Overview
Title
Standardized Instructions and Format To Be Used for Interim and Final Progress Reporting
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Appraisal Subcommittee wants to know what people think about a new way of doing reports, like homework for a project they gave money for, to make it easier and less work. They want to hear from anyone interested by March 19, 2021, before they decide to make it official.
Summary AI
The Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) is inviting public comments on a new format for its Progress Report that will be used for interim and final reports by recipients of ASC grants. This proposed information collection has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, complying with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Interested individuals and organizations are encouraged to provide their feedback by March 19, 2021. The progress report is designed to standardize reporting and reduce the administrative burden on ASC grantees.
Abstract
This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register on November 20, 2020 and allowed 60 days for public comment. No comments were received to that Notice. In conjunction with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the ASC has submitted to the OMB a request for review and approval of information collection listed below. The purpose of this notice is to allow an additional 30 days for public comment from all interested individuals and organizations.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register announces a request for public comments regarding a new standardized format for progress reports required from recipients of grants provided by the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC). The agency aims to collect feedback by March 19, 2021, before finalizing the process. This proposal aligns with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which seeks to streamline information collection processes government-wide.
General Summary
The Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council is introducing a standardized format for their Progress Reports. This change seeks to make reporting more consistent and to ease the administrative burden on grantees. The form will be required for both interim and final progress reports, submitted semi-annually alongside the Federal Financial Report form. The project calls for public comment, inviting insights and concerns regarding this new requirement.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several issues arise from this document:
Cost Implications: There is no clear estimate of costs associated with transitioning to this new format, which could be pivotal in assessing its practicality and potential waste.
Estimated Burden: The document estimates that each response should take around one hour. This could be an underestimate, particularly for organizations with varying current reporting processes, potentially leading to additional time and administrative workload.
Clarity of Requirements: The document does not elaborate on the specific types of information that will be required. Grantees might face confusion without this clarity when preparing their submissions.
User-Friendly Access: The link to the draft instructions is not direct, which might limit easy access for those interested in reviewing the proposed changes. Providing a clickable link could significantly enhance usability.
Comment Submission Process: The method for submitting comments through www.reginfo.gov is presented in a somewhat complicated manner. Simplifying this could encourage more substantial public engagement from those not familiar with bureaucratic platforms.
Broad Public Impact
The new standard format for progress reports could broadly benefit the public by ensuring that federal grants are monitored efficiently and transparently. Standardization aims to save time and effort both for the grant recipients who compile the reports and the agency personnel who review them, potentially leading to better use of taxpayer money.
Specific Stakeholder Impacts
For ASC grantees, the move to a standardized reporting format presents both challenges and opportunities. Initially, grantees may need to invest time in adjusting to the new format; however, long-term benefits could include streamlined processes and reduced compliance costs, particularly if this effort succeeds in making reporting more efficient.
Conversely, the lack of clarity on the specifics of required information may lead to initial confusion or misreporting until the stakeholders become accustomed to the new format requirements.
In conclusion, while this new standardized reporting format aims to benefit both the ASC and its grantees by standardizing and streamlining reporting processes, ensuring clarity, understanding, and appropriate support will be crucial to successful implementation. Stakeholders and the general public may wish to engage in the commenting process to refine and optimize these proposed changes.
Issues
• The document does not provide a cost estimate for the implementation of the new standardized reporting format, which could be important for assessing potential wasteful spending.
• The burden estimate of 1 hour per response seems low and may not fully account for variations in grantees' existing reporting processes, which might underestimate the actual time required.
• The document lacks specific details on the types of information that will be required in the progress reports, which can cause confusion among grantees as they prepare to comply with new requirements.
• The language around where to find the draft version of the instructions (i.e., https://www.asc.gov/Documents/GrantsFundingCorrespondence/PR-FFR%20Reporting%20Instructions%20and%20Form.pdf) could be more user-friendly, such as providing a direct or clickable link.
• The process for submitting comments through www.reginfo.gov is described in a complex manner and may confuse users unfamiliar with the platform.