67748 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 219 / Monday, November 13, 2000 / Notices

Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression

Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family

Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public

Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing

Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant

Program.)

James L. Witt,

Director.

[FR Doc. 00–29005 Filed 11–09–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–02–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Open Meeting, Technical Mapping

Advisory Council

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Notice of teleconference

meeting.

SUMMARY: In accordance with section

10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 1, the

Federal Emergency Management Agency

gives notice that the following meeting

will be held:

Name: Technical Mapping Advisory

Council.

Date of Meeting: November 14, 2000.

Place: The FEMA Conference Operator in

Washington, DC will administer the

teleconference. Individuals interested in

participating should call 1–800–320–4330 at

the time of the teleconference. Callers will be

prompted for the conference code, #17, and

they will then be connected through to the

teleconference.

Time: 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., EST.

Proposed Agenda:

1. Call to order.

2. Announcements.

3. Action on minutes from October 2000

teleconference meeting.

4. Review Annual and Year 2000 Report

draft text.

5. New business.

6. Adjournment.

Status: This meeting is open to the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Sally P. Magee, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,

room 442, Washington, DC 20472,

telephone (202) 646–8242 or by

facsimile at (202) 646–4596.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Minutes of

the meeting will be prepared and will be

available upon request 30 days after

they have been approved by the next

Technical Mapping Advisory Council

meeting in October 2000.

Dated: November 3, 2000.

Michael K. Buckley,

Director, Technical Services Division,

Mitigation Directorate.

[FR Doc. 00–29004 Filed 11–09–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–04–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Agency for Healthcare Research and

Quality

Nominations of Topics for EvidenceBased Practice Centers (EPCs)

AGENCY: The Agency for Healthcare

Research and Quality (AHRQ), formerly

AHCPR.

ACTION: Nominations of topics for

evidence reports and technology

assessments.

SUMMARY: AHRQ invites a fourth round

of nominations of topics for evidence

reports and technology assessments

relating to the prevention, diagnosis,

treatment and management of common

diseases and clinical conditions, as well

as topics relating to organization and

financing of health care. AHRQ’s

previous requests for topic nominations

were published in the Federal Register

on December 23, 1996, November 28,

1997, and May 4, 1999.

DATES: Topic nominations should be

submitted by January 12, 2001 in order

to be considered for the next group of

evidence reports and technology

assessments. In addition to timely

responses to this request for

nominations, AHRQ also accepts topic

nominations on an ongoing basis. AHRQ

will not reply to individual responses,

but will consider all nominations during

the selection process. Topics selected

will be announced from time to time in

the Federal Register and AHRQ press

releases.

ADDRESSES: Topic nominations should

be submitted to Douglas B. Kamerow,

M.D., MPH, Director, Center for Practice

and Technology Assessment, AHRQ,

6010 Executive Boulevard, Suite 300,

Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jacqueline Besteman, J.D., M.A., Center

for Practice and Technology

Assessment, AHRQ, 6010 Executive

Blvd., Suite 300, Rockville, MD 20852;

Phone: (301) 594–4017; Fax: (301) 594–

4027; E-mail: jbestema@ahrq.gov.

Arrangement for Public Inspection:

All nominations will be available for

public inspection at the Center for

Practice and Technology Assessment,

telephone (301) 594–4015, weekdays

between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. (Eastern

time).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background

Under Title IX of the Public Health

Service Act (42 U.S.C. 299a–299c) as

amended by Pub. L. 106–129 (1999),

AHRQ is charged with enhancing the

quality, appropriateness, and

effectiveness of health care services and

access to such services. AHRQ

accomplishes these goals through

scientific research and through

promotion of improvements in clinical

practice and health systems practices

including the prevention of diseases and

other health conditions.

2. Purpose

The purpose of this Federal Register

notice is to encourage participation and

collaboration of professional societies,

health systems, payors, and providers,

with AHRQ as it carries out its mission

to promote the practice of evidencebased health care. AHRQ serves as the

science partner with private-sector and

public organizations in their efforts to

improve the quality, effectiveness, and

appropriateness of health care delivery

in the United States, and to expedite the

translation of evidence-based research

findings into improved health care

services. AHRQ awards task order

contracts to its Evidence-based Practice

Centers (EPCs) to undertake scientific

analyses and evidence syntheses on

high-priority topics. The EPCs produce

science syntheses—evidence reports

and technology assessments—that

provide to public and private

organizations the foundation for

developing and implementing their own

practice guidelines, performance

measures, educational programs, and

other strategies to improve the quality of

health care and decision-making related

to the effectiveness and appropriateness

of specific health care technologies and

services. The evidence reports and

technology assessments also may be

used to inform coverage and

reimbursement policies.

As the body of scientific studies

related to the organization and financing

of health care grows, systematic review

and analyses of these studies can

provide health system organizations

with a scientific foundation for

developing system-wide policies and

practices. These reports may address

and evaluate topics such as risk

adjustment methodologies, market

performance measures, provider

payment mechanisms, and insurance

purchasing tools, as well as provider

integration of new scientific findings

regarding health care and delivery

innovations.

Evidence-Based Practice Centers (EPCs)

The EPCs prepare evidence reports

and technology assessments on topics

for which there is significant demand

for information by health care providers,

insurers, purchasers, health-related

societies, and patient advocacy

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 219 / Monday, November 13, 2000 / Notices 67749

organizations. Such topics may include

the prevention, diagnosis and/or

treatment of particular diseases or

health conditions including, where

appropriate, the use of alternative/

complementary therapies, as well as the

appropriate use of commonly provided

services, procedures, or technologies.

Topics also may include issues related

to the organization and financing of

care. AHRQ widely disseminates the

EPC evidence reports and technology

assessments, both electronically and in

print. The EPC evidence reports and

technology assessments do not include

clinical recommendations or

recommendations on reimbursement

and coverage policies.

Topic Nomination and Selection

Process

The AHRQ will review topic

nominations and supporting

information and determine final topics,

seeking additional information as

appropriate. AHRQ encourages topic

nominations from professional societies

and organizations comprised of

members of minority populations, as

well as nomination of topics that have

significant impact on the health status

of women, children, ethnic and racial

populations. Nominators of selected

topics assume the role of Partners to

AHRQ and the EPCs. Partners are

expected to serve as resources to EPCs

as they develop evidence reports and

technology assessments. Partners may

also serve as peer reviewers of draft

evidence reports and assessments.

The processes that AHRQ employs to

select topics nominated for analyses by

the EPCs is described below. Section A

addresses AHRQ’s nomination process

and selection criteria for clinical topics.

Section B addresses AHRQ’s

nomination process and selection

criteria for organization and financing

topics.

Section A: Clinical Topics

Nomination Process for Clinical Topics

Nominations of clinical topics for

AHRQ evidence reports and technology

assessments should focus on specific

aspects of prevention, diagnosis,

treatment and/or management of a

particular condition, or on an individual

procedure, treatment, or technology.

Potential topics should be carefully

defined and circumscribed so that the

relevant published literature and other

databases can be searched, evidence

systematically reviewed, supplemental

analyses performed, draft reports and

assessments circulated for external peer

review, and final evidence reports or

technology assessments produced.

Reports and assessments can be

completed in three to six months, if

there is a small volume of literature to

be systematically reviewed and

analyzed. Some evidence reports and

technology assessments may require up

to 12 months for completion due to

complexity of the topic, the volume of

literature to be searched, abstracted, and

analyzed, and completion of the

external peer review process. Topics

selected will not duplicate current and

widely available research syntheses,

unless new evidence is available that

suggests the need for revisions or

updates.

For each topic, nominators should

provide a rationale and supporting

evidence on the clinical relevance and

importance of the topic. Nominators

also must state their plans are for rapid

translation of the evidence reports and

technology assessments into clinical

guidelines, performance measures,

educational programs, or other strategies

for strengthening the quality of health

care services, or plans to inform

development of reimbursement or

coverage policies. Nomination

information should include.

• Defined condition and target

population.

• Three to five specific questions to

be answered.

• Incidence or prevalence, and

indication of the disease burden (e.g.,

mortality, morbidity, functional

impairment) in the U.S. general

population or in subpopulations (e.g.,

Medicare and Medicaid populations).

For prevalence, the number of cases in

the U.S. and the number of affected

persons per 1,000 persons in the general

U.S. population should be provided. For

incidence, the number of new cases per

100,000 a year should be provided.

• Costs associated with the clinical

condition, including average reimbursed

amounts for diagnostic and therapeutic

interventions (e.g., average U.S. costs

and number of persons who receive care

for diagnosis or treatment in a year,

citing ICD9–CM and CPT codes, if

possible).

• Impact potential of the evidence

report or technology assessment to

decrease health care costs or to improve

health status or clinical outcomes.

• Availability of scientific data and

bibliographies of studies on the topic.

• References to significant differences

in practice patterns and/or results;

alternative therapies and controversies.

• Demonstrated commitment by

nominating organization to incorporate

the report into its managerial or policy

decision making (i.e., rapid translation

of the report or assessment into clinical

practice guidelines or other quality

improvement tools, or to inform

reimbursement or coverage policies

about a particular technology or

service).

• Plans by the nominating

organization to measure the impact of

the report on clinical practice.

Selection Criteria for Clinical Topics

Factors that will be considered in the

selection of clinical topics for AHRQ

evidence report and technology

assessment topics include: (1) High

incidence or prevalence in the general

population and in special populations,

including women, racial and ethnic

minorities, pediatric and elderly

populations, and those of low

socioeconomic status; (2) significance

for the needs of the Medicare, Medicaid

and other Federal health programs; (3)

high costs associated with a condition,

procedure, treatment, or technology,

whether due to the number of people

needing care, high unit cost of care, or

high indirect costs; (4) controversy or

uncertainty about the effectiveness or

relative effectiveness of available

clinical strategies or technologies; (5)

impact potential for informing and

improving patient or provider decision

making; (6) impact potential for

reducing clinically significant variations

in the prevention, diagnosis, treatment,

or clinical management of a disease or

condition, or in the use of a procedure

or technology, or in the health outcomes

achieved; (7) availability of scientific

data to support the systematic review

and analysis of the topic; (8)

demonstrated commitment by the

nominating organization to incorporate

the report into its managerial or policy

decision making; and (9) plans by the

nominating organization to measure the

impact of the report on clinical practice.

Section B: Organization and Financing

Topics

Nomination Process for Organization

and Financing Topics

Nominations of organization and

financing topics for AHRQ evidence

reports should focus on specific aspects

of health care organization and finance.

Topics should be carefully defined and

circumscribed so that relevant databases

may be searched, the evidence

systematically reviewed, supplemental

analyses performed, draft reports

circulated in three to six months if there

is a small volume of literature for

systematic review and analysis. Some

evidence reports may require up to 12

months for completion due to the

complexity of the topic and the volume

of literature to be searched, abstracted,

and analyzed. Topics selected will not

67750 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 219 / Monday, November 13, 2000 / Notices

duplicate current and widely available

research syntheses, unless new evidence

is available that suggests the need for

revisions or updates.

For each topic, nominators should

provide a rationale and supporting

evidence on the importance and

relevance of the topic. Nominators must

also state their plans for use of the

evidence report and indicate how the

report could be used by public and

private decision makers. Nomination

information should include:

• Defined organizational/financial

arrangement or structure impacting

quality, outcomes, cost, access or use.

• Three to five specific questions to

be answered.

• If appropriate, description of how

the organizational/financial

arrangement or structure is particularly

relevant to delivery of care for specific

vulnerable populations (e.g., children,

persons with chronic disease) or certain

communities (e.g., rural markets).

• Costs potentially affected by the

organizational/financial arrangement, to

the extent they can be quantified.

• Impact potential of the evidence

report to decrease health care costs or to

improve health status or outcomes.

• Availability of scientific and/or

administrative data and bibliographies

of studies on the topic.

• References to significant variation

in delivery and financing patterns and/

or results, and related controversies.

• Nominator’s plan for use of an

evidence report on this topic.

• Nominator’s plan for measuring the

impact of the report on practice.

Selection Criteria for Organization and

Financing Topics

Factors that will be considered in the

selection of topics related to the

organization and financing of care

include the following: (1) Uncertainty

about the impact of the subject

organizational or financing strategy; (2)

potential for the subject organizational

or financing strategy or the proposed

research synthesis to significantly

impact aggregate health care costs; (3)

policy-relevant to Medicare, Medicaid,

and/or other Federal and State health

programs; (4) relevant to vulnerable

populations, including racial and ethnic

minorities, and particular communities,

such as rural markets; (5) available

scientific data to support systematic

review and analysis of the topic; (6)

demonstrated commitment by the

nominating organization to incorporate

the report into its managerial or policy

decision-making; and (7) plans by the

nominating organization to measure the

impact of the report on practice.

Dated: November 2, 2000.

John M. Eisenberg,

Director.

[FR Doc. 00–28896 Filed 11–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160–90–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention

Board of Scientific Counselors,

National Center for Infectious

Diseases: Meeting

In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of

the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention (CDC)

announces the following committee

meeting.

Name: Board of Scientific Counselors,

National Center for Infectious Diseases

(NCID).

Times and Dates: 9 a.m.–5:45 p.m.,

December 7, 2000, 8:30 a.m.–2:30 p.m.,

December 8, 2000.

Place: CDC, Roybal Building 17 Conference

Room, 1600 Clifton Road, Atlanta, Georgia

30333.

Status: Open to the public, limited only by

the space available.

Purpose: The Board of Scientific

Counselors, NCID, provides advice and

guidance to the Director, CDC, and Director,

NCID, in the following areas: program goals

and objectives; strategies; program

organization and resources for infectious

disease prevention and control; and program

priorities.

Matters to be Discussed: Agenda items will

include:

1. Opening Session: NCID Update

2. CDC Facilities Master Plan, Fort Collins,

Colorado

3. Program Update: Patient Safety and

Quality Care

4. Issue Updates

a. NCID Research Agenda

b. Planning and Communication Strategies

c. Global Infectious Disease Strategic Plan

5. Tour of Roybal Building 17

6. Breakout groups on Issue Updates (Item 4,

a–c above)

7. Program Update: West Nile Virus

8. Breakout Group Report/Discussion: NCID

Research Agenda

9. Breakout Group Report/Discussion:

Planning and Communication Strategies

10. Breakout Group Report/Discussion:

Global Infectious Disease Strategic Plan

11. Late Breakers: Scientific Outbreak

Reports

12. Discussions and Recommendations

Other agenda items include

announcements/introductions; follow-up on

actions recommended by the Board May

2000; consideration of future directions,

goals, and recommendations.

Agenda items are subject to change as

priorities dictate.

Written comments are welcome and should

be received by the contact person listed

below prior to the opening of the meeting.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Diane S. Holley, Office of the Director,

NCID, CDC, Mailstop C–20, 1600 Clifton

Road, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, email

dsy1@cdc.gov; telephone 404/639–0078.

The Director, Management Analysis

and Services office has been delegated

the authority to sign Federal Register

notices pertaining to announcements of

meetings and other committee

management activities, for both the

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention and the Agency for Toxic

Substances and Disease Registry.

Dated: November 6, 2000.

Carolyn J. Russell,

Management Analysis and Services Office,

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 00–28898 Filed 11–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163–18–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention

Board of Scientific Counselors,

National Institute for Occupational

Safety and Health: Meeting

In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of

the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(Pub.L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention (CDC)

announces the following committee

meeting:

Name: Board of Scientific Counselors,

National Institute for Occupational Safety

and Health (BSC, NIOSH).

Time and Date: 9 a.m.–3:30 p.m.,

November 28, 2000.

Place: The Washington Court, 525 New

Jersey Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20001–

1527.

Status: Open to the public, limited only by

the space available. The meeting room

accommodates approximately 50 people.

Purpose: The BSC, NIOSH is charged with

providing advice to the Director, NIOSH on

NIOSH research programs. Specifically, the

Board shall provide guidance on the

Institute’s research activities related to

developing and evaluating hypotheses,

systematically documenting findings, and

disseminating results.

Matters To Be Discussed: Agenda items

include a report from the Director of NIOSH;