[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72446-72449]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30283]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET


Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment 
Request

AGENCY: Office of Federal Financial Management, Office of Management 
and Budget.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) invites the general 
public and Federal agencies to comment on the renewal of the Standard 
Form 425, Federal Financial Report and the SF-425A, Federal Financial 
Report Attachment (collectively known as ``the FFR''). The FFR is used 
in reporting financial information under grants and cooperative 
agreements. The public was invited to comment on the renewal of the FFR 
in a notice published in the Federal Register on July 28, 2011 (76 FR 
45299). Some of the public comments received in response to July notice 
resulted in changes to the content of the FFR and FFR instructions. The 
proposed revised FFR and FFR instructions are at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_standard_report_forms/.

DATES: Comments must be received by December 23, 2011. Due to potential 
delays in OMB's receipt and processing of mail sent through the US 
Postal Service, we encourage respondents to submit comments 
electronically to ensure timely receipt. We cannot guarantee that 
comments mailed will be received before the comment closing date.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent through regulations.gov, a Federal E-
Government Web site that allows the public to find, review, and submit 
comments on documents that agencies have published in the Federal 
Register and that are open for comment. Simply type ``FFR renewal-2'' 
(in quotes) in the Comment or Submission search box, click Go, and 
follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments received by 
the date specified above will be included as part of the official 
record.
    Marguerite Pridgen, Office of Federal Financial Management, Office 
of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; 
telephone (202) 395-7844; fax (202) 395-3952; email 
[email protected].

[[Page 72447]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marguerite Pridgen at the addresses 
noted above.

Debra J. Bond,
Deputy Controller.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Paperwork Reduction Act notice 
published on July 28, 2011 [76 FR 45299], OMB requested comments on the 
Standard Form (SF) 425, Federal Financial Report and Standard Form (SF) 
425A, Federal Financial Report Attachment (collectively known as ``the 
FFR''). We received comments from an individual and five organizations. 
In response to those comments, we made changes to the FFR and FFR 
instructions. The proposed revised forms are posted at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_standard_report_forms/.
    Following is a summary of the comments we received and our 
responses.

I. Comments and Responses

A. Agency Implementation

    Comment: Several commenters were in favor of the FFR and considered 
it to be an improvement over the forms it replaced (i.e., SF-269, SF-
269A, SF-272, and SF-272A). However, many commenters expressed concern 
that agencies were customizing the form and/or form instructions. One 
commenter stated that Federal agencies don't require them to use the 
FFR. A state association commented that some programs still require 
recipients to report using the legacy standard forms SF-269 and SF-272.
    Response: No change has been made. We agree that the FFR should be 
kept uniform by all agencies as much as possible to allow for 
consistency in preparation by the grantee community. Agencies are 
permitted to shade out areas that they do not use, but may not add 
additional data elements without clearance from OMB. The SF-269, SF-
269A, SF-272, and SF-272A forms were not renewed by OMB. Agencies may 
not require recipients to use expired forms. Recipients are not 
required to respond to Federal information collections that do not have 
a current and valid OMB approval number. Agencies must ensure they 
receive OMB approval when required prior to collecting information from 
recipients.
    Comment: A commenter representing a state association commented 
that the main issue concerning data collection seems to be the lack of 
standardization across and within Federal agencies regardless of 
whether the process occurs via forms or other data models. The 
commenter also stated that if the implementation of the Digital 
Accountability and Transparency Act of 2011 (``DATA Act'') would 
include reporting of all grant expenditures, it could lead to the 
elimination of the FFR or other financial reports.
    Response: No change has been made. We agree that standardization 
across and within Federal agencies, whether the process occurs via 
forms or other data models, improves the information collection process 
for agencies and recipients. As of the date of this notice, the DATA 
Act has not been enacted.
    Comment: Several commenters raised issues with how agency personnel 
and systems access and process the FFR. A commenter representing a 
state association stated that some agency personnel that deal with 
grant closeout do not always have access to the online reports that 
have been filed with their system. The recipients then fax or mail the 
FFR to the granting agency. Another commenter provided details on 
problems experienced with online submissions of these forms through the 
US Department of Health and Human Service's Payment Management System.
    Response: Because these issues deal with agency implementation, no 
change has been made to the form in response to these comments. We have 
shared the comments with the managers of the Payment Management System 
who are working to address issues raised by the commenters.

B. Form Content, Instructions, and Format

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the FFR was an improvement 
over the previous SF-269. One commenter representing a state 
association stated that the FFR is a more cumbersome report to prepare 
than the SF-269 due to the more complicated instructions and the fact 
that both Federal draws and actual Federal expenditures are on the same 
report.
    Response: The general feedback we have received is that the FFR is 
an improvement over the legacy forms it replaces. In response to 
several other public comments, we have made changes to the form and 
form instructions to foster consistency.
    Comment: A commenter stated that the instruction for program income 
on line 10e is incorrect. Specifically, the last sentence in 
instructions refers to 10o rather than 10m.
    Response: We agree and have made a change to the instruction. The 
last sentence in the instruction for 10e should read ``10m'' not 
``10o''.
    Comment: A commenter stated that Line 10l is confusing by stating 
``total Federal program income'' suggesting it would be clearer to 
remove the word Federal. As an example, the commenter stated that her 
grant program is on a reimbursement basis of 75 percent Federal 
financial participation. So in many instances where program income was 
earned, the grantee would only report 75 percent of the total amount 
that the project earned in program income, because that was the Federal 
portion. In other instances the grantee will report the total amount, 
so it is not consistent because many interpret the instructions 
differently.
    Response: We agree and have made a change to the instruction. Line 
10l is intended to collect the total Federal share of program income 
earned. Line 10l has been changed to ``Total Federal Share of Program 
Income Earned.'' The instruction for line 10l has been changed to 
``Enter the amount of the Federal share of program income earned.''
    Comment: Several commenters expressed support for certain features 
of the FFR form while some commenters expressed support for certain 
features of the legacy SF-269. For instance, one commenter stated that 
there was value to having the cumulative totals on the form (SF-269) 
while another commenter stated that it is better that the cumulative 
totals not be on the report (FFR). Another commenter stated that 
``previously reported'' and ``this period'' columns that were on the 
SF-269 made it simpler to reconcile and monitor the changes over each 
quarter while another commenter expressed support for the FFR not 
having these columns. One commenter stated that the FFR doesn't allow 
for as much oversight on what is occurring financially on each report, 
such as if any refunds, credits, and type of match, unless the grantee 
uses the Remarks box. Another commenter expressed support for the 
indirect expense field being expanded to accommodate split rates.
    Response: No change has been made. The feedback we have received 
since the FFR has been implemented is that it is easier for grantees to 
complete and for agency staff to review than the SF-269. For example, 
the intent of a single column on the FFR was to keep the form as 
simplified as possible and to reduce the reporting burden on grantees. 
Federal agencies and recipients are still able to use the data in the 
form to compute the changes in amounts from the previous report. While 
we could have added back those columns and other data elements, we are 
concerned that the burden of collecting and reporting the data may 
outweigh the utility of the data.

[[Page 72448]]

    Comment: A commenter from a Federal agency expressed support for 
the FFR and recommended that OMB clarify its position regarding 
computation of interest earned on advances of grant funds and add 
corresponding data elements and instructions to the FFR.
    Response: We agree in part with the comment. We have not added any 
additional data elements to the form in an effort to minimize reporting 
burden. We will reexamine the need for requiring recipients to report 
interest when we review other requests for changes to the form.
    Recent findings in Federal audits of recipient cash management 
policies and procedures identified issues concerning the methods that 
recipients used to compute the amount of interest earned on Federal 
Cash on Hand. Auditors found that some recipients subtracted the 
aggregated amount of disbursements they had made under all of their 
Federal awards from the aggregated amount of payments they had received 
from the Government under those awards to compute the amount of Cash on 
Hand from all payments, which then became the basis for computing the 
amount of interest to be remitted. Recipients included in the 
computation awards paid by the reimbursement method, as well as awards 
paid by the advance method for which disbursements at the time of the 
computation exceeded the amount of the advances they had requested and 
received from the Government. For reimbursement method awards, the 
recipients had used their own funds to cover cash needs, pending 
receipt of future payments of Federal funds. The calculated balances of 
Federal Cash on Hand for those awards were negative, which offset 
positive balances for other Federal awards and reduced the computed 
amount of Federal Cash on Hand for all Federal awards in the aggregate. 
It therefore also reduced the computed amount of interest to be 
remitted to the Government. In light of these matters, and the 
commenter's recommendations, we have added and instruction to line 10c 
``Cash on Hand'' to read as follows:
    ``Use of Aggregated Amounts of Disbursements and Advances. A 
recipient must compute the amount of Federal Cash on Hand due to 
undisbursed advance payments using the same basis that it uses in 
requesting the advances. Therefore, in doing the computation, a 
recipient may only aggregate the amounts of its advance payments 
received and disbursements of Federal funds under multiple awards only 
if it is authorized to aggregate its requests for advance payments in 
the same manner. The following examples should help to illustrate what 
is permissible:
     If a recipient is authorized to consolidate its requests 
for advance payment for a group of awards--i.e., it requests a single 
amount to cover its anticipated cash needs for the awards in the 
aggregate, then it may similarly compute the Cash on Hand by 
subtracting the aggregated amount of disbursements from the aggregated 
amount of the advances received for those awards.
     If the same recipient is required to request payment 
individually for other Federal awards, it must compute the Cash on Hand 
for each of those awards on an award by award basis and correspondingly 
report these awards on separate FFRs.
    Exclusion of Negative Balances of Cash on Hand. In computing the 
total amount of Cash on Hand for its Federal awards in the aggregate, a 
recipient must exclude any negative balance of Federal Cash on Hand for 
an individual award or for a group of awards paid through a 
consolidated payment request. This includes each award paid by the 
reimbursement method and any award using the advance method that has 
disbursements in excess of advances received to date. The computation 
must include only positive balances of cash on hand.''
    On the form itself, we added the word ``combined'' to the 
instruction line 10 ``Transactions'' which now reads ``(Use lines a-c 
for single or combined multiple grant reporting)'' and added the word 
``separately'' to the instruction for Federal Cash which now reads 
``Federal Cash (To report multiple grants separately, also use FFR 
Attachment).''
    Comment: A commenter expressed concern with the limited amount of 
space available on the FFR for inputting data such as dates and 
indirect cost information.
    Response: We have not made changes to the form. The Excel version 
of the FFR on the OMB Web site is the recommended version to use since 
it allows the reporter to adjust the cell and column sizes as 
appropriate. As all agencies move to electronic entry and submission, 
this problem should cease to be an issue.

C. Timing of Submission

    Comment: A commenter stated that quarterly reporting on the FFR is 
better for reconciling the grant close-out because it is cumulative for 
all the grant years included with each letter of credit. However, there 
is an issue with timing because of transactions that occur before the 
grant closing, but that are not reported until the financial 
department's reporting quarter end date. The cash transactions portion 
of the SF-425 is still quarterly, but is populated more quickly for 
reference during the process of reconciling a grant for close-out.
    Response: No change has been made. This particular issue was raised 
in the commenter's discussion of how the US Department of Health and 
Human Services' Payment Management System processes the reports and was 
referred to the system manager for review.
    Comment: A commenter stated that FFR due date (the 30th following 
the end of the quarter) is the same day or 15 days prior to several 
Federal reports' due date, which is 45 days. The commenter stated that 
this is problematic because it forces the grantee to report draws or 
prior quarter disbursements rather than current, and the commenter has 
not been able to consistently determine if the report can be amended 
during the quarter.
    Response: No change has been made. The report may not be amended 
during the quarter. The grantee has 30 days past the quarter end date 
to report expenditures. If information reported is not current, the 
grantee is able to report remaining expenditures on the following 
quarter.

D. Reporting Burden

    Comment: Several commenters expressed concern that FFR does not 
lessen their reporting burden.
    Response: No change has been made. The FFR is the combination of 
the SF-272 and SF-269 forms streamlined into one form. The consensus 
has been that recipients prefer to fill out one form instead of two. We 
recognize that a recipient may be required to report additional 
financial data through other collection instruments, and we are seeking 
ways to reduce overall reporting burden in the future by scrutinizing 
agency requests to collect this additional financial data.

II. Next Steps

    Once the revised FFR is approved by OMB, agencies shall adopt it 
for use on their grants and cooperative agreements, and where 
appropriate, on other assistance agreements. Agencies that use 
customized (non-standard) forms to collect financial data from their 
recipients should discuss the need to continue use of the customized 
forms with OMB's Office of Federal Financial Management prior to 
seeking clearance or renewal from OMB's Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs.
    OMB Control No.: 0348-0061.
    Title: Federal Financial Report.

[[Page 72449]]

    Form No.: SF-425, SF-425A.
    Type of Review: Renewal of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents: States, Local Governments, Universities, Non-Profit 
Organizations.
    Number of Responses: 1,200,000.
    Estimated Time per Response: 60 minutes.
    Needs and Uses: The SF-425 is used to collect financial information 
for recipients of grants and cooperative agreements and related 
transactions under nonconstruction grant programs.

[FR Doc. 2011-30283 Filed 11-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110-01-P