[Federal Register: February 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 21)]
[Notices]
[Page 5489-5494]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02fe05-119]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY FOUNDATION
United States Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution;
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment
Request: See List of Evaluation Related ICRs Planned for Submission to
OMB in Section A
AGENCY: Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National
Environmental Policy Foundation, U.S. Institute for Environmental
Conflict Resolution.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that the U.S. Institute for
Environmental Conflict Resolution (the U.S. Institute), part of the
Morris K. Udall Foundation, is planning to submit six Information
Collection Requests (ICRs) to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). Five of the six ICRs are for revisions to currently approved
collections due to expire 06/30/2005 (OMB control numbers 3320-0003,
3320-0004, 3320-2005, 3320-0006, and 3320-0007). One ICR pertains to a
new collection request. The six ICRs are being consolidated under a
single filing to provide a more coherent picture of information
collection activities designed primarily to measure performance. The
proposed collections are necessary to support program evaluation
activities. The collection is expected neither to have a significant
economic impact on respondents, nor to affect a substantial number of
small entities. The average cost (in lost time) per respondent is
estimated to be 0.16 hours/6.18 dollars.
Before submitting the ICRs to OMB for review and approval, the U.S.
Institute is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed
information collection as described at the beginning of the section
labeled ``Supplementary Information.''
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 4, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing this Federal Register
notice, by e-mail to orr@ecr.gov, or by fax to 520-670-5530, or by mail
to the attention of Patricia Orr, Program Evaluation Coordinator, U.S.
Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, 130 South Scott
Avenue, Tucson, Arizona 85701.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Orr, Program Evaluation
[[Page 5490]]
Coordinator, U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, 130
South Scott Avenue, Tucson, Arizona 85701, Fax: 520-670-5530, Phone:
520-670-5299, E-mail: orr@ecr.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Overview
To comply with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA)
(Public Law 103-62), the U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict
Resolution, as part of the Morris K. Udall Foundation, is required to
produce, each year, an Annual Performance Budget and an Annual
Performance and Accountability Report, linked directly to the goals and
objectives outlined in the Institute's five-year Strategic Plan. The
U.S. Institute's evaluation system is key to evaluating progress
towards achieving its performance commitments. The U.S. Institute is
committed to evaluating all of its projects, programs and services not
only to measure and report on performance but also to use this
information to learn from and improve its services. The refined
evaluation system has been carefully designed to support efficient and
economical generation, analysis and use of this much-needed
information, with an emphasis on performance measurement, learning and
improvement.
As part of the program evaluation system, the U.S. Institute
intends to collect specific information from participants in, and users
of, several of its programs and services. Specifically, six programs
and services are the subject of this Federal Notice: (1) Mediation and
facilitation services; (2) situation/conflict assessment services; (3)
training and workshop services; (4) facilitated meeting services; (5)
the roster program services; and (6) program support and system design
services. Evaluations will mainly involve administering questionnaires
to process participants and professionals, as well as members and users
of the National Roster. Responses by members of the public to the
Institute's request for information (i.e., questionnaires) will be
voluntary.
In 2003, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Conflict
Prevention and Resolution Center (CPRC) was granted the approval of the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to act as a named administrator
of the U.S. Institute's currently approved information collections for
evaluation. The CPRC and the U.S. Institute will seek approval as part
of this proposed collection to continue this evaluation partnership.
Other agencies have approached the U.S. Institute seeking (a)
evaluation services and (b) assistance in establishing their own
internal evaluation systems. Therefore, the U.S. Institute will request
OMB approval to administer the evaluation questionnaires on behalf of
other agencies. One agency, the Department of Interior (Office of
Collaborative Action and Dispute Resolution) has already requested such
evaluation services through its interagency agreement with the U.S.
Institute.
The burden estimates in the ICRs take into consideration the multi-
agency usage of the evaluation instruments. The broad interest in the
U.S. Institute's evaluation system has fostered an evaluation
collaborative among several State and Federal agencies. The sharing of
evaluation resources and expertise is advantageous on several fronts:
(a) design and development efforts are not duplicated across agencies;
(b) common methods for evaluating collaborative processes are
established; (c) knowledge, expertise and resources are shared,
realizing cost-efficiencies for the collaborating agencies; and (d)
learning and improvement on a broader scale will be facilitated through
the sharing of comparable multi-agency findings.
Key Issues
The U.S. Institute would appreciate receiving comments that can be
used to:
i. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the U.S. Institute, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
ii. Determine whether the nature and extent of the proposed level
of anonymity for those from whom the U.S. Institute will be collecting
information is adequate and appropriate;
iii. Evaluate the accuracy of the U.S. Institute's estimate of the
burden associated with the proposed information collection activities;
iv. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected;
v. Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who
are to respond, including suggestions concerning use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g.,
allowing electronic submission of responses).
Burden
The average estimated burden for each response is 0.16 hours/6.18
dollars. As used in this document, ``burden'' means the total time,
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
Agency. This includes time needed to: Review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes
of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
Hour burdens are monetized using fully burdened labor rates derived
from Bureau of Labor Statistics tables (U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation'', Table 2: Civilian workers, by occupational and industry
group. Available at: http://www.ecr.gov/multiagency/program_eval.htm.
Technical Details
Five of the six upcoming ICRs are for revisions to currently
approved collections. In 1999, the U.S. Institute, in cooperation with
the Policy Consensus Initiative and state alternative dispute
resolution programs, began the task of designing a common program
evaluation system. After extensively piloting the evaluation
instruments under the currently approved information collection, staff
from the U.S. Institute, PCI, Oregon Dispute Resolution Commission,
Oregon Department of Justice, Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium,
Environmental Protection Agency (Conflict Prevention and Resolution
Center), and the Department of Interior (Center for Alternative Dispute
Resolution) joined forces to refine the evaluation instruments
(particularly the mediation and facilitation instruments). This effort
also benefited from input from over 40 practitioners, program
administrators, evaluators, researchers and trainers. Dr. Kathy
McKnight and Dr. Lee Sechrest, the University of Arizona, assisted with
this effort. Evaluation consultant, Dr. Andy Rowe, GHK International,
guided the earlier evaluation design. Throughout this effort the
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation provided financial assistance.
Technical details of the Institute's program evaluation system are
contained in a January 2005 design document entitled ``Program
Evaluation System at the U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict
Resolution''. Paper copies of this report can be obtained by contacting
the Institute; an
[[Page 5491]]
electronic copy can be downloaded from the Institute's Web site: http://www.ecr.gov/
.
Information generated from the evaluation system will be used for a
variety of purposes, including performance measurement and reporting,
and ongoing improvements to the design and operation of projects and
services. Primary audiences for results from the evaluation system
include the Udall Foundation Board of Trustees, Congress and OMB, and
program management and staff, who will use the information in decision-
making regarding program operations and directions. Secondary audiences
will likely include practitioners in the field, process participants,
prospective users, and members of the public.
A. List of ICRs Planned To Be Submitted
The U.S. Institute is planning to submit six ICRs to OMB,
corresponding to 11 individual questionnaires that will be administered
to those involved in collaborative problem solving and conflict
resolution activities. In the listing below, the questionnaires are
organized into six activity areas, indicating the recipients of the
questionnaires and, in parentheses, the frequency of administration per
respondent. It should be noted that additional questionnaires will be
administered to project managers who are federal employees (thus OMB
clearance is not necessary).
Mediation/Facilitation Services
(1) Mediations/Facilitations--Participants, at the conclusion of
the process (once)
(2) Mediations/Facilitations--Participants, subsequent to the
conclusion of the process (once)
(3) Mediations/Facilitations--Facilitators/Mediators (Neutral
Practitioner) at the conclusion of the process (once) Situation/
Conflict Assessment Services
(4) Assessment--Initiating Organizations and Key Participants, at
the conclusion of the process (once)
(5) Assessment--Assessor (Neutral Practitioner) at the conclusion
of the process (once)
Training and Workshop Services
(6) Training/Workshop--Participants, at the conclusion (once)
Facilitated Meeting Services
(7) Facilitated Meeting--Meeting Attendees, at the conclusion of
the process (once)
Roster Program Services
(8) Roster--Members (once annually)
(9) Roster--Users, at the end of the search (once)
(10) Roster--Users, subsequent to the search (once)
Program Support and System Design Services
(11) Program Support and System Design--Agency Representatives and
Key Participants, annually or at the conclusion of the process if the
project is completed in less than 12 months (once annually for length
of project)
B. Contact Individual for ICRs
Patricia Orr, Program Evaluation Coordinator, U.S. Institute for
Environmental Conflict Resolution, 130 South Scott Avenue, Tucson,
Arizona 85701, Fax: 520-670-5530, Phone: 520-670-5658, E-mail:
orr@ecr.gov.
C. Confidentiality and Access to Information
To encourage candor and responsiveness on the part of those
completing the questionnaires, the U.S. Institute intends to report
information obtained from questionnaires only in the aggregate at a
project or program level. The U.S. Institute also intends to withhold
the names of respondents and individuals named in responses. The U.S.
Institute believes such information regarding individuals is exempt
from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), pursuant
to exemption (b)(6) (5 U.S.C. section 552(b)(6)), as the public
interest in disclosure of that information would not outweigh the
privacy interests of the individuals. Therefore, respondents will be
afforded anonymity. Furthermore, no substantive case-specific
information that might be confidential under statute, court order or
rules, or agreement of the parties will be sought.
The U.S. Institute is committed to providing agencies, researchers
and the public with information on the effectiveness of collaborative
problem solving and conflict resolution processes and the performance
of the U.S. Institute's programs and services. Access to such useful
information will be facilitated to the extent possible. The U.S.
Institute will strive to report all information in an open and
transparent manner. The U.S. Institute is also committed, however, to
managing the collection and reporting of data so as not to interfere
with any ongoing processes or the subsequent implementation of
agreements. Project/case specific data will not be released until an
appropriate time period has passed following conclusion of the project/
case; such time periods will be determined on a case by case basis.
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests will also be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis.
D. Information on Individual ICRs
Mediation/Facilitation Services
A variety of non-adversarial, participatory processes are available
as adjuncts or alternatives to conventional forums for solving
environmental problems or resolving environmental conflicts. Such
collaborative processes range broadly depending on the nature of the
problem/dispute and the parties involved as well as their context (for
example, early on in planning processes, when seeking administrative
relief, or during litigation). Under the right circumstances, a well-
designed collaborative process facilitated or mediated by the
appropriate mediator/facilitator (neutral practitioner) can effectively
assist parties in reaching agreement on plans, proposals, and
recommendations to solve their problem or resolve their dispute.
Collaborative processes can also result in improvement in relationships
among the parties, and increase capacity among the parties to manage or
resolve the issue or dispute. The following survey instruments have
been designed for use across the broad range of collaborative
processes, be it a process to reach agreement on a plan or a set of
recommendations or environmental mediation to resolve a dispute.
(1) Mediation/Facilitation Process--Participants End-of-Process
Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract:
Immediately following conclusion of a mediation/facilitation process,
the participants that have been involved will be surveyed once, via
questionnaire, to determine their views on a variety of issues. Topics
to be investigated include: Are the parties now more likely to consider
collaborative processes in the future; were the appropriate
participants effectively engaged; did the participants have the
capacity to engage in the process; was the mediator/facilitator that
guided the process appropriate; and did all participants have access to
relevant information? The voluntary questionnaire contains 27 questions
requiring respondents to provide fill-in-the-blank and open-ended
responses. Information from the questionnaire will provide the
opportunity to evaluate if the intended outcomes were achieved, and if
so or not, why. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are parties to the collaborative processes. Burden
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national
[[Page 5492]]
public burden and associated costs will be approximately 600 hours and
$23,400 respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on
average: (a) Participants require 20 minutes per questionnaire; (b)
there are 12 respondents per case; (c) respondents are requested to
complete this surveyed only once; and (d) there will be 150 cases
evaluated each year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no
capital or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is
valued at $39/hr.
(2) Mediation/Facilitation Process--Participants Follow-up
Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract:
To gain information concerning the longer-term effectiveness of the
mediation/facilitation process, a follow-up questionnaire will be
administered to the parties at a future date following conclusion of
the process. Topics to be examined include: Do all participants
perceive an improvement in their collective relationships; is the
agreement durable. The voluntary questionnaire contains 12 questions
requiring respondents to provide fill-in-the-blank and open-ended
responses. Information from the questionnaire will permit U.S.
Institute staff to evaluate if the process outcomes were sustainable,
and if not, why not. The information will also facilitate the
assessment of the longer-term impacts of the collaborative processes
and agreements. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are participants to mediations/facilitations. Burden
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and
associated costs will be approximately 300 hours and $11,700,
respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on average:
(a) Participants require 10 minutes per questionnaire; (b) there are
approximately 12 respondents per project; (c) respondents are asked to
complete this questionnaire only once; and (d) there will be 150 cases
evaluated each year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no
capital or start-up costs for respondents, and b) respondents' time is
valued at $39/hr.
(3) Mediation/Facilitation Process--Mediator/Facilitator (Neutral
Practitioner) Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved
collection; Abstract: Immediately following conclusion of a mediation/
facilitation process, the mediator(s)/facilitator(s) will be surveyed
once, via questionnaire, to determine their views on a variety of
issues. Topics to be investigated include: was the collaborative
approach well suited to the nature of the issues in conflict; were all
key parties consulted, and, were all key issues and alternatives
properly identified and considered? In most cases, it will be specified
in the mediator/facilitator contracts that they are required to
complete the questionnaire. The mediator/facilitator questionnaire
contains 34 questions. Information from this questionnaire will provide
the opportunity to evaluate if the intended mediation/facilitation
outcomes/impacts were achieved, and if so or not, why. Affected
Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are mediators/
facilitators who are federal agency staff or contracted non-federal
professionals. Burden Statement: It is estimated that the annual
national public burden and associated costs will be approximately 100
hours and $3,900, respectively. These values were calculated assuming
that on average: (a) Mediators/facilitators will require 30 minutes per
questionnaire; (b) there are 2 respondents per project; (c) respondents
are surveyed only once; and (d) there will be 100 cases evaluated each
year (note: the EPA's CPRC does not require ICR clearance to evaluate
its cases using this instrument. The CPRC mediators/facilitators will
be paid under contract to complete the evaluation questionnaires). Cost
burden estimates assume: (a) there are no capital or start-up costs for
respondents, and (b) respondents'' time is valued at $39/hr.
Situation/Conflict Assessment Services
Situation or conflict assessments are conducted by a neutral party
and include a series of confidential structured interviews in person or
on the telephone with individuals or groups of parties. Through such
assessments, assessors (neutral practitioners) identify and clarify key
issues and parties, and assess the appropriateness of a mediation/
facilitation process and its potential for helping the parties reach
agreement. Assessment reports seek to clarify and communicate in a
neutral manner the issues and concerns of all parties, and commonly
conclude with process design recommendations intended to provide the
parties with one or more options for effectively collaborating to find
a solution to their conflict.
(4) Assessment--Initiating Organization/Key Participant
Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract:
Immediately following conclusion of a situation/conflict assessment
process, the initiating agencies/organization(s) and key participants
will be surveyed once via questionnaire to determine their views on a
variety of issues. Topics to be investigated include: was the conflict
assessment approach well suited to the nature of the issues in
conflict; was the selected assessor (neutral practitioner) appropriate
for the assignment; were all key parties consulted, and, were all key
issues and alternatives properly identified and considered? The
voluntary questionnaire contains 11 questions requiring respondents to
provide fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. Information from
the questionnaire provides the opportunity to: (a) Evaluate the
performance for specific cases/projects; (b) evaluate the performance
of assessment programs; and (c) use the evaluation feedback as a
learning tool to improve the design of future assessment cases/
projects. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this
action are individuals in organizations that participate in a conflict
assessment. Burden Statement: It is estimated that the annual national
public burden and associated costs will be approximately 62.5 hours and
$2,437 respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on
average: (a) Respondents require 10 minutes per questionnaire; (b)
there are 5 respondents per project (c) respondents are surveyed only
once; and (d) there will be 75 assessments evaluated each year. Cost
burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up costs for
respondents, and (b) respondents'' time is valued at $39/hr.
(5) Assessment--Assessor (Neutral Practitioner) Questionnaire;
Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract: Immediately
following conclusion of a situation/conflict assessment, the selected
assessor(s) will be surveyed once via questionnaire to determine their
views on a variety of issues. Topics to be investigated include: was
the conflict assessment approach well suited to the nature of the
issues in conflict; was assisted negotiation recommended; and, was the
recommendation followed? In most cases, it will be specified in the
assessor's contract that the assessor will be required to complete the
questionnaire. The assessor's questionnaire contains nine questions
requiring respondents to provide fill-in-the blank and open-ended
responses. Information from the questionnaire will permit the agency
staff to evaluate the assessment process and outcomes, and learn from
and improve the design of future assessment projects. Affected
Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are assessors
who either are staff from or have been contracted by the agency. Burden
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and
associated costs will
[[Page 5493]]
be approximately 5 hours and $195, respectively. These values were
calculated assuming that on average: (a) Assessors require 6 minutes
per questionnaire; (b) there is one respondent per project; (c)
respondents are surveyed only once; and (d) there will be 50
assessments evaluated each year (note: the EPA's CPRC does not require
ICR clearance to evaluate its cases using this instrument. The CPRC
assessors are paid under contract to complete the evaluation
questionnaires). Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital
or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued
at $39/hr.
Training and Workshop Services
Training and workshop sessions are conducted for a variety of
audiences. The subject of training and workshop sessions varies widely,
depending on the participants and their specific training needs. In
general, the training and workshop sessions are designed to increase
the appropriate and effective use of collaborative problem solving and
conflict resolution processes.
(6) Training/Workshop--Participants Questionnaire, at the
conclusion of the training/workshop; Revision of a currently approved
collection; Abstract: Training participants will be asked to complete a
questionnaire at the end of the training or workshop session.
Participation is voluntary and the survey instrument contains eight
questions, requiring responses to fill-in-the-blank and open-ended
questions. Topics to be evaluated include whether: the training
objectives were clear and understood by the participants; an
appropriate trainer(s)/facilitator(s) guided the session; participants
were engaged appropriately; participants gained valuable knowledge.
Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
individuals who participate in training/workshop sessions. Burden
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and
associated costs will be approximately 195 hours and $7,605,
respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on average:
(a) Training participants require 6 minutes to complete this
questionnaire; and (b) there will be 1,950 participants evaluated each
year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) there are no capital or start-
up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued at $39/
hr.
Facilitated Meeting Services
Agency staff and contractors facilitate and provide leadership for
many meetings, ranging from small group meetings to large public
convenings of several hundred attendees. The purpose of the facilitated
meetings varies widely, depending on the attendees and their specific
meeting objectives.
(7) Meeting Facilitation--Participants Questionnaire, at the
conclusion of the meeting; Revision of a currently approved collection;
Abstract: Participants at facilitated meetings run by agency staff or
contractors will be asked to complete a voluntary questionnaire at the
conclusion of the meeting. The questionnaire used in this case contains
seven questions, requiring fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses.
Information from this questionnaire will help evaluate the
effectiveness of meeting design, effectiveness of facilitator(s), and
meeting accomplishments. Affected Entities: Entities potentially
affected by this action are individuals who participate in these
meetings. Burden Statement: It is estimated that the annual national
public burden and associated costs will be approximately 351 hours and
$13,689, respectively. These values were calculated assuming that on
average: (a) Meeting attendees require 6 minutes to complete the
questionnaire, and (b) there will be 3,510 participants evaluated each
year. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-
up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents'' time is valued at $39/
hr.
Roster Program Services
The U.S. Institute has a full-time Roster Manager who supervises a
Roster Program consisting of two main components: design and operation
of the National Roster of Environmental Dispute Resolution and
Consensus Building Professionals and an associated referral system.
Membership on the roster remains open to new applicants at all times.
Potential members apply on-line and are required to provide information
that demonstrates a level of training and experience adequate to meet
specific, objective entry criteria. First constituted in February 2000,
the roster currently includes over 250 members nationwide. When making
referrals and locating neutral practitioners for sub-contracting, the
U.S. Institute uses the roster as a primary source to identify
experienced individuals, particularly in the locale of the project or
dispute (as required by the Institute's enabling legislation). The
public now has direct access to the roster search system via the
Internet. When requested by any party, the Roster Manager also provides
advice and assistance regarding selection of appropriate practitioners.
(8) Roster--Members Questionnaire; Revision of a currently approved
collection; Abstract: On an annual basis roster members will be
surveyed to evaluate their perceptions of the roster and to solicit
their feedback on how the roster program can be improved. This
voluntary questionnaire contains three questions, requiring fill-in-the
blank and open-ended responses. Information from this questionnaire
will permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate how well the Roster is
performing in meeting the needs of roster members. Affected Entities:
Entities potentially affected by this action are roster members. Burden
Statement: It is estimated that the annual national public burden and
associated costs will be approximately 25 hours and $975, respectively.
These values were calculated assuming that on average: (a) Roster
members require 5 minutes per questionnaire; (b) 300 roster members
will respond per year; (c) respondents are surveyed only once annually.
Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up
costs for respondents, and (b) respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.
(9) Roster--Questionnaire for Users After Each Roster Search;
Revision of a currently approved collection; Abstract: Users who search
the roster will be surveyed once for each new roster search. This
voluntary questionnaire contains seven questions, requiring simple
fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. Information from this
questionnaire will permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate how well the
Roster is performing in meeting the needs of those searching the
roster. Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action
are individuals who use the roster search system. Burden Statement: It
is estimated that the annual national public burden and associated
costs will be approximately 50 hours and $1,950 respectively. These
values were calculated assuming that on average: (a) Roster searchers
require six minutes to complete the questionnaire; (b) there will be
500 searches per year; and (c) searchers are asked to complete this
questionnaire once per search. Cost burden estimates assume: (a) There
are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and (b) respondents'
time is valued at $39/hr.
(10) Roster--User Questionnaire--Follow-Up to Search; Revision of a
currently approved collection; Abstract: Users of the roster system
will receive a follow-up questionnaire approximately four weeks after
their search. This voluntary questionnaire contains five questions,
requiring fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. Information from
this questionnaire will
[[Page 5494]]
permit U.S. Institute staff to evaluate how well the roster program is
performing to help users find appropriate practitioners. Affected
Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are individuals
who use the roster search system. Burden Statement: It is estimated
that the annual national public burden and associated costs will be
approximately 17 hours and $663, respectively. These values were
calculated assuming that on average: (a) Users will require four
minutes to complete the questionnaire; (b) there will be 250 follow-up
evaluations administered each year; and (c) searchers are asked to
complete this questionnaire once per search. Cost burden estimates
assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and
(b) respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.
Program Support and System Design Services
The U.S. Institute provides leadership and assistance to agencies/
organizations developing collaborative problem solving and dispute
resolution programs and systems. Program development and dispute system
design services include assistance with planning, developing,
designing, implementing, evaluating, and/or refining federal
environmental conflict resolution programs, systems for handling
administrative disputes, or approaches for managing environmental
decision making (e.g., with processes under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA)).
(11) Program Support and System Design Services--Questionnaire for
Agency Representatives and Key Participants (annual survey for length
of project); New collection request; Abstract: Agency representatives
and key project participants who request and receive U.S. Institute
program support and system design services will be asked to complete a
voluntary questionnaire containing six questions. The questionnaire
will require fill-in-the blank and open-ended responses. Affected
Entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are individuals
who benefit from program support and system design services from the
U.S. Institute. Burden Statement: It is estimated that the annual
national public burden and associated costs will be approximately six
hours and $234, respectively. These values were calculated assuming
that on average: (a) Agency representatives or key project participants
require six minutes to complete the questionnaire; (b) there will be 60
responses each year; and (c) on average three agency representatives/
key participants are involved in each initiative. Cost burden estimates
assume: (a) There are no capital or start-up costs for respondents, and
(b) respondents' time is valued at $39/hr.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 5601-5609)
Dated: January 27, 2005.
Christopher L. Helms,
Executive Director, Morris K. Udall Foundation.
[FR Doc. 05-1903 Filed 2-1-05; 8:45 am]