83 FR 55894 - Data Exchange Standards for Improved Interoperability of Multiple Human Service Programs
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 217 (November 8, 2018)
Administration for Children and Families
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 217 (November 8, 2018)
| Page Range | 55894-55896 | |
| FR Document | 2018-24459 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 217 (Thursday, November 8, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 55894-55896] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-24459] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Data Exchange Standards for Improved Interoperability of Multiple Human Service Programs AGENCY: Office of Planning, Research & Evaluation (OPRE), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). ACTION: Request for comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: A series of statutory changes \1\ in recent years require ACF to issue a regulation to establish standards for data exchange for the Social Security Act Title IV programs for child welfare and foster care (title IV-B and IV-E), child support (title IV-D), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF, title IV-A). ACF is seeking public comment on the most effective approaches and technological tools to meet the statutory requirements, support program objectives, and expand the ability of these programs to use, share, and analyze data for improved outcomes. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Public Law 112-34 for child welfare programs (SSA Title IV- B); Public Law 112-96 for TANF programs (SSA Title IV-A); Section 304 of Public Law 113-183 for child support programs (SSA Title IV- D); and Public Law 115-123 to amend the prior TANF (IV-A) language and add language for foster care programs (SSA Title IV-E). DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADDRESSES section below on or before January 7, 2019. ADDRESSES: Interested persons may submit written comments by any of the following methods:Email: [email protected]. Please include ``Comments on Data Exchange Standards Federal Register Notice'' in the subject line of the message. Mail or Courier Delivery: c/o Chris Traver, Senior Advisor, Division of Data & Improvement, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201. Instructions: We urge you to submit comments electronically to ensure they are received in a timely manner. All comments received may be posted publicly including any personal information provided. Please be aware that mail via the U.S. Postal Service may take an additional 3 to 4 days to process. If you choose to use an express, overnight, or other special delivery method, please ensure first that they are [[Page 55895]] able to deliver to the above address during the normal workweek. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Traver, Senior Advisor, Division of Data & Improvement, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201; (202) 401-4835. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: Purpose of Data Exchange Standardization Requirement. The purpose of the statutory requirements and corresponding regulation is to ensure that state human service programs are able to effectively share data, both at the state level and with the federal government. For instance, states find significant value in the ability to share or link case level data from one information system to another on the same individuals receiving benefits and/or services in order to support a holistic, wrap-around services approach for individuals and families. To achieve this in an efficient manner, each agency must agree to describe the shared data in a common way. As a simple example, if an agency records in its information system a client's birthdate as 12/11/10, it could be interpreted by another agency's information system as December 11, 2010, and by another agency as November 12, 2010, or something else entirely. Those agencies must also agree on the mechanisms for sharing the data, such as secure interfaces (including APIs) \2\ or file transfers. Therefore, it is critical to reach agreement beforehand regarding the definitions and structures of data that is shared across programs and systems. Under the required regulation, ACF would work with the states to develop and implement data exchange standards for certain categories of information that would improve the quality and consistency of human services data sharing implementation nationwide. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Application Programming Interface--https://www.techopedia.com/definition/24407/application-programming-interface-api. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In human services, data sharing is increasingly relied upon to enable coordination across programs and information/system silos, especially for effective integrated case management and prevention of improper payments. For example, if a single mother of two children is receiving a TANF benefit but the two children are subsequently removed and placed into foster care, data sharing across information systems would allow the TANF agency to know that the children are no longer living in the household and the mother may no longer be eligible for the same level of benefit. Data sharing also improves the quality of service delivery. For example, a child welfare caseworker might be able to retrieve a family's current address from child support data to locate the family for an in-person visit or locate the absent parent for possible placement of the children. Additionally, a data exchange between a child welfare agency with care and custody of a child and a child- placing agency with physical custody would ensure both agencies have the most current information on the child in care. The importance of data sharing may be well understood. However, the preferred implementation method may vary by agency. The greater the degree of standardization, the easier it is to share data across organizations. While more effective and cost effective in the long run, this approach requires a standardized format, structure, and methods for sharing the data prior to implementation and may initially introduce additional considerations that influence time and cost. Therefore, the final regulation will seek the appropriate balance between the benefits of standardization and ease of implementation. Regulation Development The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) will lead the drafting of the regulation with subject matter expertise from the ACF Children's Bureau (CB), Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE), and Office of Family Assistance (OFA). Additionally, OPRE will consult with other agencies that may be impacted by the regulation through existing or future data exchange relationships, such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). Definitions (for the Purposes of This Request for Comment) Data Exchange should refer to any sharing of information, whether through transfer of data, expanded access to data, or any other mechanism that increases the utilization of information. Data exchange could include sharing for the purposes of case management, program administration, data reporting, analytics, etc. It is generally thought to refer to exchange of data across program, organizational, or jurisdictional boundaries, but this is not strictly necessary to be considered an exchange of information. In this context, data exchange typically refers to the electronic exchange of data via automated data systems, rather than through more traditional, often paper-based, means. Standards should refer to any documented, consistent, and repeatable method for exchanging data, either through technical or non- technical means. There are technical standards for the electronic exchange of data (such as through tools including the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM),\3\ and there are also standards of practice in the context of business process. These are often codified in policies, interagency agreements, memoranda of understanding, service-level agreements, etc. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ https://www.niem.gov/communities/human-services. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- What We Are Looking for in Public Comments ACF is committed to providing state agencies with flexibility to implement standards for economical, efficient, and effective information systems that support policy and practice. Therefore, we are soliciting comments from interested parties on setting standards for data exchanges that affect the SSA Title IV programs for child welfare and foster care (title IV-B and IV-E), child support (title IV-D), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF, title IV-A). But we are also interested in receiving input affecting additional programs. Please comment on any aspects of the planned Data Exchange Standards Regulation that you wish. We are particularly interested in obtaining responses to the following questions: 1. The ability to share data is often impacted by state or federal law, policies, or other governing frameworks. Are there individual programs or agencies that are particularly impacted by their existence or absence? What are the key enablers and/or barriers to automated data exchange in your program or agency? 2. To what degree, if any, are data exchange efforts negatively impacted by a lack of standardization? In other words, where would greater consistency of data (definitions, format, and structure) help improve existing or planned data exchanges? 3. Have you considered adopting a standards-based approach to data exchange? If so, were any existing standards frameworks (such as the National Information Exchange Model) considered, and what influenced the decision for or against? What are some of the benefits (planned or achieved) of adopting a standards-based approach? 4. What factors should be considered before committing to a standards-based [[Page 55896]] approach to data exchange? This might include timing (procurement, fiscal year, or legislative cycles), cost, availability of required expertise, needed regulatory change, impacts on current practices, etc. 5. If a more standards-based approach to data exchange were adopted, what kinds of technical assistance or training would you anticipate needing, if any? ACF appreciates any and all comments on the above questions, or related recommendations. Comments will be considered carefully and used to inform the development of a planned Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which is anticipated to be published in the spring of 2019. Dated: October 25, 2018. Lynn A. Johnson, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families. [FR Doc. 2018-24459 Filed 11-7-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-79-P
![55894 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2018 / Notices
must submit documentation that received feedback that the revised DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
identifies each board member by name evaluation criteria was difficult to HUMAN SERVICES
and indicates his/her affiliation or understand and apply. In FY 2019, ANA
relationship to at least one of ANA’s will reorder the evaluation criteria and Administration for Children and
three categories of community include sub-criteria with smaller point Families
representation, which include: (1) allotments. We will also remove
Members of federally or state-recognized Data Exchange Standards for
duplications and clarify language. ANA
tribes; (2) persons who are recognized Improved Interoperability of Multiple
proposes the following Evaluation Human Service Programs
by members of the eligible Native criteria scores for FY 2019:
American community to be served as AGENCY: Office of Planning, Research &
having a cultural relationship with that Expected Outcomes for a maximum of 35
points, to consist of: Long Term Community
Evaluation (OPRE), Administration for
community; or (3) persons considered to Children and Families (ACF),
be Native American as defined in 45 Goal (2 points), Current Community
Condition (5 points); Project Goal (4 points); Department of Health and Human
CFR 1336.10 and Native American Services (HHS).
Pacific Islanders as defined in Section Objectives (7 points); Outcomes and
Indicators (7 points); Outputs (5 points); ACTION: Request for comments.
815 of NAPA. ANA wishes to clarify
that the second category of community Outcome Tracking Strategy (4 points); and
Outcome Tracker (1 point).
SUMMARY: A series of statutory changes 1
representation requires a ‘‘cultural’’ in recent years require ACF to issue a
relationship defined as lineage, familial, Approach for a maximum of 50 points, to
consist of: Planning, Readiness and regulation to establish standards for data
marriage, or other traditional or social exchange for the Social Security Act
connection to the community and not a Implementation Strategy (20 points);
Community-Based Strategy (8 points); Title IV programs for child welfare and
business or work relationship, (e.g. foster care (title IV–B and IV–E), child
person that owns a business or is Personnel, Partnerships and Organizational
Capacity (12 points); and the Objective Work support (title IV–D), and Temporary
employed by an organization that serves Assistance for Needy Families (TANF,
the Native community). Applicants that Plan (OWP) (10 points).
Budget and Budget Justification for a title IV–A). ACF is seeking public
do not include this documentation will comment on the most effective
be considered non-responsive, and the maximum of 15 points, to consist of: Line
Item Budget (5 points) and Budget approaches and technological tools to
application will not be considered for meet the statutory requirements,
competition. Justification (10 points).
support program objectives, and expand
3. Only One Active Award Per CFDA These changes are meant to reorganize the ability of these programs to use,
Number. ANA has a long-standing
the information into smaller point share, and analyze data for improved
policy that organizations can have no
allotments in order to make ANA’s outcomes.
more than one active award per Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) evaluation criterion more approachable, DATES: Written comments must be
number for an ANA program at any and to build consistency in the number submitted to the office listed in the
given time. SEDS, SEDS–AK, Native of points being allocated for specific ADDRESSES section below on or before
Assets Building Initiative (NABI), and application information. As a result of January 7, 2019.
ILEAD have the same CFDA number the changes to criteria scoring, ANA ADDRESSES: Interested persons may
93.612. From FY 2016 to FY 2018, ANA will not use a Scoring Guide in its FY submit written comments by any of the
allowed an exception for organizations 2019 FOAs. following methods:
that were applying for the ILEAD FOA 5. Changes to SEDS–AK FOA. ANA • Email: DataRx@acf.hhs.gov. Please
to also have an award for SEDS, SEDS– plans to modify the description of include ‘‘Comments on Data Exchange
AK, or NABI even though they had the program purpose for the SEDS–AK FOA Standards Federal Register Notice’’ in
same CFDA number as ILEAD. For FY to provide an area of interest for the subject line of the message.
2019, this exception will not be economic growth. In addition, ANA • Mail or Courier Delivery: c/o Chris
available to any currently funded ILEAD Traver, Senior Advisor, Division of Data
wants to provide a competitive
grantees; therefore, the policy will & Improvement, Office of Planning,
advantage for smaller Alaska Native
remain effective to limit the number of Research, and Evaluation,
awards an organization can have under villages or organizations that have never Administration for Children and
a single CFDA number. This policy received ANA funding. Therefore, the Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington,
change will allow other Native FOA will state that reviewers may add DC 20201.
communities without current ANA up to 5 bonus points in the scoring Instructions: We urge you to submit
funding to receive an award and criteria if an eligible entity that has comments electronically to ensure they
therefore increase the impact of funding never received an ANA award. ANA are received in a timely manner. All
in more communities. staff will confirm during the objective comments received may be posted
4. Evaluation Criteria. In FY 2018, review process whether or not an publicly including any personal
ANA made substantial revisions to the applicant organization for SEDS–AK has information provided. Please be aware
application requirements and evaluation received a past ANA award. that mail via the U.S. Postal Service may
criteria included in our FOAs. The take an additional 3 to 4 days to process.
Statutory Authority: Section 814 of the
purpose of these revisions were to shift If you choose to use an express,
Native American Programs Act of 1974
from a deficit-based, to strengths-based overnight, or other special delivery
(NAPA), as amended.
approach for application planning and method, please ensure first that they are
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
development, as well as to emphasize a Jean Hovland,
community-based approach to project Commissioner, Administration for Native 1 Public Law 112–34 for child welfare programs
planning and implementation. ANA Americans. (SSA Title IV–B); Public Law 112–96 for TANF
stands behind the revisions made in FY programs (SSA Title IV–A); Section 304 of Public
[FR Doc. 2018–24458 Filed 11–7–18; 8:45 am] Law 113–183 for child support programs (SSA Title
2018 and does not plan to change the IV–D); and Public Law 115–123 to amend the prior
BILLING CODE 4184–34–P
information being requested. However, TANF (IV–A) language and add language for foster
during the panel review process, ANA care programs (SSA Title IV–E).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:51 Nov 07, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_56111/page/1.svg)
![55896 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2018 / Notices
approach to data exchange? This might at the end of January 7, 2019. Comments a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
include timing (procurement, fiscal received by mail/hand delivery/courier Friday.
year, or legislative cycles), cost, (for written/paper submissions) will be • Confidential Submissions—To
availability of required expertise, considered timely if they are submit a comment with confidential
needed regulatory change, impacts on postmarked or the delivery service information that you do not wish to be
current practices, etc. acceptance receipt is on or before that made publicly available, submit your
5. If a more standards-based approach date. comments only as a written/paper
to data exchange were adopted, what submission. You should submit two
Electronic Submissions copies total. One copy will include the
kinds of technical assistance or training
would you anticipate needing, if any? Submit electronic comments in the information you claim to be confidential
ACF appreciates any and all following way: with a heading or cover note that states
comments on the above questions, or • Federal eRulemaking Portal: ‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS
related recommendations. Comments https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The
will be considered carefully and used to instructions for submitting comments. Agency will review this copy, including
inform the development of a planned Comments submitted electronically, the claimed confidential information, in
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which including attachments, to https:// its consideration of comments. The
is anticipated to be published in the www.regulations.gov will be posted to second copy, which will have the
spring of 2019. the docket unchanged. Because your claimed confidential information
comment will be made public, you are redacted/blacked out, will be available
Dated: October 25, 2018.
solely responsible for ensuring that your for public viewing and posted on
Lynn A. Johnson,
comment does not include any https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
Assistant Secretary for Children and Families. confidential information that you or a both copies to the Dockets Management
[FR Doc. 2018–24459 Filed 11–7–18; 8:45 am] third party may not wish to be posted, Staff. If you do not wish your name and
BILLING CODE 4184–79–P such as medical information, your or contact information to be made publicly
anyone else’s Social Security number, or available, you can provide this
confidential business information, such information on the cover sheet and not
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND as a manufacturing process. Please note in the body of your comments and you
HUMAN SERVICES that if you include your name, contact must identify this information as
information, or other information that ‘‘confidential.’’ Any information marked
Food and Drug Administration
identifies you in the body of your as ‘‘confidential’’ will not be disclosed
[Docket No. FDA–2018–N–3442] comments, that information will be except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20
posted on https://www.regulations.gov. and other applicable disclosure law. For
Agency Information Collection • If you want to submit a comment more information about FDA’s posting
Activities; Proposed Collection; with confidential information that you of comments to public dockets, see 80
Comment Request; Web-Based Pilot do not wish to be made available to the FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access
Survey To Assess Allergy to public, submit the comment as a the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/
Cosmetics in the United States written/paper submission and in the fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper 23389.pdf.
HHS. Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’). Docket: For access to the docket to
ACTION: Notice. Written/Paper Submissions read background documents or the
electronic and written/paper comments
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Submit written/paper submissions as received, go to https://
Administration (FDA or Agency) is follows: www.regulations.gov and insert the
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for docket number, found in brackets in the
announcing an opportunity for public
written/paper submissions): Dockets heading of this document, into the
comment on the proposed collection of
Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and ‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
certain information by the Agency.
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers and/or go to the Dockets Management
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are • For written/paper comments
required to publish notice in the Rockville, MD 20852.
submitted to the Dockets Management
Federal Register concerning each Staff, FDA will post your comment, as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
proposed collection of information and well as any attachments, except for Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
to allow 60 days for public comment in information submitted, marked and Food and Drug Administration, Three
response to the notice. This notice identified, as confidential, if submitted White Flint North, 10A–12M, 11601
solicits comments on a pilot study as detailed in ‘‘Instructions.’’ Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD
entitled ‘‘Web-based Pilot Survey to Instructions: All submissions received 20852, 301–796–5733, PRAStaff@
Assess Allergy to Cosmetics in the must include the Docket No. FDA– fda.hhs.gov.
United States.’’ 2018–N–3442 for ‘‘Agency Information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the
DATES: Submit either electronic or Collection Activities; Proposed PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal
written comments on the collection of Collection; Comment Request; Web- Agencies must obtain approval from the
information by January 7, 2019. based Pilot Survey to Assess Allergy to Office of Management and Budget
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Cosmetics in the United States.’’ (OMB) for each collection of
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
as follows. Please note that late, Received comments, those filed in a information they conduct or sponsor.
untimely filed comments will not be timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be ‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined
considered. Electronic comments must placed in the docket and, except for in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
be submitted on or before January 7, those submitted as ‘‘Confidential 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests
2019. The https://www.regulations.gov Submissions,’’ publicly viewable at or requirements that members of the
electronic filing system will accept https://www.regulations.gov or at the public submit reports, keep records, or
comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time Dockets Management Staff between 9 provide information to a third party.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:51 Nov 07, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_56111/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-11-08 06:22:48
Document Modified: 2018-11-08 06:22:48
| 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 | |
| Action | Request for comments. | |
| Dates | Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the | |
| Contact | Chris Traver, Senior Advisor, Division of Data & Improvement, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20201; (202) 401-4835. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 55894 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR