FFATA Subaward and Executive Compensation Reporting Requirements

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Notices
for Prime Grant Recipients, in all
correspondence.
Dated: January 21, 2011.
Casey Coleman,
Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011–1751 Filed 1–26–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–WY–P

GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
[OMB Control No. 3090–0292; Docket No.
2010–0002; Sequence 18]

Submission for OMB Review; OMB
Control No. 3090–0292; FFATA
Subaward and Executive
Compensation Reporting
Requirements
Office of Technology Strategy/
Office of Governmentwide Policy,
General Services Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Notice of request for public
comments regarding a new OMB
information clearance.
AGENCY:

Under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. chapter 35), the Regulatory
Secretariat will be submitting to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) a request to review and approve
an emergency new information
collection requirement regarding
FFATA Subaward and Executive
Compensation Reporting Requirements.
Public comments are particularly
invited on: Whether this collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of functions of the FFATA
Subaward and Executive Compensation
Reporting Requirements, whether it will
have practical utility; whether our
estimate of the public burden of this
collection of information is accurate,
and based on valid assumptions and
methodology; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and ways in
which we can minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, through the use of
appropriate technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
February 28, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
identified by Information Collection
3090–0292, FFATA Subaward and
Executive Compensation Reporting
Requirements by any of the following
methods:
• Regulations.gov: http://
www.regulations.gov. Submit comments
via the Federal eRulemaking portal by
inputting ‘‘Information Collection 3090–

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

SUMMARY:

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:51 Jan 26, 2011

Jkt 223001

0292, FFATA Subaward and Executive
Compensation Reporting Requirements’’
under the heading ‘‘Enter Keyword or
ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search’’. Select the
link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that
corresponds with ‘‘Information
Collection 3090–0292, FFATA
Subaward and Executive Compensation
Reporting Requirements’’. Follow the
instructions provided at the ‘‘Submit a
Comment’’ screen. Please include your
name, company name (if any), and
‘‘Information Collection 3090–0292,
FFATA Subaward and Executive
Compensation Reporting Requirements’’
on your attached document.
• Fax: 202–501–4067.
• Mail: General Services
Administration, Regulatory Secretariat
(MVCB), 1275 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20417. ATTN: Hada
Flowers/IC 3090–0292.
Instructions: Please submit comments
only and cite Information Collection
3090–0292, FFATA Subaward and
Executive Compensation Reporting
Requirements, in all correspondence
related to this collection. All comments
received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal and/or business
confidential information provided.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Janice Miller, Program Analyst, Office of
Technology Strategy/Office of
Governmentwide Policy, GSA, at
jan.miller@gsa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Purpose
The Federal Funding Accountability
and Transparency Act of 2006, Public
Law 109–282 (Transparency Act)
requires information disclosure of
entities receiving Federal financial
assistance through Federal awards such
as Federal contracts, sub-contracts,
grants and sub-grants, FFATA § 2(a), (2),
(i), (ii). Beginning October 1, 2010, this
Paperwork Reduction Act submission
directs compliance with the
Transparency Act to report prime and
first-tier subaward data. Specifically,
Federal agencies and prime awardees of
grants will ensure disclosure of
executive compensation of both prime
and subawardees and subaward data.
This information collection requires
reporting of only the information
enumerated under the Transparency
Act.
B. Discussion of Public Comments
Reporting of Executive Compensation
for All State Employees. One State
agency commented that the request for
comments implies that FFATA requires
the reporting of executive compensation

PO 00000

Frm 00044

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

4901

for all State employees and subcontractors and awardees, but the notice
did not define what ‘‘executive
compensation’’ means. The respondent
asked if this is the salary and benefits
that the chief executives of these entities
make, or does this apply to all
employees of these entities. The
respondent also stated that this would
be a very time-consuming and difficult
task and that they could encounter
privacy concerns with some of the
private firms.
Response: Entity has the meaning
given in 2 CFR part 25. Executive means
officers, managing partners, or any other
employees in management positions.
Total Compensation means the cash and
noncash dollar value earned by the
executive during the recipient’s or
subrecipient’s preceding fiscal year and
includes the following (for more
information see Part 170 Appendix A):
i. Salary and bonus.
ii. Awards of stock, stock options, and
stock appreciation rights. Use the dollar
amount recognized for financial
statement reporting purposes with
respect to the fiscal year in accordance
with the Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised
2004) (FAS 123R), Shared Based
Payments.
iii. Earnings for services under nonequity incentive plans. This does not
include group life, health,
hospitalization or medical
reimbursement plans that do not
discriminate in favor of executives, and
are available generally to all salaried
employees.
iv. Change in pension value. This is
the change in present value of defined
benefit and actuarial pension plans.
v. Above-market earnings on deferred
compensation which is not taxqualified.
vi. Other compensation, if the
aggregate value of all such other
compensation (e.g., severance,
termination payments, value of life
insurance paid on behalf of the
employee, perquisites or property) for
the executive exceeds $10,000.
Under the Act, a prime entity will be
required to report executive
compensation about its own or its
subawardee’s top five highly
compensated officials if: The entity in
the preceding fiscal year received 80
percent or more of its annual gross
revenues in Federal awards; and
$25,000,000 or more in annual gross
revenues from Federal awards; and the
public does not have access to the
information about the compensation of
the senior executives of the entity
through periodic reports filed under

E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM

27JAN1

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

4902

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Notices

section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a),
78o(d)) or section 6104 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986. (To determine if
the public has access to the
compensation information, see the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission
total compensation filings at http://
www.sec.gov/answers/execomp.htm.)
Duplicate Collection Requirement.
Four respondents commented that the
requirement for information on
executive compensation duplicates the
requirement currently imposed by the
Internal Revenue Service for U.S.
nonprofit tax exempt organizations
when they submit their returns on Form
990. The respondents suggest that a
means be created to allow respondents
to identify in their submissions when
such data has previously been or will be
submitted on behalf of any U.S.-based
subrecipients, and the timing of those
other submissions.
Response: Internal Revenue Service
Form 990 is required for non-profits,
charities and other tax-exempt
organizations to maintain their taxexempt status. The Transparency Act
does not exempt organizations which
file the IRS Form 990 from the
requirements of the Transparency Act.
Practicality and Utility of Collecting
the Information for Foreign (non U.S.based) Subrecipients. Five respondents
provided comments. Four respondents
commented that this comprehensive
requirement was enacted without
considering the practicality and utility
of collecting the information for foreign
(non U.S.-based) subrecipients, and that
the imposition of this requirement is
impractical, counterproductive and
even damaging to other important U.S.
Government objectives. This is
particularly the case in countries where
issues of security, sovereignty,
independence and custom are prevalent.
Respondents recommended that OMB
exempt primary recipients from having
to collect and submit such data on non
U.S.-based entities. One respondent
commented that collecting additional
information on executive compensation
of both prime and subawardees will
neither enhance the utility of the
information collected nor meet the
purpose of FFATA. The respondent
maintains that using summary or
aggregate budget data will not endanger
the safety of nongovernmental
organizations’ (NGOs) employees in the
field, or violate privacy rights, and is a
more accurate reflection of the U.S.
Government’s expenditure of taxpayer
dollars. One respondent also questioned
the value and utility of reporting
individual subaward data on such
groups to the American public and

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:51 Jan 26, 2011

Jkt 223001

recommended that the proposed rule be
revised with a blanket waiver for
individual reporting on foreign
subrecipients to an aggregate reporting
of the number of subawards issued and
total value. One respondent suggested
that avenues should be explored to
harness existing documentation on
grants and cooperative agreements to
meet the need for greater transparency.
Response: Using summary budget
data will not meet the requirements of
the Transparency Act; the Act
specifically requires the collection of
executive compensation if the threshold
requirements for such reporting are met.
GSA and OMB recognize the safety and
security concerns regarding some types
of foreign recipients and will provide
additional guidance regarding the
reporting of sensitive information. Any
revisions to the requirements based on
this guidance will be incorporated in a
subsequent Paperwork Reduction Act
submission for this information
collection.
Burden Imposed. Seven comments
were received concerning the burden
that will be imposed by this information
collection. Two respondents
commented on the burden number of
49,308 (number of respondents) and that
it appears GSA is relying on a specific
source rather than estimating a number,
that the source of the information is not
identified, and that it is impossible to
assess whether the number of
respondents is accurate or based on
valid assumptions and methodologies.
The respondents requested that GSA
and OMB publish additional
information about the sources of data in
this request so they may be assessed in
accordance with the letter and spirit of
the Paperwork Reduction Act. Two
respondents added that the estimate of
the time required to compile the
executive compensation data on behalf
of subrecipients is grossly understated.
Those who have large portfolios of
subgrants (in some cases in the
hundreds) indicate that since this data
is not routinely gathered because of the
likelihood that such personnel are not
being paid in whole or in part directly
from the subaward, they would be
required to initiate an entirely new
information collection at considerable
effort and cost. They also state that the
simple round number of 2 hours per
response identified in the estimate
belies the effort that they and other
similarly situated organizations would
be required to undertake. Two
respondents commented on the estimate
of 10 responses per respondent. Based
on their collective experiences, they
each typically issue between 20–50
subawards per year. Another respondent

PO 00000

Frm 00045

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

commented that they typically award
between 1,000–1,200 subawards per
year, and that this effort would require,
at a minimum, an additional full-time
position based on current estimates.
One respondent commented that the
estimate of 49,308 respondents, ten
responses per respondent and 2 hours
per response appears only to reflect a
one-time estimation of the reporting
burden on the prime without
considering the subsequent efforts that
would need to be made over the lifetime
of an award by both prime and
subawardees to maintain the accuracy of
the information. They also add that the
notice does not offer an estimate of the
direct or indirect costs associated with
collection, entry and maintenance of
prime and subawardees’ records. Given
the time and funding required to meet
the requirement in full, it will be
difficult for U.S.-based international
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)
with hundreds of subawards and
limited budgets to meet the reporting
deadline for each subrecipient without
dedicating a substantial number of new,
additional administrative personnel.
One respondent also commented that
the burden of the information collection
requirements proposed in the notice
will increase costs and strain the
relationship between the U.S.
Government and its recipients, and have
a chilling effect on the partnerships
between recipients and competent local
subawardees who for security reasons
will not want to be openly identified
with the U.S. Government. One
respondent requested that the burden
estimate be re-evaluated.
Response: The number of respondents
(49,308) is based on the total reported
prime grant awardees reporting into
USAspending.gov in FY 2009 (see
Supporting Statement for Paperwork
Reduction Act Submission, FFATA
Subaward and Executive Compensation
Reporting Requirements, footnote #1, p.
9, at http://www.reginfo.gov). Because
these are new statutory requirements,
the estimate of 10 responses per
respondent and 2 hours per response
were provided as GSA’s best estimate
based on available information. GSA
will continue to review and revise these
burden estimates as more information
becomes available. GSA encourages the
public to provide specific estimates
with a supporting statement of how
those estimates were calculated to
further refine the burden estimates
associated with this collection.
Executive Compensation and Foreign
Assistance Programs. Four respondents
commented that as foreign assistance
programs are sometimes funded by a
combination of multiple public and

E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM

27JAN1

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Notices
privately generated resources and,
therefore, executive salaries may not be
fully supported by U.S. Federal funds,
disclosure of executive compensation
for prime awardees or subrecipients
(U.S. and non-U.S. entities) may not be
accurate in terms of relating to Federal
expenditure of taxpayer dollars. It was
noted that publication of such
information could lead to confusion,
mistrust and misunderstanding both
here in the U.S. and in the
subrecipient’s home country.
Furthermore, the provision and/or
disclosure of such information from
overseas subrecipients may violate
applicable local privacy laws. One
respondent added that the collection of
sensitive personal information from
subawardees in Federal databases
undermines critical working
relationships built on trust over decades
with local communities, especially in
unstable security environments. One
respondent added that due to the
possibility that executive compensation
is not necessarily related in any manner
to U.S. Government-funded activities,
there is a likelihood that the executives’
salaries will be incorrectly perceived as
‘‘funded’’ by the U.S. Government,
creating a false association and resulting
in unnecessary and possible physical
harm, and jeopardizing the impartiality
and safety of recipient staff working in
the field. One respondent commented
that the lack of a direct correlation
between Federal expenditures and
reporting executive compensation into a
Federal database, together with the
potential violation of privacy rights of
foreign citizens, and the administrative
burden imposed on recipients
responsible for data input as both a
recipient and an issuer of subawards is
contrary to the stated purpose of the
legislation—FFATA requires that data
collection be in a manner that
‘‘minimizes the burdens imposed on
Federal award recipients.’’ One
respondent strongly urged that GSA and
OMB withdraw this notice until
consultations can be had on less
burdensome and more appropriate
accountability procedures for
international development and
humanitarian relief nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs) implementing
Federal funding that will not increase
the security risks for organizations and
staff in the field. One respondent
strongly urged OMB to delay the
subaward and executive compensation
reporting requirement until the rulemaking process is completed; to
complete all pilot program prerequisites required by Public Law 109–
282, report to the public and take all

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:51 Jan 26, 2011

Jkt 223001

public comments into consideration;
and not approve this emergency request
until the completion of the rule-making
process. Further, the respondent added
that Public Law 109–282 requires the
Director of OMB to commence a pilot
program vis-a`-vis the collection of
subaward data. To their knowledge, this
pilot program did not include
organizations whose principal place of
performance is outside the U.S. One
respondent requested that further
discussion be held with international
organizations receiving Federal awards
for overseas programs to ensure public
disclosure does not result in unintended
consequences. One respondent
requested that OMB facilitate a
community-wide discussion forum prior
to implementation of these
requirements.
Response: With some limited
exceptions, the reporting requirements
apply to all prime awardees of Federal
grants including foreign prime
recipients and foreign subawardees.
Each action that obligates $25,000 or
more in Federal funding would need to
be separately reported. For new Federal
grants or cooperative agreements as of
October 1, 2010, if the initial award is
$25,000 or more, reporting of subaward
information is required. If the initial
award is below $25,000 but subsequent
award modifications result in a total
award of $25,000 or more, the award is
subject to the reporting requirements, as
of the date the award exceeds $25,000.
If the initial award exceeds $25,000 but
funding is subsequently de-obligated
such that the total award amount falls
below $25,000, the award continues to
be subject to the reporting requirements
of the Transparency Act. If a single
action obligates funding from multiple
programs, the data submitted for that
action would include the Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
number for the program that is the
predominant source of the Federal
funding. If a program’s funding is
obligated by a separate amendment to
the same subaward agreement that
provides other programs’ funding,
however, then the data reported for each
amendment to the agreement would
include the CFDA number of the
program that provided the funding for
that amendment.
Nevertheless, GSA and OMB
recognize the safety and security
concerns regarding some types of
foreign recipients and will provide
additional guidance regarding the
reporting of sensitive information. Any
revisions to the requirements based on
this guidance will be incorporated in a
subsequent Paperwork Reduction Act

PO 00000

Frm 00046

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

4903

submission for this information
collection.
Regarding commencement of a pilot,
an Assistance pilot was conducted in
the fall of 2008. However, this pilot did
not generate sufficient information on
which to base (1) an operational model
or project plan for how subaward
information should be collected; or (2)
an accurate assessment of the burden
placed on award recipients.
Exemption for Primary Recipients
from Collecting and Submitting Data on
non U.S.-based Entities. Five comments
were received. Two respondents
commented that with respect to the
collection of information on
subrecipients and the need to ensure
that this effort is not seen as an
intelligence gathering, they
recommended that OMB exempt
primary recipients from having to
collect and submit data on non U.S.based entities. The principle of not
applying policies designed for U.S.
organizations on entities in other
countries is longstanding with the
Federal Government. Precedent for such
exemption exists. For example, a class
deviation was issued to USAID to
exempt non-U.S. organizations from
OMB A–110, and OMB exempted nonU.S. entities from the requirements in
the Single Audit Act Amendments of
1996. One respondent added that this
exemption was instituted whether these
non-U.S. entities expend ‘‘Federal
awards received either directly or
indirectly as a subrecipient.’’ The
respondent requested that OMB review
the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, Civil Action Case No. 06–
0635 (PLF) that involved USAID’s
decision not to release the names of
overseas partner organizations. Another
respondent commented that in certain
environments the public posting of data
on overseas programs—even something
as simple as listing the country in which
the funds are being spent or the name
of a local subrecipient partner—may
further endanger those whom they are
seeking to assist in their struggle for
freedom and democracy, and would
hinder the achievement of U.S. foreign
and development assistance objectives.
One respondent commented that
requiring recipients to collect and input
names and compensation of the
executives of partner entities in a
Federal database (even if not publicly
accessible) will further blur the line of
independence between development
professionals, threatening those
individuals employed by NGOs working
in hostile environments by associating
them with the information gathering
activities of the U.S. Government.

E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM

27JAN1

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

4904

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 / Notices

Response: GSA and OMB recognize
the safety and security concerns
regarding some types of foreign
recipients and will provide additional
guidance regarding the reporting of
sensitive information. Any revisions to
the requirements based on this guidance
will be incorporated in a subsequent
Paperwork Reduction Act submission
for this information collection.
Federal Agency Interaction. One
comment was received. The respondent
inquired with their cognizant Federal
agency on the proposed new reporting
requirements and received the following
response: ‘‘At the present time we have
not received any guidance from OMB.
As such we are unable to inform the
community on the new reporting
requirements until we have final
information/instruction/procedures
identified by OMB. Our plans to inform
the community will be based on the
guidance we receive from OMB.’’ The
respondent stated that since their
cognizant agency has not yet received
guidance from OMB, it is premature to
expect the recipient community to
design processes and systems to be
compliant with FFATA by October 1,
2010, and that OMB needs to provide
Federal agencies and recipients with
time to educate their respective
communities on this new requirement.
The respondent feels that providing
emergency approval for this information
collection will be doing disservice to the
intent of FFATA and create additional
burden on recipients and subrecipients.
Response: On August 27, 2010, OMB
issued a memorandum and guidance
regarding subaward reporting under the
Transparency Act, Memorandum to
Senior Accountable Officials, and is
available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/
omb/open. Specific guidance is also
found in Federal Register Vol. 75, No.
177, September 14, 2010.
Purpose of the Information Collection
Request. One respondent asked what
this ICR really does and why was it an
emergency new information collection
requirement.
Response: Beginning October 1, 2010,
this Paperwork Reduction Act
submission directs compliance with
FFATA to report prime and first-tier
subaward data. Specifically, Federal
agencies and prime awardees of grants
will ensure disclosure of executive
compensation of both prime and
subawardees and subaward data. This is
a new collection. The information
collected will be used to make
transparent the information about
executive compensation (if applicable)
for grants prime and subawardees and
subaward information. While some
information is currently publicly

VerDate Mar<15>2010

17:51 Jan 26, 2011

Jkt 223001

available on prime awardees, executive
compensation of prime awardees and
subawardees, as applicable, is not. In
addition, this information collection
will provide public access to
information on grant subaward
information, pursuant to the
Transparency Act.
Data in USAspending.gov. One
respondent stated there are
inconsistencies in how Federal agencies
are currently reporting data in
USAspending.gov and that OMB needs
to ensure that Federal agencies are
correctly populating data.
Response: This comment is not
related to this information collection
and has been referred to the appropriate
organization within GSA to respond.
OMB Guidance and the Regulations
Issued by the FAR Councils for
Contracts. One respondent expressed
concern regarding a key difference in
the OMB guidance for financial
assistance awards and the regulations
issued by the FAR Councils for
contracts.
Response: This comment is not
related to this information collection.
The FAR Technology Team is
considering the respondent’s comments;
appropriate responses will be included
in the resulting second interim or final
rule to FAR case 2008–039.
C. Annual Reporting Burden
Respondents: 49,308.
Responses per Respondent: 10.
Hours per Response: 2.
Total Burden Hours: 986,160.
Obtaining Copies of Proposals:
Requesters may obtain a copy of the
information collection documents from
the General Services Administration,
Regulatory Secretariat (MVCB), 1275
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20417,
telephone (202) 501–4755. Please cite
OMB Control No. 3090–0292, FFATA
Subaward and Executive Compensation
Reporting Requirements, in all
correspondence.
Dated: January 21, 2011.
Casey Coleman,
Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011–1752 Filed 1–26–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–WY–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
[Document Identifier: OS–0990–New; 30Day Notice]

Agency Information Collection
Request; 30-Day Public Comment
Request
AGENCY:

PO 00000

Office of the Secretary, HHS.

Frm 00047

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

In compliance with the requirement
of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Office of the Secretary (OS), Department
of Health and Human Services, is
publishing the following summary of a
proposed collection for public
comment. Interested persons are invited
to send comments regarding this burden
estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including any
of the following subjects: (1) The
necessity and utility of the proposed
information collection for the proper
performance of the agency’s functions;
(2) the accuracy of the estimated
burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (4) the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology to
minimize the information collection
burden.
To obtain copies of the supporting
statement and any related forms for the
proposed paperwork collections
referenced above, e-mail your request,
including your address, phone number,
OMB number, and OS document
identifier, to
Sherette.funncoleman@hhs.gov, or call
the Reports Clearance Office on (202)
690–5683. Send written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collections within 30 days
of this notice directly to the OS OMB
Desk Officer; faxed to OMB at 202–395–
5806.
Proposed Project: Public Input to
Nominate Non-Federal Health and
Health Care Data Sets and Applications
for Listing on Healthdata.gov—OMB No.
0990–NEW—Immediate Office of the
Secretary, Office of the Chief
Technology Officer.
Abstract: The Department of Health
and Human Services is promoting the
use of health and health care datasets
that are not specific to individual’s
personal health information to improve
decision making by individuals,
organizations, and governments through
better understanding of the data. Federal
agencies are making health indicator
datasets (data that is not associated with
any individuals) and tools available for
use by the public through a web portal
community known as healthdata.gov or
http://www.data.gov/health. These
datasets and tools are anticipated to
benefit development of applications,
web-based tools, and other electronic
resources improve community action for
health and health care. The
development of tools, reference sets,
dashboards, and electronic data
visualization methods serve to provide
context and understanding to complex
health and health care data.

E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM

27JAN1