GSA’s Office of Evaluation Sciences, this study is also guided by leadership from the White House ARP Implementation Team, who participate on the Steering Committee, as well as a team of agency experts across the Federal Government. To build evidence in support of the study goals, this project includes a VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Apr 01, 2024 Jkt 262001 series of up to five in-depth, crosscutting evaluations of selected ARP programs or recipient communities of multiple ARP program investments with shared outcomes, common approaches, or overlapping recipient groups. These evaluations will be selected based on program, population, place, community, or a combination of these factors. A mixed-methods approach is anticipated in order to ensure that appropriate attention is paid to context and that data collection and analysis methods reflect the complexity of program implementation and address the specific evaluation questions identified through the ongoing planning and consultation process. The ARP National Evaluation will use a multiple-phased approach for this proposed information collection activity. In Phase 1 (current request) the research team seeks approval to carry out consultations with the relevant state and local agencies, community-based organizations, and program participants, including the formal recruitment process to establish community advisory boards for each of the planned in-depth evaluations. Under subsequent phases of the request, the project will update the information collection request for the instruments tailored to each in-depth evaluation, to reflect the specific evaluation design, information collection methods and instruments, and associated burden. The proposed information collection activities cover mixed-method approaches to implement primarily outcome and process evaluations. Data collection activities for these studies may include: (1) interviews with program administrators and staff; (2) focus groups, (3) short surveys of program participants and/or eligible non-participants, and (4) data requests. Respondents: State and local program administrators, program staff, community-based program partners, and individuals who participate or are eligible to participate in the relevant ARP programs. B. Annual Burden Estimates Currently, three cross-cutting in-depth evaluations are anticipated. The burden estimates below reflect the expectations for information collection and related activities associated with the conduct of those three studies, in addition to the anticipated burden for this initial, formative phase of the overall study. During Phase 1, we estimate the following: consultations with approximately 95 state and/or local program administrators or representatives from community-based PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 22727 organizations, recruitment of up to 9 participants for each of up to seven Community Advisory Groups established across the three studies, and the initiation of the group meetings. The anticipated information collections to be undertaken in Phase 2 are expected to vary in their approaches to data collection and sample size. The subsequent information collection requests will describe the specific study design and associated burden for each evaluation. The estimates below include our current expectations for the burden associated with these evaluations. Total Respondents: 1,241. Total Annual Responses: 15. Average Burden Hours per Response: 1.9. Total Burden Hours: 3,034.5. C. Public Comments A 60-day notice published in the Federal Register at 88 FR 85621 on December 8, 2023. Two comments were received, but neither provided substantive comments relevant to this specific information collection request. Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by calling 202–501–4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB Control No. 3090–XXXX, Data Collection for a National Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan. Lois Mandell, Director, Regulatory Secretariat Division, General Services Administration. [FR Doc. 2024–06913 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820–TZ–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Solicitation of Nominations for Appointment to the Communications and Public Engagement Workgroup of the Advisory Committee to the Director, CDC; Notice of Extension Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is seeking nominations for membership on the Communications and Public Engagement Workgroup SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM 02APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22726-22727]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-06913]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

[OMB Control No. 3090-XXXX; Docket No. 2023-0001; Sequence No. 8]


Submission for OMB Review; Data Collection for a National 
Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan

AGENCY: Office of Evaluation Sciences; General Services Administration 
(GSA).

ACTION: Notice of request for comments regarding a request for a new 
OMB clearance.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, OES is 
proposing new data collection activities conducted for the National 
Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan (ARP). The objective of this 
project is to provide a systematic look at the contributions of 
selected ARP-funded programs toward achieving equitable outcomes to 
inform program design and delivery across the Federal Government. The 
project will include in-depth, cross-cutting evaluations and data 
analysis of selected ARP programs, especially those with shared 
outcomes, common approaches, or overlapping recipient communities; and 
targeted, program-specific analyses to fill critical gaps in evidence 
needs.

DATES: Submit comments on or before May 2, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for this information 
collection should be sent within 30 days

[[Page 22727]]

of publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 
Find this particular information collection by selecting ``Currently 
under Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search 
function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Martin, Program Manager, 
267-455-8556 at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Purpose

    The goal of this study is to look systematically across the 
selected subset of ARP programs, to provide an integrated account of 
whether, how, and to what extent their implementation served to achieve 
their intended outcomes, particularly with respect to advancing equity. 
More specifically, the study aims to learn how lessons from examination 
of ARP programs and interventions with shared outcomes, common 
approaches, or overlapping recipient communities may inform equitable 
program design and delivery across the Federal Government. The study 
aims to address these overarching evaluation questions:
     To what extent did ARP investments and policy 
interventions advance equitable outcomes for those they were designed 
to serve?
     What strategies contributed to the successes, and where 
are different strategies needed?
     Where multiple ARP programs aim to reach similar outcomes, 
especially among a shared population:
    [cir] To what extent is there coordination across programs in their 
administration, customer experience strategies, or performance or 
outcome measurement practices?
    [cir] To what extent are there collective impacts that could be 
attributed to more than one program? What kinds of impacts, if any, are 
observed?
    [cir] What kinds of secondary effects are observed that may not be 
captured in targeted outcome measures?
    The list of 32 programs covered in the May 2022 White House report 
``Advancing Equity through the American Rescue Plan'' provided the 
scope of programs included in the National Evaluation. A partnership 
between the Office of Management and Budget Evidence Team and GSA's 
Office of Evaluation Sciences, this study is also guided by leadership 
from the White House ARP Implementation Team, who participate on the 
Steering Committee, as well as a team of agency experts across the 
Federal Government.
    To build evidence in support of the study goals, this project 
includes a series of up to five in-depth, cross-cutting evaluations of 
selected ARP programs or recipient communities of multiple ARP program 
investments with shared outcomes, common approaches, or overlapping 
recipient groups. These evaluations will be selected based on program, 
population, place, community, or a combination of these factors. A 
mixed-methods approach is anticipated in order to ensure that 
appropriate attention is paid to context and that data collection and 
analysis methods reflect the complexity of program implementation and 
address the specific evaluation questions identified through the 
ongoing planning and consultation process.
    The ARP National Evaluation will use a multiple-phased approach for 
this proposed information collection activity. In Phase 1 (current 
request) the research team seeks approval to carry out consultations 
with the relevant state and local agencies, community-based 
organizations, and program participants, including the formal 
recruitment process to establish community advisory boards for each of 
the planned in-depth evaluations.
    Under subsequent phases of the request, the project will update the 
information collection request for the instruments tailored to each in-
depth evaluation, to reflect the specific evaluation design, 
information collection methods and instruments, and associated burden. 
The proposed information collection activities cover mixed-method 
approaches to implement primarily outcome and process evaluations. Data 
collection activities for these studies may include: (1) interviews 
with program administrators and staff; (2) focus groups, (3) short 
surveys of program participants and/or eligible non-participants, and 
(4) data requests.
    Respondents: State and local program administrators, program staff, 
community-based program partners, and individuals who participate or 
are eligible to participate in the relevant ARP programs.

B. Annual Burden Estimates

    Currently, three cross-cutting in-depth evaluations are 
anticipated. The burden estimates below reflect the expectations for 
information collection and related activities associated with the 
conduct of those three studies, in addition to the anticipated burden 
for this initial, formative phase of the overall study. During Phase 1, 
we estimate the following: consultations with approximately 95 state 
and/or local program administrators or representatives from community-
based organizations, recruitment of up to 9 participants for each of up 
to seven Community Advisory Groups established across the three 
studies, and the initiation of the group meetings.
    The anticipated information collections to be undertaken in Phase 2 
are expected to vary in their approaches to data collection and sample 
size. The subsequent information collection requests will describe the 
specific study design and associated burden for each evaluation. The 
estimates below include our current expectations for the burden 
associated with these evaluations.
    Total Respondents: 1,241.
    Total Annual Responses: 15.
    Average Burden Hours per Response: 1.9.
    Total Burden Hours: 3,034.5.

C. Public Comments

    A 60-day notice published in the Federal Register at 88 FR 85621 on 
December 8, 2023. Two comments were received, but neither provided 
substantive comments relevant to this specific information collection 
request.
    Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information 
collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by 
calling 202-501-4755 or emailing [email protected]. Please cite OMB 
Control No. 3090-XXXX, Data Collection for a National Evaluation of the 
American Rescue Plan.

Lois Mandell,
Director, Regulatory Secretariat Division, General Services 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2024-06913 Filed 4-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-TZ-P


This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.