APS Outcomes Study Justification for No Material/Non-substantive Change

OMB Non-Substantive Change Request

Title: Adult Protective Services (APS) Client Outcomes Study

OMB Control Number: 0985-0065

Expiration Date: 01/31/2023

This document provides brief descriptions and justifications for three, non-substantive changes to the APS Client Outcomes Study (OMB Control Number: 0985-0065, Expiration Date: 01/31/2023). These non-substantive changes will improve the study’s sampling procedures and provide options for respondents on how to complete and submit the APS Client Questionnaire information collection form. The changes will not alter the OMB-approved data elements or burden associated with this collection of information.

Non-Substantive Change 1: State replacement sampling procedure for invited states that decline to participate in the APS Client Outcomes Study

Background: State participation in the APS Client Outcomes Study is voluntary. Under the current sampling approach, states selected in the initial sample that decline the invitation to participate in the study will be replaced by a randomly selected state in their sampling stratum (or group). The sampling stratum is determined by three factors¹. None of these factors account for the overall geographic dispersion of selected states across the U.S. Although geographic location wasn’t so important to have been an original sampling criterion in our study design, we believe that it strongly improves the study to have states in each U.S. Census Region (i.e., Northeast, South, Midwest, West) and we would propose a modification to the state replacement sampling procedure to help achieve this goal.

Proposed Change: If a state declines to participate, we would randomly sample from a subset of states in the same stratum, limited to states in that stratum from the least represented U.S. Census Region(s). For example, if the initial sample includes multiple states in the South, Midwest, and West but no states in the Northeast, and one state in the initial sample declines to participate, we would randomly sample from among only the Northeast states within the same stratum to replace the state that declined.

Non-Substantive Change 2: Percentages for rural thresholds for county sampling procedure

Background: Our initial goal in developing the three county rurality categories was to have our study sample reflect the range of how counties look across the U.S. Performing the county sampling procedure, however, has made it apparent that this approach leans too heavily toward selecting rural counties and not enough toward selecting counties that include large cities. We believe that we need to revise the proposed criteria to capture a better mix of counties in our sample.

Proposed Change: Adjust the thresholds for the three rurality categories to improve the chances that the sample will include one or more counties with large cities. This is important to capture APS programs that operate in more urban settings, as they may differ substantially from programs in more rural counties. Additionally, higher client volumes in ‘urban counties’ are likely to help the study to reach its target response numbers. The table below shows the current thresholds (in white) and the proposed thresholds (in gray):

Current Category	Current Threshold	Proposed Category	Proposed Threshold
Completely Rural	100% rural	Mostly Rural	50-100% rural
Mostly Rural	50-99% rural	Suburban	11-49% rural
Mostly Urban	0-49% rural	Mostly Urban	0-10% rural

Additionally, some states have no counties that fall within the thresholds for one or more of our rurality categories. For states like this, we propose to purposively sample the county with the percent rural population that is closest to our target category’s threshold.

This proposed change will not impact sampling at the state level; those states sampled remain the same.

Non-Substantive Change 3: Add a web-based method of response for the APS Client Questionnaire

Background: The current data collection procedure for the APS Client Questionnaire only allows for a respondent to complete the hardcopy form and submit via mail. Providing an additional option for completing and submitting the form could be more convenient to respondents, help respondents who find hardcopy forms difficult to complete due to disability, and improve response rates.

Proposed Change: Create a web-based option for respondents who prefer to complete and submit the APS Client Questionnaire online, instead of by writing on a hardcopy form and submitting by mail. This would not change the survey administration method. The client would still receive a hardcopy of the APS Client Questionnaire from the APS caseworker at case closure. However, the form would now include a SurveyMonkey link printed on the APS Client Questionnaire. Then, if the client wanted to answer online, they would type that link into a web-browser, enter their 8-digit number from the form, and answer the APS Client Questionnaire questions online. This response option requires the client to initiate their response online. Client responses would still be anonymous.

The attachment entitled, “APS_Client_Outcomes_Study_Client_Questionnaire_FINAL_v4.docx”, shows the proposed edits to the currently approved version of the APS Client Questionnaire. The edits include a new statement in the instructions section, including the active SurveyMonkey link to the web-based version of the APS Client Questionnaire. The proposed edits are shown in “tracked changes” to indicate how the revised version would differ from the version currently approved by OMB.

1 Determined by three factors: (1) Administration of APS Program (i.e., state-administered or county-administered); (2) Agency Responsible for APS Program (i.e., aging agency or other agency); (3) State Rurality (i.e., tertiles for percentage of residents living in rural areas – low, middle, and high)