Overview
Title
30-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Application for the Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) Program for Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages: OMB Control No.: 2577-0191; Correction
Agencies
ELI5 AI
HUD is asking people to share their thoughts on how Native American tribes can get money to help make their homes and communities better, and they're giving everyone a little more time to think about and talk about it. They've fixed some mistakes in their previous announcement but didn't clearly explain what was changed.
Summary AI
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is seeking comments from the public on its application for the Indian Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) program. This program supports Federally recognized Native American tribes and Alaska Native communities by funding projects that improve housing, living environments, and economic opportunities. HUD provides detailed guidelines for eligible activities and requires applicants to submit specific reports for funding and monitoring. This notice extends the public comment period for an additional 30 days and corrects earlier information that was published.
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 an additional 30 days of public comment. This notice is a correction to the notice HUD published on December 26, 2024.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document in question is a notice from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) about the Indian Community Development Block Grant (ICDBG) program. It serves to extend the public comment period on a previously published notice and corrects certain details from that publication, specifically the title and burden hours.
General Summary
This notice informs the public of HUD's intention to gather comments on the ICDBG program, which aims to improve housing, living environments, and economic opportunities for Federally recognized Native American tribes and Alaska Native communities. The program requires that applicants submit detailed reports and data, which will be used for funding allocation and monitoring purposes. HUD is seeking public input to ensure the collection processes are efficient and serve the needs of the communities involved.
Significant Issues or Concerns
The notice mentions corrections to a previous announcement but fails to specify these corrections beyond generic references to the title and burden hours. This vagueness could lead to confusion among stakeholders who follow these notices closely, as it lacks critical details. Furthermore, the document does not explicitly state why an additional 30 days for public comment is necessary, which might cause uncertainty about HUD's intentions.
Moreover, the document makes multiple references to technical regulations such as "24 CFR part 1003" without providing context or explanation. This might make it challenging for those not versed in federal regulations to grasp the document's implications fully. Additionally, several sections seem redundant, notably the repeated points about minimizing the burden of information collection on respondents.
Impact on the Public
The primary impact on the public is the opportunity to comment on the ICDBG program's information collection practices. For the general public, particularly those who might be direct beneficiaries or stakeholders, this process allows for input that could shape how the program's requirements and its monitoring are conducted. However, due to the technical nature of the notice, individuals lacking specialized knowledge might find it difficult to contribute meaningfully without further clarification.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Federally recognized Native American tribes, Alaska Native communities, and associated tribal organizations are the principal stakeholders of the ICDBG program. The extension of the comment period could positively impact these groups by providing more time to review and respond to the proposed information collection requirements, potentially influencing more efficient and suitable methods for their reporting.
Conversely, the ambiguity regarding the corrections in the notice might create challenges for these stakeholders, leaving them uncertain about which aspects of the previously published notice were inadequately addressed or are undergoing revision. This could detract from their ability to provide focused feedback, impacting their preparedness for compliance or submission of future funding applications.
Overall, while the aim of this notice is to engage stakeholders in refining program operations, the lack of specificity and potential for confusion presents barriers that may hinder meaningful public and stakeholder participation.
Issues
• The document mentions a correction to a previous notice published on December 26, 2024, but does not specify what the correction entails except for the title and burden hours, which may lead to confusion.
• The purpose of the additional 30 days for public comment is not clearly defined, potentially leaving stakeholders uncertain about the reasons behind the extension.
• The document uses technical language and references specific regulations (e.g., 24 CFR 1003.506) without providing context or explanation, making it difficult for those unfamiliar with these regulations to fully understand.
• There is a repetitive statement regarding minimizing the burden of information collection on respondents, specifically in items (4) and (5) in Section B, which seems redundant.
• The notice refers to the 'Indian Community Development Block Grant Information Collection' and mentions specific forms and reports (e.g., SF-425, HUD-2516), but it lacks a detailed explanation of what each form or report involves and why it is necessary.
• The document mentions 'ICDBG program regulations are at 24 CFR part 1003' and recipients must submit an 'Annual Status and Evaluation Report (ASER)', yet it doesn't explain how this aligns with broader federal reporting requirements, potentially leading to misunderstandings about compliance.