E9-4857. Proposed Information Collection Activity; Comment Request

Proposed Projects:

Title: Developmental Disabilities Program Independent Evaluation Project.

OMB No.: New collection.

Description: The Developmental Disabilities Program Independent Evaluation (DDPIE) Project is an independent (non-biased) evaluation to examine through rigorous and comprehensive performance-based research procedures the targeted impact on the lives of people with developmental disabilities and their families of three programs funded under the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (DD Act): (1) State Councils on Developmental Disabilities (SCDDs); (2) State Protection and Advocacy Systems for Individuals with developmental disabilities (P & As); and (3) University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities (UCEDDs). The intent of this evaluation is to understand and report on the accomplishments of these programs, including collaborative efforts among the DD Network programs. The results of this evaluation will provide a report to the Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD) (the agency that administers these programs) with information on the effectiveness of its programs and policies and serve as a way for ADD to promote accountability to the public.

The independent evaluation is a response to accountability requirements for ADD as identified in the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (DD Act), the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993, and the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), administered by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This project meets the requirements of PART by providing a non-biased method of evaluating the effectiveness and impact of DD Network programs on the lives of people with developmental disabilities and their families.

ADD is seeking OMB approval for the evaluation tools (e.g., data collection instruments). The evaluation tools are designed to collect data for two purposes: (1) To measure the programs according to indicators (structural, process, output, and outcome) in key function areas; and (2) to establish performance standards for measuring the impact of each of the programs. The evaluation tools are primarily protocols for conducting interviews with various staff of the three programs and stakeholders associated with the programs. The interview protocols were tested during a pilot study in 2008. There is also a self-administered form for each of the programs to be completed by Executive Directors or his/her designee. The self-administered form was developed as a result of the pilot study and, therefore, has not been tested for reliability and validity. It is intended that the clearance process will be a mechanism for determining the reliability, validity, and feasibility of using this instrument.

Respondents: Staff of State Councils on Developmental Disabilities, State Protection and Advocacy Systems for Indiviiduals with developmental disabilities, and University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities, Education, Research, and Service; individuals with developmental disabilities; parents of individuals with developmental disabilities; siblings of individuals with developmental disabilities; guardians; advocates; policymakers; service providers; university faculty; and others (e.g., DDC chairs, members of Protection and Advocacy boards of directors or commissioners; Consumer Advisory Committee members).

Annual Burden Estimates

Instrument	Number of respondents	Number of responses per respondent	Average burden hours per response	Total burden hours
DD Council: Executive Director Interview	20	1	4	80
DD Council: Interview with Council Chair/Council Members	60	1	0.75	45
DD Council: Group Interview with Policymakers, Collaborators, and Grantees	160	1	2	320
DD Council: Group Interview with Recipients of Self-Advocacy and Leadership Education and Training	100	1	0.75	75
DD Council: Group Interview with Recipients of Education and Training to Improve Community Capacity	100	1	0.75	75
DD Council: Self-administered Form	20	1	8	160
P&A: Executive Director Interview	20	1	4	80
P&A: Staff Interview	60	1	0.75	45
P&A: Board of Directors (Commissioners)—Chair and Members	60	1	0.75	45
P&A: Group Interview with Policymakers and Collaborators	160	1	2	320
P&A: Interview with Recipient of Community Education	100	1	0.75	75
P&A: Interview with Clients	100	1	0.75	75
P&A: Self-administered Form	20	1	8	160
UCEDD: Interview with Director	20	1	4	80
UCEDD: Telephone Interview with Current and Graduated Students	100	1	0.75	75
UCEDD: Interview with the Consumer Advisory Committee	60	1	0.75	45
UCEDD: Interview with Peer Researchers and Colleagues	100	1	0.75	75
UCEDD: Interview with Recipients of Community Services or Members of Organizations/Agencies that are Trained to Provide Community Services	100	1	0.75	75
UCEDD: Self-administered Form	20	1	8	160

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,065.

In compliance with the requirements of Section 506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Administration for Children and Families is soliciting public comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described above. Copies of the proposed collection of information can be obtained and comments may be forwarded by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Administration, Office of Information Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance Officer. E-mail address: [e-mail]. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.

The Department specifically requests comments 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) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (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. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

Dated: March 4, 2009.

Janean Chambers,

Reports Clearance Officer.