Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Notices 14283 

individuals may submit one paper copy. 

Comments are to be identified with the 

docket number found in brackets in the 

heading of this document. Received 

comments may be seen in the Division 

of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. 

Dated: March 16, 2007. 

Linda S. Kahan, 

Deputy Director, Center for Devices and 

Radiological Health. 

[FR Doc. E7–5572 Filed 3–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request 

In compliance with Section 

3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 concerning 

opportunity for public comment on 

proposed collections of information, the 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration (SAMHSA) 

will publish periodic summaries of 

proposed projects. To request more 

information on the proposed projects or 

to obtain a copy of the information 

collection plans, call the SAMHSA 

Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276–

1243. 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collections of information 

are 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) ways to enhance 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. 

Proposed Project: Independent 

Evaluation of the Substance Abuse 

Prevention and Treatment Block Grant 

Program—NEW 

The Substance Abuse and Mental 

Health Services Administration 

(SAMHSA), Center for Substance Abuse 

Treatment (CSAT), Division of State and 

Community Assistance administers the 

Substance Abuse Prevention and 

Treatment Block Grant (SAPT BG) in 

collaboration with the Center for 

Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP), 

Division of State Programs. The 

Substance Abuse Prevention and 

Treatment Block Grant is funded by 

Congress to provide monies to States, 

Territories, and one Native American 

Tribe for the purpose of planning, 

carrying out, and evaluating activities to 

prevent and treat substance abuse and 

other allowable activities. The SAPT BG 

constitutes approximately 40 percent of 

all States budgets for substance abuse 

prevention and treatment services and 

activities, and is the primary Federal 

source of funding. States have flexibility 

in determining how funds should be 

allocated, but there are specific set-aside 

and maintenance of effort requirements 

that must be met in order to receive 

funding. These requirements, 

introduced by both the ADAMHA 

Reorganization Act of 1992 and the 

Children’s Health Act of 2000, are listed 

below: 

TABLE 1.—SAPT BG SET-ASIDE PROVISIONS a

Category Set-aside provision 

Prevention and treatment activities regarding alcohol.Not less than 35 percent of SAPT BG funding.* 

Prevention and treatment activities regarding 

other drugs.

Not less than 35 percent of SAPT BG funding.* 

Primary prevention programs ............................. Not less than 20 percent of SAPT BG funding. 

Pregnant women and women with dependent 

children.

Not less than amount equal to expenditure in FY1994. 

Tuberculosis services ......................................... No set amount but services must be provided to receive SAPT BG funds. 

HIV services b ..................................................... No more than 5 percent increase over State allotment for HIV services in FY 1991. 

Prohibition of sale of tobacco to individuals 

under age of 18 (Synar amendment).

State must enforce law against sale of tobacco to underage individuals to receive SAPT BG 

funds—noncompliance leads to a 10 percent reduction in funds the first applicable fiscal 

year; 20 percent, the second year; 30 percent, the third year; and 40 percent, the fourth 

year. 

Maintenance of effort (MOE) for State expenditures.State will maintain funding at no less than the average level of expenditures for the 2 years 

preceding the fiscal year for which the State is applying. 

Administrative expenses .................................... Limited to 5 percent of SAPT BG funding. 

aThese set-asides shown in this table were included in the 1992 SAPT BG authorizing legislation 42 U.S.C. 300x–21 to 42 U.S.C. 300x–62). 

In the Children’s Health Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106–310) Sec. 3303(a)(1)), however, the set-asides marked with asterisks were removed. bFor designated States whose rate of AIDS cases is 10 or more per 100,000 individuals as confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention. 

In addition to the set-asides, the SAPT 

BG Program has identified 17 goals 

which must be met by States in order to 

receive this Federal funding: 

TABLE 2.—FEDERAL GOALS FOR THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT BLOCK GRANT

GOAL #1: Continuum of substance abuse treatment services.The State shall expend block grant funds to maintain a continuum of substance abuse treatment services that meet these needs for the services identified by the state (see 42 U.S.C. 

300x–21(b) and 45 CFR 96.122(f)(g)). 

GOAL #2: Spending on primary prevention programs.The State agrees to spend not less than 20 percent on primary prevention programs for individuals who do not require treatment for substance abuse, specifying the activities proposed 

for each of the six strategies (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–22(b)(1) and 45 CFR 96.124(b)(1)). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
14284 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Notices 

TABLE 2.—FEDERAL GOALS FOR THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT BLOCK GRANT—Continued 

GOAL #3: Spending on services for pregnant 

women and children.

The State agrees to expend not less than an amount equal to the amount expended by the 

State for FY 1994 to establish new programs or expand the capacity of existing programs to 

make available treatment services designed for pregnant women and children with dependent children; and, directly or through arrangements with other public or nonprofit entities, to 

make available prenatal care to women receiving such treatment services, and, while the 

women are receiving services, child care (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–22(c)(1) and 45 CFR 

96.124(c)(e)). 

GOAL #4: Treatment for intravenous drug 

abusers.

The State agrees to provide treatment to intravenous drug abusers that fulfills the 90 percent 

capacity reporting, 14–120 day performance requirement, interim services, outreach activities and monitoring requirements (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–23 and 45 CFR 96.126). 

GOAL #5: Tuberculosis services for people in 

substance abuse treatment.

The State agrees, directly or through arrangements with other public or nonprofit private entities, to routinely make available tuberculosis services to each individual receiving treatment 

for substance abuse and to monitor such service delivery (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–24 and 45 

CFR 96.127). 

GOAL #6: Early intervention services for HIV 

for people in substance abuse treatment.

Designated States agree to provide treatment for persons with substance abuse problems with 

an emphasis on making available within existing programs early intervention services for HIV 

in areas of the state that have the greatest need for such services and to monitor such service delivery (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–24(b) and 45 CFR 96.128). 

GOAL #7: Group homes for recovering substance abusers.Designated States agree to provide for and encourage the development of group homes for recovering substance abusers through the operation of a revolving loan fund (see 42 U.S.C. 

300x–25 and 45 CFR 96.129). 

GOAL #8: State efforts to reduce the availability 

of tobacco products.

The State agrees to continue to have in effect a State law that makes it unlawful for any manufacturer, retailer, or distributor of tobacco products to sell or distribute any such product to 

any individual under the age of 18; and, to enforce such laws in a manner than can reasonably be expected to reduce the extent to which tobacco products are available to individuals 

under age 18 (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–26 and 45 CFR 96.130). 

GOAL #9: Preferential admission of pregnant 

women to substance abuse treatment.

The State agrees to ensure that each pregnant woman be given preference in admission to 

treatment facilities; and, when the facility has insufficient capacity, to ensure that the pregnant woman be referred to the State, which will refer the woman to a facility that does have 

the capacity to admit the woman, or if no such facility has the capacity to admit the woman, 

will make available interim services within 48 hours (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–27 and 45 CFR 

96.131). 

GOAL #10: Improved process for referring individuals to substance abuse treatment.The State agrees to improve the process in the State for referring individuals to the treatment 

modality that is most appropriate for the individual (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–28 and 45 CFR 

96.132(a)). 

GOAL #11: Continuing education for employees 

at substance abuse prevention and/or treatment facilities.

The State agrees to provide continuing education for the employees of facilities which provide 

prevention activities or treatment services (or both) (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–28(b) and 45 CFR 

96.132(b)). 

GOAL #12: Coordination of services ................. The State agrees to coordinate prevention activities and treatment services with the provision 

of other appropriate services (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–28(c) and 45 CFR 96.132(c)). 

GOAL #13: Needs assessment by State and locality.The State agrees to submit an assessment of the need for both treatment and prevention in 

the State for authorized activities, both by locality and by the State in general (see 42 U.S.C. 

300x–29 and 45 CFR 96.133). 

GOAL #14: Ensuring that needles and syringes 

are not provided for illegal drug use.

The State agrees to ensure that no program funded through the block grant will use funds to 

provide individuals with hypodermic needles or syringes so that such individuals may use illegal drugs (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–31(a)(1)(F) and 45 CFR 96.135(a)(6)). 

GOAL #15: Improving the quality and appropriateness of treatment services.The State agrees to assess and improve, through independent peer review, the quality and appropriateness of treatment services delivered by provider that receive funds from the block 

grant (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–53(a) and 45 CFR 96.136). 

GOAL #16: Protecting patient records from inappropriate disclosure.The State agrees to ensure that the State has in effect a system to protect patient records 

from inappropriate disclosure (see 42 U.S.C. 300x–53(b), 45 CFR 6.132(e), and 42 CFR 

part 2). 

GOAL #17: Compliance with 42 CFR part 54 

Charitable Choice Provisions and Regulations.

The State agrees to ensure that the State has in effect a system to comply with 42 CFR part 

54 (see 42 CFR 54.8(c)(4) and 54.8(b)) Charitable Choice Provisions and Regulations). 

SOURCE: Performance Partnership Grant Branch, Division of State and Community Assistance, Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, ‘‘Uniform Application, FY 2007, Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block 

Grant (42 U.S.C. 300x–21 through 300x–64),’’ Rockville, MD, 2004. 

The FY 2003 Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Program Assessment 

Rating Tool (PART) assessment of the 

SAPT BG Program rated the program as 

‘‘Ineffective.’’ The SAPT BG received 

high scores on three of four PART areas 

rated, including Program Purpose and 

Design, Strategic Planning, and Program 

Management. However, the scores could 

have been even higher in these areas if 

data were available to document that the 

resources were reaching the intended 

beneficiaries or the program had 

ambitious targets and long-term 

measures. In the fourth area, Program 

Results/Accountability, where a low 

rating was achieved, it was found that 

‘‘no independent evaluation of the 

program has been completed’’ to 

establish that the SAPT BG Program is 

effective and fulfilling its legislative 

mandates. 

In direct response to this OMB 

finding, a contract was developed and 

awarded in FY 2003 to conduct an 

Evaluability Assessment (EA) to 

determine the feasibility of conducting 

an independent evaluation of the SAPT 

BG Program, and subsequently, to fund 

such an evaluation effort. EA is a 

recognized program evaluation 

methodology which involves 

collaboration with multiple 

stakeholders and development of a 

program logic model used to plan 

formal evaluations of large and/or 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Notices 14285 

complex programs, such as the SAPT 

BG program. The findings of the EA 

were used as a foundation in the 

development and awarding of a multiyear contract in FY 2004 to conduct an 

independent, comprehensive evaluation 

of the SAPT BG Program. 

As noted in the OMB PART 

Assessment, the legislative intent of the 

SAPT BG is to provide funding to states 

by formula to plan, carry out, and 

evaluate activities to prevent and treat 

substance abuse. Therefore, the 

evaluation is designed to examine the 

system-level activities, outputs, and 

outcomes associated with the program 

in relation to its goals. 

In this evaluation, a multi-method 

evaluation approach is being used to 

examine Federal and State performance 

with regard to the SAPT BG and its 

identified goals. This approach 

emphasizes a qualitative and 

quantitative examination of both the 

SAPT BG process (e.g., activities and 

outputs in the logic model) and systemlevel outcomes whereby Federal and 

State stakeholder perspectives on the 

SAPT BG, as captured through semistructured interviews and surveys, are 

corroborated and compared to the 

considerable amount of alreadycollected source documents and data 

provided by States, CSAT, and CSAP 

(e.g., BGAS applications, Treatment 

Episode Data Set (TEDS), National 

Survey on Drug Use and Health 

(NSDUH), the Minimum Data Set 

(MDS), Technical Review Reports, State 

Prevention and Synar System Reports). 

The purpose of the evaluation is to 

determine the extent to which States 

and the Federal Government are 

implementing the SAPT BG according 

to the authorizing legislation. The 

evaluation will cover the following 

domains: the State SAPT BG planning 

process, Federal review of SAPT BG 

applications and implementation 

reports, Federal technical assistance, 

State SAPT BG implementation, Federal 

oversight and management, State SAPT 

BG reporting, and State-level outcomes. 

The results of this evaluation will not 

only document the effectiveness of the 

Program in supporting the Substance 

Abuse Prevention and Treatment 

system, they will also help guide CSAT 

and CSAP and the States to improve the 

methods by which they implement the 

SAPT BG, including the capacity to 

collect, analyze, and interpret the 

National Outcome Measures (NOMS). 

As a separate, parallel SAMHSA 

initiative, the NOMS project began after 

the SAPT BG Evaluation contract 

inception and was not used in the SAPT 

BG EA or the development of the 

evaluation framework and logic model. 

However, selected NOMS items that 

relate to the evaluation framework and 

logic model will be examined in the 

independent evaluation. These selected 

NOMS items include: 

• Increase in number of persons 

reporting a reduction in 30-day drug/ 

alcohol use 

• Increase in number of persons 

employed or in school 

• Reduction in number of drug or 

alcohol-related arrests 

• Increase in number of persons in 

stable housing situations (reduction in 

homelessness) 

• Increase in access to services 

measured by unduplicated counts of 

persons served and numbers served 

compared to those in need 

• Increase in number of persons 

receiving evidence-based services. 

In addition, the evaluators will 

attempt to collect information on 

system-wide client perception of care. 

Statistical tests for association between 

outcome measures and a number of 

independent variables will be 

conducted. Examples of independent 

variables include, but are not limited to, 

level of funding, level of the SSA within 

State government, degree of SSA 

partnership with other State agencies 

and community organizations, and 

amount of State-funded support 

available for research and training 

activities. 

In addition to information about the 

selected NOMS domains, the evaluation 

will also examine systemic measures 

related to infrastructure. Infrastructure 

refers to the resources, systems, and 

policies that support the nation’s public 

substance abuse prevention and 

treatment system, and is a potential 

contributor to significant State 

behavioral health system outcomes. 

Examples of infrastructure include staff 

training, policy changes, and service 

availability. 

Because this is the first-ever 

comprehensive evaluation of the 

Program, the data collection activities 

are more extensive (and time intensive) 

than would be expected of a Program 

that has been regularly evaluated. These 

data will serve as a baseline for future 

evaluations. 

The two primary data collection 

strategies will include open-ended 

interviews and web-based surveys. 

Interviews will be conducted with 

Federal staff involved in the 

administration of the SAPT BG and 

State staff from all States and Territories 

involved in their State’s implementation 

of the SAPT BG program. Two webbased surveys will be administered to 

all individuals who formally participate 

in monitoring the SAPT BG as part of 

the Technical Review or State 

Prevention and Synar System Review 

Teams. 

The interview protocol for Federal 

staff includes 79 questions (mostly 

open-ended), and, on average, should 

take 90 minutes to complete. The 

interview protocol for the State staff 

includes 99 questions (again, mostly 

open-ended), and should take, on 

average, 3 hours to complete. Both the 

Federal staff interviews and the State 

staff interviews will be conducted as inperson interviews. While the Federal 

staff will each be interviewed 

individually, a single group State staff 

interview will be conducted for all 

relevant State staff. State Substance 

Abuse Authority Directors will be asked 

to select those State staff who they 

believe are most knowledgeable about 

the SAPT BG for participation in the 

interviews. It is anticipated that, at a 

minimum, the State Planner, the State 

Data Analyst, the State Prevention Lead, 

the State Treatment Lead, one 

additional State staff member, and the 

State SSA Director will participate. 

The two web-based surveys will be 

distributed to the two current sets of 

formal reviewers for the SAPT BG: 

Technical Reviewers and State 

Prevention and Synar System 

Reviewers. The web-based surveys are 

designed so that each stakeholder group 

receives survey questions designed to 

capture their specific knowledge of and 

experience with the SAPT BG. The 

Technical Reviewer survey contains 47 

questions and the State Prevention and 

Synar System Reviewer survey has 27 

questions. Each survey should take 

approximately 1 hour or less to 

complete. Reviewers will submit their 

responses to the survey online over a 3- 

week period. 

Table 3 summarizes the estimated 

annual total burden hours for the inperson and web-based surveys for the 

Federal and State staff stakeholders, 

Technical Reviewers, Synar Reviewers, 

and SPSA. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
14286 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Notices 

TABLE 3.—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN

Respondents Number of 

respondents 

Response per 

respondent 

Average hours 

per interview 

Estimated total 

burden 

(hours) 

In-person Interviews: 

State Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Agency Commissioner ................................................................................................ 60 1 3 180 

State Planners ...................................................................................... 60 1 3 180 

State Data Analysts .............................................................................. 60 1 3 180 

State Prevention Lead .......................................................................... 60 1 3 180 

State Treatment Lead ........................................................................... 60 1 3 180 

Additional State Staff ............................................................................ 60 1 3 180 

Federal SAPT Block Grant Staff .......................................................... 35 1 1 .5 52 .5 

Subtotal ......................................................................................... 395 ........................ .......................... 1132 .5 

Web-based Interviews: 

Technical Reviewers ............................................................................ 15 1 1 15 

State Prevention and Synar System Reviewers .................................. 30 1 1 30 

Subtotal ......................................................................................... 45 ........................ .......................... 45 

Total ....................................................................................... 440 ........................ .......................... 1177 .5 

This Federal Register Notice is 

focused on the interviews and surveys 

that will be administered to the SAPT 

BG stakeholders as those methods of 

data collection require OMB approval. It 

is anticipated that in future independent 

evaluations of the SAPT BG Program 

focus will be given to the NOMS and 

their implications for program 

performance and goals. 

Send comments to Summer King, 

SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, 

Room 7–1044, One Choke Cherry Road, 

Rockville, MD 20857. Written comments 

should be received within 60 days of 

this notice. 

Dated: March 20, 2007. 

Elaine Parry, 

Acting Director, Office of Program Services. 

[FR Doc. E7–5582 Filed 3–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4162–20–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

[FEMA–1689–DR] 

California; Major Disaster and Related 

Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the 

Presidential declaration of a major 

disaster for the State of California 

(FEMA–1689–DR), dated March 13, 

2007, and related determinations. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 13, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2705. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that, in a letter dated 

March 13, 2007, the President declared 

a major disaster under the authority of 

the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 

U.S.C. 5121–5206 (the Stafford Act), as 

follows: 

I have determined that the damage in 

certain areas of the State of California 

resulting from a severe freeze during the 

period of January 11–17, 2007, is of sufficient 

severity and magnitude to warrant a major 

disaster declaration under the Robert T. 

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121–5206 (the 

Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such 

a major disaster exists in the State of 

California. 

In order to provide Federal assistance, you 

are hereby authorized to allocate from funds 

available for these purposes such amounts as 

you find necessary for Federal disaster 

assistance and administrative expenses. 

You are authorized to provide Disaster 

Unemployment Assistance and Food 

Commodities in the designated areas and any 

other forms of assistance under the Stafford 

Act that you deem appropriate. If Public 

Assistance, Hazard Mitigation, and the Other 

Needs Assistance program under Section 408 

of the Stafford Act are later requested and 

warranted, Federal funding will be limited to 

75 percent of the total eligible costs. Further, 

you are authorized to make changes to this 

declaration to the extent allowable under the 

Stafford Act. 

The Federal Emergency Management 

Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that 

pursuant to the authority vested in the 

Director, under Executive Order 12148, 

as amended, Justo Hernandez, of FEMA 

is appointed to act as the Federal 

Coordinating Officer for this declared 

disaster. 

I do hereby determine the following 

areas of the State of California to have 

been affected adversely by this declared 

major disaster: 

Fresno, Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, 

Monterey, Riverside, San Bernardino, San 

Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, 

Tulare, and Ventura Counties for Disaster 

Unemployment Assistance and Food 

Commodities. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic 

Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used 

for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 

Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora 

Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis 

Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services 

Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment 

Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management 

Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and 

Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and 

Households Disaster Housing Operations; 

97.050, Individuals and Households 

Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public 

Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation 

Grant Program.) 

R. David Paulison, 

Under Secretary for Federal Emergency 

Management and Director of FEMA. 

[FR Doc. E7–5529 Filed 3–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–10–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES