SUPPORTING STATEMENT

FOR PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION

**     **

**A. Justification**

1\. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information
necessary. Identify any legal or administrative requirements that
necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of the appropriate section of
each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the collection of
information.

Consistent with the provisions of P.L. 105-244 (Title VII, Part B,
Section 741 of the Higher Education Act as amended), the Fund for the
Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) works to improve
postsecondary education through grants to postsecondary educational
institutions and agencies. Such grants are awarded on the basis of
competitively reviewed applications submitted to FIPSE under its
Comprehensive and Special Focus Competition Program grant competitions.
The U.S. Department of Education is requesting approval of the grant
application guidelines used to solicit applications for new grants under
the Special Focus Program: the U.S.-Brazil Higher Education Consortia
Program (U.S.-Brazil Program). The U.S.-Brazil Program has been funded
annually since fiscal year 2001. The current application 1840-0761
expires on October 31, 2006. Please note that the request and
justification provided here only applies to the application guidelines.
The forms for the application guidelines (Title Page, Budget Form, and
Consortia Identification Partner Form) were consolidated with FIPSE's
other two international Special Focus competitions; the consolidated
forms which accompany the application guidelines in "Grants.gov" were
approved by OMB earlier and now have an expiration date of January 31,
2009.

FIPSE's U.S.-Brazil Program awards grants to U.S. institutions
participating in bilateral institutional cooperation and student
exchange programs in the United States and Brazil. Institutions are
funded by their respective government agencies: in the United States,
the U.S. Department of Education's Fund for the Improvement of
Postsecondary Education (FIPSE); in Brazil, the Fundação Coordenação de
Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), Brazilian Ministry
of Education.

2\. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be
used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency
has made of the information received from the current collection.

The application guidelines for the U.S.-Brazil Program have been used
since fiscal year 2001. The guidelines, which are developed in
cooperation, with the Brazilian Ministry of Education have not changed.
The guidelines are used to provide institutions of higher education with
information and criteria by which they can submit proposals to the
U.S.-Brazil grant competition.

The U.S.-Brazil Program awards grants to U.S. institutions that form a
bilateral consortium with institutions in Brazil. Two institutions from
each country comprise a consortium of four institutions. For each
country, one institution is designated as the lead institution or fiscal
representative responsible for submitting a separate proposal to its
respective government. Using established review criteria in 34 CFR 75,
external readers and FIPSE program staff review the U.S. applications.
The typical number of applications received for this program is
approximately 25 - 35; for fiscal year 2006, 23 applications were
received. No more than 12 applications received and reviewed are funded.

3\. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information
involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or forms of information technology,
e.g. permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for
the decision of adopting this means of collection. Also describe any
consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.

The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Postsecondary Education
(OPE) is now using the electronic portal "Grants.gov" to receive grant
applications. Fiscal Year 2006 was the first year that many grant
competitions within OPE used this portal. The U.S.-Brazil Program was
among the first of the OPE grant programs to use the portal. Submission
through "Grants.gov" will continue to be the method by which all
applications are received in the U.S.-Brazil Program.

As a result of efforts to streamline electronic submission for the
U.S.-Brazil Program and FIPSE's other two international competitions
(North American Program and E.U.-U.S.-Atlantis Program), the Title Page,
Budget Form, and Consortia Identification Partner Form) were
consolidated for use within "Grants.gov." Fiscal Year 2006 was the first
year for this consolidation procedure. The consolidated forms have an
OMB expiration date of January 31, 2009; these forms are not being
submitted with the application guidelines. However, they are among the
attachments with this package to OMB.

4\. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any
similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use
of the purposes described in Item 2 above.

FIPSE staff has made every effort to ensure that there is no duplication
of data acquisition. The collection is unique to the collaborative
postsecondary efforts between the United States and Brazil through the
respective governmental programs: FIPSE and CAPES (Brazilian Ministry of
Education).

5\. If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other
small entities (Item 5 of OMB Form 83-I), describe any methods used to
minimize burden.

The collection of information does not impact small businesses or other
small entities.

6\. Describe the consequences to Federal program or policy activities if
the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well
as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

This application process occurs on an occasional basis (less than once a
year) to enable applicants to compete for Federal funds that are
appropriated by Congress. This application is the lowest frequency
possible to award funds appropriated for this purpose.

7\. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information
collection to be conducted in a manner:

-   requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often
    than quarterly;

-   requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection
    of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;

-   requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies
    of any document;

-   requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical,
    government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records for more than
    three years;

-   in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to
    produce valid and reliable results than can be generalized to the
    universe of study;

-   requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not
    been reviewed and approved by OMB;

-   that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by
    authority established in statute or regulation, that is not
    supported by disclosure and data security policies that are
    consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing
    of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or

-   requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secrets, or other
    confidential information unless the agency can demonstrate that it
    has instituted procedures to protect the information's
    confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

Please note that no special circumstances apply.

8.  If applicable, provide a copy and identify the date and page number
    of publication in the Federal Register of the agency's notice,
    required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting comments on the information
    collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public comments
    received in response to that notice and describe actions taken by
    the agency in response to these comments. Specifically address
    comments received on cost and hour burden.

-   Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to
    obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of
    collection, the clarity of instruction and record keeping,
    disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements
    to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.

-   Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is
    to be obtained or those who must compile records should occur at
    least once every 3 years -- even if the collection of information
    activity is the same as in prior periods. There may be circumstances
    that may preclude consultation in a specific situation. These
    circumstances should be explained.

These application guidelines have been used previously by FIPSE in FY
2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and most recently in 2006; the guidelines were
originally cleared in FY 2001. There are no changes made in the amounts
or kinds of data collected, based on comments by applicants, external
readers or applications, FIPSE's Advisory Board, the collaborating
governmental agency, CAPES in Brazil, and currently funded project
directors in the United States and Brazil.

9\. Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents,
other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

The U.S. Department of Education does not provide any payment or gift to
respondents.

10\. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents
and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency
policy.

No assurance of confidentiality is provided to respondents except as
provided by the Privacy Act and the U.S. Department of Education's
policies governing the review of discretionary grant applications.

11\. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive
nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and
other matters that are commonly considered private. The justification
should include the reasons why the agency considers the questions
necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the
explanation to be given to persons from whom the information is
requested, and any steps to be taken to obtain their consent.

There are no questions of a sensitive nature.

12\. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of
information. The statement should:

> Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour
> burden, and an explanation of how the burden was estimated. Unless
> directed to do so, agencies should not conduct special surveys to
> obtain information on which to base hour burden estimates.
> Consultation with a sample (fewer than 10) of potential respondents is
> desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is expected to vary
> widely because of differences in activity, size, or complexity, show
> the range of estimated hour burden, and explain the reasons for the
> variance. Generally, estimates should not include burden hours for
> customary and usual business practices.
>
> If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide
> separate hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour
> burdens in item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.
>
> Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents of the hour
> burdens for collections of information, identifying and using
> appropriate wage rate categories. The cost of contracting out or
> paying outside parties for information collection activities should
> not be included here. Instead, this cost should not be included in
> Item 14.

[Number of Respondents]{.underline}: 30

[Frequency of response]{.underline}: once annually

> [Annual hour burden]{.underline}: 30 hours per applications; total 900
> annual hour burden. Annual hour burden was estimated based on oral
> accounts of applicants and grantees.

[Estimated Annualized Cost to Respondents of Hour Burdens]{.underline}:

Preparation of applications (\$28.00) per hour x 900 burden
hours...\$25,200

13\. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents
or record keepers resulting from the collection of information. (Do not
include the cost of any hour burden shown in Items 12 and 14.)

> The cost estimate should be split into two components: (a) a total
> capital and start-up cost component (annualized over its expected
> useful life); and (b) a total operation and maintenance and purchase
> of services component. The estimates should take into account costs
> associated with generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing
> the information. Include descriptions of methods used to estimate
> major cost factors including system and technology acquisition,
> expected useful life of capital equipment, the discount rate(s), and
> the time period over which costs will be incurred. Capital and
> start-up costs include, among other items, preparations for collecting
> information such as purchasing computers and software; monitoring,
> sampling, drilling and testing equipment; and record storage
> facilities.
>
> If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should present
> ranges of cost burdens and explain the reasons for the variance. The
> cost of contracting out information collection services should be a
> part of this cost burden estimate. In developing cost burden
> estimates, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents (fewer
> than 10), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment process
> and use existing economic or regulatory impact analysis associated
> with the rulemaking containing the information collection, as
> appropriate.
>
> Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or
> services, or portions thereof, made: (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2)
> to achieve regulatory compliance with requirements not associated with
> the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to provide
> information or keep records for the government, or (4) as part of
> customary and usual business or private practices.

Total Annualized Capital/Startup Cost : \$ .00

Total Annual Costs (O&M) : .00

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Total Annualized Costs Requested : \$ .00

Respondents now submit applications through Grants.gov; therefore, there
are no postage and printing costs as in previous years.

14\. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
Also, provide a description of the method used to estimate cost, which
should include quantification of hours, operational expenses (such as
equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff), and any other expense
that would not have been incurred without this collection of
information. Agencies also may aggregate cost estimates from Items 12,
13, and 14 in a single table.

Review by FIPSE program staff

(200 hours x \$30.50)...................................................
\$6,100

Administrative and Support staff

(50 hours x \$14 + 175 hours x
\$30.50)................................\$6,037

Review by Outside Readers (2 x 100 x 20)........................\$4,000

[\$16,137.00]{.underline}

15\. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reported
in Items 13 or 14 of the OMB Form 83-I.

The total dollars represented decreased as a result of the Department's
use of "Grants.gov." There are no printing and postage costs for
mailings. The application guidelines are available through the
"Grants.gov" electronic portal.

16\. For collections of information whose results will be published,
outline plans for tabulation and publication. Address any complex
analytical techniques that will be used. Provide the time schedule for
the entire project, including beginning and ending dates of the
collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and
other actions.

No data or results of this information collection are published.

17\. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB
approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display
would be inappropriate.

We will display the expiration date for OMB approval of the collection.

18\. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in
Item 20, "Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions," of OMB
Form 83-I.

There are no exceptions.

**B. Collection 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 Item 17 on Form 83-I is checked
"Yes," the following documentation should be included in the Supporting
Statement to the extent that it applies to the methods proposed:

1.  Describe the potential respondent universe (including a numerical
    estimate) 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 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.

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.

1.  Describe methods to maximize response 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.

2.  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.

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

FIPSE does not employ statistical methods in this collection of
information.