[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63166-63168]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22002]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[Docket Number 160907825-6825-01]
Request for Comments for the Commission on Evidence-Based
Policymaking
AGENCY: Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Evidence-Based Policymaking Commission Act of 2016 (Pub.
L. 114-140), enacted March 30, 2016, established a 15-member Commission
on Evidence-Based Policymaking. The Commission is charged with
examining strategies to increase the availability and use of government
data, in order to build evidence related to government programs and
policies, while protecting the privacy and confidentiality of the data.
Over the next year, the Commission will consider how data, research,
and evaluation are currently used to build evidence and continuously
improve public programs and policies, and how to strengthen evidence-
building to inform program and policy design and implementation. The
Commission's work will conclude with a presentation of findings and
recommendations on evidence-building to Congress and the President.
This request for comments seeks public input on a range of issues,
including topics the authorizing law directs the Commission to
consider. The public comments received from this request will be used
to inform future deliberations of the Commission.
DATES: Comments must be received by November 14, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal. We
will not accept comments by fax or paper delivery. Please include the
Docket ID and the phrase ``Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking
Comments'' at the beginning of your comments. Please also indicate
which questions described in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of this
notice are addressed in your comments.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov to
submit your comments electronically under Docket ID USBC-2016-0003.
Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for
accessing Commission
[[Page 63167]]
documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket, is available on
the site under ``How to Use This Site.''
Privacy Note: Comments submitted in response to this
notice may be made available to the public through relevant Web sites.
Therefore, commenters should only include in their comments information
that they wish to make publicly available on the Internet. Please note
that responses to this public comment request containing any routine
notice about the confidentiality of the communication will be treated
as public comments that may be made available to the public,
notwithstanding the inclusion of the routine notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Hart, Policy and Research
Director for the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose
The Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking (hereafter,
``Commission'') established by Public Law 114-140 is charged with
examining strategies to improve the production and use of evidence to
support U.S. government programs and policies. Specifically, the
Commission is considering how to increase the availability and use of
government data in support of evidence-building activities related to
government programs and policies, while protecting the privacy and
confidentiality of such data.
This request for comments offers government entities, researchers,
evaluators, contractors, and other interested parties the opportunity
to inform the Commission's work and provide recommendations on core
questions the Commission will consider.
Request for Comments
Through this request for comments, the Commission is seeking
initial feedback from a broad range of stakeholders on questions that
will contribute to the Commission's future activities and fulfillment
of its duties, potentially including any findings and recommendations.
This request for comments is for information-gathering and fact-finding
purposes only, and should not be construed as a solicitation or as an
obligation on the part of the Commission or Federal agencies to agree
with submitted comments or to make recommendations regarding specific
issues identified in public comments.
The Commission requests that respondents address the following
questions, where possible and applicable. Respondents are encouraged to
focus on questions informed by relevant expertise or perspectives.
Please clearly indicate which question(s) you address in your response
and any evidence to support assertions, where practicable.
Overarching Questions
1. Are there successful frameworks, policies, practices, and
methods to overcome challenges related to evidence-building from state,
local, and/or international governments the Commission should consider
when developing findings and recommendations regarding Federal
evidence-based policymaking? If so, please describe.
2. Based on identified best practices and existing examples, what
factors should be considered in reasonably ensuring the security and
privacy of administrative and survey data?
Data Infrastructure and Access
3. Based on identified best practices and existing examples, how
should existing government data infrastructure be modified to best
facilitate use of and access to administrative and survey data?
4. What data-sharing infrastructure should be used to facilitate
data merging, linking, and access for research, evaluation, and
analysis purposes?
5. What challenges currently exist in linking state and local data
to federal data? Are there successful instances where these challenges
have been addressed?
6. Should a single or multiple clearinghouse(s) for administrative
and survey data be established to improve evidence-based policymaking?
What benefits or limitations are likely to be encountered in either
approach?
7. What data should be included in a potential U.S. government data
clearinghouse(s)? What are the current legal or administrative barriers
to including such data in a clearinghouse or linking the data?
8. What factors or strategies should the Commission consider for
how a clearinghouse(s) could be self-funded? What successful examples
exist for self-financing related to similar purposes?
9. What specific administrative or legal barriers currently exist
for accessing survey and administrative data?
10. How should the Commission define ``qualified researchers and
institutions?'' To what extent should administrative and survey data
held by government agencies be made available to ``qualified
researchers and institutions?''
11. How might integration of administrative and survey data in a
clearinghouse affect the risk of unintentional or unauthorized access
or release of personally-identifiable information, confidential
business information, or other identifiable records? How can
identifiable information be best protected to ensure the privacy and
confidentiality of individual or business data in a clearinghouse?
12. If a clearinghouse were created, what types of restrictions
should be placed on the uses of data in the clearinghouse by
``qualified researchers and institutions?''
13. What technological solutions from government or the private
sector are relevant for facilitating data sharing and management?
14. What incentives may best facilitate interagency sharing of
information to improve programmatic effectiveness and enhance data
accuracy and comprehensiveness?
Data Use in Program Design, Management, Research, Evaluation, and
Analysis
15. What barriers currently exist for using survey and
administrative data to support program management and/or evaluation
activities?
16. How can data, statistics, results of research, and findings
from evaluation, be best used to improve policies and programs?
17. To what extent can or should program and policy evaluation be
addressed in program designs?
18. How can or should program evaluation be incorporated into
program designs? What specific examples demonstrate where evaluation
has been successfully incorporated in program designs?
19. To what extent should evaluations specifically with either
experimental (sometimes referred to as ``randomized control trials'')
or quasi-experimental designs be institutionalized in programs? What
specific examples demonstrate where such institutionalization has been
successful and what best practices exist for doing so?
Guidance for Submitting Documents
We ask that each respondent include the name and address of his or
her institution or affiliation, and the name, title, mailing and email
addresses, and telephone number of a contact person for his or her
institution or affiliation, if any.
[[Page 63168]]
Rights to Materials Submitted
By submitting material in response to this request, you agree to
grant the Commission a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable,
nonexclusive license to use the material, and to post it. Further, you
agree that you own, have a valid license, or are otherwise authorized
to provide the material to the Commission. The Commission will not
provide any compensation for material submitted in response to this
request for comments.
Dated: September 8, 2016.
Shelly Martinez,
Executive Director of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking.
[FR Doc. 2016-22002 Filed 9-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P