Overview
Title
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISI) Program Application
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Education wants to change some paperwork rules to help more schools that support Asian American and Pacific Islander students. They are asking people what they think about these changes and how to make filling in the forms easier without using too much time. You can share your ideas until March 1, 2021.
Summary AI
The Department of Education is proposing a revision to a current information collection under the Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISI) Program, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. This program aims to provide grants to institutions to improve services for Asian American, Native American Pacific Islander, and low-income students. The Department seeks public comments on the necessity, timeliness, and burden of this information collection, and suggestions for improving the process. Comments are due by March 1, 2021.
Abstract
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, ED is proposing a revision of a currently approved collection.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register outlines a proposed revision by the Department of Education regarding an information collection activity under the Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISI) Program. This program is designed to provide grants to eligible institutions to enhance their ability to serve Asian American, Native American Pacific Islander, and low-income students. The proposal comes in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which aims to minimize the informational burden placed upon the public.
General Summary
The Department of Education is seeking public input on the proposed revision to a currently approved collection. The proposal affects applications used by educational institutions to apply for grants under the AANAPISI Program. The process includes both an application to Part A, currently approved, and a proposed similar application for Part F, which is yet to be detailed in the document. Public comments on these proposals are requested to ensure transparency and effectiveness in the information collection process.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several notable issues arise from the document:
Lack of Transparency: The document does not explicitly detail how the annual 9,000 burden hours are calculated. This absence of clarification might create perceptions of opacity and could complicate the public's ability to fully assess and comment on the proposed changes.
Differences Between Part A and Part F: The document fails to specify how the applications for Part A and Part F differ, leading to potential confusion regarding what is expected from applicants under the program.
Bureaucratic Language: The formality and complexity of the language may pose challenges for individuals not well-versed in government paperwork or procedures, potentially hindering meaningful public participation in the commentary process.
Minimizing Burden: Although the Department invites comments on how the burden on respondents can be minimized through information technology, the document lacks concrete suggestions or examples on this matter, potentially leading to missed opportunities for operational improvements.
Impact on the Public
The proposed revisions primarily impact educational institutions that qualify for the AANAPISI Program. By promoting feedback on the necessity and efficiency of the data collection process, the Department of Education aims to ensure that the process is optimized and less burdensome.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For stakeholders, particularly educational institutions eligible for the AANAPISI Program, the proposed changes could have several implications:
Positive Impact: If the revisions lead to an optimized application process, institutions could potentially have more streamlined and clearer guidance when seeking grants. This could facilitate increased participation in the program and more effective use of funds in supporting the target student populations.
Negative Impact: Without detailed guidelines and distinctions between parts of the application process, institutions might experience confusion, leading to potential delays and complications in applying for funding. This ambiguity could inadvertently increase the burden on these institutions rather than reduce it as intended.
The document underscores the importance of public engagement in refining administrative processes for the AANAPISI Program. Meaningful participation may lead to substantial benefits for both the Department of Education and the communities these initiatives aim to serve.
Issues
• The document does not provide a specific breakdown of how the estimated 9,000 annual burden hours are calculated, which might be interpreted as lacking transparency.
• The document does not specify how the grants under Part A and Part F differ, which could lead to confusion regarding application requirements for the Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISI) program.
• The language used to describe the collection activities and public comment process is somewhat bureaucratic and might be challenging for individuals not familiar with government documents.
• The document does not provide detailed information on how to minimize the burden on respondents through the use of information technology, even though it invites comments on this topic.