[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10045-10047]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4032]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5480-N-13]


Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Comment Request; 
``eLogic Model'' Grant Performance Report Standard

AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Officer, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Information Collection.

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

SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described 
below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department 
is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal.

DATES: Comments Due Date: April 25, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding 
this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB 
Control Number {2535-0114{time}  and should be sent to: Barbara Dorf, 
Director, Office of Departmental Grants Management and Oversight, 
Department or Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room 
3156, Washington, DC 20410 or e-mail at [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Collette Pollard, Reports Management 
Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh 
Street, Southwest, Washington, DC 20410; e-mail 
[email protected]; or Dorthera Yorkshire, Senior Program Analyst 
Office of Departmental Grants Management and Oversight at 
[email protected] for copies of the proposed forms and other 
available information.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department will submit the proposed 
information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended).
    This Notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and 
affecting agencies concerning the proposed collection of information 
to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, 
including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) 
Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the 
proposed collection of information; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, 
and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the 
burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; 
including through the use of appropriate automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting 
electronic submission of responses.
    This Notice also lists the following information:
    Title of Proposal: ''eLogic Model'' Grant Performance Report 
Standard''.
    OMB Approval Number: 2535-0114.
    Form Number: The agency form number is HUD 96010, each program 
utilizing the Logic Model will have the same form number and the 
Program Name following the number to associate the logic model to the 
specific program.
    Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The 
revised form, which is an attachment to HUD Federal Financial 
Assistance applications. HUD uses standardized points for evaluating 
Logic Models submitted under Rating Factor 5, Achieving Results and 
Program Evaluation for programs using the Logic Model. The decision to 
standardize the basis for rating the Logic Model resulted from review 
of submitted Logic Models and rating factor narrative statements, and 
training sessions held with HUD staff and the applicant community. By 
standardizing the rating for the Logic Model submission, HUD believes 
that a greater understanding will be gained on the use and relationship 
of the Logic Model to information submitted as part of the Rating 
Factors for award. The standardization of the Logic Model submission in 
Rating Factor 5 highlights the relationship between the narratives 
produced in response to the factors for award, stated outputs and 
outcomes, and discrepancies or gaps that have been found to exist in 
submitted Logic Models. HUD also believes that the standardization will 
strengthen the use of the Logic Model as a management and evaluation 
tool. The Logic Model is a tool that integrates program operations and 
program accountability. It links program operations (mission, need, 
intervention, projected results, and actual results), and program 
accountability (measurement tool, data

[[Page 10046]]

source, and frequency of data collection and reporting, including 
personnel assigned to function). Applicants/grantees should use it to 
support program planning, monitoring, evaluation, and other management 
function HUD uses the Logic Model and its electronic version, the 
eLogic Model[supreg], to capture an executive summary of the 
application submission in data format, which HUD uses to evaluate the 
attainment of stated applicant goals and anticipated results. HUD also 
uses the data for policy formulation. HUD encourages applicants and 
those selected for award to use the Logic Model data to monitor and 
evaluate their own progress and effectiveness in meeting stated goals 
and achieving results consistent with the program purpose. To further 
this objective, and in response to grantee requests, the HUD eLogic 
Model[supreg] contains a column that allows the grantee to input 
results achieved for the reporting period, as well as Year-To-Date 
(YTD) in the reporting year tab for each year of the award. This added 
field allows the grantee to review performance each reporting period 
and for each year of the award ``at a glance,'' and without having to 
construct a report. The HUD eLogic Model[supreg] also has fields to 
capture the location (city, state, and nine digit Zip Code) where the 
majority of the activities take place, as well as a drop-down menu to 
identify the reporting period start and end date. In FY2010, HUD added 
a drop down field for the reporting period, as follows: Yr1Qtr1; 
Yr1Qtr2; Yr1Qtr3; Yr1Qtr4; Yr2Qtr5; Yr2Qtr6; Yr2Qtr7; Yr2Qtr8; Yr3Qtr9; 
Yr3Qtr10; Yr3Qtr11; Yr3Qtr12; and Final Report. The sequential 
numbering of the quarters was determined necessary because each start 
and end date within a program may vary by grantee, so it was difficult 
to determine the actual report that was sent in the order that they 
were received by HUD. If a grantee only reports semi annually, it would 
select Yr1 Quarter 2 as its first reporting period and Yr1 Quarter 4 as 
its second semi-annual reporting period. If a grantee is only required 
to report annually, it would select Yr1Qtr4 to denote its reporting 
period. Final reports would be denoted as a final report. Each Program 
NOFA will specify the reporting requirement with instructions, and 
whether a separate final report is required in addition to any annual 
report. Applicants and grantees must follow the following requirements 
in completing and naming their Logic Model files:
    The applicant name in the Logic Model must match the applicant name 
in box 8a of the SF424, Application for Federal Financial Assistance 
Form. If an applicant is submitting more than one application for 
funding, the project name must be completed and must be different for 
each funding request made.
    DO NOT use special characters (i.e., , %, /, etc.) in a 
file name.
    DO NOT include spaces in the file name. Limit file names to not 
more than 50 characters (HUD strongly recommends not more than 32 
characters).
    DO NOT convert Word files or Excel files into PDF format. 
Converting to PDF format increases file size and will make it more 
difficult to upload the application and does not allow HUD to enter 
data from the Excel files into a database.
    DO NOT save your logic model in .xlsm format. If necessary save as 
an Excel 97-2003 .xls format. Using the .xlsm format can result in a 
Grants.gov virus detect error. In addition, HUD cannot accept and open 
.xlsm files.
    File names with spaces and special characters in the file name or 
which contain more than 50 characters present problems for HUD entering 
the data electronically into our database. Applications that do not 
follow the naming conventions will have their applications rejected by 
the Grants.gov website, as the file names that violate these 
requirements are viewed as containing viruses by the system. Grantees 
who submit reports that do not meet the file-naming requirements or do 
not complete mandatory data fields will have their Logic Model reports 
returned to them for correction of these issues.
    For the file name of the eLogic Model[supreg], please follow the 
file naming conventions and requirements above. After award, the file 
name for Logic Model must be the award number and reporting period. For 
detailed instructions, please see the instructions under Tab 1 of the 
program eLogic Model[supreg], form HUD96010. The reporting periods will 
be specified in each of the program NOFAs.
    HUD's goal is to improve the labeling of the files to improve 
matching submitted application logic models and report Logic Models, 
thereby improving HUD's ability to place the information in a database 
and measure the effectiveness of HUD programs.
    Factor 5, Achieving Results and Program Evaluation, will consist of 
a minimum of 10 points for the Logic Model submission. The matrix 
provided in Appendix B of this General Section identifies how the Logic 
Model will be rated in a standardized way across program areas using 
the Logic Model. Training on the rating factor will be provided via 
satellite broadcast and archived on HUD's website for repeat viewing. 
Individual Program NOFAs may specify means other than the Logic Model 
for capturing performance data for evaluation purposes. Applicants 
should carefully read the Program NOFA to determine requirements and 
the Factors for Award which constitutes the basis for scoring each 
program NOFA.
    Additional details about the five rating factors and the maximum 
points for each factor are provided in individual program NOFAs. For a 
specific funding opportunity, HUD may modify these factors to take into 
account explicit program needs or statutory or regulatory limitations. 
Applicants should carefully read the factors for award as described in 
the program NOFA to which they are responding.
    e. Additional Criteria: Past Performance. In evaluating 
applications for funding, HUD will take into account an applicant's 
past performance in managing funds, including, but not limited to, the 
ability to account for funds appropriately; timely use of funds 
received either from HUD or other Federal, State, or local programs; 
timely submission and quality of reports to HUD; meeting program 
requirements; meeting performance targets as established in Logic 
Models approved as part of the grant agreement; timelines for 
completion of activities and receipt of promised matching or leveraged 
funds; and the number of persons to be served or targeted for 
assistance. HUD may consider information available from HUD's records; 
the name check review; public sources such as newspapers; Inspector 
General or Government Accountability Office reports or findings; or 
hotline or other complaints that have been proven to have merit.
    In evaluating past performance, HUD may elect to deduct points from 
the rating score or establish threshold levels as specified under the 
Factors for Award in the individual program NOFAs. Each program NOFA 
will specify how past performance will be rated.
    Agency form numbers, if applicable: HUD-96010.
    Estimation of the total number of hours needed to prepare the 
information collection including number of respondents, frequency of 
response, and hours of response: An estimation of the total time needed 
to complete the form is less than ten minutes; number of respondents is 
11,000; frequency of response is on the occasion of application 
submission. The total report burden is 1100 hours.

[[Page 10047]]

    Status of the proposed information collection: New collection of 
information for HUD's discretionary programs.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: February 16, 2011.
Colette Pollard,
Departmental Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief 
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-4032 Filed 2-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P