OMB Packag Part A

CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS DEMONSTRATION
STUDIES – TASK ORDER #2

OMB CLEARANCE PACKAGE
August 1, 2014

PART A: JUSTIFICATION
3
A1. CIRCUMSTANCES THAT MAKE THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION NECESSARY ..................................................3
A2. HOW, BY WHOM, AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE THE INFORMATION IS TO BE USED .................................................4
A2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................. 4
A2.2 PURPOSE OF THE DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................ 5
A2.3 WHO WILL USE THE INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 5
A2.4 JUSTIFICATION FOR MULTIPLE STRATEGIES .................................................................................... 5
A3. AUTOMATED ELECTRONIC, MECHANICAL OR OTHER TECHNOLOGICAL COLLECTION TECHNIQUES TO REDUCE BURDEN ..5
A4. EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY DUPLICATION.......................................................................................................5
A5. METHODS TO MINIMIZE THE BURDEN ON SMALL BUSINESSES OR OTHER SMALL ENTITIES ....................................5
A6. CONSEQUENCES IF DATA ARE NOT COLLECTED ..........................................................................................6
A7. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES ...................................................................................................................6
A8. FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE .................................................................................................................6
A9. REMUNERATION TO RESPONDENTS .......................................................................................................6
A10. ASSURANCES OF CONFIDENTIALITY ......................................................................................................6
A11. QUESTIONS OF A SENSITIVE NATURE ....................................................................................................7
A12. ESTIMATES OF THE BURDEN OF THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION..............................................................7
A12.1. ESTIMATE OF RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS................................................................................ 7
A12.2. TOTAL ANNUAL COST BURDEN TO RESPONDENTS ......................................................................... 8
A13. TOTAL ANNUAL COST BURDEN TO RESPONDENT OR RECORD KEEPERS ...........................................................9
A14. ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL COST TO THE GOVERNMENT .................................................................................9
A15. REASONS FOR ANY PROGRAM CHANGES OR ADJUSTMENTS........................................................................9
A16. PLANS FOR TABULATION, ANALYSIS, AND PUBLICATION ............................................................................9
A16.1 PLANS FOR TABULATION.......................................................................................................... 9
A16.2 PLANS FOR ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 9
A16.3 PLANS FOR PUBLICATION ......................................................................................................... 9
A16.4 TIME SCHEDULE .................................................................................................................... 9
A17. APPROVAL TO NOT DISPLAY THE OMB EXPIRATION DATE .......................................................................10
A18. EXCEPTION TO THE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT ....................................................................................10

1

PART A: JUSTIFICATION
This supporting statement provides detailed information on proposed data collection activities
associated with the Choice Neighborhood Demonstration Studies administered by the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
A1. Circumstances that make the collection of information necessary
In the words of HUD Secretary Donovan, “Choice Neighborhoods would help to build truly inclusive,
sustainable communities, not islands in a sea of need.”1 To accomplish this comprehensive objective, the
Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (CNI) builds on lessons learned from HOPE VI on how to transform
communities with concentrated, distressed public and assisted housing and extreme poverty into
healthy, mixed-income communities with quality affordable housing, high-performing schools, services,
transportation, and access to jobs. Pivoting around assisted housing developments and neighborhoods,
the program aims to improve the lives of current and new residents.2 Like certain other noteworthy
federal housing and community development programs, Choice Neighborhoods targets high-poverty
places to assist low-income people. Recognizing the importance of the different starting points and
contexts of distressed neighborhoods, CNI also permits broad flexibility and creativity in local
approaches to revitalization.
The Choice Neighborhoods Initiative is designed to support the redevelopment of neighborhoods
marked by poverty, distressed housing and a paucity of community assets and opportunities into
resource- and opportunity-rich neighborhoods that benefit all residents, especially those living in public
and assisted housing. To do so, it focuses simultaneously on housing, neighborhoods and people. At its
core, the initiative seeks to:


Transform distressed public and assisted housing into energy efficient, mixed-income housing
that is physically and financially viable over time.



Transform poor neighborhoods into viable, mixed-income areas with access to well-functioning
services, high quality public schools and education programs, public assets, public
transportation, and improved access to jobs.



Support positive outcomes related to health, safety, employment, mobility and education for
families and their children who live in the target developments and the surrounding
neighborhood.

1

Evidence Matters, published by HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research, Winter 2011.

2

Choice Neighborhoods Initiative Act of 2010, 1–14.

3

The purpose of the tracking effort is to maintain contact and location information for households that
participated in the Choice Neighborhoods Demonstration Studies’ Baseline Survey to analyze household
mobility patterns and achieve a strong response rate on any follow up surveys that the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) may conduct. The optional mobility analysis will address the
following research questions:


How many Panel households left and returned to the CNI site?



How many unassisted Panel households left the CNI community?



What are the characteristics of households who leave the community vs. those who return to
the site? Do patterns differ by characteristics such as race/ethnicity, English speaking ability,
age, or disability status?



What are the characteristics of the neighborhoods where Panel households have moved?



How far do Panel members move from the original CNI site? How many move multiple times?



How many Panel members have moved to neighborhoods that offer substantial opportunity in
terms of access to jobs, good schools and other public services, high-quality food options, low
crime, and transportation?



What proportion of assisted residents leaves assistance during the study period? How many
leave for positive (earnings increase) vs. negative (eviction, lease violation) reasons?



What proportion of Panel members experience spells of homelessness or doubling up during the
study period?
The research team will employ both passive and active tracking strategies in this study. Active tracking
involves direct contact with the Panel member—whether by mail, by phone, or in person. This
supporting statement requests approval for the active tracking strategies.
A2. How, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used
A2.1 Project Overview
This research employs a longitudinal resident tracking strategy aimed at providing HUD with all of the
information necessary to track both residents of HUD-assisted properties targeted by the Choice
Neighborhoods Initiative as well as residents in the neighborhoods surrounding those properties.
Under Task Order 1, UI, in a teaming arrangement with MDRC, established a baseline for a Panel of
households in the five sites that received CNI implementation grants in August 2011. Two groups
comprise the survey population: households living in the target assisted developments and those in the
surrounding neighborhoods. Households that were living in target developments as of December 2010
and households that were living in the neighborhood at the time of the survey were randomly selected
to be interviewed. Decision Information Resources, Inc. (DIR) was responsible for all field data
collection and collected as much of the data as possible through telephone interviewers working from
their centralized, monitored telephone interviewing facility. The interview approach was intended to
be a call-out/call-in approach whereby staff from DIR’s Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing
(CATI) center call residents to complete a CATI-based interview conducted by DIR staff or, if needed,
on-site recruiters (called “field locators”) make direct contact with residents to facilitate their
4

participation in a CATI-based interview. The research team was unable to obtain phone numbers for
most sample members so the CATI center was not able to use phone numbers to call out. A small
number of in-person interviews were conducted in Seattle in languages appropriate to Somali,
Vietnamese, and Chinese residents.
By tracking Panel households, we increase the likelihood of a high response rate to any Choice
Neighborhood follow up surveys and our ability to understand Panel members’ mobility and how the
Choice Neighborhoods Initiative affects residents’ well-being.
A2.2 Purpose of the Data Collection
The baseline research under Task Order 1 runs through 2014, permitting an analysis of early
implementation and a Baseline assessment of residents’ well-being. A full evaluation of the impact of
CNI on resident outcomes will not be completed for years to come. Task Order 2 ensures that quality
contact data are available for Panel members after 2014, allows us to analyze resident mobility and
creates the basis for a representative sample of residents at the beginning of the Choice intervention.
A2.3 Who Will Use the Information
Our team for this project consists of key members of the Task Order 1 of the Choice Neighborhood
Demonstration Studies Baseline Survey team—Urban Institute and Decision Information Resources,
Inc. (DIR). DIR, which fielded the Baseline Survey, will draw on its extensive experience from the
Baseline Survey and its other work in tracking panel samples to ensure high rates of sample retention
throughout the study period. UI will report its findings to HUD’s Office of Policy Development and
Research.
A2.4 Justification for Multiple Strategies
Each active tracking strategy will increase the likelihood that HUD will be able to contact and invite the
respondent to participate in a potential follow up Choice Neighborhood survey.
A3. Automated electronic, mechanical or other technological collection techniques to reduce burden
The Urban Institute has subcontracted with Decision Information and Resources Inc. (DIR) to conduct
the tracking. DIR will have responsibility for all data collection and, to ensure consistent and highquality data, will collect as much of the data as possible through voice messages on a toll-free
telephone number.
Electronic versions of cards/flyers will be sent to all respondents who provide an email address at
baseline. In addition, as outlined in the Active Tracking strategy, DIR will attempt to contact
respondents through electronic/ automated strategies (email, phone, then mail) and will only be
contacted in person if the previous attempts fail.
A4. Efforts to identify duplication
There are no other studies collecting the same contact information for Choice Neighborhood Baseline
Survey participants.
A5. Methods to minimize the burden on small businesses or other small entities
There are no small businesses that will be asked to participate in Panel tracking.
5

A6. Consequences if data are not collected
This will be the first comprehensive study of The Choice Neighborhood Initiative. Tracking is critical for
long-term evaluation. Contact information is essential for HUD to follow up with target development
and neighborhood survey participants. Failure to collect and maintain tracking data will result in
insufficient information about the outcomes of the Choice Neighborhood Initiative.
A7. Special circumstances
The proposed data collection activities are consistent with the guidelines set forth in 5 CFR 1320.6
(Controlling Paperwork Burden on the Public—General Information Collection Guidelines). There are no
special circumstances that require deviation from these guidelines.
A8. Federal Register Notice
In accordance with 5 CFR 1308.8 (d) a Notice was published in the Federal Register on June 11, 2014
(pages 33590-33591) announcing HUD’s intention to request OMB review of this data collection effort
and soliciting public comments. No comments have been received as of the date of this submission. The
Federal Register Notice is available here: https://federalregister.gov/a/2014-13607.
A9. Remuneration to respondents
Once a year, DIR will send a study memento (magnet, post-its, pens, etc.) with a postage-paid business
reply envelope that panel members can use to update their contact information. Panel members will not
receive financial incentives to participate in the active tracking activities.
A10. Assurances of confidentiality
As previously indicated, the survey data collection will be conducted by Decision Information Resources,
Inc. under subcontract to the Urban Institute. The Urban Institute maintains an Institutional Review
Board (IRB) to ensure that research practices and procedures effectively protect the rights and welfare
of human subjects, consistent with the requirements set forth in Title 45, Part 46 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (45 CFR 46). The Urban Institute’s policy is that all research involving human subjects, not
just research sponsored by federal government agencies that have adopted the Common Rule under 45
CFR 46, must adhere to the following principles, among others:





Risks to human subjects from research must be reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits,
and must be minimized to the extent possible;
Human subjects must be fully and accurately informed of the nature of the research in which
they will be involved, whether their participation is mandatory or voluntary, any consequences
of non-participation, any risks associated with their participation, and how the research will be
used;
Adequate provision must be made to protect the privacy of human subjects and to maintain the
confidentiality of data that are collected, where promised and as appropriate.

In accordance with these policies, we will maintain the following procedures. All Panel members have
been given a clear overview of the study and its goals, the data security plan, the staff confidentiality
6

agreement, and our methods for safeguarding anonymity in our reports and publications. In addition,
we have stressed the voluntary nature of their participation and make clear to all parties that there are
no negative consequences for their person or agency should they choose to not participate.
Second, we will take care to safeguard the information gathered from participants in this research
effort. The data gathered from the tracking will be analyzed and discussed exclusively in aggregate; no
published reports using the survey data will single out any particular resident. Within the Urban Institute
and DIR, information identifying particular respondents will only be shared with staff who have signed
Data Confidentiality Pledges and who need the information for research purposes. All such staff, as well
as consultants to the Urban Institute for the evaluation, will sign this pledge. Hard-copy materials
containing respondent identifying information will be locked up when not in use, and electronic
materials with identifying information will be stored on a secure server in password-protected and/or
encrypted files, where appropriate.
A11. Questions of a sensitive nature
Panel members will not be asked about any sensitive information.
A12. Estimates of the burden of the collection of information
A12.1. Estimate of respondent burden hours
Panel members include 750 target development residents and 947 neighborhood residents, for a total
panel of 1,697. There are four active tracking strategies that will directly affect Panel members and
result in burden.
1. Three quarters each year, panel members will receive a card/flyer with a toll-free number and
website address set up for this study that will give respondents the opportunity to update their
contact information online or by phone. We estimate that 25 percent of target development and
neighborhood respondents (424) will respond to this flyer and it will take at most 5 minutes,
resulting in 101.76 respondent burden hours per year.
2. Once a year, the flyer/card will also contain a perforated mailer and a postage-paid business
reply envelope, providing more opportunity for each panel member to update their contact
information. We estimate that 90 percent of target development Panel members (675) and 50
percent of neighborhood Panel members (474) will respond to this flyer and it will take at most 5
minutes, resulting in 91.92 respondent burden hours per year.
3. DIR will initiate follow-up phone calls to determine if the most current telephone number(s) in
the contact database are correct. This action will become necessary if there is no response to
the annual mailers and there is no online update and the postcard/flyer is returned. DIR
estimates that about half of the neighborhood sample (474) and 10 percent of the target
development sample (74) will require a follow-up phone call. We estimate this call will take 5
minutes, resulting in 21.92 respondent burden hours.
7

4. After a pre-determined number of unsuccessful telephone attempts (e.g., 3-5), a DIR field
locator will visit the household to determine if the head of household still lives there. We
estimate about 50 percent of the previous cases are expected to be resolved by telephone
contact, with the remaining 50 percent (237 neighborhood and 37 target) being assigned to a
field locator. We estimate that this field location contact will take 5 minutes, resulting in 21.92
respondent burden hours per year.
Combining all of these activities results in an estimated respondent burden of 237.52 hours per year
(see Table A2).
A12.2. Total annual cost burden to respondents
In order to calculate the total annual cost burden to respondents, the Urban Institute used Occupational
Employment Statistics from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics to identify the
median hourly wages (as classified by Standard Occupational Classification, SOC, codes) for potentially
relevant occupations for focal development and neighborhood resident heads of household.
Table A1: Estimated Median Wages of Choice Neighborhoods Survey Respondents
Occupation

SOC Code Median Hourly
Wage Rate
Laborer
53-7062
$ 12.83
Office Clerk
43-9061
$14.42
Source: Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2013, accessed online May 12, 2014 at
http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_stru.htm
We use the average for these two occupations, or $13.63 per hour, to estimate the annual costs for
household survey participants. At this hourly rate, the estimated respondent burden of 237.52 hours
would cost $3,238 annually. See Table A2 for more detail.
Table A2: Estimated Annual Burden for Choice Neighborhoods Survey Respondents
Information
Collection

Number of
Respondents

Frequency Responses Burden
of
Per
Hour Per
Response
Annum
Response
Quarterly
3
0.08
Annual
1
0.08

Annual
Hourly
Burden Cost Per
Hours Response
101.76
$13.63
91.92
$13.63

Annual
Cost

Postcard
Mailing with
return
envelope
Phone calls

424
1,149
274

Annual

1

0.08

21.92

$13.63

$299

In-person visit

274

Annual

1

0.08

21.92

$13.63

$299

Total

2,121

237.52

8

$1,387
$1,253

$3,238

A13. Total annual cost burden to respondent or record keepers
There are no capital/start-up or ongoing operation/maintenance costs associated with this data
collection.
A14. Estimate of annual cost to the government
The total cost to the government for this study, including but not limited to the data collection activities
described in this submission, is $552,949 over a 5 year period. Included are costs associated with
background research, evaluation design, development of data collection instruments, data collection
activities, analysis, and reporting.
A15. Reasons for any program changes or adjustments
This submission is a new request for approval; there is no change in burden.
A16. Plans for tabulation, analysis, and publication
A16.1 Plans for tabulation
Active tracking will begin in November 2014. During the 3-year data collection period, DIR will provide UI
with progress reports about interim tracking. At the end of the tracking period, DIR will provide the
Urban Institute with the Location Database, the most current contact information for each head of

household from the Panel and the address history of the household obtained either quarterly
or annually since completion of the baseline survey in summer 2014.
A16.2 Plans for analysis
The (optional) mobility analysis task would draw on data collected during the Baseline Evaluation study
as well as national datasets (e.g. Census/ACS, Local Employment Dynamics, etc.) to provide a rich
assessment of the characteristics of neighborhoods where sample members live in 2017 and how those
compare to baseline conditions.
A16.3 Plans for publication
The (optional) mobility analysis task would analyze, integrate, and summarize tracking data in a mobility
report. The report would use the Interim Location Database to track the trajectories of sample
members over time and assess their success in accessing and sustaining access to neighborhoods of
opportunity.
A16.4 Time Schedule
Active Panel tracking is expected to begin in November 2014 and continue through June 2017. See Table
A3 for the schedule.
9

Table A3: Tasks and Deliverables

Task Deliverable

Revised Revised
Start
Start
Date
Week

Revised
End
Week

Revised
End
Date

1 Orientation
Orientation Meeting

10/1/2012

57

12/20/2013

67

10/25/2013 64
3
1/10/2014 74

Draft Tracking and
Data Systems Memo

236

4/3/2017

248

6/30/2017

Draft Interim Location
Database

236

4/3/2017

251

7/21/2017

Final Tracking and
Data Systems Memo

252

7/17/2017

253

8/4/2017

Final Interim Location
Database

256

8/21/2017

260

9/19/2017

Draft Mobility Report

222

12/30/2016 253

7/31/2017

Final Mobility Report

257

8/31/2017

9/19/2017

2 Tracking Implementation
Plan (TIP)
Draft TIP
Final TIP

4

10/26/2012

1

3/14/2014

3 Tracking

4 Mobility(Option)
260

A17. Approval to not display the OMB expiration date
Not Applicable. DIR will display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection on all
instruments and correspondence with prospective respondents.
A18. Exception to the certification statement
This submission, describing data collection, requests no exceptions to the Certificate for Paperwork
Reduction Act (5 CFR 1320.9).

10