Overview
Title
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Application for Perkins Innovation and Modernization Program Grants
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Education wants people to tell them what they think about a plan to get new ideas for helping kids learn job skills. They ask for ideas on how to make the questions simpler and if they really need all the information they are asking for. People have just one month to send in their thoughts.
Summary AI
The Department of Education is inviting public comments on a proposed information collection related to the Perkins Innovation and Modernization Program Grants. This initiative is part of a discretionary grant program under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act, aimed at improving career and technical education. The department is seeking feedback on the necessity, timeliness, and burden of the collection, as well as suggestions for enhancing the quality and clarity of the information gathered. Comments must be submitted by February 25, 2021.
Abstract
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a new information collection.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The U.S. Department of Education has issued a notice inviting public comments on a proposal related to the Perkins Innovation and Modernization Program Grants. This initiative is a part of the discretionary grant program authorized by the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act. The main goal of these grants is to enhance career and technical education programs, crucial for preparing students for the workforce in modern industries. The department is seeking input from the public on several aspects of the proposed information collection to ensure its effectiveness and minimize any undue burden on potential respondents.
Summary of Document
The proposed information collection request is described in a notice from the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE) within the Department of Education. It emphasizes the need for public participation to refine the collection process, focusing on its necessity, timeliness, accuracy of burden estimates, and opportunities for improvement using technology. Interested individuals are encouraged to submit their comments by February 25, 2021.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One area of concern is the 1,800 annual burden hours estimated for the respondents, representing the time anticipated for completing applications and related tasks. The document lacks details on how this figure was calculated, leaving room for questions about its accuracy. Understanding the actual burden is crucial, as it affects state, local, and tribal government resources.
The document references technical sections of the law, like "section 114 of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act," which might be difficult for laypersons to comprehend. The use of specialized terminology without clarification might alienate or confuse some stakeholders.
Another potential issue is the lack of clarity regarding priorities, requirements, and selection criteria for grant applications. Without clear guidance, applicants might be uncertain about how applications will be assessed, which could lead to inconsistencies or biases in the selection process.
Additionally, the notice mentions a specific "definition of computer science," tied to one of the priorities, without explaining its relevance to the grant application process. This could create confusion and may require further clarification.
The Streamlined Clearance Process for Discretionary Grant Information Collections is noted but not explained, potentially leading to confusion for those unfamiliar with federal grant procedures.
Finally, the 30-day window for public comment is relatively short, which could limit meaningful engagement from stakeholders and impede comprehensive feedback.
Impact on the Public
From a broad perspective, improving career and technical education through these grants has the potential to benefit the public by enhancing workforce readiness and fostering innovation in educational practices. However, the complexities and limited timelines could impede the full realization of these benefits.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
State, Local, and Tribal Governments: These entities are directly affected, as they are the primary respondents to the information collection requests. The estimated burden and clarity of guidelines directly impact their ability to participate effectively.
Educators and Students: Although not directly involved in the application process, teachers and students stand to benefit from any improvements in career and technical education driven by these grants. Clear, effective guidelines and criteria are essential to ensure that grant-funded programs are innovative and meet educational needs.
General Public and Other Stakeholders: Broader public involvement, through commenting and feedback, is crucial for enhancing transparency and ensuring the grants address community-specific educational needs. Limited opportunities for thorough feedback might hinder the inclusion of diverse perspectives and considerations.
Overall, while the intent of gathering public input is commendable, the Department of Education may need to provide clearer explanations and extend the feedback period to ensure comprehensive stakeholder engagement in shaping effective educational grant strategies.
Issues
• The document does not specify how the estimate of 1,800 annual burden hours was determined, which might lead to questions about its accuracy.
• The use of technical terms and references to specific sections of law, such as 'section 114 of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006,' may be difficult for laypersons to understand without additional context or explanation.
• The document lacks details on how the priorities, requirements, and selection criteria will be applied in assessing grant applications, which may lead to ambiguity and potential bias in the selection process.
• There is no clear explanation of how the 'definition of computer science' associated with one of the priorities impacts the grant application process, which could lead to confusion among applicants.
• The Streamlined Clearance Process for Discretionary Grant Information Collections (1894-0001) is mentioned but not explained, which could be confusing for readers unfamiliar with this process.
• The notice specifies a very narrow timeline of just 30 days for public comment, which might limit comprehensive feedback and consideration from all relevant stakeholders.