Ss_a

Trafficking Victim Assistance Program Assessment—Key Informant Interviews and Focus Groups

ASPE Generic Information Collection Request

OMB No. 0990-0421

Supporting Statement—Section A

Submitted: April 10, 2018

Contracting Officer’s Representative

Amanda Benton

Social Science Analyst
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation

200 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20201

202–690–7290

[email protected]

Section A—Justification

1. Circumstances Making the Collection of Information Necessary

The Trafficking Victim Assistance Program (TVAP), as authorized by The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 USC 7105(b)(1)(B); 22 USC 7105(f); 42 USC 14044b), provides comprehensive case management services to foreign national victims of human trafficking residing in the United States. Since its inception, TVAP funding and infrastructure have remained relatively unchanged: Services are paid on a per capita basis, and funds are managed through primary grantees that enter into cooperative agreements with service providers (subrecipients) to provide regional coverage. Given the changing landscape and greater understanding of the nature and extent of trafficking, an assessment of the program is timely and appropriate. This assessment will examine the strengths and weaknesses of the current per capita funding allocation method and regional grant structure, determine if efficiencies can be gained in the program administration and structure, and identify potential alternative funding strategies.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families’ (HHS/ACF) Office on Trafficking in Persons (OTIP) is responsible for managing TVAP. In collaboration with the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) and ACF’s Office of Planning, Research & Evaluation (OPRE), OTIP has contracted with the firm ICF to conduct this assessment. The findings will be of interest primarily to OTIP but also to other funding agencies, and organizations that work with individuals who have been trafficked.

2. Purpose and Use of the Information Collection

ASPE, in partnership with ACF, is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for this information collection request (ICR), “Trafficking Victim Assistance Program (TVAP) Assessment—Key Informant Interviews and Focus Groups,” as well as for a separate full ICR titled “Trafficking Victim Assistance Program Social Network Analysis – Network Survey,”¹ for this program assessment. The program assessment represents a collaboration between ASPE, OPRE, OTIP, and the contractor (ICF).

The overall program assessment aims to address the following goals:

1. Gain in-depth knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the current per capita funding allocation method.

2. Gain in-depth knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the current regional grant structure.

3. Determine if efficiencies can be gained through improved coordination of services and/or merger of different federal trafficking programs.

4. Identify potential alternative funding or grant structure strategies that would address the needs of the target population (i.e., foreign national victims of trafficking).

The program assessment will utilize a mixed methods approach with two separate data collection efforts (i.e., qualitative and quantitative) to address the goals of the assessment. Qualitative data (i.e., key informant interviews and focus groups) will be used to address the first, second, and fourth goals of the study. The qualitative component of the assessment, for which we are seeking approval in this ICR, will involve (1) key informant interviews with a sample of fiscal year 2016 TVAP grantees and subrecipients (e.g., grant administrators, case managers, and service referral contacts) and (2) focus groups with a sample of TVAP subrecipients with extensive knowledge of trafficking-related grants or funding allocation models. This methodology will help document and describe information related to perceptions and experiences with the current grant structure and per capita funding model and identify alternative approaches for funding trafficking services.

The key informant interviews will be 1-hour semi-structured interviews, conducted in person or virtually, with key staff representing grantees and subrecipients. At each of the three grantee organizations, we will seek to interview three types of key staff: grant administrator, lead case manager, and lead service referral contact. At each subrecipient organization, we will seek to interview the lead case manager.

There will be two 1-hour focus groups, including one each with large (i.e., more than five clients per year) TVAP subrecipients and small (i.e., less than five clients per year) TVAP subrecipients. Focus groups will be conducted virtually with key staff who serve in an oversight role from subrecipient organizations (e.g., program managers, program coordinators, grant administrators).

We will submit a separate, full ICR for this quantitative component as mentioned previously to address the third goal of the assessment. an electronic social network survey and analysis will be conducted to specifically focus on service coordination and referrals among TVAP grantees and subrecipients and other community-based service partners.

3. Use of Improved Information Technology and Burden Reduction

All efforts will be made to reduce the burden on grantee and subrecipient organizations. Interviews will be conducted in person at grantee locations during site visits when convenient for the respondents but will primarily be conducted virtually to reduce burden on grantee and subrecipient organizations. Focus groups will be conducted virtually with TVAP subrecipients. We will take notes and audio record (with consent) the interviews and focus groups. Qualitative data analysis software will be used to analyze the transcripts.

4. Efforts to Identify Duplication and Use of Similar Information

To our knowledge, no information has been or is currently being collected similar to those described. An assessment of the implementation of TVAP has not been conducted previously, and no data exists to address the goals of this assessment. This is an exploratory study to answer questions for which we currently do not have the data to answer.

5. Impact on Small Businesses or Other Small Entities

No small businesses will be involved in this data collection.

6. Consequences of Collecting the Information Less Frequently

This request is for a one-time data collection.

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

There are no special circumstances with this information collection package. This request fully complies with the regulation 5 CFR 1320.5 and will be voluntary.

8. Comments in Response to the Federal Register Notice and Efforts to Consult Outside the Agency

This data collection is being conducted using a generic information collection mechanism through ASPE–OMB No. 0990-0421.

9. Explanation of Any Payment or Gift to Respondents

We will not be providing incentives for this study.

10. Assurance of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents

We are not collecting personally identifiable information. We are asking respondents about their perceptions and experiences related to the current grant structure in a professional capacity. ICF will obtain names and work email addresses of respondents only for the purposes of scheduling interviews and focus groups. Interviews and focus groups will be recorded with consent, transcribed, and de-identified before analysis. All materials (e.g., recordings, transcriptions, and notes) will be stored in a secure database accessible only to members of the contractor’s research team and deleted when the project is completed.

11. Justification for Sensitive Questions

We will not ask any questions of a sensitive nature.

12. Estimates of Annualized Burden Hours and Costs

The key informant interviews and focus groups will each take approximately 60 minutes.

Table A-12: Estimated Annualized Burden Hours and Costs to Respondents

Type of Respondent	No. of Respondents	No. of Responses per Respondent	Average Burden per Response	Total Burden Hours	Hourly Wage Rate	Total Respondent Costs
TVAP grantees (interviews)	9	1	60/60	9	$57.11	$513.99
TVAP subrecipients (interviews)	41	1	60/60	41	$57.11	$2,341.51
TVAP subrecipients (focus groups)	24	1	60/60	24	$57.11	$1,370.64
TOTALS	74			74		$4,226.12

13. Estimates of Other Total Annual Cost Burden to Respondents or Recordkeepers

There will be no direct costs to the respondents other than their time to participate in the data collection.

14. Annualized Cost to the Government

Table A-14: Estimated Annualized Cost to the Federal Government

Staff (FTE)	Average Hours per Collection	Average Hourly Rate	Average Cost
Social Science Analyst, GS 11	200	$33.00	$6,600
Social Science Analyst, GS 15	160	$76.00	$12,160
Estimated Total Cost of Information Collection			$18,760

15. Explanation for Program Changes or Adjustments

This is a new data collection.

16. Plans for Tabulation and Publication and Project Time Schedule

Program assessment goals:

1. Gain in-depth knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the current per capita funding allocation method.

2. Gain in-depth knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the current regional grant structure.

3. Determine if efficiencies can be gained through improved coordination of services and/or merger of different federal trafficking programs.

4. Identify potential alternative funding or grant structure strategies that would address the needs of the target population (i.e., foreign national victims of human trafficking).

We will conduct key informant interviews with key staff at grantee and subrecipient organizations and focus groups with a sample of TVAP subrecipients to address goals one, two, and four above. We have developed two interview protocols and one focus group protocol that will be administered to key grantee and subrecipient staff and TVAP subrecipients as appropriate. The key informant interviews and focus groups will allow us to document and describe perceptions and experiences related to the current regional grant structure and per capita funding model and identify potential alternative funding strategies.

We anticipate a sample of 50 key informants, including grantee (n=9) and subrecipient (n=41) staff to be selected for interviews. Two semi structured interview protocols, one each for grantee and subrecipient staff, will focus on the following topics related to the TVAP funding model: (1) funding and structure of TVAP; (2) meeting the needs of different types of victims; (3) challenges and successes; (4) alternative funding models; (5) and information and resources. Each interview will be tailored to incorporate specific discussions based on the individual’s experiences with TVAP and their organization’s role (i.e., grantee or subrecipient).

We anticipate a sample of 12 staff each from large (i.e., more than 5 clients served per year) and small (i.e., less than 5 clients per year) TVAP subrecipients to be selected for participation in 2 focus groups, for a total of 24 participants across the focus groups. A semi structured focus group protocol has been developed.

The focus group protocol for TVAP subrecipients includes the following topics: (1) perceptions of TVAP per capita funding (e.g., ability to meet needs of different types of victims, flexibility of funding model, challenges, unmet needs resulting from funding model); (2) perceptions of other types of funding; and (3) general questions and suggestions for TVAP. Each focus group will be tailored to incorporate specific discussions based on participants’ experiences with TVAP or other funding models.

We will collect additional quantitative data via an electronic survey to address goal three for which we will obtain a full clearance using a separate OMB information collection request. The survey will collect information related to estimated costs of services provided as well as the frequency and types of interactions (e.g., referrals) and service coordination among grantees, subrecipients, and other community-based partners. The information collected will be analyzed to identify potential opportunities for improving the efficiency of the network.

Findings from both data collection efforts will be synthesized and presented in a final report prepared by the contractor and submitted to ASPE, OPRE, and OTIP. The final report will describe all data collection activities (i.e., interviews, focus groups, and survey), findings, and implications. Findings from this assessment will be for internal use only and the final report will not be published. HHS intends to use the findings to inform updates to the structure and requirements of the program under future funding opportunity announcements, which will be publicly available. However, no data collected under this ICR will ever be made directly publicly available or included directly in an external publication.

Timeline:

Completion Date	Major Tasks/Milestones
March 2018	Submit request for OMB approval under an existing generic PRA clearance for the interviews and focus groups. Submit 60-day notice for full IC request for OMB approval of social network survey. Submit project for IRB approval. Receive IRB approval.
April 2018	Receive OMB approval under an existing generic PRA clearance. Conduct focus groups.
May–September 2018	Submit 30-day notice and full IC request for OMB approval of social network survey. Conduct interviews.
July–August 2018	Disseminate social network survey.
September–October 2018	Conduct qualitative data analysis on interviews and focus groups.
October–November 2018	Conduct quantitative descriptive and predictive analyses. Conduct social network analysis.
December 2018–January 2019	Submit preliminary analysis of interviews, focus groups, and social network analysis of draft deliverables.
February 2019	Deliver final briefings and presentation of results. Deliver final report.

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

We are requesting no exemption.

18. Exceptions to Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions

There are no exceptions to the certification. These activities comply with the requirements in 5 CFR 1320.9.

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS—Section A

Note: Attachments are included as separate files as instructed.

1. Grantee Semi Structured Interview Protocol

2. Subrecipient Semi Structured Interview Protocol

3. TVAP Subrecipient Focus Group Protocol

1 Federal Register notice published on March 5, 2018, Volume 83, Number 43, pages 9325-9326.