80 FR 60694 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 194 (October 7, 2015)

Page Range		60694-60696
FR Document		2015-25472

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 194 (Wednesday, October 7, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 194 (Wednesday, October 7, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60694-60696]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-25472]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request

In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 concerning opportunity for public comment on proposed
collections of information, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (SAMHSA) will publish periodic summaries of
proposed projects. To request more information on the proposed projects
or to obtain a copy of the information collection plans, call the
SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer on (240) 276-1243.
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology.

Proposed Project: National Outcomes Evaluation of the Garrett Lee Smith
Suicide Prevention Program--Revision

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) is requesting
clearance for the revision of data collection associated with the
previously-approved cross-site evaluation of the Garrett Lee Smith
(GLS) Youth Suicide Prevention and Early Intervention Program (GLS
Suicide Prevention Program), now entitled National Outcomes Evaluation
(NOE). The NOE is a proposed redesign of the currently-approved cross-
site evaluation (OMB No. 0930-0286; Expiration, January 2017) that
builds on prior published GLS evaluation proximal and distal training
and aggregate findings from program activities (e.g., Condron et al.,
2014; Walrath et al., 2015). As a result of the vast body of
information collected and analyzed through the cross-site evaluation of
the two GLS Suicide Prevention Programs components--the GLS State/
Tribal Program and the GLS Campus Program--SAMHSA has identified areas
for additional investigation and the types of inquiry needed to move
the evaluation into its next phase.
The NOE aims to address the field's need for additional evidence on
the impacts of the GLS Suicide Prevention Program in three areas: (1)
Suicide prevention training effectiveness, (2) early identification and
referral on subsequent care follow-up and adherence, and (3) suicide
safer care practices within health care settings. The evaluation
comprises three distinct, but interconnected core studies--Training,
Continuity of Care (COC), and Suicide Safer Environment (SSE). The
Training and SSE studies also have ``enhanced'' study components. Core
study data align with required program activities across the State/
Tribal and Campus programs and provide continuity with and utility of
data previously collected (implementation and proximal outcomes).
Enhanced components use experimental and quasi-experimental methods
(randomized controlled trial [RCT] and retrospective cohort study
designs) to truly assess program impacts on distal outcomes (e.g.,
identifications and referrals, hospitalizations, and suicide attempts
and deaths) without undue burden on grantees and youth. This outcome-
and impact-focused design reflects SAMHSA's desire to assess the
implementation, outcomes, and impacts of the GLS program.
The NOE builds on information collected through the four-stage
cross-site evaluation approach (context, product, process, and impact)
to further the field of suicide prevention and mental health promotion.
Of notable importance, the design now accounts for differences in
State/Tribal and Campus program grant funding cycles (i.e., 5-year
State/Tribal and 3-year Campus programs), while also establishing
continuity with and maximizing utility of data previously collected.
Further, the evaluation meets the legislative requirements outlined in
the GLSMA to inform performance and implementation of programs.
Eleven data collection activities compose the NOE--two new
instruments, three previously-approved instruments, and six previously-
approved and improved instruments. As GLS program foci differ by
grantee type, some instruments will apply to either State/Tribal or
Campus programs only. Of the 11 instruments, 2 will be administered
with State/Tribal and Campus grantees (tailored to grantee type), 6 are
specific to State/Tribal grantees, and 3 pertain only to Campus
grantees.

Instrument Removals

Due to the fulfillment of data collection goals, six currently-
approved instruments and their associated burden will be removed. The
combined estimated annual burden for these instruments is 4,300 hours.
These include the State/Tribal Training Utilization and Preservation
Survey.

(TUP-S) Adolescent Version, Coalition Profile, and Coalition Survey,
and the Campus Training Exit Survey (TES) Interview Forms, Life Skills
Activities Follow-up Interview, and the Student Awareness Intercept
Survey

Instrument Continuations

Three instruments will be administered only in OMB Year 1 to
finalize data collection for the current cross-site evaluation
protocol. Each instrument was previously approved as part of the four-
stage approach (OMB No. 0930-0286; Expiration, January 2017) and no
changes are being made. These include the State/Tribal Referral Network
Survey (RNS), TUP-S Campus Version, and Campus Short Message Service
Survey (SMSS). Each instrument will be discontinued once the associated
data collection requirement has been fulfilled.

Instrument Revisions

Six currently-approved instruments will be revised for the NOE.
Each of the instruments, or an iteration thereof, has received approval
through multiple cross-site evaluation packages cleared by OMB. As
such, the information gathered has been, and will continue to be,
crucial to this effort and to the field of suicide prevention and
mental health promotion.
[ssquf] Prevention Strategies Inventory (PSI): The PSI has been
updated to enhance the utility and accuracy of the data collected.
Changes capture different strategies implemented and products
distributed by grantee programs, the population of focus for each
strategy, total GLS budget expenditures, and the percent of funds
allocated by the activity type.
[ssquf] Training Activity Summary Page (TASP): New items on the
TASP gather information about the use of behavioral rehearsal and/or
role-play and resources

[[Page 60695]]

provided at trainings--practices that have been found to improve
retention of knowledge and skills posttraining. In addition,
understanding how skills can be maintained over time with materials
provided at trainings (e.g., video reminders, wallet cards, online and
phone applications) is an area suggested for further study (Cross et
al., 2011).
[ssquf] Training Utilization and Preservation Survey (TUP-S) 3 and
6-month follow up: The TUP-S has been improved to examine posttraining
behaviors and utilization of skills by training participants--factors
known to improve understanding of the comprehensive training process
and the impact of training on identifications, referrals, and service
use. The survey now requests information about training resources
received, practice components, trainee participation in role play, and
previous suicide prevention trainings attended; experience intervening
with a suicidal individual (from QPR evaluation tool), intended use of
the training, and referral behaviors; and previous contact and quality
of relationships with youth. Broad items about training others, the
use/intended use of skills, and barriers/facilitators have been
removed. The consent-to-contact form has been modified to add brief
items about the trainee and previous identifications/referrals. The
TUP-S will be administered at 3 and 6 months post-training to a random
sample of training participants via CATI (2000 ST TUP-S 3-mo/600 ST
TUP-S 6-mo per year).
[ssquf] Early Intervention, Referral, and Follow-up Individual Form
(EIRF-I): The EIRF-I has been improved to gather initial follow-up
information about youth identified as being at risk as a result of the
State/Tribal GLS program (whether or not a service was received after
referral). In addition, EIRF-I (1) data elements have been expanded to
include screening practices, screening tools, and screening results of
youth identified as at-risk for suicide; (2) response options have been
expanded/refined (i.e., setting/source of identification, mental health
and non-mental health referral locations, and services received); (3)
tribal-specific data elements have been added; and (4) sources of
information used has been removed.
[ssquf] EIRF Screening Form (EIRF-S): Data elements have been added
to indicate whether State/Tribal screenings were performed at the
individual- or group-level. New response options have been added under
``screening tool'' and ``false positive'' has been removed.
[ssquf] Student Behavioral Health Form (SBHF): The SBHF (formerly
entitled the MIS) has been expanded and renamed. The Campus form has
been enhanced to include referral and follow-up procedure questions
(rather than simply counts); numbers screened, identified at risk,
receiving suicide-specific services, referred, and receiving follow-up;
and age and gender breakdowns of suicide attempts and deaths. Student
enrollment/retention items have been removed; these will be obtained
through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. The SBHF
will require closer involvement with campus behavioral health/health
providers to gather data on procedural questions and screenings, risk
assessment, services, referrals, and follow-ups.

Instrument Additions

Four instruments will augment the evaluation--two are newly
developed instruments and two represent new versions of existing
instruments.
[ssquf] TUP-S RCT (Baseline and 12-Month versions): The TUP-S RCT
refers to versions administered as part of the Training Study RCT. The
RCT collects TUP-S data at baseline (pre-training) and 3, 6, and 12
months after training. Because the surveys are conducted at different
times, each version refers the participant to a specific time period.
All trainees from States/Tribes participating in the RCT and who
consent to be contacted will be surveyed until the desired sample size
of 1332 respondents is achieved. The consent-to-contact form will
describe the RCT and the 4 assessment periods. The consent-to-contact
form will describe the RCT and the 4 assessment periods.
[ssquf] Behavior Health Provider Survey (BHPS): The BHPS is a new
State/Tribal data collection activity and the first to specifically
target behavioral health providers partnering with GLS grantees. Data
will include information about referrals for at-risk youth, SSE care
practices implemented, and client outcomes (number of suicide attempts
and deaths). A total of 1-10 respondents from each State/Tribal
grantee's partnering behavioral health provider will participate
annually.
The estimated response burden to collect this information
associated with the redesigned National Outcomes Evaluation is as
follows annualized over the requested 3-year clearance period is
presented below:

Total and Annualized Averages: Respondents, Responses and Hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burden per
Type of respondent Instrument Number of Responses per Total number response Annual burden
respondents respondent of responses (hours) (hours)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATE/TRIBAL INSTRUMENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Evaluator......................... PSI......................... 43 4 172 0.750 129
Project Evaluator......................... TASP........................ 43 4 172 0.250 43
Project Evaluator......................... EIRF-Individual Form........ 43 4 172 0.750 129
Project Evaluator......................... EIRF Screening Form......... 43 4 172 0.750 129
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S Consent to Contact.... 6,000 1 6000 0.167 1000
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S 3 Month Version....... 2,000 1 2000 0.500 1000
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S 6 Month Version....... 600 1 600 0.417 250
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT BL Version........ 444 1 444 0.417 185
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT 3 Month Version... 444 1 444 0.500 222
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT 6 Month Version... 444 1 444 0.417 185
Provider Trainee.......................... TUP-S RCT 12 Month Version.. 444 1 444 0.417 185
Provider Stakeholder...................... RNS......................... 26 1 26 0.667 17
Behavioral Health Provider................ BHPS........................ 407 1 407 0.750 305
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 60696]]

CAMPUS INSTRUMENTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Evaluator......................... PSI......................... 56 4 224 0.750 168
Project Evaluator......................... TASP........................ 56 4 224 0.250 56
Project Evaluator......................... SBHF........................ 56 1 56 0.667 37
Student................................... TUP-S Campus Version........ 167 1 167 0.167 28
Student................................... SMSS........................ 734 1 734 0.083 61
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. 12,050...................... .............. 12,902 .............. 4,129
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Rounded to the nearest whole number.

Send comments to Summer King, SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer,
Room 2-1057, One Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857 OR email her a
copy at summer.king@samhsa.hhs.gov. Written comments should be received
by December 7, 2015.

Summer King,
Statistician.
[FR Doc. 2015-25472 Filed 10-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162-20-P

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Notices 60695

provided at trainings—practices that youth identified as being at risk as a Instrument Additions
have been found to improve retention of result of the State/Tribal GLS program
knowledge and skills posttraining. In (whether or not a service was received Four instruments will augment the
addition, understanding how skills can after referral). In addition, EIRF–I (1) evaluation—two are newly developed
be maintained over time with materials data elements have been expanded to instruments and two represent new
provided at trainings (e.g., video include screening practices, screening versions of existing instruments.
reminders, wallet cards, online and tools, and screening results of youth D TUP–S RCT (Baseline and 12-
phone applications) is an area suggested identified as at-risk for suicide; (2) Month versions): The TUP–S RCT refers
for further study (Cross et al., 2011). response options have been expanded/ to versions administered as part of the
D Training Utilization and refined (i.e., setting/source of Training Study RCT. The RCT collects
Preservation Survey (TUP–S) 3 and 6- identification, mental health and non- TUP–S data at baseline (pre-training)
month follow up: The TUP–S has been mental health referral locations, and and 3, 6, and 12 months after training.
improved to examine posttraining services received); (3) tribal-specific Because the surveys are conducted at
behaviors and utilization of skills by data elements have been added; and (4) different times, each version refers the
training participants—factors known to sources of information used has been participant to a specific time period. All
improve understanding of the removed. trainees from States/Tribes participating
comprehensive training process and the D EIRF Screening Form (EIRF–S): Data in the RCT and who consent to be
impact of training on identifications, elements have been added to indicate contacted will be surveyed until the
referrals, and service use. The survey whether State/Tribal screenings were desired sample size of 1332 respondents
now requests information about training performed at the individual- or group- is achieved. The consent-to-contact form
resources received, practice level. New response options have been will describe the RCT and the 4
components, trainee participation in added under ‘‘screening tool’’ and ‘‘false assessment periods. The consent-to-
role play, and previous suicide positive’’ has been removed. contact form will describe the RCT and
prevention trainings attended; D Student Behavioral Health Form the 4 assessment periods.
experience intervening with a suicidal (SBHF): The SBHF (formerly entitled
individual (from QPR evaluation tool), the MIS) has been expanded and D Behavior Health Provider Survey
intended use of the training, and referral renamed. The Campus form has been (BHPS): The BHPS is a new State/Tribal
behaviors; and previous contact and enhanced to include referral and follow- data collection activity and the first to
quality of relationships with youth. up procedure questions (rather than specifically target behavioral health
Broad items about training others, the simply counts); numbers screened, providers partnering with GLS grantees.
use/intended use of skills, and barriers/ identified at risk, receiving suicide- Data will include information about
facilitators have been removed. The specific services, referred, and receiving referrals for at-risk youth, SSE care
consent-to-contact form has been follow-up; and age and gender practices implemented, and client
modified to add brief items about the breakdowns of suicide attempts and outcomes (number of suicide attempts
trainee and previous identifications/ deaths. Student enrollment/retention and deaths). A total of 1–10 respondents
referrals. The TUP–S will be items have been removed; these will be from each State/Tribal grantee’s
administered at 3 and 6 months post- obtained through the Integrated partnering behavioral health provider
training to a random sample of training Postsecondary Education Data System. will participate annually.
participants via CATI (2000 ST TUP–S The SBHF will require closer The estimated response burden to
3-mo/600 ST TUP–S 6-mo per year). involvement with campus behavioral collect this information associated with
D Early Intervention, Referral, and health/health providers to gather data the redesigned National Outcomes
Follow-up Individual Form (EIRF–I): on procedural questions and screenings, Evaluation is as follows annualized over
The EIRF–I has been improved to gather risk assessment, services, referrals, and the requested 3-year clearance period is
initial follow-up information about follow-ups. presented below:

TOTAL AND ANNUALIZED AVERAGES: RESPONDENTS, RESPONSES AND HOURS
Responses Burden per
Number of Total number Annual burden
Type of respondent Instrument per response
respondents of responses (hours)
respondent (hours)

STATE/TRIBAL INSTRUMENTS

Project Evaluator ................. PSI ...................................... 43 4 172 0.750 129
Project Evaluator ................. TASP .................................. 43 4 172 0.250 43
Project Evaluator ................. EIRF-Individual Form ......... 43 4 172 0.750 129
Project Evaluator ................. EIRF Screening Form ........ 43 4 172 0.750 129
Provider Trainee ................. TUP–S Consent to Contact 6,000 1 6000 0.167 1000
Provider Trainee ................. TUP–S 3 Month Version .... 2,000 1 2000 0.500 1000
Provider Trainee ................. TUP–S 6 Month Version .... 600 1 600 0.417 250
Provider Trainee ................. TUP–S RCT BL Version .... 444 1 444 0.417 185
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Provider Trainee ................. TUP–S RCT 3 Month 444 1 444 0.500 222
Version.
Provider Trainee ................. TUP–S RCT 6 Month 444 1 444 0.417 185
Version.
Provider Trainee ................. TUP–S RCT 12 Month 444 1 444 0.417 185
Version.
Provider Stakeholder .......... RNS .................................... 26 1 26 0.667 17
Behavioral Health Provider BHPS .................................. 407 1 407 0.750 305

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM 07OCN1

60696 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 194 / Wednesday, October 7, 2015 / Notices

TOTAL AND ANNUALIZED AVERAGES: RESPONDENTS, RESPONSES AND HOURS—Continued
Responses Burden per
Number of Total number Annual burden
Type of respondent Instrument per response
respondents of responses (hours)
respondent (hours)

CAMPUS INSTRUMENTS

Project Evaluator ................. PSI ...................................... 56 4 224 0.750 168
Project Evaluator ................. TASP .................................. 56 4 224 0.250 56
Project Evaluator ................. SBHF .................................. 56 1 56 0.667 37
Student ................................ TUP–S Campus Version .... 167 1 167 0.167 28
Student ................................ SMSS ................................. 734 1 734 0.083 61

Total ............................. 12,050 ................................ ........................ 12,902 ........................ 4,129
* Rounded to the nearest whole number.

Send comments to Summer King, community’s confidence in purchasing site at http://www.firstresponder.gov.
SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, land mobile radio (LMR) equipment The forms will be available in Adobe
Room 2–1057, One Choke Cherry Road, built to P25 LMR standards. The P25 PDF format. The supplier will complete
Rockville, MD 20857 OR email her a CAP establishes a process for ensuring the forms electronically. The completed
copy at summer.king@samhsa.hhs.gov. that equipment complies with P25 forms may then be submitted via
Written comments should be received standards and is capable of Internet to the FirstResponder.gov Web
by December 7, 2015. interoperating across manufacturers. site.
The Department of Homeland Security The Department is committed to
Summer King,
needs to be able to collect essential improving its information collection
Statistician. information from manufacturers on their and urges all interested parties to
[FR Doc. 2015–25472 Filed 10–6–15; 8:45 am] products that have met P25 standards as suggest how these materials can further
BILLING CODE 4162–20–P demonstrated through the P25 CAP. reduce burden while seeking necessary
Equipment suppliers will provide information under the Act.
information to publicly attest to their DHS is particularly interested in
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND products’ compliance with a specific set comments that:
SECURITY of P25 standards. Accompanied by a (1) Evaluate whether the proposed
Summary Test Report that substantiates collection of information is necessary
[Docket No. ]
this declaration, the SDoC constitutes a for the proper performance of the
Agency Information Collection company’s formal, public attestation of functions of the agency, including
Activities: Submission for Review; compliance with the standards for the whether the information will have
Information Collection Request for the equipment. In providing this practical utility;
Department of Homeland Security information, companies will consent to (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
(DHS), Science and Technology, making this information public. In turn, agency’s estimate of the burden of the
Project 25 Compliance Assessment the emergency response community will proposed collection of information,
Program (P25 CAP) use this information to identify P25- including the validity of the
compliant communications systems. methodology and assumptions used;
AGENCY: Science and Technology The P25 CAP Program Manager will (3) Suggest ways to enhance the
Directorate, DHS. perform a simple administrative review quality, utility, and clarity of the
ACTION: 60-day notice and request for to ensure the documentation is information to be collected; and
comment. complete and accurate in accordance (4) Suggest ways to minimize the
with the current P25 CAP processes. burden of the collection of information
SUMMARY: The Department of Homeland This notice and request for comments is on those who are to respond, including
Security (DHS) invites the general required by the Paperwork Reduction through the use of appropriate
public to comment on the renewal of Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. automated, electronic, mechanical, or
existing data collection forms for the chapter 35). other technological collection
DHS Science and Technology techniques or other forms of information
DATES: Comments are encouraged and
Directorate’s Project 25 (P25) technology, e.g., permitting electronic
will be accepted until December 7,
Compliance Assessment Program (CAP): submissions of responses.
2015.
Supplier’s Declaration of Compliance
(SDoC) (DHS Form 10044 (6/08)) and ADDRESSES: Interested persons are Overview of This Information
Summary Test Report (DHS Form 10056 invited to submit comments, identified Collection
(9/08)). The attacks of September 11, by docket number, by one of the (1) Type of Information Collection:
2001, and the destruction of Hurricane following methods: Renewal of information collection.
Katrina made apparent the need for • Email: John.Merrill@hq.dhs.gov. (2) Title of the Form/Collection:
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

emergency response radio systems that Please include docket number DHS- in Science and Technology, Project 25
can interoperate, regardless of which the subject line of the message. (P25) Compliance Assessment Program
organization manufactured the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John (CAP).
equipment. In response, and per Merrill (202) 254–5604 (Not a toll free (3) Agency Form Number, if any, and
congressional direction, DHS and the number). the applicable component of the
National Institute of Standards and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SDoC Department of Homeland Security
Technology (NIST) developed the P25 and Summary Test Report forms will be sponsoring the collection: Department of
CAP to improve the emergency response posted on the FirstResponder.gov Web Homeland Security, Science &

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:12 Oct 06, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM 07OCN1

Document Created: 2015-12-15 08:48:32
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 08:48:32

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
FR Citation		80 FR 60694

80 FR 60694 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESSubstance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 194 (October 7, 2015)

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration