Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 42 / Thursday, March 5, 2009 / Notices 9613 

Unauthorized Committees (PACs and 

Party Committees) 

Political committees filing on a 

semiannual basis in 2009 are subject to 

special election reporting if they make 

previously undisclosed contributions or 

expenditures in connection with the 

New York Special General Election by 

the close of books for the applicable 

report(s). (See chart below for the 

closing date for each report.) 

Political committees filing monthly 

that support candidates in the New York 

Special General Election should 

continue to file according to the 

monthly reporting schedule. 

Additional disclosure information in 

connection with the New York Special 

Election may be found on the FEC Web 

site at http://www.fec.gov/info/ 

report_dates.shtml. 

Calendar of Reporting Dates for New 

York Special Election 

Quarterly Filing Political Committees 

Involved in the Special General (03/31/ 

09) Must File: 

Report Close of books 1

Reg./cert. & overnight mailing 

deadline 

Filing deadline 

Pre-General ......................................................................................................... 03/11/09 03/16/09 03/19/09 

April Quarterly ...................................................................................................... 03/31/09 04/15/09 04/15/09 

Post-General ........................................................................................................ 04/20/09 04/30/09 04/30/09 

July Quarterly ....................................................................................................... 06/30/09 07/15/09 07/15/09 

Semiannual Filing Political 

Committees Involved in the Special 

General (03/31/09) Must File: 

Report Close of books 1

Reg./cert. & overnight mailing 

deadline 

Filing deadline 

Pre-General ......................................................................................................... 03/11/09 03/16/09 03/19/09 

Post-General ........................................................................................................ 04/20/09 04/30/09 04/30/09 

Mid-Year .............................................................................................................. 06/30/09 07/31/09 07/31/09 

1The reporting period always begins the day after the closing date of the last report filed. If the committee is new and has not previously filed 

a report, the first report must cover all activity that occurred before the committee registered up through the close of books for the first report 

due. 

Dated: February 27, 2009. 

On behalf of the Commission, 

Steven T. Walther, 

Chairman, Federal Election Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–4651 Filed 3–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–P 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Notices 

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. 

CANCELLATIONS: Executive Session 

scheduled for February 24, 2009. Open 

Meeting scheduled for February 26, 

2009. Executive Session scheduled for 

March 3, 2009. Open Meeting scheduled 

for March 5, 2009. 

DATE AND TIME: Wednesday, March 4, 

2009, at 10 a.m. and Thursday, March 

5, 2009, at 2 p.m. 

PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, 

DC. 

STATUS: These meetings will be closed 

to the public. 

ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: Compliance 

matters pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 437g. 

Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 

437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C. 

Matters concerning participation in civil 

actions or proceedings or arbitration. 

Internal personnel rules and procedures 

or matters affecting a particular 

employee. 

PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: 

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: 

(202) 694–1220. 

Mary W. Dove, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–4662 Filed 3–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research 

and Quality, HHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

intention of the Agency for Healthcare 

Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) approve the proposed 

information collection project: 

‘‘Coordinating Care across Primary Care 

and Specialty Care Practices.’’ In 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A), AHRQ invites the public 

to comment on this proposed 

information collection. 

DATES: Comments on this notice must be 

received by May 4, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz, 

Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, by email at doris.lefkowitz@ahrq.hhs.gov. 

Copies of the proposed collection 

plans, data collection instruments, and 

specific details on the estimated burden 

can be obtained from the AHRQ Reports 

Clearance Officer. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ Reports 

Clearance Officer, (301) 427–1477, or by 

e-mail at doris.lefkowitz@ahrq.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Proposed Project 

‘‘Coordinating Care Across Primary Care 

and Specialty Care Practices’’ 

AHRQ proposes an evaluation of the 

redesign of the transitions of care 

between primary care and specialty care 

services. The purpose of the redesign is 

to remedy inefficiencies in the current 

referral processes that threaten care 

quality and safety, and system 

efficiency. This redesign is being 

implemented at the Boston Medical 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
9614 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 42 / Thursday, March 5, 2009 / Notices 

Center (BMC), and two affiliated health 

centers. The evaluation will be 

conducted for AHRQ by its contractor, 

the Boston University School of Public 

Health (BUSPH). 

Care coordination has been identified 

by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) as a 

key strategy with potential to improve 

the effectiveness, safety and efficiency 

of the health care system. At the same 

time, care coordination, particularly in 

transitions among sites of care, is often 

lacking. Research shows that problems 

in coordination of care and common 

failures in patients’ transitioning 

between and among systems typically 

create serious quality concerns in many 

settings. Individuals moving across 

systems of care and between care 

providers are vulnerable to fragmented 

and disjointed care (Coleman et al., 

2004). Uncoordinated and fragmented 

transitions can lead to a wide range of 

costly problems and threats to patient 

safety including greater use of hospital 

and emergency services (Coleman et al., 

2004), ordering and completion of 

redundant tests (Coleman & Berenson, 

2004), prescription and medication 

errors and use of poly-pharmacy by 

multiple providers (Coleman & 

Berenson, 2004). The end result is often 

confusion about conflicting care plans 

and lack of follow-up care. The aim of 

this evaluation is to address this 

confusion and fragmentation by 

expanding knowledge of how to 

improve the experience and outcomes 

for patients in transitions of care 

between primary care and specialty 

practices. The initial focus is on 

referrals between primary care and two 

specialties: gastroenterology (GI) and 

obstetrics (OB). The redesigned referral 

system will be tested by implementing 

it in three participating primary care 

sites and two specialty clinics. We 

expect that the lessons learned from this 

evaluation will provide a model and 

tools that can later easily be tested and 

applied to other sites and specialties in 

the BMC system and provide lessons 

learned to other systems seeking to 

sustainably improve their referral 

systems. 

This project is being conducted 

pursuant to AHRQ’s statutory authority 

to conduct research and evaluations on 

health care and systems for the delivery 

of such care, including activities with 

respect to: the quality, effectiveness, 

efficiency, appropriateness and value of 

health care services; clinical practice, 

including primary care and practiceoriented research; and health care costs, 

productivity, organization, and market 

forces. See 42 U.S.C. 299a(a)(l), (4) and 

(6). 

The overall aims of the evaluation are 

to provide a rigorous assessment of the 

success of the redesigned referral system 

in meeting its improvement goals and to 

gain an understanding of the 

implementation of the redesigned 

system. 

Method of Collection 

This evaluation will include the 

following data collections: 

b Medical record data will be used 

to analyze aspects of the referral 

process, such as percentage of items on 

referral forms filled in, proportion of 

specialty appointments made, time 

between referral and initial specialty 

appointment. Patients’ personal health 

data will not be analyzed. The medical 

record data will be used to measure both 

the fidelity of the redesigned system 

within the practices and success in 

meeting redesign improvement goal 

(outcome) indicators. The medical 

record data will be extracted by project 

staff and will not impose a burden on 

the participating health care sites. 

b Patient satisfaction survey will be 

administered to selected patients twice 

during the project. The questionnaire 

will be designed to assess patient 

experience in the referral system. Only 

patients with referrals to obstetrics or 

gastroenterology specialists will receive 

the questionnaire. These two 

questionnaires are essentially identical 

and vary only by the type of specialist 

seen; for the purpose of this clearance 

request they are treated as identical. 

Results from the first survey will 

provide baseline data; results from the 

second survey will provide the basis for 

assessing change over time and fidelity 

to the new system design. 

b Focus groups with providers, 

clinical staff and administrative staff 

will be conducted in each primary care 

site and in each specialty practice. The 

group sessions will pursue three topics: 

the extent to which the new system is 

being used as intended; the perceived 

effectiveness of the new system as 

implemented; and the organization and 

culture of the clinical setting. Themes 

from the focus groups will be used to 

assess fidelity of implementation, 

performance outcomes and factors 

affecting fidelity and outcomes. 

b Implementation logs and meeting 

notes kept by the project team 

throughout the redesign implementation 

will document the implementation 

process, including factors affecting the 

process, challenges encountered, and 

strategies for dealing with the 

challenges. This component of the 

evaluation will not impose a burden on 

the participating health care sites. 

Estimated Annual Respondent Burden 

Exhibit 1 shows the estimated 

annualized burden hours for the 

respondents’ time to participate in this 

two year evaluation. The patient 

satisfaction survey questionnaire will be 

completed by a total of 600 patients 

prior to the referral process redesign and 

600 patients after the completion of the 

redesign (Exhibit 1 shows 300 per year). 

The questionnaire is estimated to take 6 

minutes to complete. Focus groups will 

be conducted with about 21 clinical 

staff at each of the 3 primary care sites 

and 2 specialty care sites (Exhibit 1 

shows 2.5 sites per year). Each focus 

group session will last about 45 

minutes. The total annualized burden is 

estimated to be 99 hours. 

Exhibit 2 shows the estimated 

annualized cost burden associated with 

the respondents’ time to participate in 

this project. The total annualized cost 

burden is estimated to be $2,620. 

EXHIBIT 1—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Form name Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Hours per 

response 

Total burden 

hours 

Patient satisfaction survey ............................................................................. 300 2 6/60 60 

Focus groups ................................................................................................. 2 .5 21 45/60 39 

Total ........................................................................................................ 302 .5 na na 99 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 42 / Thursday, March 5, 2009 / Notices 9615 

EXHIBIT 2—ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST BURDEN

Form name Number of 

respondents 

Total burden 

hours 

Average 

hourly wage 

rate* 

Total cost 

burden 

Patient satisfaction survey ............................................................................. 300 60 $19.29 $1,157 

Focus groups ................................................................................................. 2 .5 39 37.50 1,463 

Total ........................................................................................................ 302 .5 99 na 2,620 

* The hourly wage for the patient surveys is based on the national average wage. The hourly wage for the focus groups is based upon the 

weighted mean of the average wages for physicians ($58.76, n=45), clinical administrative staff ($17.64, n=30) and other clinical staff ($25.48, 

n=30). National Compensation Survey: Occupational Wages in the United States, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. June 

2007, Summary 07–03, http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/ncblO9lO.pdf. Accessed December 10, 2008. 

Estimated Annual Costs to the Federal 

Government 

Exhibit 3 shows the estimated total 

and annualized cost for this two-year 

evaluation. The total cost is $155,110 

and includes $23,267 for project 

development, $32,573 for data 

collection activities, $31,022 for data 

processing and analysis, $15,511 for the 

publication of results, $12,408 for 

project management and $40,329 for 

overhead. 

EXHIBIT 3—ESTIMATED TOTAL AND ANNUALIZED COST

Cost component Total cost Annualized 

cost 

Project Development ....................................................................................................................................................... $23,267 $11,633 

Data Collection Activities ................................................................................................................................................. 32,573 16,287 

Data Processing and Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 31,022 15,511 

Publication of Results ...................................................................................................................................................... 15,511 7,756 

Project Management ........................................................................................................................................................ 12,408 6,204 

Overhead ......................................................................................................................................................................... 40,329 20,164 

Total .......................................................................................................................................................................... 155,110 77,555 

Request for Comments 

In accordance with the above-cited 

Paperwork Reduction Act legislation, 

comments on AHRQ’s information 

collection are requested with regard to 

any of the following: (a) Whether the 

proposed collection of information is 

necessary for the proper performance of 

AHRQ health care research, quality 

improvement and information 

dissemination functions, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of 

AHRQ’s estimate of burden (including 

hours and costs) of the proposed 

collection(s) 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 upon the 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and 

included in the Agency’s subsequent 

request for OMB approval of the 

proposed information collection. All 

comments will become a matter of 

public record. 

Dated: February 24, 2009. 

Carol M. Clancy, 

Director. 

[FR Doc. E9–4515 Filed 3–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–90–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

[30Day–09–08AR] 

Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork 

Reduction Act Review 

The Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of 

information collection requests under 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) in compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). To request a copy of these 

requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance 

Officer at (404) 639–4766 or send an 

e-mail to omb@cdc.gov. Send written 

comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of 

Management and Budget, Washington, 

DC or by fax to (202) 395–6974. Written 

comments should be received within 30 

days of this notice. 

Proposed Project 

CDC Cervical Cancer Study (CX3)— 

New—National Center for Chronic 

Disease Prevention and Health 

Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

Background and Brief Description 

The National Breast and Cervical 

Cancer Early Detection Program 

(NBCCEDP) is the only organized 

national screening program in the 

United States that offers breast and 

cervical cancer screening to 

underserved women. Screening policies 

for cervical cancer in the program 

include an annual Pap test until a 

woman has had three consecutive 

normal Pap tests. However, human 

papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing is 

not currently a reimbursable expense 

under NBCCEDP guidelines, therefore 

adopting HPV DNA testing along with 

Pap testing in women over 30 could 

help the program better utilize resources 

by extending the screening interval of 

women who are cytology negative and 

HPV test negative, which is estimated to 

be 80–90% of women. 

CDC proposes to conduct a pilot study 

at 18 clinics in the state of Illinois in 

order to assess the feasibility, 

acceptability and barriers to use the 

HPV DNA test in conjunction with Pap 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES