0990-Cross-Site_MSI HIV _REVISED 05 01 12

0990-Cross-Site_MSI HIV _REVISED 05 01 12.doc

Cross-site Evaluation of the Minority Serving Institutions' HIV/AIDS Demonstration Initiative and Capacity Building Project

OMB: 0990-0395

Document [doc]
Download: doc | pdf

Cross-Site Evaluation of the Minority Serving Institutions HIV/AIDS Demonstration Initiative

And Capacity Building

Project

Supporting Statement Parts A & B



Updated April 23, 2012


Office of HIV/AIDS Policy

200 Independence Avenue, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20201



Project Officer:


Tim Harrison, PhD















Table of Contents

A. Justification 3

1. Circumstances Making the Collection of Information Necessary 3

2. Purpose and Use of Information Collection 3

3. Use of Improved Information Technology and Burden Reduction 4

4. Efforts to Identify Duplication and Use of Similar Information 4

5. Impact on Small Businesses or Other Small Entities 4

6. Consequences of Collecting the Information Less Frequently 4

7. Special Circumstances Relating to the Guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5 4

8. Comments in Response to the Federal Register Notice/Consultation Outside the Agency 5

9. Explanation of Any Payment/Gift to Respondents 5

10. Assurance of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents 5

11. Justification for Sensitive Questions 6

12. Estimates of Annualized Hour and Cost Burden 6

13. Estimates of Other Total Annualized Cost to Respondents or Recordkeeper/Capital Costs 11

14. Annualized Cost to Federal Government 11

15. Explanation for Program Changes or Adjustments 11

16. Plans for Tabulation and Publication and Project Time Schedule 12

17. Reason(s) Display of OMB Expiration Date is Inappropriate 12

18. Exceptions for Certifications for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 12

B. Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods Error! Bookmark not defined.13

1. Respondent Universe and Sampling Methods Error! Bookmark not defined.13

2. Procedures for the Collection of Information Error! Bookmark not defined.14

3. Methods to Maximize Response Rates and Deal with Nonresponse Error! Bookmark not defined.16

4. Tests of Procedures or Methods to be Undertaken Error! Bookmark not defined.16

5. Individuals Consulted on Statistical Aspects and Individuals Collecting and/or Analyzing Data Error! Bookmark not defined.17


A. Justification

1. Circumstances Making the Collection of Information Necessary

The Office of HIV/AIDS Policy (OHAP) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is requesting Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance for data to be collected for a cross-site evaluation of a new initiative called the Minority Serving Institutions HIV/AIDS Demonstration Initiative and Capacity Building Project. This initiative was developed in response to the devastating impact of HIV/AIDS on communities of color in the U.S. population. Although minority populations comprise only 30% of the total U.S. population, they account for nearly 65% of the new AIDS cases.


OHAP has funded the Minority Serving Institutions’ (MSIs) HIV/AIDS Demonstration Initiative and Capacity-Building Project at 7 MSI colleges and universities across the country. These educational institutions serve diverse groups of Hispanic, African American, and Native American minority students, and offer a significant opportunity to engage minority students in HIV/AIDS activities. More than just academic institutions, MSIs often provide students with an atmosphere that nurtures their cultural and spiritual needs, as well as helps them achieve their academic goals. Through this project, the MSIs will develop HIV/AIDS interventions that address prevention, diagnosis and treatment among their students. The specific goals of the project are to increase student awareness and knowledge, and positive changes in their attitudes, beliefs and behaviors related to HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment; and increase the numbers of students who access HIV/AIDS counseling and testing services.


To monitor this demonstration project across the different schools, OHAP has contracted with Abt Associates, Inc. to conduct a cross-site project evaluation. The cross-site evaluation will document the activities and progress of the projects at the MSI sites; ascertain whether the projects’ goals and objectives were achieved; and identify challenges and opportunities in the implementation of the MSI projects. Both process and outcome data will be collected and analyzed at each specific site. Process measures will include those related to activities and events held and program implementation challenges. Outcome measures will include changes in student attitudes, knowledge, behaviors and access to testing. The project resources, activities and outcomes are summarized in the logic model attached. These data will be collected through student pre- and post-tests, surveys, focus groups and interviews. In addition Abt staff will conduct key informant interviews with MSI staff and collaborative partners. Each MSI site will be submitting its evaluation plan to its local Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) or Human Subject Committees (HRCs).

2. Purpose and Use of Information Collection

The data collected in this cross-site evaluation will provide information about the effectiveness of different approaches to HIV/AIDS prevention, including numbers of students reached and engaged, changes in knowledge and awareness of HIV/AIDS, and behaviors related to prevention, testing and treatment. The data collected will also be used to identify best practices that offer the greatest promise for sustained effectiveness and expansion to other minority youth. The information collected in this cross-site evaluation can assist OHAP and other federal agencies in setting future priorities for HIV/AIDS prevention activities at MSIs, and potentially other educational institutions.


3. Use of Improved Information Technology and Burden Reduction

All data collected and reported by the sites will be submitted electronically to Abt Associates, Inc. Site-specific outcome data will be submitted semi-annually. Each MSI site is contractually obligated to submit monthly progress reports. These will not only be used for the cross-site evaluation, but will also monitor ongoing activity and identify technical assistance needs.


4. Efforts to Identify Duplication and Use of Similar Information

As part of funding, each MSI is required to have an evaluation plan in place. The cross-site evaluation builds on these required local evaluations. The MSI sites will be asked to submit summaries of their evaluation data to Abt Associates every six months. Program activity data, such as the numbers of activities and activity participants, will be retrieved from the monthly program progress reports and other program records. The additional evaluation data from key informant interviews collected during the annual site visits will focus on implementation issues, and are not available elsewhere. These interview data will be critical in understanding the feasibility and sustainability of implementing these projects in MSIs and other colleges and universities. The outcome evaluation data related to changes in knowledge and awareness of HIV/AIDS, and behaviors related to prevention, testing and treatment are not available elsewhere at the MSI sites where such interventions are being implemented.

5. Impact on Small Businesses or Other Small Entities

The information collected in this cross-site evaluation has been held to the absolute minimum required for the intended use of the data.

6. Consequences of Collecting the Information Less Frequently

The nature of this project suggests that a variety of data will be collected at different frequencies from the 7 different MSIs. This includes monthly progress reports for the cross-site evaluation (although used for the cross-site evaluation, data collected through the monthly progress reports are primarily being used to monitor progress, identify implementation challenges and barriers and identify technical assistance needs); semi-annual summaries of site-specific outcome evaluation data; and annual key informant interviews. This schedule of data collection is necessary to ensure a full understanding of the implementation issues, as well as provide opportunities for the sites to make adjustments to their programs. For the key information interviews that will focus more fully on implementation issues and challenges, conducting them less frequently than annually would result in a loss of important information.


7. Special Circumstances Relating to the Guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5

Any data requests specific to the cross-site evaluation fully comply with guidelines of 5 CFR 1320.5. Although the evaluation will include a review of progress reports that are submitted monthly, these progress reports are used primarily for ongoing program monitoring, and for identifying and addressing any program implementation challenges encountered. As mentioned earlier, monthly progress reports from each site are a contractual obligation for the 7 MSIs.


8. Comments in Response to the Federal Register Notice/Consultation Outside the Agency

A 60-day Federal Register Notice was published in the Federal Register on December 22, 2011, vol. 76, No. 246; pp. 79683-84 (see Appendix). There were no public comments.

Consultation Outside the Agency

Prior to implementation of this demonstration project, Abt Associates Inc. (Abt), on behalf of the Office of HIV/AIDS Policy (OHAP) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) convened an invitational stakeholders meeting to discuss the Minority Serving Institutions’ (MSI) Demonstration Initiative on March 31 and April 1, 2010.

The meeting was attended by a distinguished group of representatives from MSIs, student leaders, advocacy and service organizations representing Hispanic, Asian Pacific Islanders, African American, and Tribal organizations, representatives of elected officials, and federal agencies, including Health Resources Services Administration (HRSA), the Office of Minority Health (OMH), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), that support HIV prevention programs. At the day and a half long meeting, participants were asked to participate in roundtable discussions and provide specific and concrete suggestions for key programmatic and organizational components for the Initiative. To help inform the discussions the meeting included a summary of the research on sexual and drug using behavior among young people, the state of HIV prevention programs at MSIs, the experience of current MSI program leaders, and a presentation summarizing the literature on HIV prevention activities on MSI campuses.

Recommendations from this stakeholder meeting included the need for MSIs to participate in a cross-site evaluation led by Abt Associates as well as collaborate with Abt in preparing and disseminating reports or publications intended to share the results of the Demonstration Initiative to address the gap in literature on HIV prevention on MSI campuses.

9. Explanation of Any Payment/Gift to Respondents

Students trained as peer leaders for the program will be paid an average of $10 per hour and/or given class credit when applicable. Students participating in the evaluation surveys and focus groups will receive gifts cards ranging from $10-$25 depending on the length of time involved. The MSI sites determined this reimbursement given their past involvement of students with similar campus activities.


10. Assurance of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents

For each of the data collection methods, procedures will be in place to provide assurance of privacy to respondents to the fullest extent of the law. All evaluation data received from the sites will be reported in the aggregate only, and any data related to students participating in the different activities will be de-identified. No MSI students, staff and community partners who are interviewed or surveyed will be identified, and consent forms will be developed and signed prior to the interviews.


All the MSI sites will be submitting their evaluation and data collection plans to their schools’ IRBs; and the Abt team also will submit the cross-site evaluation to the Abt IRB.


11. Justification for Sensitive Questions

Including questions of a sensitive nature is essential in determining whether the MSI projects have been successful and effective. As stated previously, the goals of this project are to: 1) increase awareness and knowledge of risk factors and prevention methods for HIV/AID transmission, 2) reduce high risk behaviors, 3) increase access to counseling, testing and referral services, and 4) improve access to HIV/AIDS prevention services. In order to assess whether these goals have been met, sensitive questions may be asked by the schools to their project participants. Understanding the nature of this study, every effort will be taken to ensure that no student is identified, and that the students understand why the questions are being asked and are given the chance to consent.


Information about students’ race and ethnic group will be collected in order to identify and understand any differences across the racial/ethnic groups in the knowledge and awareness of HIV/AIDS, and participation in prevention, testing and treatment activities of the projects. For example, there may be cultural differences that may explain different rates of participation. This information may be helpful in adapting the program activities to different student populations, particularly at other MSIs.


12. Estimates of Annualized Hour and Cost Burden

A. Hour Burden

The burden hour calculations found in the table below were based on the type of respondent, and the form to be completed by that respondent. The number of respondents is based on average number of respondents per site given 7 sites. For example, 14 respondents include 2 respondents per the 7 sites.


Forms


Type of Respondent


Number of Respondents

Number of Responses per Respondent

Average Burden (in hours) per Response

Total Burden Hours

Annual Staff Key Informant Interview


(see 1. KII MSI Program Staff.pdf)

MSI Demonstration Project staff

14

1

4

56

Monthly Progress Reports


(see 2. Mthly Progress Reports.pdf)

MSI Demonstration Project staff

14

12

1

168

Semi-Annual Reporting of Site Evaluation Findings


(see 3. Semi-Annual Eval Reports MSI Sites.pdf)

MSI Demonstration Project staff


14

2

5

140

Annual Site Visit Partner Key Informant Interview


(see 4. KII Interviews_MSI Prog Partners.pdf)

MSI Demonstration Project partners

14

1

2

28

Pre-and Post- Surveys C


See list of Items #5 through #7 below

Students

1,000 A

2

1

2,000

Pre- and Post- Tests D


See list of items #8 through 26 below (19 instruments)

Students

420 B

2

15/60

210

Focus Groups/

Interviews


See item #27, #28

Students

50

1

1

50

Total


1,526



2,652


Note A: This is collective across those schools using this type of data collection form (see table below). Each survey will take no longer than 1 hour to complete.

Note B: This is collective across those schools using this type of data collection form (see table below). Each survey will take no longer than 15 minutes to complete.

Note C: The following 3 items are presented in this order in a single PDF file named: Pre-and Post- Surveys Items 5-7.pdf

5. HIV Risk Assessment among College Students (Hou)

6. HIV Attitude and Knowledge Survey (Gou)

7. Knowing your Status Social Marketing Campaign Evaluation Questionnaire (used before and after campaign)


Note D: The following 19 items are presented in this order in a single PDF file named: Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf

8. SiHLE Healthy Relationships Pre-Questionnaire

9. SiHLE Healthy Relationships Post-Questionnaire

10. SISTA Eval Session 1 (Handout 1E)

11. SISTA Eval Session 2 (Handout 2G)

12. SISTA Eval Session 3 (Handout 3H)

13. SISTA Eval Session 4 (Handout 4H)

14. SISTA Eval Session 5 (Handout 5F)

15. SISTA PreTest/ Posts Test

16. Brief HIV Knowledge Questionnaire (HIV KQ-18)

17. HIV 101 Questionnaire

18. Nia Pre-Intervention Assessment Survey

19. Nia Post Intervention Assessment Survey Outcome Monitoring

20. Nia Follow-Up Assessment Survey Outcome Monitoring

21. Nia Participant Satisfaction Survey

22. Prevention Education Pre-Test Questionnaire for College Women

23. Post Peer-led Program Evaluation Assessing Changes in Knowledge and Attitude

24. FIU Post Peer-led Program Evaluation (satisfaction survey)

25. The Sexually Transmitted Disease Knowledge Questionnaire (STD KQ)

26. Sociodemographic Questionnaire (for Program Participants)

Below is a table that provides a listing of the specific forms to be used for the different data collection types (e.g., curriculum pre- and post- tests). The table also includes the respondent type for each data collection form, and the schools where the forms will be used. Copies of the data collection forms also are included in the Appendix and additional detail about the information to be collected from the MSI sites may be found in Section B of this Supporting Statement (Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods).


MSI HIV Demonstration Project

Data Collection Forms by School and Type of Respondent


Data Collection Form

College/University

MSI Respondent Type

Staff and Partner Key Informant Interviews

Annual Staff Key Informant Interview

(see pdf in appendix: “1. KII MSI Program Staff”)

All schools

Demonstration Project staff

Annual Site Visit Partner Key Informant Interview

(see pdf in appendix: “4. KII Interviews_MSI Prog Partners”)

All schools

Demonstration Project partners

Reports

Monthly Progress Reports

(see pdf in appendix: “2. Mthly Progress Reports”)

All schools

Demonstration Project staff

Semi-Annual Reporting of Site Evaluation Findings

(see pdf in appendix: “3. Semi-Annual Eval Reports MSI Sites”)

All schools

Demonstration Project staff

Student Surveys

HIV Risk Assessment Among African American Students (Hou)


(See item #5 in the appendix: “Pre-and Post- Surveys Items 5-7.pdf”)


  • Dine College

  • Florida International University

  • Fort Valley State University

  • Stone Child College


Students

HIV/AIDS Attitude & Knowledge (Goh) Survey


(See item #6 in the appendix: “Pre-and Post- Surveys Items 5-7.pdf”)

  • Dine College

  • Stone Child College

Students

Knowing Your Status Social Marketing Campaign Evaluation Questionnaire (Pre- and post- marketing campaign)


(See item #7 in the appendix: Pre-and Post- Surveys Items 5-7.pdf)

  • North Carolina Central University

Students

Curriculum Pre- and Post-Tests

SiHLE (Sistas, Informing, Healing, Living, Empowering) Curriculum

  • Healthy Relationships Pre-Questionnaire

  • Healthy Relationships Post-Questionnaire

(See items #8 and #9 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Southern University, Baton Rouge

Students

SISTA Curriculum

  • Session evaluations (Session 1 – 5) (See items #10-14 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Pre/Post Test

(See items #15 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Fort Valley State University

  • North Carolina Central University

Students

Brief HIV Knowledge Questionnaire

(See items #16 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Florida International University

Students

HIV 101 Questionnaire (Modified SihLE)

(See items #17 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Southern University, Baton Rouge

Students

Nia Curriculum

  • Pre-Intervention Assessment Survey

(See items #18 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Post-Intervention Assessment Survey Outcome Monitoring

(See items #19 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Follow-up Assessment Survey Outcome Monitoring

(See items #20 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Participant Satisfaction Survey

(See items #21 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)


  • Fort Valley State University

Students

Prevention Education Pre-Test Questionnaire for College Women (pre- and pre- and post-test for peer leadership training; previously approved by OMB – No. 0990-0334)


(See items #22 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Florida International University

Students

Post Peer-led Programs Evaluation Assessing in Changes in Knowledge and Attitudes


(See items #23 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Florida International University

Students

Peer-led Programs Evaluation (Post)


(See items #24 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Florida International University

Students

The Sexually Transmitted Disease Knowledge Questionnaire (Pre- and post-test for peer leadership training)


(See items #25 in the appendix: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Florida International University

Students

Socio-demographic Questionnaire for Training Participants


(See items #26 in the appendix pdf titled: “Pre- and Post- Tests 8-26.pdf”)

  • Jackson State University

Students

Student Focus Groups/Interviews

Focus Group Questions with African American Men

(see pdf in appendix: “27 Focus Grp w AAMen”

  • Jackson State University

Students

Interview Questions with African American Men

(see pdf in appendix: “28. KII with AA men”)

  • Jackson State University

Students


B. Cost Burden

The estimated annual cost burden on respondents may be found in the table below.

Type of Respondent

Total Burden Hours

Hourly Wage Rate

Total Respondent Costs

Project Directors

40

$50

$2,000

Program Managers/Community Partners

200

$25

$5,000

Students

70

$10

$700

Analysts

185

$20

$3,700

Total Costs

$11,400

13. Estimates of Other Total Annualized Cost to Respondents or Recordkeeper/Capital Costs

Not Applicable


14. Annualized Cost to Federal Government

The total cost to the federal government for the two years of data collection is estimated to be $1,255,950.00.

15. Explanation for Program Changes or Adjustments

This is a new collection of information.

16. Plans for Tabulation and Publication and Project Time Schedule

Annual reports will be produced in November 2011 and October 2012. A final report will be produced in October 2013. Publication plans are still to be determined. The analytic plan is included in the Supporting Statement B.



17. Reason(s) Display of OMB Expiration Date is Inappropriate

The expiration date will be displayed.

18. Exceptions for Certifications for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.



















13


File Typeapplication/msword
File TitleMEMORANDUM
AuthorDawn Smith
Last Modified ByCTAC
File Modified2012-04-02
File Created2012-04-02

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy