FR 2024-28177

The document is a notice from the Office on Violence Against Women, part of the Department of Justice, regarding a proposed extension of an information collection related to the Abuse in Later Life Program. This program aims to address elder abuse by enhancing training for professionals and improving community responses. The notice invites public comments on the data collection process until January 31, 2025, focusing on its necessity, accuracy, and efficiency.

General Summary

The proposal seeks an extension for the semiannual progress report collection associated with projects funded by the Abuse in Later Life Program. These projects focus on combating elder abuse through various initiatives. The document provides an overview of the program's objectives and outlines the target respondents, which include approximately 15 grantees involved in relevant training and services. It estimates that each respondent will take about one hour to complete the required report, resulting in a total annual burden of 30 hours. The document also indicates an estimated annual cost to the federal government of $2016 for reviewing these reports.

Significant Issues or Concerns

One notable issue is the lack of detailed information about which organizations have previously received funding through this program. The absence of such data might raise concerns about the equitable distribution of funds across various organizations. Additionally, the criteria for selecting grantees are not clearly outlined, which could leave room for perceived or actual bias in grant distribution.

Furthermore, the estimated total annual burden is redundantly stated in two consecutive points, which might be confusing or appear as an editorial oversight. Additionally, the language used in describing the costs associated with federal review processes could be overly complex for those not familiar with government budgeting processes.

Another area of potential confusion is the mention of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 without providing a detailed explanation or context for those unfamiliar with this legislative act.

Impact on the Public

Broadly speaking, the public may view this initiative as a beneficial step toward addressing elder abuse by ensuring that professionals receive proper training and that communities are better equipped to respond to such cases. Public engagement is invited to ensure that the data collection process is refined and effective, fostering a sense of involvement and oversight.

However, the complexities in the language and the lack of comprehensive data regarding past beneficiaries could dilute public understanding and interest, particularly among those less familiar with governmental operations and legislative frameworks.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For grantees and potential applicants, clearer delineation of selection criteria and examples of successful projects could help align their efforts with the program's objectives. If concerns about bias or inequitable distribution of funds arise, it might discourage participation from certain organizations, potentially limiting the program's reach and effectiveness.

For policymakers and advocates focused on elder abuse prevention, this document represents an opportunity to influence and shape the ongoing efforts through guided feedback during the comment period. The engagement of these stakeholders is crucial in ensuring that the program's objectives are met efficiently and equitably.

In summary, while the document sets a constructive framework for public engagement and outlines necessary details about the Abuse in Later Life Program, improved clarity and additional information on certain aspects could significantly enhance transparency and effectiveness.

The document references $2,016 as the estimated annual cost burden to the Federal Government associated with reviewing progress reports submitted by grantees within the Abuse in Later Life Program. This cost is incurred by the staff of the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) as they conduct reviews of the data collection forms completed by the program’s grantees.

While the financial reference is clearly stated, it is rather technical and may not be immediately clear to a layperson why this number matters or how it aligns with the agency’s broader financial commitments. From a financial perspective, this sum reflects only the administrative cost of evaluating the progress reports, rather than the direct financial support provided to combat elder abuse through grants. However, understanding the relationship between administrative costs and the effectiveness of fund utilization could provide more transparency regarding fiscal management.

The document's issues highlight certain gaps, such as the lack of detailed information on how grantees are selected and whether any particular organizations consistently receive these funds. This is crucial when considering how effectively and equitably the program's over-arching budget is being allocated. Financial transparency becomes key here, warranting that the OVW ensures funds are not only distributed but also managed in a manner that optimizes the intended outcomes of enhanced training and services.

Another noted issue involves potential duplicity within the text concerning the annual burden estimate, mentioned as both points six and seven. While this confusion primarily relates to reporting efforts rather than costs, it underscores the importance of precision in both monetary and procedural documentation.

Furthermore, the mention of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 in the abstract, without elaboration, leaves those unfamiliar with this act uncertain about its implications on cost and efficiency within government operations, including those of the Abuse in Later Life Program. Clarifying this could enhance public understanding of why such financial assessments and reporting requirements exist, thereby cultivating a greater appreciation for fiscal transparency and accountability within federal programs.