Memo - NonSub Change to Surveys - July 2020

To: Josh Brammer

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)

Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

From: Mary Mueggenborg

Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE)

Administration for Children and Families (ACF)

Date: July 24, 2020

Subject: NonSubstantive Change Request – Evaluation of the National Human Trafficking Hotline Program [Descriptive Study] (OMB #0970-0539)

This memo requests approval of nonsubstantive changes to the two instruments for the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) project: Evaluation of the National Human Trafficking Hotline Program [Descriptive Study] (OMB #0970-0539).

Background

OMB approval was granted on 01/16/2020 to conduct two multi-mode surveys, gathering information from individuals who seek assistance from the National Human Trafficking Hotline (NHTH) as part of OPRE’s Evaluation of the NHTH Program. Programming and testing of the surveys in multiple modes (web, interactive voice response [IVR], and telephone) has resulted in the need for modifications to accommodate mode-specific conventions and improve the quality of survey administration.

Time Sensitivities

Data collection must be completed before the NHTH Program cooperative agreement grant ends on September 30, 2020.

Overview of Requested Changes

We are requesting changes to the two instruments, the NHTH Immediate Survey (Instrument 1) and NHTH Two-Week Follow-Up Survey (Instrument 2), described below. These changes do not affect burden estimates or meaningfully alter the survey content for the respondent.

We are requesting to shorten and streamline the consent language in both surveys with anticipation that a more concise consent will strengthen response rates. Particularly in IVR (Immediate Survey) and CATI (Two-Week Follow Up Survey) modes, we aim to convey key information (e.g., length, voluntary participation, privacy, gift card) as succinctly and early in the consent as possible to reduce the probability that potential respondents disconnect (i.e., hang up the phone) because of a longwinded introduction. To this end, in addition to reducing the length of the consent, we propose reorganizing the order of the information presented to improve the flow. Additionally, we wish to clearly convey how respondents’ contact information will be used (only for purposes of this survey) in the body of the survey (when it is requested) instead of in the consent; to this end, we are requesting the addition of a sentence in two places in the surveys, in lieu of the language originally included in the consent—when respondents are asked to (1) provide a telephone number or email address where they would like to receive their gift card (in the Immediate Survey after question 8b [survey 1a only] and after question 19 in the Two-Week Follow-Up Survey) and (2) participate in the second survey (question 9 in the Immediate Survey). Furthermore, we propose the addition of the gift card vendor (Starbucks) in both surveys when the token of appreciation is mentioned to provide complete details of what is being offered (for example, in the survey 1a consent: “At the end of the survey, you will be asked for a telephone number or an e-mail address to receive a $10 Starbucks electronic gift card.”). Finally, we are requesting the addition of a sentence in the Immediate Survey consent to introduce the Two-Week Follow Up Survey which we anticipate may help strengthen response rates across both surveys. These requested consent changes were made in consultation with RTI International’s Office of Research Protection.

Slight wording changes are requested to provide clear instructions and offer adequate response options that adhere to mode-specific conventions (most pertain to IVR mode). Proposed changes to Immediate Survey include the following:

• Placeholders¹ for specific telephone keys updated to reflect IVR conventions (for example, to hear the recorded response options over, respondents are instructed to “press the star key”).

• The addition of instructions and response options to allow IVR respondents to choose the language in which they want to take the survey (“To continue in English, press 1. For Spanish, press 2.”).

• The addition of a response option in survey 1a (after question 8b) to allow respondents to decline the gift card (and not share their contact information) and move to the next question; additions and clarifications to collect and convey information necessary to provide the gift card to survey 1a participants.

• A slight modification to the wording of response option 2 in question 9 to clearly convey the choice to not participate in survey 2.

• Slight wording and response option changes in the series of items that collect respondents’ preferences for how and when they want to receive the second survey invitation (asked of those who agree to participate in the second survey by answering yes to question 9) to provide clear instructions and offer adequate response options that adhere to mode-specific conventions.

• The addition of instructions for clearing internet browser history in Safari and the omission of instructions for Opera.

In the Two-Week Follow-Up Survey, we propose changes to the gift card section at the end of the survey to collect and convey information necessary to provide the gift card or allow respondents to decline the gift card.

In both surveys, we are requesting to slightly adjust the wording of the top response option in the questions that use a 5-point Likert scale to facilitate multimode administration (Immediate Survey questions 1-6, 8a, 8b; and Two-Week Follow-Up Survey questions 3, 7, and 13). The approved instrument included a placeholder for the response options to be specified in the Immediate Survey. The process of specifying the response options to be recorded orally (in IVR mode) prompted an adjustment to the adverb at the top of the scale to “extremely” from “very.”

1 Note that the study email address and telephone numbers have been programmed into the surveys where indicated by placeholders; however this study-specific contact information is not included in the instruments attached for purposes of OMB review.