[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65512-65514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27245]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
[30Day-12-11JD]
Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act Review
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publishes a
list of information collection requests under review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction
Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). To request a copy of these requests, call
the CDC Reports Clearance Officer at (404) 639-5960 or send an e-mail
to [email protected]. Send written comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-
5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this
notice.
Proposed Project
Evaluation of Dating Matters: Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen
RelationshipsTM--New--National Center for Injury Prevention
and Control--Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Background and Brief Description
Evaluation of Dating Matters: Strategies to Promote Healthy Teen
RelationshipsTM is the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's new teen dating violence prevention initiative.
Recently, efforts to prevent teen dating violence (TDV) have grown,
particularly in schools, among policymakers, and among sexual violence
and domestic violence coalitions. Now many states and communities also
are working to stop teen dating violence. However, these activities
vary greatly in quality and effectiveness. To address the gaps, CDC has
developed Dating Matters, a teen
[[Page 65513]]
dating violence prevention program that includes programming for
students, parents, educators, as well as policy development. Dating
Matters is based on the current evidence about what works in prevention
and focuses on high-risk, urban communities where participants include:
Middle school students age 11 to 14 years; middle school parents; brand
ambassadors; educators; school leadership; program implementers;
community representatives; and local health department representatives
in the following four communities: Alameda County, California;
Baltimore, Maryland; Broward County, Florida; and Chicago, Illinois.
The primary goal of the current proposal is to conduct an outcome
and implementation evaluation of Dating Matters in the four
metropolitan cities to determine its feasibility, cost, and
effectiveness. In the evaluation a standard model of TDV prevention
(Safe Dates which is administered in the 8th grade) will be compared to
a comprehensive model (this model will be administered to students in
the 6th, 7th, and 8th grades). The comprehensive model also includes
communications strategies, policy development, and programs involving
parents of 6th, 7th, and 8th graders and their educators.
Burden estimates are based on the following information:
Number of communities/sites: 4.
Number of schools across 4 communities/sites: 48 (12
schools per community).
Number of students in each middle school: 600 students--
6th, 7th, 8th grade (200 students per grade).
Number of educators/school staff (e.g., teachers,
principals, support staff) in each school: 40.
Number of schools implementing the standard model of TDV
prevention: 24 (6 schools per community).
Number of schools implementing the comprehensive model of
TDV prevention: 24 (6 schools per community).
Across 4 communities/sites, 48 schools will implement the two
models of teen dating violence prevention. Based on an anticipated
school size of 600 the sampling frame for this data collection is
28,800 each year. The sampling frame for parents, given that we would
only include one parent per student, is also 28,800. Based on our
research and consultation with middle schools, most schools with
approximately 600 students have approximately 40 staff. If we assume 40
educators per school, the sampling frame for the educator sample is
1,920.
The following are explanations of estimated burden by respondent:
Students: We will use random selection to identify one-third of the
total participants, which is 9,600 student participants per year.
Parents: We will attempt to recruit all parents participating in
the parent curricula and select an equal number of parents from the
standard of care schools to serve as a matched comparison group. We
anticipate our final sample will include 40 parents per grade per
school, with a total of (40 parents x 48 schools x 3 grades) 5,760
parents per year. This sample of parents will respond to surveys twice
per year.
Educators: Although we will attempt to recruit all educators in
each school (1,920) each year, we expect that 85 percent will
participate, with the total number of 1,632 educator respondents per
year.
School data extractors: We will attempt to recruit one data
extractor per 48 schools to extract school data to be used in
conjunction with the outcome data for the students. Individual level
school data will only be collected for students participating in the
evaluation (one-third of all students in each school or 200 students),
so the number of respondents/extractors will be 48 and the number of
responses per data extractor is 200.
School leadership: Based on the predicted number of one school
leadership (e.g., principal, vice principal) per 48 schools, the number
of respondents will be 48.
Local Health Department representative: Based on the predicted
number of four communities/sites and four local health department
representatives working on Dating Matters per community, the number of
respondents will be 16.
Parent Program Manager: With a maximum of one parent program
manager per community/site, the number of program manager respondents
will be 4.
Community Representative: Based on the predicted number of 10
community representatives per 4 communities/sites, the number of
respondents will be 40.
Parent Curricula Implementers: 6 schools from each community will
implement the comprehensive approach. Parent groups in the
comprehensive approach are led by one male and one female parent. We
have estimated 7 parent pairs per community with 56 total parent
implementers (2 parents x 7 parent pairs x 4 communities = 56
implementers). These 56 implementers will host 5 sessions to 6th
graders (280 respondents) and 3 sessions to 7th graders (168
respondents). It is anticipated that the parent curricula implementers
will conduct three rounds of each curricula per year, with three
responses per session log per year.
Student Curricula Implementers: There are six student curricula
implementers per school that will be completing fidelity instruments
(48 schools x 6 implementers = 288 respondents). The 6th and 7th grade
implementers will complete 6 program sessions each (288 x 6 = 1,728
respondents) and the 8th grade implementers will complete 10 program
sessions (288 x 10 = 2,880 respondents). It is anticipated that the
student curricula implementers will conduct one round of each curricula
per year, with one response per session log per year.
Safe Dates Implementers: Based on the predicted number of 3
implementers in each of 48 schools, who will implement the 8th grade
SafeDates program, the number of respondents for the Safe Dates
implementer survey will be 144.
Brand Ambassadors: The Brand Ambassador Implementation Survey will
be provided to each brand ambassador in each community. With a maximum
of 20 brand ambassadors per community, the feedback form will be
collected from a total of 80 brand ambassadors. Brand Ambassadors will
respond to the survey twice per year.
Communications Implementers (``Brand Ambassador Coordinators''):
The Communications Campaign Tracking form will be provided to each
brand ambassador coordinator in each community. With a maximum of one
brand ambassador coordinator per community (n = 4), the feedback form
will be collected from a total of 4 brand ambassador coordinators.
There are no costs to the respondents other than their time. The
total estimated annual burden hours are 60,182.
[[Page 65514]]
Estimated Annualized Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Average burden
Type of respondent Form name Number of responses per per response
respondents respondent (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Student Program Participant........ Student Outcome Survey 9600 1 1.5
Baseline--Appendix D.
Student Program Participant........ Student Outcome Survey 9600 2 1.5
Follow-up--Appendix E.
School data extractor.............. School Indicators--Appendix 48 200 15/60
F.
Parent Program Participant......... Parent Outcome Survey-- 5760 2 1
Appendix G.
Educator........................... Educator Outcome Survey-- 1632 1 30/60
Appendix H.
Student Brand ambassador........... Brand Ambassador 80 2 20/60
Implementation Survey--
Appendix I.
School leadership.................. School Leadership Capacity 48 1 1
and Readiness Survey--
Appendix J.
Parent Curricula Implementer (6th Parent Program Fidelity 6th 280 3 15/60
grade). Grade Sessions 1-5--
Appendices K, L, M, N, O.
Parent Curricula Implementer (7th Parent Program Fidelity 7th 168 3 15/60
grade). Grade Sessions 1, 3-5--
Appendices P, Q, R.
Safe Dates Implementer Safe Dates Implementation 144 1 1
(implementation). Survey--Appendix S.
Student Curricula Implementer (6th Student Program Fidelity 1728 1 15/60
grade). 6th Grade Session 1-6--
Appendices T, U, V, W, X,
Y.
Student Curricula Implementer (7th Student Program Fidelity 1728 1 15/60
grade). 7th Grade Sessions 1-6--
Appendices Z-EE.
Student Curricula Implementer (8th Student Program Fidelity 2880 1 15/60
grade). 8th Grade Sessions 1-10--
Appendices FF-OO.
Communications Implementer......... Communications Campaign 4 4 20/60
Tracking--Appendix PP.
Local health department Local Health Department 16 1 2
representative. Capacity and Readiness--
Appendix QQ.
Parent Program Manager............. Parent Program Capacity and 4 1 1
Readiness--Appendix RR.
Community Representative........... Community Capacity and 40 1 1
Readiness--Appendix SS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catina Conner,
Acting Reports Clearance Officer, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2011-27245 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-P