[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10045-10047]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4032]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-5480-N-13]
Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Comment Request;
``eLogic Model'' Grant Performance Report Standard
AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Information Collection.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described
below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department
is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal.
DATES: Comments Due Date: April 25, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding
this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB
Control Number {2535-0114{time} and should be sent to: Barbara Dorf,
Director, Office of Departmental Grants Management and Oversight,
Department or Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room
3156, Washington, DC 20410 or e-mail at [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Collette Pollard, Reports Management
Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh
Street, Southwest, Washington, DC 20410; e-mail
[email protected]; or Dorthera Yorkshire, Senior Program Analyst
Office of Departmental Grants Management and Oversight at
[email protected] for copies of the proposed forms and other
available information.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department will submit the proposed
information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended).
This Notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and
affecting agencies concerning the proposed collection of information
to: (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; (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 collection
techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
This Notice also lists the following information:
Title of Proposal: ''eLogic Model'' Grant Performance Report
Standard''.
OMB Approval Number: 2535-0114.
Form Number: The agency form number is HUD 96010, each program
utilizing the Logic Model will have the same form number and the
Program Name following the number to associate the logic model to the
specific program.
Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The
revised form, which is an attachment to HUD Federal Financial
Assistance applications. HUD uses standardized points for evaluating
Logic Models submitted under Rating Factor 5, Achieving Results and
Program Evaluation for programs using the Logic Model. The decision to
standardize the basis for rating the Logic Model resulted from review
of submitted Logic Models and rating factor narrative statements, and
training sessions held with HUD staff and the applicant community. By
standardizing the rating for the Logic Model submission, HUD believes
that a greater understanding will be gained on the use and relationship
of the Logic Model to information submitted as part of the Rating
Factors for award. The standardization of the Logic Model submission in
Rating Factor 5 highlights the relationship between the narratives
produced in response to the factors for award, stated outputs and
outcomes, and discrepancies or gaps that have been found to exist in
submitted Logic Models. HUD also believes that the standardization will
strengthen the use of the Logic Model as a management and evaluation
tool. The Logic Model is a tool that integrates program operations and
program accountability. It links program operations (mission, need,
intervention, projected results, and actual results), and program
accountability (measurement tool, data
[[Page 10046]]
source, and frequency of data collection and reporting, including
personnel assigned to function). Applicants/grantees should use it to
support program planning, monitoring, evaluation, and other management
function HUD uses the Logic Model and its electronic version, the
eLogic Model[supreg], to capture an executive summary of the
application submission in data format, which HUD uses to evaluate the
attainment of stated applicant goals and anticipated results. HUD also
uses the data for policy formulation. HUD encourages applicants and
those selected for award to use the Logic Model data to monitor and
evaluate their own progress and effectiveness in meeting stated goals
and achieving results consistent with the program purpose. To further
this objective, and in response to grantee requests, the HUD eLogic
Model[supreg] contains a column that allows the grantee to input
results achieved for the reporting period, as well as Year-To-Date
(YTD) in the reporting year tab for each year of the award. This added
field allows the grantee to review performance each reporting period
and for each year of the award ``at a glance,'' and without having to
construct a report. The HUD eLogic Model[supreg] also has fields to
capture the location (city, state, and nine digit Zip Code) where the
majority of the activities take place, as well as a drop-down menu to
identify the reporting period start and end date. In FY2010, HUD added
a drop down field for the reporting period, as follows: Yr1Qtr1;
Yr1Qtr2; Yr1Qtr3; Yr1Qtr4; Yr2Qtr5; Yr2Qtr6; Yr2Qtr7; Yr2Qtr8; Yr3Qtr9;
Yr3Qtr10; Yr3Qtr11; Yr3Qtr12; and Final Report. The sequential
numbering of the quarters was determined necessary because each start
and end date within a program may vary by grantee, so it was difficult
to determine the actual report that was sent in the order that they
were received by HUD. If a grantee only reports semi annually, it would
select Yr1 Quarter 2 as its first reporting period and Yr1 Quarter 4 as
its second semi-annual reporting period. If a grantee is only required
to report annually, it would select Yr1Qtr4 to denote its reporting
period. Final reports would be denoted as a final report. Each Program
NOFA will specify the reporting requirement with instructions, and
whether a separate final report is required in addition to any annual
report. Applicants and grantees must follow the following requirements
in completing and naming their Logic Model files:
The applicant name in the Logic Model must match the applicant name
in box 8a of the SF424, Application for Federal Financial Assistance
Form. If an applicant is submitting more than one application for
funding, the project name must be completed and must be different for
each funding request made.
DO NOT use special characters (i.e., , %, /, etc.) in a
file name.
DO NOT include spaces in the file name. Limit file names to not
more than 50 characters (HUD strongly recommends not more than 32
characters).
DO NOT convert Word files or Excel files into PDF format.
Converting to PDF format increases file size and will make it more
difficult to upload the application and does not allow HUD to enter
data from the Excel files into a database.
DO NOT save your logic model in .xlsm format. If necessary save as
an Excel 97-2003 .xls format. Using the .xlsm format can result in a
Grants.gov virus detect error. In addition, HUD cannot accept and open
.xlsm files.
File names with spaces and special characters in the file name or
which contain more than 50 characters present problems for HUD entering
the data electronically into our database. Applications that do not
follow the naming conventions will have their applications rejected by
the Grants.gov website, as the file names that violate these
requirements are viewed as containing viruses by the system. Grantees
who submit reports that do not meet the file-naming requirements or do
not complete mandatory data fields will have their Logic Model reports
returned to them for correction of these issues.
For the file name of the eLogic Model[supreg], please follow the
file naming conventions and requirements above. After award, the file
name for Logic Model must be the award number and reporting period. For
detailed instructions, please see the instructions under Tab 1 of the
program eLogic Model[supreg], form HUD96010. The reporting periods will
be specified in each of the program NOFAs.
HUD's goal is to improve the labeling of the files to improve
matching submitted application logic models and report Logic Models,
thereby improving HUD's ability to place the information in a database
and measure the effectiveness of HUD programs.
Factor 5, Achieving Results and Program Evaluation, will consist of
a minimum of 10 points for the Logic Model submission. The matrix
provided in Appendix B of this General Section identifies how the Logic
Model will be rated in a standardized way across program areas using
the Logic Model. Training on the rating factor will be provided via
satellite broadcast and archived on HUD's website for repeat viewing.
Individual Program NOFAs may specify means other than the Logic Model
for capturing performance data for evaluation purposes. Applicants
should carefully read the Program NOFA to determine requirements and
the Factors for Award which constitutes the basis for scoring each
program NOFA.
Additional details about the five rating factors and the maximum
points for each factor are provided in individual program NOFAs. For a
specific funding opportunity, HUD may modify these factors to take into
account explicit program needs or statutory or regulatory limitations.
Applicants should carefully read the factors for award as described in
the program NOFA to which they are responding.
e. Additional Criteria: Past Performance. In evaluating
applications for funding, HUD will take into account an applicant's
past performance in managing funds, including, but not limited to, the
ability to account for funds appropriately; timely use of funds
received either from HUD or other Federal, State, or local programs;
timely submission and quality of reports to HUD; meeting program
requirements; meeting performance targets as established in Logic
Models approved as part of the grant agreement; timelines for
completion of activities and receipt of promised matching or leveraged
funds; and the number of persons to be served or targeted for
assistance. HUD may consider information available from HUD's records;
the name check review; public sources such as newspapers; Inspector
General or Government Accountability Office reports or findings; or
hotline or other complaints that have been proven to have merit.
In evaluating past performance, HUD may elect to deduct points from
the rating score or establish threshold levels as specified under the
Factors for Award in the individual program NOFAs. Each program NOFA
will specify how past performance will be rated.
Agency form numbers, if applicable: HUD-96010.
Estimation of the total number of hours needed to prepare the
information collection including number of respondents, frequency of
response, and hours of response: An estimation of the total time needed
to complete the form is less than ten minutes; number of respondents is
11,000; frequency of response is on the occasion of application
submission. The total report burden is 1100 hours.
[[Page 10047]]
Status of the proposed information collection: New collection of
information for HUD's discretionary programs.
Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.
Dated: February 16, 2011.
Colette Pollard,
Departmental Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-4032 Filed 2-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P