95-13220. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; Linking State Administrative Data  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 31, 1995)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 28419-28423]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-13220]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
    Office of the Secretary
    
    
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; 
    Linking State Administrative Data
    
    AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, 
    HHS.
    
    ACTION: Request for applications for grants to support State efforts to 
    link case-level administrative data across multiple low-income 
    assistance programs.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: Recent state efforts to link longitudinal, administrative data 
    across programs have proven extremely successful. Linked databases have 
    provided a more thorough understanding of many aspects of both program 
    participation and the characteristics of individuals who receive 
    benefits from multiple anti-poverty programs. State-supported efforts 
    have also provided valuable insight into both inter- and intra-state 
    variations in program participation. Much of this information would not 
    have been accessible through national panel data.
        While the efforts of individual states have been extremely 
    valuable, they have been limited to relatively few states. Factors such 
    as prohibitive cost, lack of necessary staff expertise, and 
    insufficient time and computational resources have precluded many 
    interested states from linking their administrative data. Total funding 
    of up to $200,000 is available to provide one to two interested states 
    with resources needed to successfully link administrative data and use 
    it for program management, research and scholarly analysis. It is not 
    expected that the funding available in this grant will be sufficient 
    for any state to complete a project that links micro-level 
    administrative data. Rather, this grant is intended to assist those 
    states which are interested in linking their administrative data, but 
    currently lack the resources to successfully complete the project on 
    their own.
    
    Part I. Linking State Administrative Data
    
    A. Background:
    
        In the last five years, several states have begun assembling 
    administrative data from income-maintenance and other programs targeted 
    toward low-income individuals and families for use in policy research 
    and program evaluation. Most notably, administrative data that has been 
    linked from a variety of anti-poverty programs has been used to study 
    characteristics of program participation, multi-service usage, and 
    caseload dynamics. The results from many of these research initiatives 
    have provided an extremely useful insight into the characteristics of 
    program participants, the patterns of multi-service utilization, and 
    the interactions between multiple programs that provide assistance to 
    low-income families.
        Administrative data also offer more possibilities for in-depth 
    analysis than do other forms of data, such as national panel data. Many 
    national studies do not give reliable state-level estimates, 
    particularly in smaller states with relatively few sampling points. As 
    a result, it is generally quite difficult to estimate the state-level 
    effects of national anti-poverty programs. State administrative data 
    offer the opportunity to study inter- and intra-state comparisons of 
    government programs, and to examine the extent to which variations in 
    state anti-poverty programs are successful in serving various client 
    populations.
    Usefulness of Project
        The research that has been conducted to date has illustrated the 
    efficacy in using linked administrative data for research and 
    evaluation. In the vast majority of states, however, the use of linked 
    data still remains either untouched or far below what is technically 
    possible. A study funded by the Department surveyed fifteen states and 
    determined that, for the majority of the states surveyed, linked 
    administrative data is a potentially rich source of information about 
    programs targeted toward low-income populations.
        Despite the potential of state administrative data, the 
    Department's previous findings indicate that linked, state-level 
    program data still remains a vastly under-utilized source of 
    information. Many states have both the interest and raw administrative 
    data necessary to produce longitudinally-linked files at the case or 
    client level. However, as the process of linking data across programs 
    and over time is an expensive, iterative process that requires 
    significant time and expertise, many states lack the capacity to link 
    their data. Some states lack the computer hardware, software, disk 
    space, and memory necessary to actually perform the process of linking 
    data. Other states lack the expertise and staff-time to devote energy 
    to a research project. Many states face both of these obstacles.
        This grant will help the selected states overcome the obstacles 
    that hinder the process of linking administrative data. For example, 
    states with limited data- [[Page 28420]] linking experience and 
    capacity could add the hardware and software needed to link and store 
    data. States with more experience (such as those which currently 
    operate linked, research data bases) could use the funds to add 
    administrative data from additional anti-poverty programs.
    
    Part II. Awardee Responsibilities
    
        Due to the substantial variation among states in the level of 
    experience and expertise in working with linked administrative data, we 
    fully expect a wide range of proposals to be submitted. Proposals from 
    states which currently have linked administrative databases will 
    obviously differ dramatically from proposals submitted by states with 
    which have never worked with linked data. Given this, the specific 
    responsibilities of the awardees may vary. Each state will, however, be 
    expected to follow the following guidelines:
        1. Each applicant must develop the computer systems and technical 
    capacity necessary to produce longitudinal, linked administrative 
    micro-level data. The focus of the data may be on cases, households, 
    clients, filing units, etc., or any combination thereof. For those 
    applicants which currently have linked data bases, it is expected that 
    this grant will provide the resources necessary to significantly 
    enhance their current data systems.
        2. Each applicant must link administrative data from at least two 
    programs that primarily benefit low-income individuals or families. The 
    states that currently operate linked, administrative research databases 
    began by focusing on data from the AFDC, Medicaid and Food Stamps 
    computer systems, largely because these data operating systems for 
    these programs were fairly compatible due to the interactions between 
    the programs. States in the early stages of data linking may choose to 
    focus on these programs, but links between other programs are also 
    strongly encouraged. Other administrative data that states may choose 
    to link include: Child welfare and foster care, child support 
    enforcement, unemployment insurance, vital statistics, disability, SSI 
    and income tax data. Linkages between these programs are especially 
    encouraged, as they will likely provide fresh insight into the 
    interactions over time among these programs.
        3. Each applicant must develop the capacity and knowledge necessary 
    to prepare and standardize data for program management and scholarly 
    analysis. The data resulting from this grant should be able to support 
    policy research and program evaluation, and should provide insight into 
    a variety of policy relevant concerns. Data-sets should support 
    research into questions concerning (but not limited to) multi-program 
    participation and usage, interactions between various anti-poverty 
    programs, caseload dynamics, recidivism, fraud and abuse, and the 
    demographic, economic and social characteristics of multi-program 
    participants.
        4. In addition to preparing the data in a manner suitable for 
    program administration and scholarly research, applicants must 
    demonstrate an ability to actually utilize the data analytically. 
    Linked administrative data allow for a great variety of analysis. For 
    example, files linked longitudinally can be studied with event-history 
    and survivor analysis, methods which are used to understand caseload 
    dynamics and determine how the sequence of service events affects a 
    client's outcomes. Additionally, since administrative data typically 
    have more complete and detailed information than panel data, 
    administrative data analysis can more accurately assess the demographic 
    and social characteristics of multi-service users. Administrative data 
    can also be used to do detailed geographic analysis, which is helpful 
    in studying whether there are significant variations in service usage 
    across different administrative regions or across neighborhoods.
        It is necessary for applicants to detail exactly how their linked 
    data can be used for scholarly analysis. States with larger social 
    service departments may have researchers on staff who possess the 
    skills necessary to fully explore the data. Other states may wish to 
    combine their efforts with an academic or policy research organization 
    with expertise in data analysis. Both of these alternatives, as well as 
    others, would be acceptable. It is not our intent to limit the 
    analytical choices of applicants, but rather to ensure that the data 
    sets created under this grant are used to their full potential.
        5. Applicants must obtain written agreements with all state or 
    county social service departments that will supply the source data. The 
    agreement should clearly indicate the responsibilities of both the 
    applicants and the state or county agency, and the willingness of the 
    parties to work cooperatively. Applicants must also include a plan 
    which ensures that the resulting linked Data ensure client 
    confidentiality.
        6. Applicants must demonstrate an ongoing commitment to the 
    project. A principal use of these data is to study current policy 
    relevant questions about programs for low-income populations. Data for 
    answering current questions are most useful when they capture current 
    effects of such programs. Consistent with their on-going commitment to 
    data linking and analysis, applicants must ensure that both recent 
    historical data and new case data will be added after the Federal 
    funding for this project expires.
    
    Part III. Prerequisites, Content of Application, Review Process, 
    and Evaluation Criteria
    
    A. Prerequisites
    
        Who may apply? We will only accept applications from state 
    agencies, large urban county agencies, or universities working with 
    them. This announcement is aimed primarily at states that can link 
    statewide data bases. Applications will also be considered from large 
    urban county governments that can clearly demonstrate the ability to 
    link administrative databases in a way that could provide data of 
    national policy relevance. University-based research teams that are 
    working with state agencies to develop linked data bases may apply but 
    must provide assurances from the state that they are intimately 
    involved in developing and utilizing the data base for policy purposes.
        What data bases? Applicants must clearly demonstrate the ability to 
    link at least two micro (person, family, or case) files and at least be 
    in the midst of analyzing data for policy research or evaluation 
    purposes. Examples of files that have been linked in other situations 
    are: AFDC, Medicaid, Child Welfare and Foster care, Unemployment 
    Insurance, Child Support, Individual Income Tax, Vital Statistics, and 
    Juvenile Courts. At a minimum, linked data bases must allow for at 
    least three years of longitudinal analysis.
        On-going commitment? The state agency responsible for establishing 
    the linked data system must provide evidence of an on-going commitment 
    to developing the data base and using it to understand poverty, program 
    utilization, caseload dynamics, program effectiveness, and other 
    important aspects of administration of anti-poverty, employment, and 
    welfare programs. Applicants that do not provide assurances that all 
    three of these prerequisites will be fulfilled will be unacceptable.
    
    B. Applicant Content
    
        The application shall include the following elements:
    1. Abstract
        A one page abstract of the project and its 
    objectives. [[Page 28421]] 
    2. Goals and Justification for Project
        This section will discuss why the agency wishes to undertake the 
    project and what the short and long-term goals of the project are. The 
    applicant should discuss the background of what it has been doing to 
    support linking administrative data bases, the current status of data 
    base development, and what it expects to accomplish with this project. 
    It should discuss what analysis will be completed given completion of 
    the project, the analytical report that will be produced, and what 
    policy relevance it will have. States should also present their plans, 
    if any, to produce a public use dataset as a result of this project.
        Linking two or more administrative data bases for analytical 
    purposes is a complicated and difficult endeavor. It often can take 
    several iterations of refinement to produce a data base that supports 
    analysis of more than simple descriptive statistics about the caseload. 
    This section should discuss where the agency is in the evolution of the 
    linking and embedding policy analysis in the administrative management 
    of the programs involved. It should contain a discussion of how the 
    agency will carry on after this funding is exhausted. For applicants 
    who are not currently linking databases, they should clearly 
    demonstrate their knowledge of the process, as well as their plans to 
    obtain the necessary expertise to successfully carry out their proposed 
    project.
    3. Project Design and Approach
        In this section, the applicant will discuss what, if any, data are 
    currently linked, what will be added through this grant, and how it 
    will be accomplished. This section should describe what variables are 
    available and will be added, what length of time period is covered, 
    what kind of data analysis currently can be done, and what analytical 
    capability will be added by this project. The discussion should make it 
    clear to the reader what is the structure of the data, what are the 
    building blocks (individuals, families, households, cases, filing 
    units, etc.), the universe of state population covered, the types of 
    variables (demographic, program participation, program dynamics, costs, 
    etc.) that can be used for analysis. The applicant should also clearly 
    specify how the micro-level data will be linked and how the 
    retrospective case files will be assembled. Does a unique identifier 
    exist that will allow data to be easily linked across programs? If not, 
    what variable or record-matching technique will be employed? It also 
    should make clear what information is not available, and the 
    limitations this poses for policy-relevant analysis.
        If applicants are not currently linking any administrative data, 
    then they should assure reviewers that they have adequate access to at 
    least three years of recent historical administrative data. Applicants 
    should also convince reviewers that they have the expertise needed to 
    complete the project, and also have the commitment to continue linking 
    administrative data for research, analysis, and program management 
    purposes.
        The treatment of confidentiality and proper disclosure is a very 
    important issue related to linking data and analyzing it. The 
    applicants will discuss how they will protect data from improper 
    disclosure, and how they will facilitate analytical use of sensitive 
    data. This section will discuss the time table to accomplish this 
    project. Who will do what, when, and how? It also will discuss what 
    will be the end product of this project. What sort of report will be 
    produced? What policy relevance will it have to the state and to DHHS?
    4. Organization and Staffing
        The application will describe the organization applying for the 
    grant. If the applicant is a state agency, where does it fit in the 
    state organization? What are its responsibilities? What are its 
    capabilities and limitations? How can it assure that this project will 
    be embedded in the state's policy analysis system?
        The applicant will discuss the staffing for the project. Who will 
    be the project leader? What are the qualifications of the staff and who 
    will be involved? What are their time commitments to the project and 
    what other time commitments do they have that might interfere with 
    successful completion of the project? Personal vita and job 
    descriptions should be attached as an appendix to the application.
        If a university group is involved in the project, the application 
    will clearly delineate what the responsibilities of the group will be 
    and how the state agency will exercise control over their work. It will 
    describe the mechanism (subcontract, etc.) used to procure the 
    university group services.
    5. Budget
        This section will include a budget summary and narrative which 
    describes how the budget supports the research plan. It should show the 
    financial contribution made or expected by other funding sources, and 
    the share of total project costs covered by ASPE's grant. It will 
    discuss how the overall funding level and federal contribution relate 
    to the successful completion of the project. The actual budget will be 
    presented on the forms and in accordance with the requirements 
    discussed in the section entitled ``Components of a Complete 
    Application.''
    6. Commitment of State
        Applicants should use this section to completely describe the 
    resources the state has already committed to the project. If the state 
    has not yet established support for the project, then applicants should 
    discuss any future involvement expected of the state. Resources 
    contributed by the state could include any financial assistance (and 
    whether it is an outright cash grant or is targeted for a specific 
    purchase such as computing equipment), allocation of staff or computing 
    time, technical assistance, and any other relevant contribution.
    
    C. Review Process and Evaluation Criteria
    
        A technical panel of at least three people will review and score 
    those applications which are submitted by the deadline, and which meet 
    the screening and prerequisite requirements. The review will be based 
    on the criteria listed below. The review of the technical proposal and 
    budget will be used by the Assistant Secretary in making funding 
    decisions. ASPE reserves the option to discuss the application and the 
    state agency record of performance with other agencies, Regional Office 
    staff, and experts who may have information that could assist the 
    selection process.
        The evaluation criteria correspond to the outline for the 
    development of the Program Narrative Statement of the application. 
    Although not mandatory, it is strongly recommended that applications be 
    prepared with the format indicated by this outline.
        Selection of the successful applicant(s) will be based on the 
    technical and financial criteria laid out in this announcement. 
    Reviewers will determine the strengths and weaknesses of each 
    application in terms of the evaluation criteria listed below, provide 
    comments and assign numerical scores. The review panel will prepare a 
    summary of all applicant scores and strengths/weaknesses and 
    recommendations and submit it to the Assistant Secretary for Planning 
    and Evaluation for final decisions on the award.
        The point value following each criterion heading indicates the 
    maximum numerical weight that each section will be given in the review 
    [[Page 28422]] process. An unacceptable rating on any individual 
    criterion may render the application unacceptable. Consequently, 
    applicants should take care to ensure that all criteria are fully 
    addressed in the applications. Applications will be reviewed as 
    follows:
        (a) Quality of the goals and Project Justification. (See Part B, 
    Type of Application Requested, Section 2.) (15 points) Applications 
    will be judged on whether they provide a thoughtful and coherent 
    discussion of the need for the project and what it will accomplish. 
    Reviewers will judge applicant's past, current, and future commitment 
    to linking administrative data for policy analysis, research, and 
    evaluation. Particular attention will be given to the agency's 
    commitment to scholarly, policy-relevant work, and their commitment to 
    producing a public use dataset as a result of this project.
        (b) Quality of the project design and approach. (See Part B, 
    Section 3.) (35 points) Reviewers will judge this section on the basis 
    of whether the research agenda is scientifically sound and policy 
    relevant. They will also consider whether the applicant is likely to 
    make a significant contribution to understanding such important issues 
    as program utilization and effectiveness, caseload dynamics, types of 
    clients, and multiple program participation. Applications will be rated 
    on their plans to conduct policy relevant research and interact with 
    various levels of government to research and evaluate significant 
    government initiatives and policies.
        Reviewers will assess the completeness of the data bases linked, 
    population coverage, and the extensiveness of the variables in the data 
    base. A proposal with more data bases linked will be rated higher than 
    one with only two program databases, all other factors being constant. 
    Evidence of data quality control and validity is also extremely 
    important. Ratings will consider the thoroughness of the discussion of 
    the database strengths and weaknesses. Reviewers will assess whether 
    there is appropriate use and protection of sensitive or confidential 
    data. The type and quality of end product anticipated from this project 
    will be considered and rated. Finally, reviewers will rate the 
    feasibility of the workplan and time schedule.
        (c) Quality of the staffing proposal and proposed organizational 
    arrangements. (See Part B, Section 4.) (35 points) Reviewers will judge 
    applicant's staff on research experience, demonstrated research skills, 
    public administration experience, and relevant policy-research and 
    policy-making skills. Ratings may consider references on prior research 
    projects. Staff time commitments to the project also will be a factor 
    in the evaluation. Furthermore, reviewers will rate the applicant's 
    pledge and ability to produce a database capable of supporting policy-
    relevant analysis.
        Reviewers will evaluate the track record of the lead agency ability 
    to support scholarly, policy relevant research that can meet the 
    demands of the academic, research, and policy communities.
        If a university group is involved in the project, raters will judge 
    the administrative relationships between the group and the state agency 
    and whether the administrative arrangements can assure quality data and 
    analysis.
        (d) Appropriateness of the budget to carry out the planned staffing 
    and activities. (See Part B, Section 5.) (15 points) Ratings will 
    consider whether: (a) The budget assures an efficient and effective 
    allocation of funds to achieve the objectives of this solicitation and 
    (2) the applicant has appropriate financial commitment from the state 
    and the university, if one is involved.
        State Single Point of Contact (E.O. No. 12372): The Department of 
    Health and Human Services has determined that this program is not 
    subject to Executive Order No. 12372, Intergovernmental Review of 
    Federal Programs, because it is a program that is national in scope and 
    the only impact on State and local governments would be through 
    subgrants. Applicants are not required to seek intergovernmental review 
    of their applications within the constraints of E.O. No. 12372.
        Deadline for Submission of Applications: The closing date for 
    submission of applications under this announcement is July 31, 1995. 
    Applications must be postmarked or hand-delivered to the application 
    receipt point no later than 4:30 p.m. on July 31, 1995.
        Hand-delivered applications will be accepted Monday through Friday 
    prior to and on July 31, 1995 during the hours of 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 
    in the lobby of the Hubert H. Humphrey building located at 200 
    Independence Avenue, SW., in Washington, DC. When hand-delivering an 
    application, call 690-8794 from the lobby for pick-up. A staff person 
    will be available to receive applications.
        An application will be considered as meeting the deadline if it is 
    either: (1) Received at, or hand-delivered to, the mailing address on 
    or before July 31, 1995, or (2) postmarked before midnight five days 
    prior to the deadline date July 31, 1995, and received in time to be 
    considered during the competitive review process (within two weeks of 
    the deadline date).
        When mailing application packages, applicants are strongly advised 
    to obtain a legibly dated receipt from a commercial carrier (such as 
    UPS, Federal Express, etc.), or from the U.S. Postal Service as proof 
    of mailing by the deadline date. If there is a question as to when an 
    application was mailed, applicants will be asked to provide proof of 
    mailing by the deadline date. When proof is not provided, an 
    application will not be considered for funding. Private metered 
    postmarks are not acceptable as proof of timely mailing.
        Applications which do not meet the July 31, 1995, deadline are 
    considered late applications and will not be considered or reviewed in 
    the current competition. HHS will send a letter to this effect to each 
    late applicant.
        HHS reserves the right to extend the deadline for all applications 
    due to acts of God, such as floods, hurricanes or earthquakes; due to 
    acts of war; if there is widespread disruption of the mail; or if HHS 
    determines a deadline extension to be in the best of the Government. 
    However, HHS will not waive or extend the deadline for any applicant 
    unless the deadline is waived or extended for all applicants.
        Applications forms. See section entitled ``Components of a Complete 
    Application.'' All of these documents must accompany the application 
    package.
        Length of Application. Applications should be brief and concise as 
    possible, but assure successful communication of the applicant's 
    proposal to the reviewers. In no case shall an applicant (excluding the 
    resume appendix and other appropriate attachments) be longer than 25 
    double-spaced pages; it should neither be unduly elaborate not contain 
    voluminous supporting documentation.
    
    Disposition of Applications.
    
        1. Approval, disapproval, or deferral. On the basis of the review 
    of an application, the ASPE will either (a) approve the application in 
    whole, as revised, or in part for such amount of funds and subject to 
    such conditions as are deemed necessary or desirable for the initiation 
    and operation of the data linking project; (b) disapprove the 
    application; or (c) defer action on the application for such reasons as 
    lack of funds or a need for further review.
        2. Notification of disposition. The ASPE will notify the applicants 
    of the disposition of their application. A signed notification of award 
    will be [[Page 28423]] issued to notify the applicant of the approved 
    application.
        Components of a Complete Application. A complete application 
    consists of the following items in this order:
        1. Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424, Revised 
    4-88);
        2. Budget Information--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form 
    424A, Revised 4-88);
        3. Assurances--Non-construction Programs (Standard Form 424B, 
    Revised 4-88);
        4. Table of Contents;
        5. Budget Justification for Section B--Budget Categories;
        6. Proof of non-profit status, if appropriate;
        7. Copy of the applicant's approved indirect cost rate agreement if 
    necessary;
        8. Project Narrative Statement, organized in five sections 
    addressing the following topics:
        (a) Understanding of the Effort,
        (b) Project Approach,
        (c) Staffing Utilization, Staff Background, and Experience,
        (d) Organizational Experience, and
        (e) Budget Narrative;
        9. Any appendices/attachments;
        10. Certification Regarding Drug-Free Work place;
        11. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other 
    Responsibility Matters; and
        12. Certification and, if necessary, Disclosure Regarding Lobbying;
        13. Supplement to Section II--Key Personnel; and
        14. Application for Federal Assistance Checklist.
    
        Dated: May 22, 1995.
    David T. Ellwood,
    Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
    [FR Doc. 95-13220 Filed 5-30-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4151-04-M
    
    

Document Information

Published:
05/31/1995
Department:
Health and Human Services Department
Entry Type:
Notice
Action:
Request for applications for grants to support State efforts to link case-level administrative data across multiple low-income assistance programs.
Document Number:
95-13220
Pages:
28419-28423 (5 pages)
PDF File:
95-13220.pdf