Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices 22565

evaluating benefit systems. It provides

the baseline functionality that benefit

systems must have to support agency

missions and comply with laws and

regulations. When issued in final, the

JFMIP Benefit System Requirements

document will augment the existing

body of FFMSR that define financial

system functional requirements which

are used in evaluating compliance with

the Federal Financial Management

Improvement Act (FFMIA) of 1996.

DATES: Comments are due by July 1,

2001.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the exposure draft

have been mailed to agency senior

financial officials, together with a cover

memo listing the questions on which

JFMIP is soliciting feedback. The

exposure draft and cover memo are

available on the JFMIP website:

WWW.JFMIP.GOV

Comments should be addressed to

JFMIP, 1990 K Street, NW., Suite 430,

Washington, DC 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Steven

Fisher, (202) 219–0530 or via Internet:

fishers@jfmip.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FFMIA of 1996 mandated that agencies

implement and maintain systems that

comply substantially with FFMSR,

applicable Federal accounting

standards, and the U.S. Government

Standard General Ledger at the

transaction level. The FFMIA statute

codified the JFMIP financial system

requirements documents as a key

benchmark that agency systems must

meet to substantially comply with

systems requirements provisions under

FFMIA. To support the provisions

outlined in the FFMIA, the JFMIP is

updating obsolete requirements

documents and publishing additional

requirements documents.

Comments received will be reviewed

and the exposure draft will be revised

as necessary. Publication of the final

requirements will be mailed to agency

senior financial officials and will be

available on the JFMIP website.

Dated: May 1, 2001.

Steven A. Fisher,

Senior Management Analyst, Joint Financial

Management Improvement Program.

[FR Doc. 01–11323 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1610–02–U

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary, Assistant

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation;

Notice Inviting Applications for New

Award for Fiscal Year 2001

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation

(ASPE), HHS.

ACTION: Announcement of the

availability of funds and request for

applications from states and large

counties for cooperative agreements to

study the characteristics of persons

receiving cash assistance from the

Temporary Assistance to Needy

Families (TANF) program.

SUMMARY: The Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation

(ASPE) announces the availability of

funds and invites applications for

cooperative agreements to conduct

research into the characteristics of

individuals who receive cash assistance

from the Temporary Assistance to

Needy Families (TANF) program.

Approximately four to five states or

large counties will receive funding

under a cooperative agreement that will

enable them to monitor and conduct

research into the characteristics of

current TANF recipients and their

families. Topics relevant to these

studies fall into several interrelated

categories: (1) Demographic

characteristics of the caseload; (2)

employment and economic outcomes of

the caseload; and (3) barriers to

employment. ASPE is particularly

interested in assisting state and local

efforts to study their TANF recipients’

potential barriers and opportunities for

obtaining employment and achieving

self-sufficiency using survey data

analysis enriched with administrative

data. Given the nature of the research

involved, competition is open only to

state agencies that administer TANF

programs and to counties with total

populations greater than 500,000 that

administer TANF programs.

Cooperative Agreements are

assistance mechanisms and subject to

the same administrative requirements as

grants; however, they are different from

either a grant or a contract. Cooperative

Agreements allow more involvement

and collaboration by the government in

the affairs of the project compared to a

grant, but provide less direction of

project activities than a contract. The

Terms of Award are in addition to not

in lieu of otherwise applicable

guidelines and procedures.

CLOSING DATE: The deadline for

submission of applications under this

announcement is June 18, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Application instructions

and forms should be requested from and

submitted to: Adrienne Little, Grants

Officer, Office of the Assistant Secretary

for Planning and Evaluation,

Department of Health and Human

Services, Room 405F, Hubert H.

Humphrey Building, 200 Independence

Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20201.

Telephone: (202) 690–8794. Requests for

forms and administrative questions will

be accepted and responded to up to ten

(10) working days prior to the closing

date.

Copies of this program announcement

and many of the required forms may

also be obtained electronically at the

ASPE World Wide Web Page: http://

aspe.hhs.gov. You may fax your request

to the attention of the Grants Officer at

(202) 690–6518. Applications may not

be faxed or submitted electronically.

The printed Federal Register notice is

the only official program

announcement. Although reasonable

efforts are taken to assure that the files

on the ASPE World Wide Web Page

containing electronic copies of this

program announcement are accurate

and complete, they are provided for

information only. The applicant bears

sole responsibility to assure that the

copy downloaded and/or printed from

any other source is accurate and

complete.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Administrative questions should be

directed to the Grants Officer at the

address or phone number listed above.

Programmatic/technical questions

should be directed to Susan Hauan,

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation, Department of

Health and Human Services, Room

404E, Hubert H. Humphrey Building,

200 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20201. Telephone:

(202) 690–8698. Questions may be faxed

to (202) 690–6562 or e-mailed to

shauan@osaspe.dhhs.gov.

Part I. Supplemental Information

Legislative Authority

This cooperative agreement is

authorized by section 1110 of the Social

Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1310) and

awards will be made from funds

appropriated under the Departments of

Labor, Health and Human Services, and

Education, and Related Agencies

Appropriations Act, 2001, as enacted by

section 1000(a)(4) of the Consolidated

Appropriations Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 106–

554).

22566 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices

Eligible Applicants

Given the nature of the research

involved, competition is open only to

state agencies that administer TANF

programs and to counties with total

populations greater than 500,000 that

administer TANF programs. Consortia

of states and counties are also

encouraged to apply, as long as their

combined total populations exceed

500,000 and a single agency is identified

as the lead to handle grant funds and

sub-granting. Public or private nonprofit

organizations, including universities

and other institutions of higher

education, may collaborate with states

in submitting an application, but the

principal grantee will be a state or

county. Private for-profit organizations

may also apply jointly with states or

counties, with the recognition that grant

funds may not be paid as profit to any

recipient of a grant or subgrant.

The Code of Federal Regulations, Title

45, Part 92 defines a state as: ‘‘Any of

the several states of the United States,

the District of Columbia, the

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any

territory or possession of the United

States, or any agency or instrumentality

of a State exclusive of local

governments. The term does not include

any public and Indian housing agency

under United States Housing Act of

1937.’’

Available Funds

Approximately $1,000,000 is available

from ASPE, in funds appropriated for

fiscal year 2001. ASPE anticipates

providing approximately four to five

awards of between $200,000 and

$250,000 each. If additional funding

becomes available in fiscal year 2002,

additional projects may be funded or

some projects may receive second-year

non-competing continuation funding.

However, applications for funding

under this announcement should

describe projects that can be completely

carried out with fiscal year 2001

funding at the above anticipated level.

Use of Funds

No federal funds received as a result

of this announcement can be used to

purchase computer equipment and no

funds may be paid to grantees or subgrantees as profit, i.e., any amount in

excess of allowable direct and indirect

costs of the recipient (45 CFR 74.81).

Our intent is to sponsor state and local

survey data collection efforts and

administrative data linking and

analysis, and grant funds awarded may

not be used to pay for assistance

programs or the provision of services.

Grantees must provide a minimum of

5 percent of the total approved cost of

the project. The total approved cost of

the project is the sum of the federal

share and the non-federal share. Thus,

a project with a total budget of $200,000

must include a match of at least $10,000

and would imply a request for federal

funds of no more than $190,000. The

non-federal share may be met by cash or

in-kind contributions, although

applicants are encouraged to meet their

match requirements through cash

contributions.

If a study has approved funding from

other funding sources, the amount,

duration, purpose, and source of the

funds should be indicated in materials

submitted under this announcement. If

completion of the proposed study is

contingent upon approval of funding

from other sources, the relationship

between the funds being sought

elsewhere and from ASPE should be

discussed in the budget information

submitted as part of the application. In

both cases, the contribution that ASPE

funds will make to the project should be

clearly presented.

Background

Welfare caseloads have declined

precipitously in recent years. Since

January 1993, the number of people

receiving welfare benefits has fallen

from 14.1 million to 5.8 million

recipients, a reduction of nearly 60

percent. This decline is attributable to

several factors, including the provisions

of the Personal Responsibility and Work

Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996

(Pub. L. 104–193) and the strong

economy. In response to the demand

from the public and policymakers, many

studies to date address the

circumstances of individuals who have

left welfare or who applied and were

formally or informally diverted from

welfare. Fewer studies focus on the

status of current TANF recipients.

Questions have been raised, however,

about who is staying on welfare. How

many of the individuals on welfare are

‘‘hard-to-employ’’ or more

disadvantaged? How many are at high

risk of reaching time limits? What

services do recipients need to make the

transition to work and success in the

labor market? This information is of

great interest to policymakers and

administrators trying to adapt work

programs to serve those remaining on

the caseload better. Long-term recipients

and those close to reaching time limits

are of particular interest.

ASPE is interested in funding studies

under this announcement that address

the characteristics and circumstances of

individuals and families receiving cash

assistance from the TANF program at a

given point in time. TANF

administrative records are an important

source of data on the caseload. These

administrative records provide valuable

data on the characteristics of the TANF

caseload; however, the picture they

provide is incomplete. These state and

county studies on the TANF caseload

will help enrich our understanding of

the characteristics of TANF recipients.

The studies funded under this

announcement continue ASPE’s

partnership with states and counties in

building data infrastructure and, as

such, build closely on many previous

ASPE-sponsored research projects to

study the outcomes of welfare reform.

These include projects involving

administrative data linking and several

earlier rounds of grants to states and

large counties.

For the past three years, the

Department has received policy research

funds targeted by Congressional

appropriators to support studies of the

outcomes of welfare reform. Additional

funds were also included in the fiscal

year 2001 appropriation. Projects

funded in fiscal years 1998, 1999, and

2000 include studies that measure

outcomes for a broad population of lowincome families and measure family

hardship and well-being, including the

utilization of other support programs. A

large portion of the welfare outcome

funds has been spent on competitive

grants to states and large counties to

study families leaving welfare, as well

as those who have been diverted

(formally and informally) from welfare

receipt. Based on both linked

administrative data and survey data,

these projects provide valuable data on

welfare outcomes from a variety of

perspectives. Additional information on

ASPE-funded welfare outcomes studies

can be found on the ASPE web site at:

http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/hsp/leavers99/

index.htm.

As findings from these studies

continue to emerge, forming a valuable

knowledge base around welfare

outcomes for families who leave

welfare, it is appropriate to expand our

understanding of the characteristics of

current TANF recipients. Current

recipients include both those who

entered the program recently as well as

those who have received welfare cash

assistance over a longer period of time.

The policy community is particularly

interested in understanding the

personal, family, and community-level

barriers current recipients may face, as

well as specific characteristics and skills

that may provide opportunities for

employment and future self-sufficiency.

There have been several successful

efforts to measure the characteristics of

welfare recipients beyond

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices 22567

demographics. For example, both

Missouri and Nebraska are using

telephone interviews to collect data on

barriers to employment among current

and former welfare recipients. The

National Survey of America’s Families

is another example of a telephone

survey that includes questions on a

variety of potential barriers to

employment including mental health.

The Women’s Employment Survey

collects a rich set of in-person interview

data on the characteristics of current

and former welfare recipients, including

domestic violence and substance abuse,

in one Michigan County, and

CalWORKS Needs Assessment examines

health-related and other barriers to selfsufficiency in Alameda County,

California. In March 2001, a workshop

sponsored by ASPE and co-organized

with Sheldon Danziger, principal

investigator for the Women’s

Employment Survey, explored the use

of measures in a telephone survey to

capture such potential barriers as

domestic violence, mental health,

physical health, and substance use and

abuse.

Based on studies to date, it is clear

that the information required to

understand the detailed characteristics

and circumstances of this population is

not available in administrative data

sources. Hence, survey data methods are

needed for these state and county-level

TANF caseload projects.

Part II. Purpose and Responsibilities

Purpose

The purpose of this announcement is

to partner with states and large counties

through cooperative agreements to

support their research efforts on the

characteristics and circumstances of

current Temporary Assistance to Needy

Families (TANF) recipients. ASPE is

committed to using the research funds

appropriated by Congress to help build

state and local capacity to conduct

studies of the outcomes of welfare

reform. Through these cooperative

agreements, ASPE hopes to support

state and local efforts to gather a variety

of information about the above

individuals and their families, including

their demographic characteristics,

employment and economic

circumstances, and potential personal,

family and community-level barriers to

employment and economic selfsufficiency. Again, while TANF

administrative records include basic

data on TANF recipient characteristics,

they do not provide sufficiently detailed

information on recipient needs, barriers

to work, and outcomes.

This research will allow states and

large counties to learn about the

characteristics of families who receive

TANF cash assistance at a given point

in time. What are the characteristics of

recipients and their families? What are

the characteristics of employed

recipients? What types of barriers do

recipients face and how do these

barriers differ between working and

non-working recipients? How are such

families faring in terms of economic and

non-economic family well-being?

While applicants have the flexibility

to define their specific study

population, states’ and localities’

understanding of their own caseloads as

well as a broader understanding of the

circumstances of the TANF population

as a whole, is achieved best with some

cross-state comparability. The National

Academy of Sciences has also indicated

that increased comparability across state

and local area welfare studies is needed

for providing the most useful knowledge

to the wider research and policy

community and should be a high

priority. To achieve cross-study

comparability it is preferred that the

study populations identified include all

single-parent families receiving TANF

cash assistance at a given point in time.

This preferred study population would

include child-only cases where a single

parent is present in the household. To

meet state-specific policy and research

needs, states and counties may also

choose to stratify their samples of the

study population and/or to broaden

their study populations to include

additional TANF cash recipients (e.g.,

two-parent cases, all child-only cases) or

recipients of other forms of TANF

assistance in the same month.

Applicants are encouraged to propose

to draw their sample cohorts of TANF

recipients from their TANF

administrative data files so as to

minimize the amount of time between

sample identification and the desired

timing for survey implementation. This

would maximize the number of survey

respondents still receiving TANF at the

time of the interview.

Based on prior work, telephone

survey instruments have been

developed to address this population.

ASPE will provide these instruments to

the grantees and will work closely with

them to finalize a data collection

instrument. Grantees will have the

opportunity to include questions that

meet their own state-specific research

and policy needs. It is anticipated that

the total time to administer the survey

instrument will be approximately 30–40

minutes over the telephone. Applicants

should assume a survey instrument will

be completed and cleared by the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) by

March 2002.

Applicants may propose to draw

stratified samples based on subgroups of

particular interest to ensure sufficient

sample size for analysis. For example,

states may want to stratify their samples

of single-parent recipients based on

length of the current welfare spell or

other spell dynamics. Using

administrative data on months of past

welfare receipt, a grantee could

oversample long-term recipients (e.g.,

recipients for 24 or more months) or

‘‘cyclers’’ (e.g., recipients with multiple

spells over a given time period).

Grantees may also choose to stratify

their samples and conduct subgroup

analyses based on state-specific policy

interests such as teen parents,

immigrants, non-employed recipients,

sanctioned recipients, recipients who

are close to reaching time limits, or

other special populations (e.g., the

disabled, those with substance abuse

problems). Subgroup comparisons

across other characteristics, including

race, age and geographic area (including

urban/rural) are also encouraged. While

ASPE understands that grantees will

vary in the types of subgroup analyses

that are of interest and that can be

conducted, where possible ASPE will

work closely with individual grantees to

develop common definitions of

subgroups across studies (e.g., long-term

recipients).

Grantees are also encouraged to

augment their survey data with

administrative records to capture

welfare and work histories. For

example, projects could include

retrospective data on prior welfare

receipt and could continue to track

welfare participation data postinterview. These individual records

drawn from state TANF data files

should be linked with the survey data

collected. This combination of survey

and administrative data will provide

analysts with answers to a wider range

of questions than would be possible

with only one type of data.

Applicants for the ASPE cooperative

agreements may propose to augment

their analyses with administrative data

from additional programs. For example,

some states or localities may choose to

look at linked administrative data on

TANF and child welfare to address the

characteristics of the caseload vis a vis

contacts with the child welfare system.

Grantees could also choose to examine

linked administrative data on earnings

(using Unemployment Insurance

records) and on participation in

multiple public programs (e.g., TANF,

Medicaid, the Food Stamp Program, and

child care) in an effort to understand

22568 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices

work and program histories as well as

post-interview employment and

program participation.

ASPE is interested in funding state

and local area studies that examine the

interrelationships of demographic

characteristics, employment and

economic outcomes, and potential

barriers to employment and selfsufficiency for a sample of current

recipients, with subgroup analyses

proposed by the applicants. Below is a

list of general topics and some examples

of specific items states and localities

may want to include in these studies. It

is not meant to be exhaustive of all

topics that may be included in each

individual grantee’s study. We

encourage applicants to indicate

particular topics from the list below that

represent the most important data needs

for their state or county. In addition, if

prospective applicants have additional

topics and survey questions they feel are

relevant to their own state-specific

information needs, they are encouraged

to raise these survey topics and the

associated questions they wish to

answer in their applications. Indication

of topics and survey questions by

applicants will aid in the background

preparation of survey questions to be

cleared by the Office of Management

and Budget by March 2002.

Anticipated topics fall into three

interrelated categories: (1) Demographic

characteristics of the caseload; (2)

employment and economic outcomes of

recipients; and (3) barriers to

employment and self-sufficiency.

1. Demographic Characteristics of the

Caseload: Age (of recipient, children),

race/ethnic background, marital status,

number of children, educational

attainment, household composition,

pregnancies and births, and living

arrangements (including family and

child moves).

2. Employment and Economic

Outcomes of Recipients: Employment

status, reasons not working,

participation in work programs and job

skills training, utilization of job search

services and/or basic work orientation

services, earnings, income, child

support payments.

3. Potential Barriers to Employment

and Self-Sufficiency. Personal Barriers:

Very low education levels, few job

skills, low levels of prior labor force

participation, illiteracy, limited English

language fluency, lack of basic work

orientation skills (e.g., dress,

punctuality, attendance, following

instructions), physical and mental

health problems and disabilities,

substance abuse issues, and criminal

records or involvement with the legal

system.

Family Barriers: The presence of very

young children, presence of children or

other family members with disabilities

or chronic health problems, problems

with child care, domestic violence, and

presence of family members with

criminal records or involvement with

the legal system.

Community Barriers: Poor public

transportation, high crime rates, housing

problems including lack of affordable

housing, inadequate child care

availability, inadequate job availability,

and inadequate availability of services.

Grantees may also be interested in

additional topics such as: utilization of

specific state program services, receipt

of child care benefits, measures of

hardship and family well-being, housing

subsidies and housing insecurity, health

insecurity, food insecurity, extended

family support, or other topics of

interest to state and federal

policymakers. States and counties

should include in their applications any

additional survey topics or concepts of

interest and the related policy questions

these survey items will be used to

answer. Applicants are encouraged to

include examples of these specific

survey questions, if available, in an

appendix.

Cooperative Agreement

ASPE will make awards under this

announcement using the cooperative

agreement mechanism. A cooperative

agreement is a legal agreement between

the Department of Health and Human

Services (DHHS) and the recipient in

which DHHS provides financial

assistance and substantial federal

programmatic involvement with the

recipient during the performance of the

project. In a cooperative agreement,

DHHS and the recipient of federal funds

share roles and responsibilities. The

following two sections outline the

responsibilities of the grantee and

DHHS (respectively) in conducting

activities to achieve the purpose of this

project.

Grantee Responsibilities

1. Prior to completion of final work

plans, grantees will take part in an

ongoing joint discussion of their

proposed study designs, a survey

instrument under development, and

table shells used for reporting selected

results. As part of this early process, a

meeting will be held for the grantees

and relevant federal personnel in

Washington, D.C., to discuss the

preliminary methodology and design of

the research projects. Grantees should

plan to attend this meeting. This

ongoing process will allow for

knowledge sharing across the various

projects, as well as encourage peer-topeer contacts among the grantees.

2. No later than ninety (90) days after

the date of award, the grantee shall

submit an outline of progress to date,

including efforts to secure

subcontractors if applicable, and a final

work plan that is based on and updates

the work plan submitted in the original

application.

3. Grantees should provide concise

quarterly progress reports fifteen (15)

days after the end of each calendar

quarter. The specific format and content

for these reports will be provided by the

Federal Project Officer.

4. To continue the ongoing discussion

of project implementation and results, a

second meeting for grantees will be held

approximately 11 to 12 months after the

start of the grant period. Grantees

should plan to attend. The meeting will

provide the grantees with an

opportunity to continue their joint

discussions of survey administration

and data analysis, and to share their

preliminary project results with other

grantees.

5. After completing the full project,

grantees should provide ASPE with

copies of their own state or county final

reports. Grantees should provide at least

three (3) copies of their final reports to

the Grants Officer before the completion

of the project. Grantees should plan to

provide one unbound copy, suitable for

photocopying; if only one is the original

(has the original signature, is attached to

a cover letter, etc.), it should not be this

copy. State or county final reports

should also be provided in electronic

form on an IBM PC compatible 3 1⁄2 inch

diskette in a word processing format

compatible with ASPE software

(currently WordPerfect 8).

6. To encourage wider analysis, the

grantee is required to make all data

available to the research community. To

the extent practicable, grantees are

encouraged to follow guidance

previously developed by a workgroup of

grantees on producing and documenting

data files (see http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/

leavers99/datafiles/index.htm for

current guidance for fiscal years 1998 to

2000 Welfare Outcomes grantees). The

data file and documentation for all

survey and administrative data

compiled under this effort should be

made available for broader distribution

to the research community prior to the

completion of the project. If the data file

has been edited to ensure

confidentiality of individuals, the

grantee has the option of designating the

data file as a public-use data file. If not,

the data file should be made available

to researchers under restricted-access

conditions to ensure confidentiality.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices 22569

Grantees should plan to deposit these

databases and documentation in an

ASPE-designated central and secure

depository. For example, ASPE is

working with the fiscal years 1998 to

2000 grantees to place most of their

Welfare Outcomes data files at the

Research Data Center (RDC) of the

National Center for Health Statistics in

Hyattsville, Maryland. The RDC controls

and monitors access by researchers to

guard against breaches of

confidentiality; associated costs are not

the responsibility of the grantees.

ASPE Responsibilities

1. ASPE shall convene two meetings

of grantees, federal personnel, and

relevant experts in the areas the grantees

choose to address. These meetings will

allow for technical assistance and peerto-peer contacts both before final

research design and survey instrument

decisions have been made and after the

first, preliminary results are available.

2. ASPE shall work with grantees to

develop a survey instrument.

3. ASPE shall work with grantees to

develop table shells for reporting

selected results.

4. ASPE shall provide consultation

and technical assistance in the planning

and operation of grant activities. This

will include working closely with states

and localities on the production and

documentation of data files.

5. ASPE will work with individual

grantees on their data analysis and in

preparing any reports and/or

publications of the results.

6. ASPE shall assist in information

exchange and the dissemination of state

and local area reports to appropriate

federal, state, and local entities.

7. ASPE shall facilitate arrangements

to make data files available to the

broader research community under

restricted-access conditions to ensure

confidentiality. ASPE will designate a

central, secure depository for the

restricted-access databases that grantees

will provide at the end of the grant

period.

Part III. Application Preparation and

Evaluation Criteria

This section contains information on

the preparation of applications for

submission under this announcement,

the forms necessary for submission, and

the evaluation criteria under which the

applications will be reviewed. Potential

grant applicants should read this section

carefully in conjunction with the

information provided above. The

application must contain the required

federal forms, title page, table of

contents, and sections listed below. All

pages of the narrative should be

numbered.

The application should include the

following elements:

1. Abstract: A one-page summary of

the proposed project.

2. Goals and Objectives of the Project:

An overview that describes (1) The

project; (2) state-specific information

needs and policy questions to be

investigated; (3) proposed

accomplishments; and (4) knowledge

and information to be gained from the

project by the applicant, policymakers,

and the research community.

Applications should include specific

policy questions to be answered;

particular items of interest on the list of

proposed topics for a survey instrument;

identified gaps (if any) in the included

survey topics; and any additional

information that would be helpful for

the grantee to gather from the sample of

TANF recipients (including any

questions the additional survey data

would help to answer and examples of

specific survey questions if available).

The application should also describe

how the applicant views the importance

of this study and how each applicant

plans to use the information collected.

If the study builds on any current

project, the applicant should describe

how funding under this announcement

will enhance, not substitute for, current

state or local efforts. Applications from

states and counties that received

funding from ASPE previously are not

precluded from submitting applications

under this announcement; however,

such applications will be graded only

on the Evaluation Criteria listed below

and will receive no preferential

treatment during the award process.

3. Methodology and Design: Provide a

description and justification of how the

proposed research project will be

implemented, including definition of

study population, data collection

activities, use of existing data sources,

methodologies, and an analytic research

plan. The research design must

appropriately link policy questions, data

sources, and analyses, and must employ

technically sound and appropriate

approaches, design elements and

procedures. The research plan should:

(a) Describe in detail the methodology

the applicant will use to extract a

sample of TANF recipients in the

sample month, including detailed

information on plans for drawing a

stratified sample if applicable. Sample

sizes should be large enough to make

statistically reliable within-group

estimates and comparisons between

planned subgroups.

(b) Identify and describe the

methodology used to gather survey data

including the sampling plan, the survey

mode, and the steps that will be taken

to address any biases inherent in each.

These should include steps planned to

ensure a high response rate, such as inperson follow up to locate those who are

difficult to contact, and steps taken to

analyze differences between

respondents and non-respondents, such

as comparisons based on administrative

data.

(c) If applicant proposes to use

administrative data, describe the

methods used to clean, standardize and

link case-level administrative data from

different administrative sources (if

applicable) as well as the methods used

to match case records between TANF

administrative data and survey data.

(d) identify the methodology to be

used to analyze the data and organize

their final report. Simple tabular

analysis, descriptive statistics, and

associated tests for statistical

significance are appropriate. More

complex data analysis is acceptable but

not expected.

To the extent that the analysis uses

data on individuals from multiple,

separate sources, such as administrative

databases from several state agencies,

the application should discuss measures

taken to maintain confidentiality, as

well as demonstrate that the grantee has

obtained authorized access to those data

sources. The preferred form of proof is

a signed interagency agreement with

each of the relevant agencies/

departments. Though not preferable,

letters of support from the appropriate

agencies are acceptable, provided that

the letters clearly state that the

proposing agency has the authorization

to access and link all necessary data.

Grant applicants must ensure that the

collected data will only be used for

management and research purposes, and

that all identifying information will be

kept completely confidential.

Applicants should present the methods

that will be used to ensure

confidentiality of records and

information once data are made

publically available for research

purposes.

4. Experience, Capacity,

Qualifications, and Use of Staff: Briefly

describe the grant applicant’s

organizational capabilities and

experience in conducting pertinent

research projects. The application

should describe the applicant’s

experience in conducting relevant

surveys (e.g., experience in locating

respondents and in completing

interviews with similar populations) or

identify key subcontractors with such

experience. For applicants proposing

administrative data analysis, the

22570 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices

application should detail the applicant’s

experience in linking administrative

records across administrative sources

and between administrative and survey

data sources (as applicable), and in

conducting research based on

administrative data or identify key

subcontractors with such experience.

If the grant applicant plans to contract

for any of the work (e.g., survey

administration or data-linking),

applications should include relevant

information on any similar procurement

activities and on their experiences in

providing oversight on similar data

projects. In addition, if the contractors

have not been retained, the applicant

should describe the process by which

they will be selected and the time line

for this selection process. Identify the

key staff who are expected to carry out

the project and provide a resume or

curriculum vitae for each person.

Provide a discussion of how key staff

will contribute to the success of the

project, including the percentage of each

staff member’s time that will be devoted

to the project. Finally, applicants should

demonstrate access to computer

hardware and software for storing and

analyzing the data necessary to

complete this project.

5. Work Plan: A work plan should be

included which lists the start and end

dates of the project, a time line that

indicates the sequence of tasks

necessary for the completion of the

project, and the responsibilities of each

of the key staff. In listing the sequence

of tasks, the plan should provide

sufficient detail to demonstrate the

applicant has carefully thought through

the necessary steps to complete the

project. The plan should identify the

total time commitments of key staff

members in both absolute and

percentage terms, including other

projects and teaching or managerial

responsibilities. Grantees should

assume a survey instrument will be

cleared by the Office of Management

and Budget by March 2002 allowing for

interviews to begin as early as April

2002. Due to the level of effort needed

to conduct these survey data studies,

grantees may want to consider work

plans with time lines of seventeen

months.

The work plan also should include

plans for dissemination of the results of

the study (e.g., articles in journals,

presentations to state legislatures or at

conferences) and plans for making

resulting data files available to qualified

researchers. As noted above, ASPE

prefers that appropriately documented

data files be placed at a controlled

environment such as the Research Data

Center of the National Center for Health

Statistics or be edited as appropriate for

confidentiality and issued as a publicuse data file. If the grant applicant does

not plan to provide a public-use file or

to place the data at a controlled

environment, the application should

explain why and should fully articulate

how the applicant will make the data

available to qualified researchers.

6. Budget: Grant applicants must

submit a request for federal funds using

Standard Form 424A and include a

detailed breakdown of all federal line

items. A narrative explanation of the

budget should be included that states

clearly how the funds associated with

this announcement will be used and

describes the extent to which funds will

be used for purposes that would not

otherwise be incorporated within the

project. The applicant should also

document the level of funding from

other sources and describe how these

funds will be expended.

As noted above, applicants should

budget for two trips to the Washington,

D.C. area, for at least two members of

the research team. The preparation and

documentation of a public-use data file

or other efforts to make the resulting

data publically available should also be

accounted for in the project budget.

Review Process and Funding

Information

Applications will initially be screened

for compliance with the timeliness and

completeness requirements. Three (3)

copies of each application are required.

One of these copies must be in an

unbound format, suitable for copying. If

only one of the copies is the original

(i.e., carries the original signature and is

accompanied by a cover letter) it should

not be this copy. Applicants are

encouraged to send an additional two

(2) copies to ease processing, but the

application will not be penalized if

these extra copies are not included. The

grant applicant’s Standard Form 424

must be signed by a representative of

the applicant who is authorized to act

with full authority on behalf of the

applicant.

A federal review panel will review

and score all applications submitted by

the deadline date that meet the

screening criteria (all information and

documents as required by this

announcement). The panel will use the

evaluation criteria listed below to score

each application. The panel results will

be the primary element used by the

Assistant Secretary for Planning and

Evaluation when making funding

decisions. The Department reserves the

option to discuss applications with

other federal or state staff, specialists,

experts and the general public.

Comments from these sources, along

with those of the reviewers, will be kept

from inappropriate disclosure and may

be considered in making an award

decision.

As a result of this competition, four to

five grants of $200,000 to $250,000 each

are expected to be made from funds

appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Additional awards may be made

depending on the policy relevance of

applications received and the available

funding, including funds that may

become available in fiscal year 2002.

State Single Point of Contact

DHHS has determined that this

program is not subject to Executive

Order 12372, ‘‘Intergovernmental

Review of Federal Programs.’’

Applicants are not required to seek

intergovernmental review of their

applications within the constraints of

Executive Order 12372.

Deadline for Submission of Applications

The closing date for submission of

applications under this announcement

is June 18, 2001. Hand-delivered

applications will be accepted Monday

through Friday, excluding federal

holidays, during the working hours of

9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in the lobby of the

Hubert H. Humphrey building, located

at 200 Independence Avenue, SW in

Washington, D.C. When hand-delivering

an application, call (202) 690–8794 from

the lobby for pick up. A staff person will

be available to receive applications.

An application will be considered as

having met the deadline if it is either

received at, or hand-delivered to, the

mailing address on or before June 18,

2001, or postmarked before midnight

three days prior to June 18, 2001, and

received in time to be considered during

the competitive review process (within

two weeks of the deadline).

When mailing applications,

applicants are strongly advised to obtain

a legibly dated receipt from the U.S.

Postal Service or from a commercial

carrier (such as UPS, Federal Express,

etc.) 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. If proof

cannot be provided, the application will

not be considered for funding. Private

metered postmarks will not be accepted

as proof of timely mailing. Applications

which do not meet the deadline will be

considered late applications and will

not be considered or reviewed in the

current competition. DHHS will send a

letter to this effect to each late

applicant.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices 22571

DHHS reserves the right to extend the

deadline for all applications due to: (1)

Natural disasters, such as floods,

hurricanes, or earthquakes; (2) a

widespread disruption of the mail; or,

(3) if DHHS determines a deadline

extension to be in the best interest of the

federal government. The Department

will not waive or extend the deadline

for any applicant unless the deadline is

waived or extended for all applicants.

Application Forms

Application instructions and forms

should be requested from and submitted

to: Adrienne Little, Grants Officer,

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation, Department of

Health and Human Services, Room

405F, Hubert H. Humphrey Building,

200 Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20201. Telephone:

(202) 690–8794. Requests for forms and

questions (administrative and technical)

will be accepted and responded to up to

ten (10) working days prior to closing

date of receipt of applications.

Copies of this program announcement

and all of the required forms may also

be obtained electronically at the ASPE

World Wide Web Page: http://

aspe.hhs.gov. You may fax your request

to the attention of the Grants Officer at

(202) 690–6518. Grant applications may

not be faxed or submitted electronically.

The printed Federal Register notice is

the only official program

announcement. Although reasonable

efforts are taken to assure that the files

on the ASPE World Wide Web Page

containing electronic copies of this

program announcement are accurate

and complete, they are provided for

information only. The applicant bears

sole responsibility to assure that the

copy downloaded and/or printed from

any other source is accurate and

complete.

Also see section entitled

‘‘Components of a Complete

Application.’’ All of these documents

must accompany the application

package.

Length of Application

In no case shall an application for the

ASPE grant (excluding the resumes,

appendices and other appropriate

attachments) be longer than thirty (30)

single-spaced pages with 12 point font

and one-inch margins on top, bottom,

left, and right. Applications should not

be unduly elaborate, but should fully

communicate the applicant’s proposed

study to the reviewers.

Selection Process and Evaluation

Criteria

Selection of successful applicants will

be based on the technical and financial

criteria described 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, strengths and 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

process. An unacceptable rating on any

individual criterion may render the

application unacceptable. Consequently,

grant applicants should take care to

ensure that all criteria are fully

addressed in the applications. Grant

applications will be reviewed as

follows:

1. Goals, Objectives, and Potential

Usefulness of the Analyses (25 points).

The potential usefulness of the

objectives and how the anticipated

results of the proposed project will

advance policy knowledge and

development. If the proposed project

builds on previous work, the

application should explain how.

Applications will be judged on the

quality, policy relevance and adequate

discussion of proposed questions to be

addressed and proposed analyses,

including subgroup analyses.

2. Quality and Soundness of

Methodology and Design (30 points).

The appropriateness, soundness, and

cost-effectiveness of the methodology,

including the research design, selection

of existing data sets, definition of the

study population, plans for survey

administration, adequacy of sample

sizes, statistical techniques, and

analytical strategies.

Reviewers will evaluate the

methodology proposed to gather survey

data. In particular, reviewers will

evaluate the sampling plan, the survey

mode, and the steps that will be taken

to address any biases inherent in each.

This will include evaluating steps

planned to ensure a high response rate,

such as in-person follow up to locate

those who are difficult to contact, and

steps planned to analyze differences

between respondents and nonrespondents, such as comparisons based

on administrative data.

For planned administrative data

analysis, a critical scoring element will

be the applicant’s discussion of the

methods used to clean, standardize, and

link the individual-level or case-level

data from different sources, including

links between administrative data and

survey data.

Reviewers also will evaluate the

proposed data analysis, the planned

organization of the applicant’s final

report, and the applicant’s discussion of

how different data sources (e.g., data

from administrative sources, survey data

collection, other research if applicable)

will be synthesized to enhance the

proposed analyses.

3. Qualifications of Personnel and

Organizational Capability (20 points).

The qualifications of the project

personnel for conducting the proposed

research as evidenced by professional

training and experience, and the

capacity of the organization to provide

the infrastructure and support necessary

for the project. Reviewers will evaluate

the principal investigator and staff on

research experience and demonstrated

research skills.

Applications will be evaluated in

terms of the applicant’s or

subcontractor’s experience in

conducting relevant surveys, including

experience in securing high response

rates from welfare recipients or other

low-income populations. Applications

that involve linking of administrative

data and assembling of large databases

will be scored on the applicant’s or

subcontractor’s experience with such

linking efforts. If the applicant plans to

contract for any of the work (e.g., datalinking or survey administration),

applicants will be evaluated on any

relevant procurement activities and on

their experiences in providing oversight

on similar data projects. In addition, if

the contractors have not been retained,

reviewers will consider the process by

which they will be selected and the time

frame for this selection.

Reviewers may consider references for

work completed on prior research

projects. Principal investigator and staff

time commitments also will be a factor

in the evaluation. Reviewers will rate

the applicant’s pledge and ability to

work in collaboration with other

scholars or organizations in search of

similar goals. Reviewers also will

evaluate the applicant’s demonstrated

capacity to work with a range of

government agencies.

4. Ability of the Work Plan and

Budget to Successfully Achieve the

Project’s Objectives (20 points).

Reviewers will examine: (a) Whether the

work plan and budget are reasonable

and sufficient to ensure timely

implementation and completion of the

study; (b) whether the application

22572 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices

demonstrates an adequate level of

understanding by the applicant of the

practical problems of conducting such a

project; (c) the use of any additional

funding and the role that ASPE funds

will play in the total project; and (d)

whether the applicant has shown how

results will be disseminated.

The applicant should also discuss in

detail how resulting data will be made

available to qualified researchers. As

noted above, ASPE prefers that

appropriately documented data files be

placed at a controlled environment such

as the Research Data Center of the

National Center for Health Statistics or

be edited as appropriate for

confidentiality and issued as a publicuse data file. If the grant applicant does

not plan to provide a public-use file or

to place the data at a controlled

environment, the application should

explain why and should fully articulate

how the applicant will make the data

available to qualified researchers.

5. Ability to Sustain Project After

Funding (5 points). One of ASPE’s goals

is to help states and large counties build

their capacity to study the outcomes of

welfare reform. Grant applicants should

identify an ability to continue their

studies after the funding period closes.

To this end, reviewers will consider

whether the application adequately

addresses questions such as the

following: To what extent could the

survey administered and the

administrative data linkages performed

on the cohort under study be duplicated

for later cohorts? To what extent could

additional survey data or data linkages

be collected/performed to follow the

initial cohort for additional years? What

agency(ies) will have responsibility for

and jurisdiction over the resulting data

sets after the project is completed? Are

there any sources of financial and staff

support for maintaining the database?

Disposition of Applications

1. Approval, Disapproval, or Deferral.

On the basis of the review of the

application, the Assistant Secretary will

either (a) approve the application as a

whole or in part; (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

Assistant Secretary for Planning and

Evaluation will notify the applicants of

the disposition of their applications. If

approved, a signed notification of the

award will be sent to the business office

named in the ASPE checklist.

3. The Assistant Secretary’s

Discretion. Nothing in this

announcement should be construed as

to obligate the Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation to make any

awards whatsoever. Awards and the

distribution of awards among priority

areas are contingent on the needs of the

Department at any point in time and the

quality of the applications that are

received.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic

Assistance number is 93–239.

Components of a Complete Application

A complete application consists of the

following items in this order:

1. Application for Federal Assistance

(Standard Form 424);

2. Budget Information—NonConstruction Programs (Standard Form

424A);

3. Assurances—Non-Construction

Programs (Standard Form 424B);

4. Table of Contents;

5. Budget Justification for Section B

Budget Categories;

6. Copy of the applicant’s Approved

Indirect Cost Rate Agreement, if

applicable;

7. Project Narrative Statement,

organized in five sections, addressing

the following topics (limited to thirty

(30) single-spaced pages):

(a) Abstract,

(b) Goals, Objectives and Usefulness

of the Project,

(c) Methodology and Design,

(d) Background of the Personnel and

Organizational Capabilities and

(e) Work Plan (timetable);

8. Any appendices or attachments;

9. Certification Regarding Drug-Free

Workplace;

10. Certification Regarding

Debarment, Suspension, or other

Responsibility Matters;

11. Certification and, if necessary,

Disclosure Regarding Lobbying;

12. Supplement to Section II—Key

Personnel;

13. Application for Federal Assistance

Checklist.

Dated: April 26, 2001.

William F. Raub,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Planning and

Evaluation.

[FR Doc. 01–11301 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4154–05–U

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

Statement of Delegation of Authority

Notice is hereby given that I have

delegated to the Director, National

Institutes of Health, the authorities

under Public Law 106–310 (Children’s

Health Act of 2000), title I, section 104

(a) and (c) as amended, to establish and

to administer the Autism Coordinating

Committee. I am also delegating the

authority under title I, section 104(b)(1)

to select as members of the Committee,

such Directors of national research

institutes and the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention as appropriate.

I will retain the authority under title 1,

section 104(b) (1) and (2) pertaining to

the selection of additional members of

the Committee.

This delegation shall be exercised

under the Department’s existing

delegation of authority and policy on

regulation. In addition, I ratify and

affirm any actions taken by you or your

subordinates which involved the

exercise of the authorities delegated

herein prior to the effective date of this

delegation.

This delegation is effective upon date

of signature.

Dated: April 25, 2001.

Tommy G. Thompson,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–11300 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease Registry

[Program Announcement 01043]

Program To Conduct and Coordinate

Site-Specific Activities; Notice of

Availability of Funds

A. Purpose

The Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease Registry (ATSDR) announces

the availability of fiscal year (FY) 2001

funds for a cooperative agreement

program to Conduct and Coordinate

Site-Specific Activities. This program

addresses the ‘‘Healthy People 2010’’

focus area of Environmental Health.

The purpose of the program is for

recipients to conduct site-specific health

activities to determine the public health

impact of human exposure to hazardous

substances at hazardous waste sites or

releases. The ultimate goal of this

program is to reduce exposures to

hazardous substances and mitigate

potential adverse health effects from

such exposures. Specifically, funds will

be used to build capacity in

coordination and cooperation with

ATSDR to conduct site-specific

activities under the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act

(CERCLA) and the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),