1028-new - Ss-b Cru 20220614

Supporting Statement B

Information collection through surveys to evaluate and improve how the Cooperative Research Units Program meets its mission, functions, and goals

Terms of Clearance: None

OMB Control Number 1028-NEW

Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods

The agency should be prepared to justify its decision not to use statistical methods in any case where such methods might reduce burden or improve accuracy of results. When the question “Does this ICR contain surveys, censuses, or employ statistical methods?” is checked "Yes," the following documentation should be included in Supporting Statement B to the extent that it applies to the methods proposed:

1. Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any sampling or other respondent selection method to be used. Data on the number of entities (e.g., establishments, State and local government units, households, or persons) in the universe covered by the collection and in the corresponding sample are to be provided in tabular form for the universe as a whole and for each of the strata in the proposed sample. Indicate expected response rates for the collection as a whole. If the collection had been conducted previously, include the actual response rate achieved during the last collection.

The following table includes estimates for our potential respondent universe. We intend to capture individuals within the CRU-Cooperator network (i.e., those who have collaborated in research planning, funding, or execution with a CRU scientist in the past five years). Cooperators have a vested interest in completing the survey as the results will inform how the program addresses Cooperator needs. Additionally, periodic evaluations of CRU-Cooperator collaborations are compulsory requirements of the Cooperative Agreements as authorized by the Cooperative Research Units Act (16 U.S.C. 753a-753b). We expect a response rate of over 75 percent.

Federal respondents will include individuals employed through the CRU program (closed population of 137 people) and official Cooperators of the USFWS, including regional leadership and state-based offices. USFWS participation is contingent upon what active collaborations among CRU scientists and Cooperators may exist, the types of USFWS facilities in each region or state, and the number of resources allocated to those regions or states. Based on conversations with CRU scientists, they report collaborating with 0-10 USFWS personnel within a five-year period. We have based our estimates on an average of five individuals per region and five individuals per state.

Private respondents will include individuals associate with CRU host universities (n=41), both university administrators and faculty, and with the Wildlife Management Institute, an official Cooperator of the CRU program. Based on conversations with CRU scientists, they report collaborating with 0-10 university personnel within a five-year period. We have based our estimates on an average of five administrators per university and five faculty per university. The Wildlife Management Institute consists of a total of seven individuals.

State government respondents will include individuals associated with official state resource agency cooperators (n=41). Based on conversations with CRU scientists, they report collaborating with 0-10 state personnel within a five-year period. We have based our estimates on an average of five administrators per state agency and five scientists/managers per state agency.

Entity Type	Organization Name	Org Number	Personnel Per Org	Total Contacts
Private	University Admin (VP of Research, Dean of Grad School, Office of Research Sponsored Programs, etc.)	41 Host Universities	5	205
Private	University Faculty	41 Host Universities	5	205
Private	Wildlife Management Institute	1 WMI	7	7
State Gov	State Resource Agency Admin (Commissioner, Directors of Fish and Wildlife, Research Director, etc.)	41 State Agencies	5	205
State Gov	State Resource Agency Biologists and Managers	41 State Agencies	5	205
Total				827

2. Describe the procedures for the collection of information including:

* Statistical methodology for stratification and sample selection,

* Estimation procedure,

* Degree of accuracy needed for the purpose described in the justification,

* Unusual problems requiring specialized sampling procedures, and

* Any use of periodic (less frequent than annual) data collection cycles to reduce burden.

This Information Collection aims to be a census of the top participants in CRU-Cooperator network which will include the top individuals from each organization who have officially collaborated on research planning, funding, and execution with a CRU personnel in the last five years. Cooperators will be identified based on self-reporting by CRU personnel and will be cross checked with official project descriptions maintained by the CRU internal record collection system. Cooperators in turn will be asked to identify the top individuals they collaborate with from their perspective. This collection will occur only once and will not require periodic burden.

3. Describe methods to maximize response rates and to deal with issues of non-response. The accuracy and reliability of information collected must be shown to be adequate for intended uses. For collections based on sampling, a special justification must be provided for any collection that will not yield "reliable" data that can be generalized to the universe studied.

Reminders by email and phone will be sent weekly to prompt responses. Survey options “not applicable” and “do not know” will be used to reduce non-response error associated with a statement not applying to an individual. Questions with low response rates will be disregarded and responses from different types of users will be weighted.

4. Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken. Testing is encouraged as an effective means of refining collections of information to minimize burden and improve utility. Tests must be approved if they call for answers to identical questions from 10 or more respondents. A proposed test or set of tests may be submitted for approval separately or in combination with the main collection of information.

Prior to administering the survey to the potential universe, they will be administered to a pilot group. The group will consist of graduate students, university personnel, and academic advisors to gauge readability, survey design, unintended confusion, and any other challenges that arise.

5. Provide the names and telephone numbers of individuals consulted on statistical aspects of the design and the name of the agency unit, contractor(s), grantee(s), or other person(s) who will actually collect and/or analyze the information for the agency.

Consultation about the statistical aspects of the sampling design included conversations with Cynthia Loftin (CRU Northeast Regional Supervisor; 207-881-3500), Joseph Zydlewski (Unit Leader of the Maine Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit; 207-581-2853), David Fulton (Assistant Unit Leader of the Minnesota Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit; 612-625-5256), and James Cook (Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Maine, Augusta; 207-621-3190). The consultation identified available information, helped bound the CRU-Cooperator network universe, and established the goal of surveying the top individuals in the network.

Sarah Vogel (PhD Student and Research Assistant at the University of Maine; 207-216-0478) will be primarily responsible for the collection and analysis of the information and will be assisted by her academic advisors (Cynthia Loftin and Joseph Zydlewski) and committee (David Fulton, James Cook, and Linda Silka (Senior Fellow at the Senator George J. Mitchell Center for Sustainability Solutions, University of Maine, Orono).

[OMB-OIRA has produced a number of documents that may serve as useful reference material for completing Supporting Statement B. These can be found at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg_statpolicy ]

The above link is not active.