60 day FRN

32562

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 110 / Tuesday, June 9, 2015 / Notices

Dated: June 3, 2015.
David A. Shive,
Acting Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015–13995 Filed 6–8–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–23–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES

Georgia 30329; phone: 404–639–7570;
Email: [email protected].

Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[60-Day 15–15ANC; Docket No. CDC–2015–
0044]

Proposed Data Collection Submitted
for Public Comment and
Recommendations

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE
Physician-focused Payment Model
Technical Advisory Committee
Nomination Letters
Government Accountability
Office (GAO).
ACTION: Notice on letters of nomination
of candidates.
AGENCY:

The Medicare Access and
CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015
established the Physician-Focused
Payment Model Technical Advisory
Committee to provide comments and
recommendations to the Secretary of
Health and Human Services on
physician payment models, and gave
the Comptroller General responsibility
for appointing the committee’s 11
members. The Advisory Committee
members shall include individuals with
national recognition for their expertise
in physician-focused payment models
and related delivery of care. No more
than 5 members of the Committee shall
be providers of services or suppliers, or
representatives of providers of services
or suppliers. A member of the
committee shall not be an employee of
the federal government.
GAO is accepting nominations of
individuals for this committee. For
appointments to be made in October
2015, I am announcing the following:
Letters of nomination and resumes
should be submitted by July 22, 2015 to
ensure adequate opportunity for review
and consideration of nominees.
Acknowledgement of submissions will
be provided within two weeks of
submission. Please contact Mary Giffin
at (202) 512–3710 if you do not receive
an acknowledgement.
ADDRESSES: Email: PTACcommittee@
gao.gov.
Mail: ATTN: PTAC Appointments,
U.S. GAO, 441 G Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20548.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: GAO
Office of Public Affairs, (202) 512–4800.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

Authority: Pub. L. 114–10, § 101(e), 129
Stat. 87, 115 (2015).
Gene L. Dodaro,
Comptroller General of the United States.
[FR Doc. 2015–13983 Filed 6–8–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1610–02–M

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:12 Jun 08, 2015

Jkt 235001

Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice with comment period.
AGENCY:

The Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of
its continuing efforts to reduce public
burden and maximize the utility of
government information, invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on proposed and/or
continuing information collections, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995. This notice invites
comment on a newly proposed
information collection entitled
‘‘Formative and Summative Evaluation
of the National Diabetes Prevention
Program’’. Mixed methods will be used
to describe program performance.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 10, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. CDC–2015–
0044 by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal:
Regulation.gov. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments.
Mail: Leroy A. Richardson,
Information Collection Review Office,
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS–
D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
Docket Number. All relevant comments
received will be posted without change
to Regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
access to the docket to read background
documents or comments received, go to
Regulations.gov.
SUMMARY:

Please note: All public comment should be
submitted through the Federal eRulemaking
portal (Regulations.gov) or by U.S. mail to the
address listed above.

To
request more information on the
proposed project or to obtain a copy of
the information collection plan and
instruments, contact the Information
Collection Review Office, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, 1600
Clifton Road NE., MS–D74, Atlanta,

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

PO 00000

Frm 00039

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies
must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each
collection of information they conduct
or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also
requires Federal agencies to provide a
60-day notice in the Federal Register
concerning each proposed collection of
information, including each new
proposed collection, each proposed
extension of existing collection of
information, and each reinstatement of
previously approved information
collection before submitting the
collection to OMB for approval. To
comply with this requirement, we are
publishing this notice of a proposed
data collection as described below.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology; and (e) estimates of capital
or start-up costs and costs of operation,
maintenance, and purchase of services
to provide information. Burden means
the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to
generate, maintain, retain, disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal
agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; to develop,
acquire, install and utilize technology
and systems for the purpose of
collecting, validating and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; to train
personnel and to be able to respond to
a collection of information, to search
data sources, to complete and review
the collection of information; and to
transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
Proposed Project
Formative and Summative Evaluation
of the National Diabetes Prevention
Program—New—National Center for
Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM

09JNN1

32563

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 110 / Tuesday, June 9, 2015 / Notices
Background and Brief Description
Diabetes takes a significant toll on the
public’s health and, subsequently, our
nation’s health care system. In addition
to 29.1 million people in the U.S.
population diagnosed with diabetes,
CDC estimates that 86 million adults
aged 20 or older have prediabetes.
Evidence-based lifestyle change
programs have proven effective for
preventing or delaying the onset of type
2 diabetes. However, several challenges
must be addressed to achieve large-scale
adoption and implementation of
evidence-based lifestyle change
programs. Implementation barriers
include creating a shared vision among
inherently different organizations,
managing costs, managing variations in
the quality of interventions, and training
and appropriate referral of those at risk
to lifestyle change programs.
In response to these challenges, CDC
led the development of the National
Diabetes Prevention Program (National
DPP), a lifestyle change program aimed
to increase knowledge and awareness of
healthy eating and activities among
people at-risk for diabetes. The National
DPP funded six grantees to establish and
expand ‘‘a network of structured,
evidence-based lifestyle change
programs designed to prevent type 2
diabetes among people at high risk.’’
Grantees are responsible for sustaining
and scaling up the National DPP, which
involves establishing evidence-based
lifestyle change programs in multiple
states and building a system to
strategically recruit participants at high
risk for diabetes.
As a central component of the
National DPP, grantees promote sites’
participation in the CDC’s Diabetes
Prevention Recognition Program
(DPRP). The DPRP recognizes
organizations that demonstrate effective
delivery of proven type 2 diabetes
prevention lifestyle interventions. To
sustain the programs beyond the
funding period, grantees are responsible
for

• gaining concrete support for
delivery sites from insurance companies
in the form of reimbursement, and
• developping delivery sites’ capacity
to obtain and maintain DPRP
recognition, and
• actively educating employers and
insurance companies on the cost savings
of including the lifestyle change
program as a covered health benefit and
reimbursing delivery sites on a pay-forperformance basis.
The National DPP has the potential
for increasing the availability and reach
of lifestyle change programs for those at
risk for type 2 diabetes, improving the
quality of programs and resources
offered, and creating sustainable
changes in how third-party payers offer
and reimburse for programs to ensure
that they are available to individuals
regardless of their ability to pay.
CDC plans to collect information
needed to evaluate the role of programlevel factors on the effectiveness of
National DPP efforts and to identify best
practices. The best practices will draw
from many different implementation
strategies and take into account the
barriers that arise in a variety of
different delivery settings. Specifically,
this assessment will reveal the impact of
recruitment strategies and delivery
models on factors such as reaching
targeted demographics and participant
completion rates. As a result of the
assessment, the successes and
challenges experienced by all programs
can be used by other organizations to
sustain and increase the effectiveness of
their own lifestyle change programs.
This information is necessary for
translating the National DPP into
various settings nationwide.
CDC plans to distribute an assessment
tool (spreadsheet) to all six grantees,
who will, in turn, disseminate the tool
to their partner organizations across 23
states and 2 tribes and tribal
organizations. The spreadsheets are a
means for grantees and intervention
sites to report on program components
and progress. Grantees are responsible
for completing their specific data

collection spreadsheet and for
distributing the spreadsheets to their
interventions sites. Each grantee will
collect information from its intervention
sites, collate the site-specific
spreadsheet reports into an aggregate
grantee report, and submit the aggregate
spreadsheet report to the CDC.
Program coordinators at each
intervention site will be asked to
describe their intervention, identify
barriers and facilitators to
implementation, and identify resources
used to hold the lifestyle change classes.
The estimated burden per response is 30
minutes. Project directors at the grantee
level will be asked similar questions
about resource use and implementation
strategies, but will also be asked to
discuss elements related to the reach of
their National DPP programs. The
estimated burden per response for a
grantee is 8 hours.
CDC will use the information to
investigate how to (1) expand the reach
and sustainability of the National DPP
program, (2) ensure the quality of the
program as it is offered within
communities, (3) increase referrals, and
(4) secure sustained commitment among
insurance providers to reimburse
organizations providing the program so
it is accessible to individuals most in
need of this intervention. Finally, CDC
will use the information to inform the
development of data-driven technical
assistance for National DPP grantees and
their intervention sites.
OMB approval is requested for three
years, in which there will be two waves
of information collection. Wave one will
include 110 NDPP Intervention Sites
and 6 NDPP Grantees, and wave two
will include 120 NDPP Intervention
Sites and 6 NDPP Grantees. Over the
three-year clearance period, the total
burden estimate is based on 73
annualized responses from NDPP
Intervention Sites (110 + 120/3) and 4
annualized responses from NDPP
Grantees (6 + 6/3).
Participation is voluntary and there
are no costs to respondents other than
their time.

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS
Number of
responses per
respondent

Number of
respondents

Average
burden
per response
(in hrs.)

Total burden
(in hrs.)

Type of respondents

Form name

NDPP Intervention Sites ...................

73

1

30/60

37

NDPP FOA Grantees ........................

Spreadsheet for NDPP Intervention
Sites.
Spreadsheet for NDPP Grantees ....

4

1

8

32

Total ...........................................

...........................................................

........................

........................

........................

69

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:12 Jun 08, 2015

Jkt 235001

PO 00000

Frm 00040

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM

09JNN1

32564

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 110 / Tuesday, June 9, 2015 / Notices

Leroy A. Richardson,
Chief, Information Collection Review Office,
Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the
Associate Director for Science, Office of the
Director, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2015–13955 Filed 6–8–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request

tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Title: National Child Abuse and
Neglect Data System
OMB No.: 0970–0424.
Description: The Administration on
Children, Youth and Families in the
U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) established the National
Child Abuse and Neglect Data System
(NCANDS) to respond to the 1988 and
1992 amendments (P.L. 100–294 and
P.L. 102–295) to the Child Abuse
Prevention and Treatment Act (42
U.S.C. 5101 et seq.), which called for the
creation of a coordinated national data
collection and analysis program, both
universal and case specific in scope, to
examine standardized data on false,
unfounded, or unsubstantiated reports.
In 1996, the Child Abuse Prevention
and Treatment Act was amended by
Public Law 104–235 to require that any
state receiving the Basic State Grant
work with the Secretary of the
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) to provide specific data
on child maltreatment, to the extent
practicable. These provisions were
retained and expanded upon in the 2010
reauthorization of CAPTA (Pub. L. 111–
320).
Each state to which a grant is made
under this section shall annually work
with the Secretary to provide, to the
maximum extent practicable, a report
that includes the following:
1. The number of children who were
reported to the state during the year as
victims of child abuse or neglect.
2. Of the number of children
described in paragraph (1), the number
with respect to whom such reports
were—

A. substantiated;
B. unsubstantiated; or
C. determined to be false.
3. Of the number of children
described in paragraph (2)—
A. the number that did not receive
services during the year under the state
program funded under this section or an
equivalent state program;
B. the number that received services
during the year under the state program
funded under this section or an
equivalent state program; and
C. the number that were removed
from their families during the year by
disposition of the case.
4. The number of families that
received preventive services, including
use of differential response, from the
state during the year.
5. The number of deaths in the state
during the year resulting from child
abuse or neglect.
6. Of the number of children
described in paragraph (5), the number
of such children who were in foster
care.
7. A. The number of child protective
service personnel responsible for the—
i. intake of reports filed in the
previous year;
ii. screening of such reports;
iii. assessment of such reports; and
iv. investigation of such reports.
B. The average caseload for the
workers described in subparagraph (A).
8. The agency response time with
respect to each such report with respect
to initial investigation of reports of child
abuse or neglect.
9. The response time with respect to
the provision of services to families and
children where an allegation of child
abuse or neglect has been made.
10. For child protective service
personnel responsible for intake,
screening, assessment, and investigation
of child abuse and neglect reports in the
state—
A. information on the education,
qualifications, and training
requirements established by the state for
child protective service professionals,
including for entry and advancement in
the profession, including advancement
to supervisory positions;
B. data of the education,
qualifications, and training of such
personnel;
C. demographic information of the
child protective service personnel; and

D. information on caseload or
workload requirements for such
personnel, including requirements for
average number and maximum number
of cases per child protective service
worker and supervisor.
11. The number of children reunited
with their families or receiving family
preservation services that, within five
years, result in subsequent substantiated
reports of child abuse or neglect,
including the death of the child.
12. The number of children for whom
individuals were appointed by the court
to represent the best interests of such
children and the average number of out
of court contacts between such
individuals and children.
13. The annual report containing the
summary of activities of the citizen
review panels of the state required by
subsection (c)(6).
14. The number of children under the
care of the state child protection system
who are transferred into the custody of
the state juvenile justice system.
15. The number of children referred to
a child protective services system under
subsection (b)(2)(B)(ii).
16. The number of children
determined to be eligible for referral,
and the number of children referred,
under subsection (b)(2)(B)(xxi), to
agencies providing early intervention
services under part C of the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (20
U.S.C. 1431 et seq.).
The Children’s Bureau proposes to
continue collecting the NCANDS data
through the two files of the Detailed
Case Data Component, the Child File
(the case-level component of NCANDS)
and the Agency File (additional
aggregate data, which cannot be
collected at the case level). Technical
assistance will be provided so that all
states may provide the Child File and
Agency File data to NCANDS. There are
no proposed changes to the NCANDS
data collection instruments. New fields
were implemented during the previous
OMB clearance cycle in support of the
CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010 and
to improve reporting on federal
performance measures.
Respondents: State governments, the
District of Columbia, and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Instrument

Number of
respondents

Number of
responses per
respondent

Average
burden hours
per response

Total burden
hours

Detailed Case Data Component: Child File and Agency File .........................

52

1

82

4,264

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:12 Jun 08, 2015

Jkt 235001

PO 00000

Frm 00041

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM

09JNN1