Overview
Title
60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Disaster Response Survey and Disaster Recovery Survey, OMB Control No.: 2502-0615
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government wants to hear what people think about some questions they plan to ask about how to help homes and communities after disasters, like storms or floods. They want to make sure these questions are important, useful, and not too hard for people to answer.
Summary AI
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is looking for public feedback on a proposed information collection related to Disaster Response and Recovery Surveys. These surveys aim to assess the condition and needs of housing counseling agencies impacted by disasters, helping HUD understand and support them better. The public can comment on matters like the necessity, accuracy, and ways to reduce the burden of this information collection. Comments are welcome until February 10, 2025.
Abstract
HUD is seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD is requesting comment from all interested parties on the proposed collection of information. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days of public comment.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document is a notice from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) seeking public input on two proposed surveys: the Disaster Response Survey and the Disaster Recovery Survey. These surveys are designed to evaluate the operational status and capacity of HUD-approved housing counseling agencies affected by disasters. HUD intends to use the resulting information to tailor their support to these agencies more effectively. Public comments are invited until February 10, 2025, focusing on the necessity, accuracy, and potential burden of the information collection process.
General Summary
HUD is aiming to refine its response to disasters by gathering data from housing counseling agencies. This data will help HUD understand the impact of disasters on these agencies and determine what kind of support they need. The surveys are part of a process to ensure these agencies can continue to help communities recover over the lifecycle of a disaster. The public, especially those directly impacted by this initiative, is encouraged to provide feedback on several elements, including the practicality and efficiency of the proposed data collection.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several issues arise in the document:
Lack of Financial Details: The notice does not provide information about the costs associated with this proposed data collection. Without this, stakeholders can't gauge whether the effort is financially justifiable or if there is a risk of wasteful spending.
Unclear Revisions: The document states that the surveys are a revision of a currently approved collection but does not explain what changes or improvements are being considered. Clarity on this matter would help stakeholders understand the necessity and potential benefits of the revisions.
Assessment Criteria Ambiguity: There are no explicit examples or parameters for assessing the "operational and capacity status" of the agencies. This omission could lead to inconsistent evaluations across different agencies, complicating efforts to standardize or compare results.
Unclear Impact on Support: The document does not elaborate on how the data gathered will directly enhance support for the agencies. Without clear links between data collection and improved outcomes, there's potential for stakeholders to question the data's utility.
Unspecified Frequency Criteria: The response frequency is stated as "1-3 per year," but no criteria explain how this is determined for each agency. This lack of detail could result in uneven data collection, affecting the consistency and comparability of the data collected.
Broad Public Impact
The document highlights a step toward improved disaster management and response. By understanding the challenges faced by housing counseling agencies, HUD can potentially enhance its support structure, which could lead to swifter, more effective disaster recovery. However, the implementation costs, both financial and operational, need careful scrutiny to ensure that valuable resources are not wasted.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Housing Counseling Agencies: These surveys could significantly impact how agencies receive support during and after disasters. More tailored support from HUD may allow these agencies to maintain or even enhance their services in challenging times, benefiting communities directly.
Non-Profit Institutions: Given that these respondents making up the surveying pool are not-for-profit institutions, they might encounter increased administrative burdens without seeing immediate benefits. Balancing their usual service loads with the additional task of participating in these surveys could stretch their resources.
General Public: For those affected by disasters, improved support for counseling agencies could translate into faster access to recovery resources, potentially reducing the long-term impact of disasters on communities.
In summary, while the proposed surveys could lead to better-targeted HUD support for housing agencies, clear communication regarding costs, benefits, and practical details are essential to gain broad support and ensure effective implementation.
Issues
• The document does not specify the cost or budget associated with the collection of information, making it difficult to assess potential wasteful spending.
• The notice does not detail why the current approved collection is being revised, leaving ambiguity about the specific changes or improvements being made.
• The document does not provide specific examples or criteria on how it will assess the 'operational and capacity status of Housing Counseling Agencies,' which could lead to unclear or inconsistent evaluations.
• No detailed explanation is given on how the information collected will directly translate into improved support for housing counseling agencies, potentially leaving room for misinterpretation of the utility of the data.
• The frequency of response is stated as '1-3 per year' without specifying criteria on how the frequency is determined for different agencies, which could lead to uneven data collection efforts.