Notice2025-18212
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request, Employment Transition Models Demonstration and Evaluation, New Collection
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 19, 2025
Issuing agencies
Labor Department
Abstract
The Department of Labor (DOL), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents is properly assessed. Currently, DOL is soliciting comments concerning the collection of data about the Employment Transition Models Demonstration and Evaluation. A copy of the proposed Information Collection Request (ICR) can be obtained by contacting the office listed below in the addressee section of this notice.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 180 (Friday, September 19, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 180 (Friday, September 19, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45257-45260]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-18212]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request, Employment Transition Models Demonstration and
Evaluation, New Collection
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Chief Evaluation
Office, Department of Labor.
ACTION: Notice of Information Collection; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor (DOL), as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and
federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or
continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95). This program helps to ensure that
requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden
(time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are
clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on
respondents is properly assessed. Currently, DOL is soliciting comments
concerning the collection of data about the Employment Transition
Models Demonstration and Evaluation. A copy of the proposed Information
Collection Request (ICR) can be obtained by contacting the office
listed below in the addressee section of this notice.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the
addressee section below on or before November 18, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either one of the following
methods:
Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c685aeafa3a083b0a7aab3a7b2afa9a889a0a0afa5a386a2a9aae8a1a9b0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e2a18a8b8784a794838e9783968b8d8cad84848b8187a2868d8ecc858d94">[email protected]</span></a>; Mail or Courier: Neil Ridley,
Chief Evaluation Office, OASP, U.S. Department of Labor, Room S-2312,
200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210. Instructions: Please
submit one copy of your comments by only one method. All submissions
received must include the agency name and OMB Control Number identified
above for this information collection. Comments, including any personal
information provided, become a matter of public record. They will also
be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of the
information collection request.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil Ridley by email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bdfed5d4d8dbf8cbdcd1c8dcc9d4d2d3f2dbdbd4ded8fdd9d2d193dad2cb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fbb893929e9dbe8d9a978e9a8f929495b49d9d92989ebb9f9497d59c948d">[email protected]</span></a> or by phone at (202) 693-7915.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Employment Transition Models (ETM) Demonstration and Evaluation
is a joint effort by DOL's Chief Evaluation Office (CEO), Office of
Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), and the Employment and Training
Administration (ETA).
The ETM Demonstration includes five-year grants for state projects
to (1) identify, develop, and scale evidence-based solutions or
strategies that improve work-related outcomes among youth and young
adults with disabilities (Y&YAD) and (2) increase states' capacity to
create innovative employment strategies for them. The aim of the ETM
Demonstration is to make America more prosperous and to save taxpayer
dollars by implementing a direct employment-based service intervention
for young people with disabilities to improve labor force participation
and reduce the reliance on disability income benefits. This is
important to the country and economy, and aligned to the Presidential
Action, `Delivering Emergency Price Relief for
[[Page 45258]]
American Families and Defeating the Cost-of-Living Crisis,' which
instructed all departments and agencies to ``create employment
opportunities for American workers, including drawing discouraged
workers into the labor force.'' ETM grantees are implementing new,
evidence-based strategies to increase the employment, post-secondary
education, and economic independence of Y&YAD. The demonstration builds
upon lessons learned from past projects designed to reduce the reliance
of Y&YAD on Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and other disability
benefits.
In 2024, ODEP awarded ETM Demonstration project grants to four
states: Connecticut, Kansas, Minnesota, and New York.
CEO and ETA are also conducting a 5-year ETM Evaluation to build
evidence on the implementation and outcomes of the strategies grantees
use to enable Y&YAD to successfully transition into the workforce and
post-secondary settings.
This Federal Register Notice provides the opportunity to comment on
proposed plans for collecting data needed for both the demonstration
and the evaluation: intake data, service receipt data, implementation
data, and outcome data. These data will be used to produce the
performance measures required for ETM grants, facilitate technical
assistance (TA), and address the evaluation's requirements.
<bullet> Intake data include (a) baseline information for all Y&YAD
participating in ETM projects (``ETM youth'') or collected from these
Y&YAD with support from their guardians; and (b) information on
referrals to ETM recorded by grantee staff for all ETM youth.
<bullet> Service receipt data will involve grantee staff tracking
information on services that all ETM youth are receiving. ETM case
managers will have to periodically review their notes and gather
additional information from project partners, including service
providers, and participants and their families, and enter data into the
management information system (MIS). These data will track which
services ETM participants have ever received and the frequency of case
management.
<bullet> Implementation data consists of data collected by the
evaluation team from a variety of parties involved with ETM to address
the evaluation's requirements, including:
--Data on implementation activities collected through semi-structured
interviews with ETM project directors, local site administrators, and
case managers during grantee site visits. There will be two site visits
with each grantee--the first in 2026 and the second in 2027. The site
visits will help the evaluation team understand how the grantee's
program was developed, operates, and matures into a full-scale
implementation, as well as the context in which the program operates.
--Data on project partner collaboration activities collected through
(1) partner survey for ETM local site administrators and (2) semi-
structured telephone interviews with ETM local site administrators to
understand collaboration among ETM partners in helping Y&YAD reach
employment and career milestones. The survey will ask ETM staff to
describe collaborations with up to 15 partners who serve ETM youth. The
evaluation team will then conduct interviews to follow-up on the survey
to learn more about the partners and their contributions to the
delivery of ETM services. The evaluation will collect this data once in
2026 and 2027.
--Data on ETM program experiences collected during site visits through
semi-structured interviews with ETM youth, focus groups with families
of ETM youth, and semi-structured interviews with employers to better
understand the needs, service experiences, and perspectives of these
groups related to the demonstration.
<bullet> Outcome data, including:
--Data on satisfaction levels among ETM youth and their families,
employers, and participating project partners. Data will be collected
by ETM grantee staff annually on customer experience satisfaction to
summarize how well ETM participants and project partners believed they
were served by the demonstration project.
--Data on the employment and education outcomes of ETM youth collected,
in part, from these youth and recorded by ETM grantee staff.
To reduce burden, the demonstration and evaluation will use
existing data collected as part of the DOL Participant Individual
Record Layout (PIRL), whenever possible, as well as national
administrative records on employment and education outcomes. The PIRL
data contain information covered by OMB Control Nos. 1205-0521 and
1205-0526, and will be combined with additional information collected
for the demonstration and the evaluation in grantees' MIS records.
II. Desired Focus of Comments
Currently, DOL is soliciting comments concerning the above data
collection for the Employment Transition Models Demonstration and
Evaluation. DOL is particularly interested in comments that do the
following:
[cir] evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility;
[cir] evaluate the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate of the
proposed information collection, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions;
[cir] enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
to be collected; and
[cir] minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology--for example, permitting
electronic submissions of responses.
To generate the Estimated Annual Burden Hours in the table below,
the evaluation team took estimates from ODEP and the TA provider on the
number of respondents and duration of engagement. These intermediate
values were then amortized over a three-year period. For example, the
``baseline information from ETM'' intake data (first row) estimates 898
annual respondents which corresponds to 2,682 youth over three years.
ODEP and the TA provider estimate that, on average, the baseline
information from ETM youth will take 23 minutes to collect; multiplying
this estimate by annual number of respondents yields an estimated
annual burden of 341.24 hours.
III. Current Actions
At this time, the Department of Labor is requesting clearance for
baseline data collection, service receipt data, implementation data,
outcome data collection, semi-structured interview protocols, family
focus group interview protocols, and partner survey protocols.
Type of Review: New information collection request.
OMB Control Number: 1290-0NEW.
Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Government (Primary), and
Individuals or Households.
Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,192.
Total Estimated Number of Responses: 11,360.
Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 1,176 hours.
Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.
[[Page 45259]]
Comments submitted in response to this request will be summarized
and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget
approval of the information collection request; they will also become a
matter of public record.
Estimated Annual Burden Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual number Annual total Average burden Annual
Data type and source Annual number of responses number of hours per estimated
of respondents per respondent responses response burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intake Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline information from ETM \a\ 898 1 898 23/60 341.24
youth..........................
Youth referral information \b\ 93 10 930 4/60 65.10
completed by ETM and partner
staff..........................
Service Receipt Data for ETM \c\ 155 33.0 5,115 4/60 358.05
Youth..........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation Activities:
Semi-structured interviews \d\ 3 1 3 1.50 4.50
with project directors.....
Semi-structured interviews \e\ 6 1 6 1.00 6.00
with ETM local site
administrators.............
Semi-structured interviews \f\ 16 1 16 1.00 16.00
with ETM case managers.....
Partner Collaboration
Activities:
Partner list survey for ETM \g\ 13 1 13 1.00 13.00
local site administrators..
Semi-structured interviews \h\ 13 1 13 1.00 13.00
with ETM local site
administrators on partner
collaboration activities...
ETM Program Experiences:
Semi-structured interviews \i\ 27 1 27 1.00 27.00
with ETM youth.............
Focus groups with families \j\ 22 1 22 1.50 33.00
of ETM youth...............
Semi-structured interviews \k\ 7 1 7 1.00 7.00
with employers.............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Outcome Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Satisfaction:
Satisfaction data from ETM \l\ 1,197 1 1,197 5/60 95.76
youth......................
Satisfaction data from \m\ 1,197 1 1,197 5/60 95.76
families of ETM youth......
Satisfaction data from ETM \n\ 96 1 96 5/60 77.68
employers..................
Satisfaction data from ETM \o\ 128 1 128 5/60 10.67
project partners...........
Employment and Education
Outcomes:
Information on outcomes from \p\ 240 3 720 4/60 14.4
ETM youth..................
Information on outcomes \q\ 81 12 972 4/60 68.04
recorded by ETM and AJC
staff......................
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................... \r\ 44,192 .............. 11,360 .............. 1,176
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General: The table reports integer values for the annual number of respondents and responses. In cases when
underlying assumptions about totals over the three-year period covered by PRA clearance resulted in a
fractional count of respondents per year, that count was rounded upward to the nearest integer. When the
estimate of average burden hours is less than one, the table reports the value as the fraction of 60 minutes.
\a\ Assumes approximately 2,682 youth enrolled in ETM over the three-year demonstration period across all four
grantees.
\b\ Assumes ETM grantee and partner staff will record information about referral pathways for all ETM youth.
\c\ Assumes that (i) ETM grantee and partner staff will collect service-receipt data for all ETM youth, (ii) an
equal number of youth will be enrolled each year, (iii) the data will be recorded quarterly between when youth
enroll and when they exit from ETM or the end of the three-year period covered by PRA clearance (whichever
comes first), (iv) and the average length of participation in ETM will be two years.
\d\ Assumes interviews with the four ETM project directors, twice during data collection period.
\e\ Assumes interviews with 16 ETM local site administrators at all four grantees, twice during data collection
period.
\f\ Assumes interviews with 48 ETM case managers across all four grantees, twice during data collection period.
\g\ Assumes surveying 19 ETM local site administrators, twice during data collection period.
\h\ Assumes interviews with 19 ETM local site administrators, twice during data collection period.
\i\ Assumes 80 interviews across four grantees once during data collection period.
\j\ Assumes 4 focus groups with up to 8 parents/guardians each, twice during data collection period.
\k\ Assumes interviews with 20 employers across four grantees, once during data collection period.
\l\ Assumes satisfaction questions will be asked annually, and 80 percent of youth will respond. Additionally
assumes that a two-year average period of youth participation in ETM, resulting in up to two responses from
two thirds of youth and at most one response from one third youth during the three-year period covered by PRA
clearance.
\m\ Assumes satisfaction questions will be asked annually, and 80 percent of families will respond. Additionally
assumes that a two-year average period of youth participation in ETM, resulting in up to two responses from
two thirds of families and at most one response from one third families during the three-year period covered
by PRA clearance.
\n\ Assumes satisfaction questions will be asked annually, and 80 percent of employers will respond.
Additionally assumes an average of 8 employer partners across 4 sites (32 employers) responding to quarterly
surveys, all of which will remain throughout the three-year-period covered by the PRA clearance.
\o\ Assumes satisfaction questions will be asked quarterly, and 80 percent of project partners will respond.
Additionally assumes an average of 10 employer partners across 4 sites, (40 partners), and that all initial
project partners will remain on the project during the three-year period covered by PRA clearance. Project
partners include, but are not limited to: Youth agencies and service providers; Disability agencies and
service providers; Local health and mental health agencies and providers; Parent organizations and service
providers; K-12 local education agencies; American Job Centers (sometimes known as One-Stop Career Centers);
One or more community college(s), technical institution(s), four-year colleges/universities, or other
education partners that can provide education and training activities; and One or more business or industry
partners (such as business membership associations or Chambers of Commerce) that will participate in defining
the program strategies and goals and be actively involved in participating in funded project activities.
[[Page 45260]]
\p\ Assumes employment and education information will be collected during the year after youth exit from
services, 33 percent of ETM youth will reach the end of the first post-service year during the three-year
period covered by PRA clearance, and 80 percent of youth will respond to requests for information.
\q\ Assumes that ETM and AJC staff will obtain and record information on employment and education for an
approximately equal number of youth during the year after youth exit from services, 33 percent of ETM youth
will reach the end of the first post-service year during the three-year period covered by PRA clearance, 80
percent of these youth will respond to requests for information, and staff will obtain administrative data for
100 percent of the youth.
\r\ The total annual number of respondents is a sum of the rows in the table above and does not adjust for
potential overlap between respondent groups across rows.
Sheng Li,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, U.S. Department of Labor.
[FR Doc. 2025-18212 Filed 9-18-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-HX-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 19, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.