Alternative Supporting Statement for Information Collections Designed for
Research, Public Health Surveillance, and Program Evaluation Purposes
TANF and Child Support Moving Forward: Further Incorporating Family Input
Formative Data Collections for Program Support
0970 – 0531
Supporting Statement
Part A
January 2023
Submitted By:
Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation
Administration for Children and Families
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
4th Floor, Mary E. Switzer Building
330 C Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20201
Project Officer:
Lisa Zingman
A1. Necessity for Collection 4
A3. Use of Information Technology to Reduce Burden 9
A5. Impact on Small Businesses 10
A6. Consequences of Less Frequent Collection 10
A7. Now subsumed under 2(b) above and 10 (below) 11
A10. Privacy: Procedures to protect privacy of information, while maximizing data sharing 12
A14. Estimated Annualized Costs to the Federal Government 17
A15. Reasons for changes in burden 17
Part A
Type of Request: This Information Collection Request is for a generic information collection under the umbrella generic, Formative Data Collections for Program Support (0970-0531).
Description of Request: This request is for formative data collection activities to obtain information about 4 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and 4 child support programs’ experiences engaging families for feedback during program improvement efforts. These 8 participating sites will pilot test an original toolkit developed by the study, called the Family Input Resources toolkit. The study also seeks to obtain feedback about the toolkit itself from the 8 pilot sites. Each pilot site will identify an Implementation Team, representing a mix of program administrators, managers, and frontline staff, who will lead the program improvement effort and use the Family Input Resources toolkit. All respondents for this study are members of these site-specific Implementation Teams.
Data collection will include (1) a web-based questionnaire that collects prospective sites’ expressions of interest to participate in the study; (2) semi-structured recruitment interviews with a subset of prospective sites; (3) a web-based questionnaire administered monthly for 12 months to one member of each site’s Implementation Team, (4) semi-structured interviews with all members of each site’s Implementation Team, conducted at two points during the pilot testing period, and (5) focus groups with each site’s Implementation Team after the end of the pilot testing period.
The data collected in the study are not intended to be generalized to a broader universe. We do not intend for this information to be used as the principal basis for public policy decisions.
Time Sensitivity: ACF aims to start data collection as soon as possible. Timely information can inform ways in which TANF and child support agencies can improve their program operations and service delivery. This information is increasingly important as human services programs focus on equity and engaging people with lived experience to help inform operational, policy, and service delivery considerations and changes.
For the human services system, the increased focus on meeting family needs within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and concern over its disproportionate impact on workers with low incomes and communities of color has underscored (1) the importance of including families’ input on what is and is not working and (2) heightened awareness of the need to consider how to promote equity and inclusion in all aspects of program operations and policies. Empowering families and elevating their voice can lead to more responsive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and child support policies and programs in ways that help reduce rather than exacerbate underlying disparities and perpetuate inequality.
To support this goal, the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) within the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) has contracted with Mathematica and its subcontractor, MEF Associates, to conduct this study and the related Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic study.1 Both studies are part of OPRE’s TANF and Child Support Moving Forward project. For the TANF and Child Support Moving Forward: Further Incorporating Family Input study, ACF has carried out: 1) a scan of academic and nonacademic literature about how human services programs engage families in program improvement processes and 2) consultations with eight human services program leaders experienced in seeking and using families’ input to improve their programs. This scan revealed an absence of:
documented information about how TANF and child support programs seek and use feedback from the families they serve to improve their program’s policies, service delivery, or operations; and
materials designed for TANF and child support administrators and practitioners that focus on engaging families for their feedback to inform program improvement.
Informed by the literature scans and consultations, and in collaboration with an Expert Workgroup including TANF, Tribal TANF, and child support administrators and staff and people with lived experience in the programs, the study developed a toolkit to support and encourage engaging families in program improvement. The toolkit (“Family Input Resources”) includes original and existing resources, guides, and tools designed specifically for administrators and practitioners of TANF and child support programs.
ACF is conducting this formative information collection to:
gather and provide information to and better support TANF and child support programs seeking to improve their programs using input from the families they serve; and
refine and improve the Family Input Resources toolkit that ACF is developing based on the feedback of TANF and child support programs.
There are no legal or administrative requirements that necessitate this collection. ACF is undertaking the collection at the discretion of the agency.
Purpose and Use
The purpose of this study is to:
better understand the successes and challenges TANF and child support programs face in using input from families to improve their programs; and
ensure that the Family Input Resources toolkit is valuable, relevant, and actionable for TANF and child support program leaders and staff and helps fill the existing gap in available resources that support TANF and child support programs in engaging families in program improvement.
This information will increase ACF’s understanding of how TANF and child support programs use family input for program improvement, which can inform future ACF-funded training and technical assistance (T/TA). ACF will also use this information to support and encourage TANF and child support programs to collect and use family input, as well as inform revisions and updates to the Family Input Resources toolkit. The information collected will contribute to the body of knowledge on ACF programs. It is not intended to be used as the principal basis for a decision by a federal decision-maker, and is not expected to meet the threshold of influential or highly influential scientific information.
This proposed information collection meets the following goals of ACF’s generic clearance for formative data collections for program support (0970-0531):
Obtaining feedback about processes and/or practices to inform ACF program development or support.
Delivery of T/TA and/or workflows related to the development or refinement of program processes.
Planning for provision of programmatic or evaluation-related T/TA.
Requesting information about resources, programs, or other ACF services or related activities to provide consolidated public sources of information for those using or interested in ACF funded services, or those interested in systems, programs, or research related to ACF.
Timely information can inform ways in which TANF and child support agencies can improve their program operations and service delivery. It will assist in ACF’s T/TA planning and delivery efforts by identifying challenges that TANF and child support programs face in engaging families for program improvement and potential contextual factors that may influence programs’ approaches to involving families in program improvement. It will also inform revisions to the Family Input Resources toolkit, which will be a resource for TANF and child support program leaders, staff, families served by those programs, and others interested in ACF programs.
Guiding Questions
Three broad questions will guide this study:
How did TANF and child support programs engage families in their program improvement processes?
How did TANF and child support programs use the Family Input Resources toolkit to support engaging families and improving their program?
To what extent did TANF and child support programs find the Family Input Resources toolkit actionable, relevant, and valuable to their program improvement work?
Study Design
Table 1 provides an overview of the study design and data collection activities that are planned to address the guiding questions. Programs will self-nominate. The study will collect information from programs that self-nominate. If selected, pilot sites will pilot test the Family Input Resources toolkit and will receive technical assistance to support both their use of the Family Input Resources toolkit and their engagement of families in a program improvement effort of their choosing. The study design includes collecting information from 4 TANF and 4 child support programs, including state, local, and Tribal programs during the pilot testing period.
The selection of TANF and child support programs for inclusion in the study will be based on a number of factors. The programs will represent a range of geography, caseload size (the number of TANF and child support cases in a state), administration type (state, Tribal, or local), involvement with other Federal initiatives or research, and considerations related to their readiness to engage in a program improvement effort involving families. More details about site selection are available in Supporting Statement B, section B2.
Each participating site will identify an Implementation Team of up to 8 members. The composition of the Implementation Team will vary by pilot site and depend on the type of program improvement and family engagement effort the agency wants to undertake. Implementation Team members could range from state-level program or policy directors to frontline case managers. Each participating agency will designate an Implementation Team lead as the study’s primary point of contact.
Implementation Teams will identify a program improvement effort to undertake in the first six months of the pilot testing period and a new program improvement effort for the second six months of the pilot testing period. If an Implementation Team wishes to improve an aspect of their program that is likely to take longer than six months, they may work on the same effort over the full 12-month period.
Data will be collected using five different instruments:
Expression of interest web-based questionnaire for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support prospective Implementation Team Leads (Instrument 1: Expression of Interest form)
Prospective site tele- or video-conference semi-structured interview guide for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support prospective Implementation Team Leads (Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide)
Web-based questionnaire for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support Implementation Team Leads (Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead)
Semi-structured tele- or video-conference staff interview guide for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support Implementation Team members (Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide)
Tele- or video conference focus group guide for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support Implementation Team members (Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide)
Prospective Implementation Team Leads will self-nominate using the expression of interest web-based questionnaire. The form will be used for programs to indicate interest in participating in the study. The form will take, on average, 10 minutes to complete and consists of a mix of closed- and open-ended questions. The form will be completed once by prospective Implementation Team Leads.
Based on the expressions of interests received, the study team will hold conversations with a subset of the programs that expressed interest. The study will use the prospective site semi-structured interview guide for the conversation with the prospective Implementation Team Leads. The conversations will help the study team systematically learn about potential pilot sites’ interests and readiness, provide prospective sites an opportunity to ask questions, and inform the study team’s site selection process. They will take, on average, 30 minutes to complete and will be held once with prospective Implementation Team Leads.
Data collected through the web-based questionnaire will be used to systematically document successes and challenges pilot sites face engaging families in program improvement, which materials in the Family Input Resources toolkit sites have used and how, and what sites like and dislike about the materials. The questionnaire will take, on average, 15 minutes to complete and consists of a mix of closed- and open-ended questions. Only the Implementation Team Lead for each pilot site will complete the questionnaire. The questionnaire will be administered monthly for the 12-month pilot period to collect ongoing and evolving feedback and experiences of sites piloting the Family Input Resources toolkit.
The semi-structured interviews with TANF and child support staff on the Implementation Team will provide the opportunity to learn more about each Implementation Team member’s experience using the Family Input Resources toolkit and engaging families in their program improvement effort. Semi-structured interviews with respondents will take approximately 60 minutes. Interviews will occur after the first six months of pilot testing the Family Input Resources toolkit and again six months later, at the conclusion of the pilot testing period. In cases when two Implementation Team members are in similar roles in their agency, they may be interviewed together.
The focus groups with TANF and child support staff on the Implementation Team will provide insights into how the full Implementation Team used the Family Input Resources toolkit and engaged families since the end of the pilot testing period. It will also offer the opportunity to learn about the Implementation Team’s overall reflections on their approach to engaging families in program improvement and how they plan to engage families in the future. The focus group, which will include up to 8 respondents per pilot site, will take approximately 60 minutes and will occur about 4 months after the end of the pilot testing period.
The study is intended to be descriptive in nature, and the limitations of the study methodology will be clearly stated in all published material.
Table 1. Information Collection Procedures and Processes
Data Collection Activity/Instrument |
Respondent, Content, Purpose of Collection |
Mode and Duration |
Instrument 1. Expression of interest form |
Respondents: State, local, or Tribal TANF and child support program administrators, including a mix of TANF and child support agency directors, policy staff, and operations managers.
Content:
Purpose: To provide prospective pilot sites an opportunity to indicate interest to participate in the study and ask the study team questions. |
Mode: e-mail link to online survey software questionnaire
Duration: 10 minutes; administered once during the recruitment period |
Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide |
Respondents: State, local, or Tribal TANF and child support program administrators, including a mix of TANF and child support agency directors, policy staff, and operations managers.
Content:
Purpose: To help the study team systematically learn about potential pilot sites’ interests and readiness, provide prospective sites an opportunity to ask questions, and to inform site selection. |
Mode: Tele- or video conference
Duration: 30 minutes; conducted once during the recruitment period |
Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead |
Respondents: State, local, or Tribal TANF and child support program administrators, including a mix of TANF and child support agency directors, policy staff, and operations managers.
Content:
Purpose: To systematically collect ongoing and evolving feedback about the Family Input Resources toolkit and the site’s successes and challenges engaging families in program improvement. |
Mode: e-mail link to online survey software questionnaire
Duration: 15 minutes; administered monthly for 12 months during the pilot testing period |
Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide |
Respondents: State, local, or Tribal TANF and child support program administrators and staff, including a mix of TANF and child support agency directors, policy staff, operations managers, supervisors, and frontline staff.
Content:
Purpose: To learn about each Implementation Team member’s experiences with engaging families in program improvement and feedback about the Family Input Resources toolkit. |
Mode: Tele- or video conference
Duration: 60 minutes; conducted 6 and 12 months after starting the pilot testing period (12-month pilot testing period) |
Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide |
Respondents: State, local, or Tribal TANF and child support program administrators and staff, including a mix of TANF and child support agency directors, policy staff, operations managers, supervisors, and frontline staff.
Content:
Purpose: To understand the use of the Family Input Resources toolkit since the end of the pilot testing period and collect the Implementation Team’s collective reflections on changes to approaches and perceptions related to family input in program improvement since the start of the pilot period. |
Mode: Tele- or video conference
Duration: 60 minutes; conducted approximately 4 months after the conclusion of the 12-month pilot testing period |
Other Data Sources and Uses of Information
The study will also collect informal and unstructured feedback from participating TANF and child support agencies through ongoing technical assistance with each pilot site’s Implementation Team. The study will use information obtained through technical assistance activities to probe about site-specific activities, challenges, and context during semi-structured interviews and focus groups with Implementation Teams.
Dissemination of Findings
Although the primary purpose of this information collection is not for publication, findings from this study will be incorporated into reports that will be shared publicly to provide timely information to TANF and child support programs about how participating TANF and child support sites have sought and used families’ feedback to improve their policies, operations, and services, and better support the well-being of families.
Findings related to how TANF and child support pilot sites used the Family Input Resources toolkit and their feedback about the toolkit will be used to revise the toolkit’s content and/or structure and produce a final version of the toolkit.
Prospective sites interested in participating in the study will complete the expression of interest web-based questionnaire. These questionnaires will collect a mix of close- and open-ended information about the program and its interest in participating in the study. The web-based questionnaire will be administered using QuestionPro, a user-friendly on-line survey software platform. It is anticipated that all questionnaires will be completed electronically by web.
The information collected through prospective site tele- or video-conference semi-structured interviews will build on and supplement the information prospective sites submitted through the expression of interest web-based questionnaire. The study team will use information collected through the expression of interest web-based questionnaire to tailor the interview, allowing for a shorter interview duration. The study will use responses to the expression of interest web-based questionnaire and the prospective site semi-structured interview to select sites for participation.
A web-based questionnaire will be administered to TANF and child support Implementation Team Leads to collect a mix of close- and open-ended information about the use and perceptions of the Family Input Resources toolkit and the site’s successes and challenges engaging families in program improvement. The web-based questionnaire will also be administered using QuestionPro. Respondents will receive a unique web questionnaire link that will take them directly to their survey instrument. It is anticipated that all questionnaires will be completed electronically by web. However, in the event a respondent wishes not to complete the questionnaire on-line, a fillable pdf version of the survey will also be provided.
The information collected through semi-structured interviews and focus groups via tele- or video conference with staff is not conducive to information technology allowing the electronic submission of responses. The semi-structured interviews and focus groups with TANF and child support Implementation Team members will be audio-recorded, with the permission of the respondent(s), in order to assist with written note-taking. In addition, information collected through the web-based questionnaire and ongoing technical assistance activities will be used to help guide semi-structured staff interviews and focus groups so that discussions focus on the site’s specific context, program improvement effort, feedback about the Family Input Resources toolkit, and success and challenges engaging families to date, thereby allowing for a shorter interview and focus group duration.
The study has made every effort to avoid duplication and minimize burden. To inform the study design and ensure that it did not duplicate existing research, a literature scan was conducted to learn about how human services programs engage families in program improvement processes. This scan revealed a gap in information about how TANF and child support programs seek and use feedback from the families they serve to improve their program’s policies, service delivery, or operations. The scan also revealed an absence of materials designed specifically for TANF and child support administrators and practitioners that focus on engaging families for their feedback to inform program improvement. This project will fill this gap by building on but not duplicating earlier studies and providing this information in a format that is not comparable elsewhere.
No small businesses will be involved with this information collection.
The expression of interest form web-based questionnaire (Instrument 1. Expression of Interest form) and prospective site tele- or video-conference semi-structured interview (Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide) for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support prospective Implementation Team Leads will be administered once during the study.
The web-based questionnaire for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support Implementation Team Leads (Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead) will be administered monthly during the 12-month pilot testing period. Understanding the usefulness of specific materials in the Family Input Resources toolkit relies on receiving high-quality, reliable feedback from respondents. Administering the questionnaire less frequently would subject the quality of the information respondents provide to recall bias and could result in omitted or incomplete information upon which to base revisions to the Family Input Resources toolkit.
The semi-structured tele- or video-conference staff interview guide for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support Implementation Team members (Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide) will be administered twice during the 12-month pilot testing period. These discussions will provide insight into the experiences of each member of the Implementation Team while engaging families for their feedback in a program improvement process. Collecting information from respondents twice during the pilot-testing period minimizes the risk of recall bias and offers insights into both program improvement efforts (for sites that undertake different efforts in the first and second halves of the pilot testing period). As Implementation Team members gain more experience engaging families in program improvement over the course of the pilot testing period, their opinions and reflections on their experiences and their use of the Family Input Resources toolkit are likely to change. Collecting information from the full Implementation Team twice will facilitate capturing those changes.
The tele- or video conference focus group guide for state, local, and Tribal TANF and child support Implementation Team members (Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide) will be administered once during the study.
Federal Register Notice and Comments
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations at 5 CFR Part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29, 1995), ACF published a notice in the Federal Register announcing the agency’s intention to request an OMB review of this information collection request to extend approval of the umbrella generic with minor changes. The notice was published on January 28, 2022, (87 FR 4603), and provided a sixty-day period for public comment. ACF did not receive any comments on the first notice. A second notice was published, allowing a thirty-day period for public comment, in conjunction with submission of the request to OMB. ACF did not receive any comments on the second notice.
Consultation with Experts
Consultations were held with two members of the study’s Expert Workgroup to inform the study design and data collection instruments included in this request:
Selamawit Habtom, TANF Director at Owens Valley Career Development Center (Tribal TANF program)
Erin Frisch, Director of the Office of Child Support, State of Michigan
This study will not provide monetary, in-kind, or material tokens of appreciation to respondents.
Personally Identifiable Information
Program staff names, telephone numbers, and/or e-mail addresses will be collected for use during study recruitment and scheduling purposes (Instrument 1. Expression of Interest form). This personally identifiable information (PII) will not be linked to individual responses and will be destroyed after completion of data collection. Information will not be maintained in a paper or electronic system from which data are actually or directly retrieved by an individuals’ personal identifier.
Assurances of Privacy
Information collected will be kept private to the extent permitted by law. Respondents will be informed of all planned uses of data, that their participation is voluntary, and that their information will be kept private to the extent permitted by law. As stated in the data collection instruments, all interview respondents will be notified at the beginning of each interview that the information that they provide will never be linked to their names, that their names will never be shared in any study report, and that their participation is voluntary (see Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide, Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead, Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide, and Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide). Interview notes will not be shared by the study team with ACF or anyone outside of the study team, except as otherwise required by law. All study team interviewers, including contractor staff from Mathematica and MEF, have received training in privacy procedures.
Data Security and Monitoring
Mathematica, the primary contractor, has developed a data safety and monitoring plan for ACF that assesses all protections of respondents’ PII. It ensures that the study team members from Mathematica and MEF who perform work under this contract are trained on data privacy issues and procedures and comply with the above requirements. All study team members with access to PII will receive study-specific training on (1) limitations on disclosure; (2) safeguarding the physical work environment; and (3) storing, transmitting, and destroying data securely. All study team interviewers have already received training in data security procedures.
Mathematica uses access control lists to restrict access to the encrypted project folders where sensitive and private project data are stored. Access to the project folder is explicitly authorized by the Project Director on need-to-know and least privilege bases. Mathematica staff are required to change their password for computer and network access every thirty days, and passwords must adhere to strict composition standards. Staff access rights to the project folder are revoked when they leave the project. If a staff member leaves Mathematica, his or her access to computing assets, including network access, is terminated.
Data collected will be stored in a restricted folder on the servers of the primary contractor. Mathematica’s servers are located behind Mathematica’s firewall and housed in a locked data center located in Mathematica’s locked access-controlled office suite. The data is mirrored in a secure, fault-tolerant data center; only authorized Mathematica Information Technology Services staff have physical and logical access to the data mirror. Sensitive data resides on a project-specific folder that is only accessible to Mathematica staff who have a business need-to-know, as restricted by identity-based policies and access control lists. The data is encrypted as it is stored on the server with an Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) 256-bit key, which is FIPS 140-2 compliant. The folder in which the data resides is backed up onto encrypted disks. These backups are overwritten every two months by backups of newer secure data, a process that enables compliance with secure data destruction requirements.
Data collected by MEF study team members will be stored on cloud-based tools purchased through Microsoft Office 365 Business for storage of digital project materials. Office 365 Business meets FISMA requirements and has the FedRAMP Agency Authority to Operate (ATO) at the moderate level. Any paper information will be stored in locked cabinets and will be shredded once scanned.
To share data between Mathematica and MEF study team members, the team will use Box.com. MEF’s data security guidelines include using encrypted laptops for writing up any notes; using secure storage locations; using secure transfer mechanisms; limiting access to only those who need to know; and destroying data once analysis is complete.
The study does not require asking TANF and child support program staff sensitive questions to understand their experiences engaging families in program improvement or using the toolkit.
The study has submitted a request for approval from an Institutional Review Board for this information collection.
Explanation of Burden Estimates
The total annual burden requested is 230 hours (Table 4). This includes burden associated with data collection from up to 80 unique respondents.
There are 242 TANF and child support programs run by states, Tribal organizations, and territories. The study assumes that no more than 10 percent of all programs will complete the expression of interest web-based questionnaire (Instrument 1. Expression of interest form) and that one respondent per program will complete the form. The study therefore assumes that a maximum of 24 respondents will include:
Up to 4 state-level TANF program staff and up to 4 state-level child support program staff
Up to 4 local-level TANF program staff and up to 4 local-level child support program staff
Up to 4 Tribal TANF program staff and up to 4 Tribal child support program staff
The study team assumes the person completing the expression of interest form will be manager-level staff at the prospective site (i.e., staff in positions with some leadership and authority who are also close to day-to-day work and program operations). The expression of interest form will take approximately 10 minutes to complete.
The study will cap the number of prospective site conversations we have. If 24 prospective sites express interest, the study anticipates speaking with a subset of 16 prospective sites using the prospective site virtual or telephone semi-structured interview guide (Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide). The study team assumes one respondent per site; therefore the 16 respondents will include:
Up to 3 state-level TANF program staff and up to 3 state-level child support program staff
Up to 2 local-level TANF program staff and up to 2 local-level child support program staff
Up to 3 Tribal TANF program staff and up to 3 Tribal child support program staff
The study team assumes the respondent will be a manager-level staff person. The prospective site conversation will take approximately 30 minutes to complete.
The study assumes that of the 8 participating pilot sites, 4 will be TANF and 4 will be child support, including 4 state-level agencies (Table 2), 2 local-level agencies (Table 3) and 2 Tribal programs (Table 3). The study assumes that each site will have an Implementation Team consisting of 8 members. The study team assumes that the 64 respondents will therefore include:
Up to 16 state-level TANF program staff and up to 16 state-level child support program staff
Up to 8 local-level TANF program staff and up to 8 local-level child support program staff
Up to 8 Tribal TANF program staff and up to 8 Tribal child support program staff
The study also assumes that each pilot site’s Implementation Team includes 1 program director, 2 managerial staff, and up to 5 frontline staff.
A total of up to 4 TANF respondents and 4 child support respondents—one member from each site’s Implementation Team—will complete the web-based questionnaire for approximately 15 minutes (Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead). The questionnaire will be completed by each agency’s Implementation Team lead; the study team assumes the people in this role will be manager-level staff.
All 64 respondents will participate in a semi-structured virtual or telephone interview (Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide) for approximately 60 minutes.
All 64 respondents will participate in virtual focus groups (Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide) made up of 8 staff members (1 program director, up to 2 program managers, and up to 5 frontline staff) that will last approximately 60 minutes.
Estimated Annualized Cost to Respondents
The annualized cost burden to respondents is based on the estimated burden hours and the assumed hourly wage rate for respondents. The total annual respondent cost is $7,480.07 (Table 4). To compute the total estimated annual cost, the total burden hours were multiplied by the estimated average hourly wage for program staff. Hourly wage estimates were derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Operational Employment and Wage Statistics2.
State employees3:
Program director role: the median hourly wage for state government full-time general and operations managers is $49.57 (NAICS 999200, 11-1021).
Program manager role: the median hourly wage for state government full-time social and community service managers is $38.16 (NAICS 999200, 11-9151).
Frontline staff role: the median hourly wage for state government full-time miscellaneous community and social service specialists is $22.56 (NAICS 999200, 21-1090).
Local and Tribal program employees4:
Program director role: the median hourly wage for local government full-time general and operations managers is $48.19 (NAICS 999300, 11-1021).
Program manager role: the median hourly wage for local government full-time social and community service managers is $44.87 (NAICS 999300, 11-9151).
Frontline staff role: the median hourly wage for local government full-time miscellaneous community and social service specialist is $23.68 (NAICS 999300, 21-1090).
Table 2. Annual burden hours requested under this information collection: state agencies
Instrument and Respondent Type |
No. of Respondents (total over request period) |
No. of Responses per Respondent (total over request period) |
Avg. Burden per Response (in hours) |
Annual Burden (in hours) |
Average Hourly Wage Rate |
Total Annual Respondent Cost |
Instrument 1. Expression of interest form |
||||||
Manager |
8 |
1 |
0.2 |
1.6 |
$38.16 |
$61.06 |
Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide |
||||||
Manager |
6 |
1 |
0.5 |
3 |
$38.16 |
$114.48 |
Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead |
||||||
Manager |
4 |
12 |
0.25 |
12 |
$38.16 |
$457.92 |
Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide |
||||||
Director |
4 |
2 |
1 |
8 |
$49.57 |
$396.56 |
Manager |
8 |
2 |
1 |
16 |
$38.16 |
$610.56 |
Frontline staff |
20 |
2 |
1 |
40 |
$22.56 |
$902.40 |
Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide |
||||||
Director |
4 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
$49.57 |
$198.28 |
Manager |
8 |
1 |
1 |
8 |
$38.16 |
$305.28 |
Frontline staff |
20 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
$22.56 |
$451.20 |
Totals: |
114 |
|
$3,497.74 |
|||
Table 3. Annual burden hours requested under this information collection: local & Tribal agencies
Instrument and Respondent Type |
No. of Respondents (total over request period) |
No. of Responses per Respondent (total over request period) |
Avg. Burden per Response (in hours) |
Annual Burden (in hours) |
Average Hourly Wage Rate |
Total Annual Respondent Cost |
Instrument 1. Expression of interest form |
||||||
Manager |
16 |
1 |
0.2 |
3.2 |
$44.87 |
$143.58 |
Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide |
||||||
Manager |
10 |
1 |
0.5 |
5 |
$44.87 |
$224.35 |
Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead |
||||||
Manager |
4 |
12 |
0.25 |
12 |
$44.87 |
$538.44 |
Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide |
||||||
Director |
4 |
2 |
1 |
8 |
$48.19 |
$385.52 |
Manager |
8 |
2 |
1 |
16 |
$44.87 |
$717.92 |
Frontline staff |
20 |
2 |
1 |
40 |
$23.68 |
$947.20 |
Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide |
||||||
Director |
4 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
$48.19 |
$192.76 |
Manager |
8 |
1 |
1 |
8 |
$44.87 |
$358.96 |
Frontline staff |
20 |
1 |
1 |
20 |
$23.68 |
$473.60 |
Totals: |
116
|
|
$3,982.33 |
|||
Table 4. Summary of annual burden hours requested under this information collection: totals by instrument
Instrument |
No. of Respondents (total over request period) |
No. of Responses per Respondent (total over request period) |
Avg. Burden per Response (in hours) |
Annual Burden (in hours) |
Average Hourly Wage Ratea |
Total Annual Respondent Costb |
|
Instrument 1. Expression of interest form |
24 |
1 |
0.2 |
4.8 |
--- |
$206.64 |
|
Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide |
16 |
1 |
0.5 |
8 |
--- |
$338.83 |
|
Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead |
8 |
12 |
0.25 |
24 |
--- |
$996.36 |
|
Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide |
64 |
2 |
1 |
128 |
--- |
$3,960.16 |
|
Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide |
64 |
1 |
1 |
64 |
--- |
$1,980.08 |
|
Totals: |
230 |
|
$7,480.07
|
|
|||
a See Tables 2 and 3 for wage rates by respondent role |
|||||||
b Calculated by adding the total annual respondent costs by instrument |
|||||||
There are no additional costs to respondents.
We estimate the annual costs to the Federal Government will be $255,962 (Table 5). This includes direct and indirect costs of the information collection.
Table 5. Estimated Annualized Costs to the Federal Government
Cost Category |
Estimated Costs |
Data collection/Field Work (including recruitment and engagement) |
$314,164 |
Analysis |
$33,551 |
Publications/Dissemination |
$304,582 |
Total costs over the request period (26 months) |
$652,298 |
Annual costs |
This is for an individual information collection under the umbrella formative generic clearance for program support (0970-0531).
Schedule
Task Completion date__________
Data collection/Field Work 26 months after OMB approval5
Data analysis 32 months after OMB approval
Dissemination of findings 42 months after OMB approval
No exceptions are necessary for this information collection.
Attachments
Instruments
Instrument 1. Expression of Interest form
Instrument 2. Prospective site conversation guide
Instrument 3. Questionnaire about Family Input Resources for Implementation Team Lead
Instrument 4. Implementation Team interview guide
Instrument 5. Implementation Team focus group guide
Appendices
Appendix A. Family Input OFA-OCSE and APHSA-NCCSD Support Email Examples
Appendix B. Family Input Project Description and Pilot Testing Flier
Appendix C. Family Input Example Direct Emails to TANF-CS Programs
Appendix D. Family Input Invitation Emails for Data Collection
1 https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/project/tanf-and-child-support-moving-forward-lessons-learned-covid-19-pandemic-and-further
5 26 months accounts for the entire span of time when any pilot site may be engaged in recruitment, pilot testing, and follow-up focus groups. For each pilot site, data collection will conclude after 16 months. Pilot sites may begin pilot testing at any point over a 6-month period. For example, Site A begins in June 2023 and their data collection concludes 16 months later, in September 2024. Site B begins in November 2023 and concludes 16 months later, in March 2025.
| File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
| File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
| File Created | 0000-00-00 |