Overview
Title
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Agriculture wants to check with people if it's a good idea to collect certain information about building more affordable houses in the countryside. They are asking for help from the public to see if this is really needed and if there are better ways to do it without making it too hard for everyone involved.
Summary AI
The Department of Agriculture has submitted an information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act. They are seeking public comments on whether this data collection is necessary, the accuracy of the time estimates, and how to reduce the burden of data collection. The Rural Housing Service is using this collection to manage and evaluate the Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing Program (GRRHP), which aims to increase affordable rural rental housing by partnering with lenders and public agencies. Interested parties have until March 15, 2021, to submit comments.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The recent notice published by the Department of Agriculture submits a request for information collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This document focuses primarily on the Guaranteed Rural Rental Housing Program (GRRHP), a program within the Rural Housing Service aimed at boosting affordable rental housing in rural areas by leveraging partnerships with private lenders and public agencies.
General Summary
The Department of Agriculture's notice is a procedural document intended to open a dialogue with the public and stakeholders regarding the necessity, efficiency, and potential burden of their proposed information collection. Specifically, this relates to the GRRHP, which supports the creation of affordable rural housing through loan guarantees. The notice calls for public comments to refine their approach to data collection, ensuring it is both necessary and minimally intrusive.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One notable issue with the document is the absence of an introductory abstract. This omission makes it somewhat difficult for readers to quickly ascertain the core purpose of the notice. Additionally, while the document outlines the need for information collection, it lacks specific examples or case studies that might illustrate past successes or areas for improvement. This makes it challenging to fully understand the utility and impact of such a collection.
Furthermore, the document does not provide in-depth information about the methodology used to estimate the time and resources required for respondents to comply, which translates into an opportunity for greater transparency. The language in the text tends towards the technical, potentially alienating general readers or those without a background in federal regulatory processes.
Impact on the Public
From a broader public perspective, the document demonstrates an effort by the Department of Agriculture to ensure that its information collection practices are both justified and refined through public feedback. By participating in this review process, concerned citizens and advocacy groups can voice their perspectives on federal data collection processes, potentially shaping future policies.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For specific stakeholders such as businesses and non-profits operating within the rural housing sector, the impacts of the proposed information collection are mixed. On the one hand, the GRRHP presents an opportunity to engage in projects that could be financially and socially beneficial. On the other hand, the burden of compliance through regular reporting—from quarterly to annual submissions—poses an operational challenge. While the document does address the goal of minimizing burdens via technological means, it stops short of detailing how effective these measures have been or will be.
The potential consequences of not collecting this information remain underexplored, yet it is implied that failure to do so could hinder the ability of the Rural Housing Service to assess and tweak program effectiveness adequately. This could adversely affect the agency’s capacity to responsibly guarantee loans, which are critical to facilitating affordable housing developments.
In summary, while the document fulfills its procedural role by soliciting public comments, it could benefit from improvements in clarity, transparency, and user engagement, ensuring that the intended audience can readily comprehend and engage with its objectives.
Issues
• The document does not provide an abstract, which could be helpful for quickly understanding the purpose of the notice.
• The purpose and impact of the information collection are not clearly quantified, making it difficult to assess its necessity or efficiency in terms of cost and outcome.
• The description of the information collection's utility and necessity lacks specific examples or case studies that illustrate the benefits or results obtained from prior collections.
• The specific criteria or methodology used to evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden is not provided, which could be useful for transparency.
• The language in the document is somewhat technical and may be difficult for laypeople to understand, particularly in explaining the relationship between different parts of the program.
• There might be a lack of clarity on how the burden on respondents (e.g., businesses or non-profits) is minimized, aside from mentioning the use of technology.
• The potential impact or consequences of failing to collect this information is mentioned but not detailed, which could help in understanding the importance of compliance.
• There is no mention of any alternatives considered or rejected in the process of finalizing this information collection, which could be useful for context.