FR 2021-03813

The document titled "Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request" represents a formal notice from the Department of Agriculture seeking public input on a proposed data collection activity. This request is made in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which mandates the assessment of information collection to ensure it is necessary and efficient. The specific focus is on the Food and Nutrition Service's (FNS) need to conduct quick response surveys for the Special Nutrition Programs (SNP).

Summary of the Document

The Department of Agriculture has submitted a proposal to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review certain data collection activities. The intention is to determine if collecting this data is vital for the agency's operations and how it can be improved in terms of utility and efficiency. The proposed data collection aims to facilitate timely responses to specific issues within the SNPs. The collected information will aid in enhanced decision-making, policy formulation, and program management. A diverse group of respondents including 108,597 state, local, tribal governments, as well as for-profit and non-profit businesses, is expected to participate over a three-year period.

Issues and Concerns

One significant concern is the lack of specific details regarding the types of information to be collected. This ambiguity might leave potential respondents unsure about what data they are expected to provide. Moreover, there is a sketchy connection between the data collected and its direct influence on policy and program changes; this might seem like a lack of transparency about how the information will be applied.

The document also utilizes technical terms such as "generic clearance" and "sample frame data collection," which might be confusing for those not familiar with bureaucratic jargon, potentially reducing public comprehension and engagement. Furthermore, the total burden of 31,335 hours calculated for the respondents lacks a comprehensive explanation, making it difficult to assess if this estimate is realistic. Finally, there is no discussion on potential costs to the respondents, an omission that may cause concern if the data collection imposes financial or operational burdens.

Impact on the General Public

For the general public, this data collection initiative may appear to be a mundane bureaucratic procedure. However, its implications are significant as it pertains to the efficient administration of nutrition programs that affect a broad swath of society. Ensuring these programs are administered based on accurate and timely data can improve their effectiveness, thereby benefiting communities reliant on such services.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Stakeholders, particularly those directly involved like state, local, and tribal governments and various businesses, may experience both positive and negative impacts. Positively, the initiative promises enhanced program management and compliance, potentially leading to more efficient and effective nutrition services. On the downside, the involvement requires a significant time commitment, as denoted by the total burden hours, and might involve other indirect costs if the reporting infrastructure is inadequate.

Overall, while well-intentioned, the proposal would benefit from additional clarity and detail to ensure stakeholders are fully informed and can provide meaningful input during the comment period. Addressing compliance burdens and enhancing transparency regarding the impact of the data collected would better align the initiative with its aim to improve nutritional program management comprehensively.