passbacks

From: Wolfgang, Dawn
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:53 PM
To: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Cc: Ruth.Brown@usda.gov; Charlene.Parker@usda.gov; Wilusz, Daniel; Heil, Fran; Giustozzi, Lisa;
Wiggins, Terry
Subject: FW: ICR 0584-0299--Quality Control Review Schedule
Importance: High
Karen. Please see our responses below. Thanks. Dawn

From: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:43 PM
To: Wolfgang, Dawn
Cc: Ruth.Brown@usda.gov
Subject: ICR 0584-0299--Quality Control Review Schedule
Importance: High
Dawn, OMB has the following comments/questions regarding this ICR. OMB is prepared to approve this
ICR on the condition that FNS agrees to make the suggested revisions below. Please ask the program
office whether they agree to the terms and if not, provide an explanation. Because the
questions/comments are rather straightforward, please have the program office/component respond to
these questions by noon on Friday. Thanks. – Karen
1. There words “and white” appears to be missing on response category #20 of Question #51. Item #20
should read “(Hispanic or Latino) and (Black or African American) and White” We have made these
changes and have attached the revised pages.

2. The term “Oriental” is considered offensive to many Asian Americans and should not be used. It should
be deleted from item #33. This term has been deleted.

3. FNS will need to have a plan in place for how it will allocate multiple race responses for use in civil
rights monitoring and enforcement. Will FNS be implementing the guidance provided in OMB BULLETIN
NO. 00-02 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/bulletins/b00-02.html)? If not, FNS will need to withdraw this
ICR and, upon resubmission, explain what it plans to do, especially regarding those respondents who do
not fall into one of the identified multiple race combinations (e.g. those who are coded as “12” or “22” in
response to question #51.
The Quality Control system (which covers this burden package) is not the system that FNS uses to collect
data for FSP civil rights monitoring and enforcement. This data is collected on the FNS-101 form. Quality
Control data collection categories in this area simply mirror already approved categories. The burden
package that covers this is OMB # 0584-0025, "Civil Rights Title VI - Collection reports-FNS-191 and
FNS-101." This package was approved in March 2006 in conjunction with a final rule “Civil Rights Data
Collection” published by FNS on May 18, 2006 that implemented FNS' plan for allocating multiple race
responses for use in monitoring and enforcement.
4. The supporting statement (item #10) should not use the term “confidential”—unless FNS has the
statutory authority to do so--because this term has a very specific legal definition. Since the Food Stamp
Act of 1977 requires only that FNS “safeguard” the respondent information (rather than authorize or
require that FNS keep the information “confidential”), terms like “privacy” and “safeguarding” should be
used instead of “confidential.”
We will use the term “safeguard” in place of “confidential.”
5. The supporting statement (item #12 c and d) would indicate that the total annual cost burden to
respondents is $514,436.06. However, the summary of ICR burden lists cost burden as $0. If the burden
is actually $514,436.06, please change the summary of ICR burden to $514,436.06.
Per our conversation, the information entered into the Annual Cost Burden is one to be thought as the
startup costs. My understanding is this information is capture by ROICS for use for the ICB. You have
asked that this entry should reflect the cost to the respondent, which are derived in question 12. I have
spoken with the Department and they are requesting guidance from the ROCIS. I will have to get back
with you on this when we get an answer.

From: Wolfgang, Dawn
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 11:30 AM
To: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Subject: RE: 0584-0299, Quality Control Review Schedule
In response to your questions:
Yes, there are the only 2 changes to this collection:
1) burden hours. The burden hours have increased due to the increase of sample cases. (of course
Respondent/Federal costs would increase due to increase as well as salary adjustments).
2) question on race. The racial and ethnic data categories had been revised to reflect new standards
issued by OMB.

The State agency would look-up the race and ethnic data information that was reported by the participant
at the time of application.
Thanks. Dawn

From: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 2:14 PM
To: Matsuoka, Karen Y.; Wolfgang, Dawn
Cc: Minor, Sandra
Subject: RE: 0584-0299, Quality Control Review Schedule
Hi Dawn. I was wondering if you had answers to the following questions from a previous email (see
below). Thanks. - Karen

From: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 4:44 PM
To: 'Wolfgang, Dawn'
Cc: 'Sandra.Minor@fns.usda.gov'
Subject: 0584-0299, Quality Control Review Schedule
Hi Dawn. I was wondering if you could confirm that the only 2 revisions being made to this ICR are:
1) burden hours
2) questions on race
Are there any others?
Also, would the information about race ever come from participant self-report? Would it ever involve a
real-time assessment by a state agency of a participant’s race? Or would it all be a retroactive
assessment by a state agency, where the state agency looks up whatever race information was reported
for the participant?
Thanks.
Karen