46994 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 10, 2017 / Notices 

of care for stroke, and improve 

transitions across stroke systems of care, 

including pre-event; transitions from 

EMS to acute care in hospitals; and 

transitions from hospitals to home, 

rehabilitation, stroke specialist care, and 

primary care providers. 

When Congress directed the Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention 

(CDC) to establish the Paul Coverdell 

National Acute Stroke Program 

(PCNASP) in 2001, CDC intended to 

monitor trends in stroke and stroke care, 

with the ultimate mission of improving 

the quality of care for stroke patients in 

the United States. Since 2015, CDC has 

funded and provided technical 

assistance to nine state health 

departments to develop comprehensive 

stroke systems of care. A comprehensive 

system of care improves quality of care 

by creating seamless transitions for 

individuals experiencing stroke. In such 

a system, pre-hospital providers, inhospital providers, and early posthospital providers coordinate patient 

hand-offs and ensure continuity of care. 

CDC contracted with RTI International 

to conduct a national evaluation of the 

state health departments awarded grants 

in 2015 to assess their implementation 

in their state-based contexts and 

progress toward short- and 

intermediate-term outcomes. 

CDC and RTI International propose to 

collect information from all nine funded 

PCNASP grantees to gain insight into 

the effectiveness of implementation of 

their quality improvement strategies, 

development (and use) of a data 

integrated management system, and 

partner collaboration in building 

comprehensive state-wide stroke 

systems of care. The information 

collection will focus on describing 

PCNASP specific contributions to 

effective state-based stroke systems of 

care and the costs associated with this 

work. 

Two components of the information 

collection include: (1) Program 

implementation cost data collection 

from program partners using a cost and 

resource utilization tool; and (2) 

telephone interviews with key program 

stakeholders, such as the PCNASP 

principal investigator, program 

manager, quality improvement 

specialist, data analyst/program 

evaluator, and partner support staff. 

Cost data collection will focus on a 

stratified sample of partners’ cumulative 

spending to support PCNASP activities, 

spending by reporting period, and 

spending associated with specific 

PCNASP strategies related to building 

comprehensive state-wide stroke 

systems of care. Interview questions will 

target how each grantee implemented its 

strategies, challenges encountered and 

how they were overcome, factors that 

facilitated implementation, lessons 

learned along the way, and observed 

outcomes and improvements. 

The information to be collected does 

not currently exist for large scale, 

statewide programs that employ 

multiple combinations of strategies led 

by state public health departments to 

build comprehensive stroke systems of 

care. The insights to be gained from this 

data collection will be critical to 

improving immediate efforts and 

achieving the goals of spreading and 

replicating state-level strategies that are 

proven programmatically and are costeffective in contributing to a higher 

quality of care for stroke patients. 

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Type of respondent Form name Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Average 

burden per 

response 

(in hours) 

Total 

burden 

(in hours) 

Partner Program Manager ................ Cost Resource and Utilization Tool 205 2 2 820 

Principal Investigator ......................... Telephonic Interviews ...................... 9 1 1 9 

Grantee Program Manager ............... Telephonic Interviews ...................... 9 1 1 9 

Quality Improvement Specialist ........ Telephonic Interviews ...................... 9 1 1 9 

Data Analyst/Program Evaluator ....... Telephonic Interviews ...................... 9 1 1 9 

Partner Support Staff ........................ Telephonic Interviews ...................... 18 1 1 18 

Total ........................................... .......................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 874 

Leroy A. Richardson, 

Chief, Information Collection Review Office, 

Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the 

Associate Director for Science, Office of the 

Director, Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2017–21751 Filed 10–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–18–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

[60Day–17–1071; Docket No. CDC–2017– 

0087] 

Proposed Data Collection Submitted 

for Public Comment and 

Recommendations 

AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC), Department of Health 

and Human Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Notice with comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of 

its continuing effort to reduce public 

burden and maximize the utility of 

government information, invites the 

general public and other Federal 

agencies the opportunity to comment on 

a proposed and/or continuing 

information collection, as required by 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

This notice invites comment on a 

proposed information collection project 

titled Generic Clearance for the 

Collection of Qualitative Feedback on 

Agency Service Delivery. In order to 

work continuously to ensure that our 

programs are effective and meet our 

customers’ needs, the National Center 

for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious 

Diseases, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention (CDC) seeks to obtain 

Office of Management and Budget 

approval of a generic information 

collection request to collect qualitative 

feedback on our service delivery. 

DATES: CDC must receive written 

comments on or before December 11, 

2017. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 10, 2017 / Notices 46995 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CDC–2017– 

0087 by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions 

for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, 

Information Collection Review Office, 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS– 

D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

Docket Number. CDC will post, without 

change, all relevant comments to 

Regulations.gov. Please note: Submit all 

Federal comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking portal (regulations.gov) or 

by U.S. mail to the address listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request more information on the 

proposed project or to obtain a copy of 

the information collection plan and 

instruments, contact Leroy A. 

Richardson, Information Collection 

Review Office, Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton 

Road NE., MS–D74, Atlanta, Georgia 

30329; phone: 404–639–7570; Email: 

omb@cdc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 

(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies 

must obtain approval from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for each 

collection of information they conduct 

or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also 

requires Federal agencies to provide a 

60-day notice in the Federal Register 

concerning each proposed collection of 

information, including each new 

proposed collection, each proposed 

extension of existing collection of 

information, and each reinstatement of 

previously approved information 

collection before submitting the 

collection to the OMB for approval. To 

comply with this requirement, we are 

publishing this notice of a proposed 

data collection as described below. 

The OMB is particularly interested in 

comments that will help: 

1. Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

2. Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

3. Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

4. Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submissions 

of responses. 

5. Assess information collection costs. 

Proposed Project 

Generic Clearance for the Collection 

of Qualitative Feedback on Agency 

Service Delivery (OMB Control Number 

0920–1071, Expires 6/30/2018)— 

Extension—National Center for 

Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious 

Diseases (NCEZID), Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC). 

Background and Brief Description 

CDC/NCEZID is seeking a three-year 

extension of OMB Control Number 

0920–1071 to continue collecting 

routine customer feedback on agency 

service delivery. 

Executive Order 12862 directs Federal 

agencies to provide service to the public 

that matches or exceeds the best service 

available in the private sector. In order 

to work continuously to ensure that our 

programs are effective and meet our 

customers’ needs, the National Center 

for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious 

Diseases, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention (CDC) (hereafter the 

‘‘Agency’’) seeks to obtain OMB 

approval of a generic clearance to 

collect qualitative feedback on our 

service delivery. By qualitative feedback 

we mean information that provides 

useful insights on perceptions and 

opinions, but are not statistical surveys 

that yield quantitative results that can 

be generalized to the population of 

study. 

This collection of information is 

necessary to enable the Agency to garner 

customer and stakeholder feedback in 

an efficient, timely manner, in 

accordance with our commitment to 

improving service delivery. The 

information collected from our 

customers and stakeholders will help 

ensure that users have an effective, 

efficient, and satisfying experience with 

the Agency’s programs. This feedback 

will provide insights into customer or 

stakeholder perceptions, experiences 

and expectations, provide an early 

warning of issues with service, or focus 

attention on areas where 

communication, training or changes in 

operations might improve delivery of 

products or services. These collections 

will allow for ongoing, collaborative and 

actionable communications between the 

Agency and its customers and 

stakeholders. It will also allow feedback 

to contribute directly to the 

improvement of program management. 

Since gaining approval in June 2015, 

NCEZID has utilized 16,800 responses 

and 2,029, burden hours for nine 

separate information collection projects. 

There is no cost to respondents other 

than the time to participate. 

Authorizing legislation comes from 

Section 301 of the Public Health Service 

Act (42 U.S.C. 241). 

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN HOURS

Type of respondents Form name Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Average 

burden per 

response 

(in hours) 

Total burden 

(in hours) 

General public ................................... Online surveys ................................. 1,500 1 30/60 750 

Focus groups ................................... 800 1 2 1,600 

In-person surveys ............................. 1,000 1 30/60 500 

Usability testing ................................ 1,500 1 30/60 750 

Customer comment cards ................ 1,000 1 15/60 250 

Total ........................................... ........................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 3,850 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
46996 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 10, 2017 / Notices 

Leroy A. Richardson, 

Chief, Information Collection Review Office, 

Office of Scientific Integrity, Office of the 

Associate Director for Science, Office of the 

Director, Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2017–21752 Filed 10–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–18–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

[60Day-17–17AZI; Docket No. CDC–2017– 

0075] 

Proposed Data Collection Submitted 

for Public Comment and 

Recommendations 

AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC), Department of Health 

and Human Services (HHS). 

ACTION: Notice with comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC), as part of 

its continuing effort to reduce public 

burden and maximize the utility of 

government information, invites the 

general public and other Federal 

agencies to take this opportunity to 

comment on proposed and/or 

continuing information collections, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995. This notice invites 

comment on a proposed study titled 

‘‘Understanding Decisions and Barriers 

about PrEP Use and Uptake among Men 

Who Have Sex with Men.’’ This study 

will provide insight on individual and 

community level PrEP-related decisionmaking, and identify barriers and 

facilitators to successful PrEP initiation 

and PrEP acceptability. 

DATES: CDC must receive written 

comments on or before December 11, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CDC–2017– 

0075 by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

Regulations.gov. Follow the instructions 

for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Leroy A. Richardson, 

Information Collection Review Office, 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE., MS– 

D74, Atlanta, Georgia 30329. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

Docket Number. CDC will post, without 

change, all relevant comments to 

Regulations.gov. 

Please note: Submit all Federal 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking portal (regulations.gov) or 

by U.S. mail to the address listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request more information on the 

proposed project or to obtain a copy of 

the information collection plan and 

instruments, contact Leroy A. 

Richardson, Information Collection 

Review Office, Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton 

Road NE., MS–D74, Atlanta, Georgia 

30329; phone: 404–639–7570; Email: 

omb@cdc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 

(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal agencies 

must obtain approval from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for each 

collection of information they conduct 

or sponsor. In addition, the PRA also 

requires Federal agencies to provide a 

60-day notice in the Federal Register 

concerning each proposed collection of 

information, including each new 

proposed collection, each proposed 

extension of existing collection of 

information, and each reinstatement of 

previously approved information 

collection before submitting the 

collection to the OMB for approval. To 

comply with this requirement, we are 

publishing this notice of a proposed 

data collection as described below. 

The OMB is particularly interested in 

comments that will help: 

1. Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

2. Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

3. Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

4. Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submissions 

of responses. 

5. Assess information collection costs. 

Proposed Project 

Understanding Decisions and Barriers 

about PrEP Use and Uptake among Men 

Who Have Sex With Men—New— 

National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral 

Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention 

(NCHHSTP), Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention (CDC). 

Background and Brief Description 

This project involves original, 

formative research toward improving 

the uptake and adherence necessary to 

achieve efficacious levels of protection 

offered by pre-exposure prophylaxis 

(PrEP) among the most affected 

population. HIV incidence and 

prevalence are higher among gay, 

bisexual, and other men who have sex 

with men (MSM) than any other risk 

group in the U.S. Approximately half of 

all diagnosed HIV infections are among 

gay, bisexual, and other MSM. The 

FDA-approved PrEP regimen, daily 

Tenofovir/emtricitabine (aka Truvada®), 

has shown greater than 90% efficacy in 

reducing HIV infections among MSM 

when taken in accordance with its 

prescribed daily schedule. In 2014, CDC 

published clinical practice guidelines 

for the use of PrEP in high-risk 

populations, and began national 

promotion of PrEP as an effective HIV 

prevention strategy for MSM. While 

hailed as an HIV-prevention ‘‘gamechanger,’’ in reality PrEP uptake has 

been slow. Some studies report a wide 

range in the percentages of MSM (28– 

81%) interested in PrEP. In addition, 

other studies indicate that specific cities 

have alarmingly low rates of PrEP 

uptake (for example, the estimate for 

Atlanta is 2%). Moreover, recent survey 

findings have shown that less than 1 in 

10 MSM on PrEP are adherent to their 

PrEP regimen; adherence is necessary to 

optimize efficacy. 

In order to develop effective programs 

that increase PrEP uptake among MSM 

at greatest risk for HIV, studies are 

needed to better understand the 

decisions men make about their HIV 

prevention needs. Qualitative methods 

will be used to explore in-depth the 

‘‘Whys’’ and ‘‘How’s’’ of MSM’s 

decisions to refuse or use PrEP, and 

barriers and challenges to successfully 

undertake a PrEP medication regimen. 

Quantitative methods will be used to 

understand the HIV risk behavior 

context, attitudes towards PrEP, health 

seeking behavior, and acceptability of 

new modes of PrEP delivery (that differ 

from current recommendation of daily 

PrEP and that are in development or 

discussion) and emerging biomedical 

HIV prevention options. 

The purpose of this research is to 

explore decisions, barriers, and 

facilitators about PrEP use among MSM: 

(1) Who were offered PrEP but refused 

it; (2) who were interested in or started 

a PrEP regimen but did not follow 

through; and (3) who are eligible for 

PrEP per CDC guidelines (report 

condomless anal sex within last 3 

months). 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES