21996 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2001 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

Center for Scientific Review; Amended

Notice of Meeting

Notice is hereby given of a change in

the meeting of the Center for Scientific

Review Special Emphasis Panel, May 1,

2001, 1 PM to May 1, 2001, 3 PM, NIH,

Rockledge 2, Bethesda, MD, 20892

which was published in the Federal

Register on April 13, 2001, 66 FR 19183.

The meeting will now start at 1:30 PM

and end at 3 PM. The date and location

remains the same. The meeting is closed

to the public.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory

Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 01–10931 Filed 5–1–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Services Administration

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for OMB

Review; Comment Request

Periodically, the Substance Abuse and

Mental Health Services Administration

(SAMHSA) will publish a list of

information collection requests under

OMB review, in compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35). To request a copy of these

documents, call the SAMHSA Reports

Clearance Officer on (301) 443–7978.

Protocols for the Cross-Site Process

Evaluation of the State Incentive Grant

(SIG) Program

(New)—SAMHSA’s Center for

Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) is

charged with evaluating the State

Incentive Cooperative Agreements for

Community-Based Action, or State

Incentive Grant (SIG) Program. States

receiving SIG funds are: (1) To

coordinate, leverage and/or redirect, as

appropriate, all substance abuse

prevention resources within the State

that are directed at communities,

families, schools, and workplaces, and

(2) to develop a revitalized,

comprehensive State-wide prevention

strategy aimed at reducing drug use by

youth. The ultimate aim of the SIG

Program is to prevent substance abuse

among youths ages 12 to 17. The District

of Columbia and the 20 States that have

received SIG grants thus far are required

to implement at the community level a

range of substance abuse, communitybased prevention efforts, at least half of

which are derived from sound scientific

research findings. CSAP awarded about

$3 million per year for three years to

each of five States in FY 1997, to each

of fourteen States in FY 1998, to one

State and the District of Columbia in FY

1999, and to seven additional States in

FY 2000.

CSAP is conducting a national, crosssite evaluation of the SIG Program,

consisting of a process and an outcome

evaluation. The outcome evaluation will

address two questions: (1) ‘‘Has the SIG

Program had an impact on youth

substance abuse?,’’ and (2) ‘‘How do SIG

States differ in their impact on youth

substance abuse?’’ These questions will

be addressed by using data already

being collected by SAMHSA’s National

Household Survey of Drug Abuse

(NHSDA) and selected data collected

independently within funded States.

The process evaluation will focus on

three questions: (1) ‘‘Did States attain

the SIG Program’s two main goals of

coordinated funding streams and

revitalized comprehensive prevention

strategies and how were these goals

attained?,’’ (2) ‘‘What other substance

abuse prevention programming has the

State implemented?,’’ and (3) ‘‘Did SIGs

meet the criterion of supporting sciencebased programs fifty percent of the time,

and what array of prevention activities

were supported?’

In addition to the NHSDA data and

the State data on outcomes, three

instruments are needed to collect

process information about SIG activities

at the State, community, and program

levels: (1) A SIG State Case Study

Protocol; (2) a Sub-Recipient

Community Protocol; and (3) a

Comparison Community Protocol. The

State Case Study Protocol, which will

serve as the final report template for the

grant, will collect data on the following

topics at the State level: contextual

conditions; SIG mobilization; system

characteristics and dynamics;

collaborative strategies or activities;

immediate outcomes; systems change;

sub-recipient characteristics and

dynamics; sub-recipient planning and

science-based prevention interventions;

immediate, intermediate, and long-term

outcomes for the sub-recipient

community and program; possible rival

explanations; and lessons learned. The

Sub-recipient Community Protocol will

collect data at the community level from

a sample of sub-recipient communities

in the SIG States on the following

topics: contextual conditions, definition

of the intervention in operation, and

immediate, intermediate, and long-term

outcomes. The Comparison Community

Protocol will collect data from a sample

communities in the SIG States that have

not received sub-recipient awards on

the following topics: the largest

prevention initiatives in the community,

community-wide policies aimed at

preventing drug abuse, the community’s

comprehensive plan, and information

about the community. Estimated

response burden is as shown in the

following table:

Protocol Number of respondents

Responses

per

respondent

Hours per

response

Total hour

burden

SIG State Case Study (n=28) ................. 28 evaluators ..................................................................... 1 80 2,240

28 program directors .......................................................... 1 8 224

56 key informants .............................................................. 1 4 224

Sub-recipient Community (n=36) ............ 28 (initial contacts) ............................................................. 1 1 28

36 (sub-recipient directors) ................................................ 1 1 36

360 (site visit interviews) ................................................... 1 1 360

Comparison Community (n=36) .............. 28 (initial contacts) ............................................................. 1 1 28

360 (site visit interviews) ................................................... 1 1 360

Total ................................................. 924 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... 3,500

Annual Average ............................... 308 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... 1,167

Written comments and

recommendations concerning the

proposed information collection should

be sent within 30 days of this notice to:

Stuart Shapiro, Human Resources and

Housing Branch, Office of Management