Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB

SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described

below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department

is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal.

DATES: Comment due date: September 12, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding

this proposal. Comments must be received within 14 working days from

the date of this notice. Comments should refer to the proposal by name

and should be sent to: Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., OMB Desk Officer, Office

of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC

20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kay F. Weaver, Reports Management Officer, Department of Housing and

Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410, telephone

no. (202) 708-0050. This is not a toll free number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice informs the public that the

Department of Housing and Urban Development has submitted to OMB for

processing an information collection package related to the National

Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients (hereinafter

``survey''). HUD is requesting a review of this information collection

on or before September 30, 1995.

The survey will provide estimates of the number and characteristics

of service providers and an assessment of the types of programs and

services available to people who are homeless. It will also provide

detailed characteristics of persons using services. Under the auspices

of the Interagency Council on the Homeless, the survey is being co-

sponsored by 11 Federal agencies:

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Veterans Affairs

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Education

Department of Energy

Department of Justice

Department of Transportation

Social Security Administration

Federal Emergency Management Agency

The survey includes two phases: Phase 1 is the collection of

information on service providers and Phase 2 is the collection of

information on service users (clients). In Phase 1, the Census Bureau

will:

(1) Select a sample of geographic areas;

(2) Develop a comprehensive list of service providers in the survey

sample areas;

(3) Collect basic information from all service providers within the

sample areas on programs offered, via a computer-assisted telephone

interview; and

(4) Select a subsample of providers and collect detailed

information on programs and services by mail, with telephone followup.

Phase 1 of the national survey is planned to be conducted starting in

October 1995 and conclude by January 1996.

In Phase 2, the Census Bureau will:

(1) Select a sample of service users (clients) within the sample

areas;

(2) Select a sample of providers in designated programs; and

(3) Select clients and conduct personal visit interviews at

selected service provider facilities.

Phase 2 of the survey is planned to be conducted starting in February

1996 and conclude by March 1996.

This request is for clearance to conduct Phase 2 of the survey, the

collection of information on service users using two instruments:

NSHAPC--200 Service Users Survey; and

NSHAPC--300 Roster for Provider Facility.

The information to be requested under the Service Users Survey is

specified, but the survey form will undergo a final forms design before

it is administered.

A pre-test of the NSHAPC was conducted in April 1995 in three

areas: Atlanta, GA; Pittsburgh, PA (including Allegheny, Fayette,

Washington, and Westmoreland Counties); and the Armstrong County

Community Action Agency Catchment area (a rural Community Action Agency

service area outside Pittsburgh). The survey instruments have been

revised to reflect the experience gained in the pre-test. The Census

Bureau sought and obtained substantial expert input over a two-year

period to develop the survey instruments.

The Department has submitted the proposal for the collection of

information, as described below to OMB for review, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35):

(1) the title of the information collection proposal;

(2) the office of the agency to collect the information;

(3) the description of the need for the information and its

proposed use;

(4) the agency form number, if applicable;

(5) what members of the public will be affected by the proposal;

(6) how frequently information submission will be required;

(7) an estimate of the total number of hours needed to prepare the

information submission including numbers of respondents, frequency of

response, and hours of response;

(8) whether the proposal is new or an extension, reinstatement, or

revision of an information collection requirement; and

(9) the names and telephone numbers of an agency official familiar

with the proposal and of the OMB Desk Officer for the Department.

Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

U.S.C. 3507; Section 7(d) of the Department of Housing and Urban

Development Act, 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).

Dated: August 17, 1995.

Michael A. Stegman,

Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy Development and Research.

Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB

Proposal: National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and

Clients (NSHAPC).

Office: Policy Development and Research.

Description of the Need for the Information and Its Proposed Use:

This national survey would provide up-to-date information about the

providers of homeless assistance and the characteristics of homeless

persons who use services. The survey will be conducted in 76 areas

including metropolitan and nonmetropolitan settings. The data will:

(1) be compared with the findings of a 1987 Urban Institute survey

of homeless characteristics to understand reported changes in the

nature of homelessness, especially those related to families with

children;

(2) provide a basis for assessing local efforts to construct

``continuums of care'' for homeless people;

[[Page 44551]]

(3) be used to develop measures to assess the impact and

performance of current homeless programs;

(4) will assist local governments and nonprofit organizations in

designing more effective more effective local programs; and

(5) provide a baseline for examining the effects on the homeless

population of proposed changes to the McKinney homeless assistance

programs, and America's ``safety net'' programs for the poor (e.g.,

Section 8, AFDC, JTPA, and Medicaid programs).

Form Number: None.

Respondents: Homeless service providers and homeless persons.

Frequency of Submission: One-time.

Reporting Burden: See attachment.

Total Estimated Burden Hours: Phase 2, Client Surveys 2,850.

Status: New survey.

Contact: James E. Hoben, HUD, (202) 708-0574 X132; George A.

Ferguson, HUD, (202) 708-1480; Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., OMB, (202) 395-

7316.

Dated: August 15, 1995.

Supporting Statement

A. Justification

1. Necessity of Information Collection

The National Survey of Homeless Assistance Providers and Clients

(NSHAPC) includes two phases: the collection of information on service

providers and the collection of information on service users (clients).

Phase 1: In Phase 1, the Census Bureau will:

(1) Select a sample of geographic areas.

(2) Develop a comprehensible list of service providers in the

survey sample areas.

(3) Collect basic information from all service providers within the

sample areas on programs offered, via a computer-assisted telephone

interview.

(4) Select a subsample of providers and collect detailed

information on programs and services by mail, with telephone follow-up.

Note: Steps 1 and 2 must be completed if Phase 2 is conducted.

Phase 2: In Phase 2, the Census Bureau will:

(1) Select a sample of service users (clients) within the sample

areas in two other stages.

(2) Select a sample of providers in designated programs.

(3) Select clients and conduct personal visit interviews at

selected service provider facilities.

This request is for clearance to conduct Phase 2 of the survey. An

earlier OMB package was submitted requesting clearance to conduct Phase

1. This request is for the following forms listed by title and code

number.

NSHAPC-200A, Service User Questionnaire.

NSHAPC-XXXX, Roster for Provider Facility.

The national survey will provide estimates of the number and

characteristics of service providers, and an assessment of the types of

programs and services available to people who are homeless. The survey

will also provide (in Phase 2) detailed characteristics of persons

using services. Phase 2 of the national survey is being sponsored by

the following Federal agencies:

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Department of Commerce (DOC).

Department of Education (ED).

Department of Energy (DOE).

Department of Justice (DOJ).

Department of Transportation (DOT).

Social Security Administration (SSA).

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Data will be collected under HUD's data collections authority.

As part of the 1990 Census, the Census Bureau enumerated persons

residing in homeless shelters and pre-identified street locations.

However, this operation was not designed to provide the full range of

information needed for guiding policy decisions related to

homelessness. With this understanding, in September of 1993, the Bureau

of the Census convened a conference of researchers, representatives of

public interest groups, and government representatives to discuss ways

of improving data collection on the homeless population. The consensus

among this group was that the decennial census is not the appropriate

vehicle for gathering information on the homeless population. They

suggested that a new national survey using a updated methodologies to

obtain an accurate and useful picture of those homeless people who use

services in the United States is needed.

2. Needs and Uses

The information the new survey would provide is critical for

developing the kinds of effective public policy responses needed to

break the cycle of homelessness, both through targeted programs and the

leveraging of mainstream resources. This survey would provide up-to-

date information about the characteristics of today's homeless

population who use services and would tell us how this population has

changed since 1987 in urban areas. Included in the survey would be the

first national examination of the characteristics of homelessness in

rural America, fulfilling a Congressional mandate for a report on this

subject.

The national NSHAPC survey would:

1. Provide national information on the types of services available

to homeless persons in both urban and rural communities.

2. Provide information not addressed by the last national study in

1987 such as: What are the triggering events that precipitate

homelessness? Where were homeless people living before they became

homeless? How prevalent is AIDS among homeless persons? What impact

does rural homelessness have on urban homelessness? What differences

are there among homeless persons found in cities, suburbs, and rural

areas?

3. Tell us what characteristics of the homeless population have

changed since the 1987 study.

4. Collect additional information related to drug use, mental

illness, AIDS, tuberculosis, and previous episodes of homelessness.

5. Include smaller cities, nonmetropolitan and rural areas in order

to more accurately and fully reflect homelessness in the United States.

The survey would interview a sufficient number of people using services

in 76 geographic areas to ensure reliability of the national estimates.

Of these 76 geographic areas, 28 would be large metropolitan areas, 24

would be medium and small metropolitan areas, and 24 would be

nonmetropolitan areas (small cities and rural areas).

Discussion of Phase 1 Activities

Phase 1 will be on-going from October 1, 1995 through January 1996.

Three steps occur in Phase 1.

Step 1: Completing the CATI Interview

1. Beginning on October 1, 1995, Census Bureau staff will use a

computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) to contact all service

providers in the 76 sample communities. Service providers interviewed

would include those with programs specifically targeted at the homeless

(e.g. homeless shelters, soup kitchens, homeless outreach programs) as

well as other community service providers with programs from which

homeless individuals are eligible. The purpose of the survey of service

providers would be to assess the types of programs and service

available to homeless persons in

[[Page 44552]]

these metropolitan, suburban, and rural areas. All service providers in

the areas will be asked about the types of programs offered and basic

information about each program offered, such as source of funding, days

of operation, and population group primarily served (e.g., veterans,

people with mental illness). Prior to the CATI calls, an advance

letter, NSHAPC--L(1)L will be mailed to each provider.

To develop the profile of programs offered nationwide, all service

providers will be asked to complete the NSHAPC Form 100A, Service

Provider Core Data Questionnaire. This questionnaire collects the

following information about the service provider and programs offered

at that address:

Name.

Contact for the facility.

Address.

Telephone Number.

Type of Facility.

Programs Provided.

The following information will be collected for each program

offered:

Average Number of Adults and Children Participating in

Programs On A Daily Basis, and Percent Homeless.

Average Number of Adults and Children the Facility Serves

On A Daily Basis.

Familial Status of Persons the Facility Serves On A Daily

Basis.

Public or private affiliation.

Source of funding.

If the program is targeted to a specific subpopulation

group.

Number of Facilities Under Contract To, or Accepting

Vouchers.

Expected Days of Operation for each program in February,

1996.

Contact person for each program.

Step 2: Reviewing the List of Service Providers

Once the CATI interview is completed, service providers will be

mailed a comprehensive list of service providers in the sample areas.

Service providers are asked to review the list for completeness and

accuracy. We are asking providers to correct any incorrect entries and

to identify service providers that are omitted from the list. The

updated lists will be mailed back to the Census Bureau for update.

After receipt of the reviewed list, Census Bureau personnel will remove

duplicate entries from the list and prepare a master list of service

providers. New service providers added to the list will then be

contacted and Census Bureau staff will administer the CATI interview.

The Census Bureau plans to generate listings of service providers

for each of the sample areas in the survey and mail, NSHAPC Form 100-M,

List of Providers Offering Homeless Programs and the NSHAPC--L(2)

letter to all service providers shown on the comprehensive list and all

knowledgeable local persons. The knowledgeable local persons and

service providers will be asked to review the listing of all service

providers in their area for completeness, and to add any missed service

providers to the list. NOTE: A sample of providers will be asked to

provide additional information about the services they offer. This is

discussed below under Phase 1, Step 3.

The Census Bureau is obtaining copies of national files of service

providers from national organizations, Federal agencies, and from

Community Action Program (CAP) coordinators. The Census Bureau has

obtained a copy of lists of service providers from the following

Federal agencies: FEMA, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs,

Housing and Urban Development, and Labor. National organizations, such

as the National Coalition for the Homeless, National Alliance to End

Homelessness, National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, National

Network of Runaway and Youth Services, Catholic Charities, Better Homes

Foundation, and Volunteers of America, Inc. have provided lists to the

Census Bureau. The Census Bureau plans to unduplicate and merge these

files into one comprehensive listing of service providers. This

comprehensive list will be used as the initial sampling frame for

identifying and interviewing service providers in the sample areas.

The local update may also provide the Census Bureau with additional

names of service providers and local persons or organizations

knowledgeable about homeless services. (Federal, State, and Local

Agencies may not have the name of a service provider if the provider

does not receive any federal, state, or local funding.

Census Bureau personnel also will contact the state homeless

coordinator designated under the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act. The

Census Bureau will tell them about the survey, indicate which counties

in their state are included in the survey, and provide them with a list

of service providers in each of the sample areas. The state

coordinators will be asked to review the list of service providers and

note any additions or changes.

Note: Census Bureau personnel have already completed some

initial contacts with federal and state government offices,

agencies, organizations, and knowledgeable local persons to begin

compiling a national list of service providers.

Shelters for abused women and runaway youths will not be on the

listings to be reviewed by service providers but are included in the

sampling frame. This is to preserve the confidential locations of

shelters for abused women and runaway youth.

The Census Bureau will use the master list of service providers as

the frame to select the sample of service providers who will receive

the detailed-program questionnaires and to select the sample of

provider facilities where client interviewing will be conducted.

Step 3: Completing the Detailed Information on Programs and Services

Once the CATI interviews are completed, a subsample of service

providers will be asked to provide more detailed information about the

specific programs and services offered at their facility. Separate

questionnaires for each program have been developed. Program managers

will be asked to complete a questionnaire by mail for each program they

administer. For each program offered, program managers will receive a

copy of the appropriate program questionnaire and the NSHAPC L(3)L

letter. Census Bureau staff will follow-up by telephone for all

nonresponding providers.

Discussion of Phase 2 Activities

The second phase of the survey would consist of interviewing a

sample of persons using services at homeless shelters, soup kitchens,

and other service locations where homeless people are found.

Respondents will be asked to complete NSHAPC Form 200A, Service User

Questionnaire (See Attachment A). To facilitate the sampling, we are

asking providers to complete Form NSHAPC 300, Roster for Providers (See

Attachment B). Providers will be asked to list all clients using the

housing program on the day of the interview. Interviews will take place

continuously over a four-week period in order to obtain a

representative sample. In addition to providing data on characteristics

of the portion of the homeless population who use services, this phase

of the survey would identify homeless subgroups and help determine

their use of various types of assistance programs. It would also

collect limited comparative data on housed persons with very low

incomes who also rely on soup kitchens and other emergency assistance.

The survey will estimate characteristics at the national level

only. The sample size is not large enough to produce estimates of

client characteristics at the regional or local levels.

[[Page 44553]]

In 1987, the Urban Institute completed a survey of homeless

persons. Data from the 1987 Urban Institute study represent the only

national level data specific to homeless persons. Since the 1987 study,

no significant national studies have been conducted to provide national

information about the characteristics of homeless persons using

services for homeless people.

NSHAPC data will be used to plan future programs and services

funded via the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act and other homeless

programs to prevent homelessness as well as ameliorate it.

Understanding the causes of homelessness can help guide the development

of preventive strategies. Data from the NSHAPC will be used by the

participating agencies to prepare reports in accordance with the

requirements of the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act and other homeless

assistance programs.

The following targeted programs will benefit from the data

collected in the NSHAPC.

Emergency/Temporary Shelter Assistance

Emergency Food and Shelter Program (FEMA)--Assistance directed toward

temporary shelter

Emergency Shelter Grants Program (HUD)

Shelter for the Homeless [Department of Defense (DOD)]

Homeless Support Initiatives--Surplus Blankets (DOD)

Food and Nutrition Assistance

Commodities for Soup Kitchens (USDA)

Emergency Food and Shelter Program--Food Assistance (FEMA)

Commissary/Food Bank Initiatives (DOD) and [Department of

Transportation (DOT)]

Federal Grain Inspection Service--Donation of Surplus Samples (USDA)

General Health Assistance

Health Care for the Homeless Grant Program (HHS)

Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans Program (VA)

Assistance to Homeless Persons With Disabilities

Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness (PATH) (HHS)

Access to Community Care and Effective Services and Supports (ACCESS)

(HHS)

Community Support Program--homeless-specific portion (HHS)

National Institute of Health (NIH) Research on Homeless (HHS)

Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program (VA)

Safe Havens (HUD)

National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) Research

Demonstration on Homelessness (HHS)

Drug Abuse Prevention for Runaway and Homeless Youth (HHS)

Education, Training, and Employment Assistance

Educ. Homeless Children & Youth State Grants Prog. (ED)

Exemplary Projects Program--Homeless Children (ED)

Adult Education for the Homeless (ED)

Job Training for the Homeless Demonstration Program (DOL)

Homeless Veterans Reintegration Project (DOL)

Housing Assistance

Transitional Housing Demonstration Program (HHS)

Supportive Housing Demonstration (HUD)

Section 87 Assistance for SROs (HUD)

Single Family Property Disposition Initiatives (HUD)

Transitional Living Program for Homeless Youth (HHS)

Farmer's Home Administration (FMHA) Homes for the Homeless (USDA)

Shelter for Homeless Vets--Acquired Property Sales (VA)

Base Closure Properties (DOD, HUD)

Homeless Prevention

Emergency Food and Shelter Program (FEMA)--Prevention Assistance

Emergency Community Services Homeless Grant Program (HHS)

General/Misc. Aid to Homeless Providers

Emergency Community Services Homeless Grant Program (HHS)

Excess and Surplus Federal Real Property [General Services

Administration (GSA)/(HUD)/(HHS)]

Runaway and Homeless Youth Program (HHS)

Programs for Homeless Children/Youth/Families

Family Support Centers (HHS)

Transitional Housing Demonstration Program (HHS)

Supportive Housing Demonstration (HUD)

Educ. for Homeless Children and Youth State Grants Program (ED)

Exemplary Projects Program--Homeless Children (ED)

Runaway and Homeless Youth Program (HHS)

Transitional Living Program for Homeless Youth (HHS)

Drug Abuse Prevention for Runaway and Homeless Youth (HHS)

Programs for Homeless Veterans

Domiciliary Care for Homeless Veterans Program (VA)

Homeless Chronically Mentally Ill Veterans Program (VA)

Shelter for Homeless Vets--Acquired Property Sales (VA)

Homeless Veterans Reintegration Project (DOL)

Each agency was asked to identify their data needs and to rank the

importance of those data requirements. From this ranking, we developed

the Service User Questionnaire, NSHAPC--Form 200A. Listed below is a

discussion of the survey questions on the Respondent Questionnaire and

how the data will be used by HUD, HHS, VA, USDA and the other Federal

agencies. Section numbers correspond to the section numbers on the

questionnaire.

Service User Questionnaire Cover Page--Items N and O--on the cover

page asks the respondent's name and age. Collection of the name (along

with the other variables described in Section 4) will be used to

eliminate duplicate interviews. Because the sampling and data

collection design calls for multiple visits to each provider site, and

because one homeless person could be found in more than one sampling

frame (e.g., in both soup kitchens and shelters), unduplicating is

central to the process of estimating the size of the population.

Question 64a asks for the respondent's social security number.

Question 64b asks for the first five digits of the respondent's social

security number if the respondent refuses to give their entire social

security number. These questions, along with the name and the other

variables described above, are being collected for purposes of

unduplicating respondents.

Section 1: Current Living Condition

Questions 1a-7

These questions determine whether or not the respondent is

homeless, and are considered essential by all participating agencies.

With minor modifications, they are the same screening questions used in

Rossi's (1986) Chicago studies, in the National Institute on Drug Abuse

(NIDA, 1992) Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area Drug Study (DC*MADS),

and in the Urban Institute's national study (Burt and Cohen, 1988,

1989) which the NSHAPC methodology is designed to parallel and extend.

For purposes of continuity and comparison, it is important that they

remain essentially the same as they were in earlier studies.

[[Page 44554]]

Section 2: Without Permanent Housing

Section 3: Currently With Permanent Housing

Section 2, Questions 8a-10, 24-27

Section 3, Questions 33a-40

The answers to these questions are necessary to make estimates of

the size of the homeless population. Sampling and estimation experts

from the Urban Institute and the Census Bureau developed the questions.

Questions 8 and 9 parallel similar questions asked in the 1987 Urban

Institute study.

The Census Bureau requires Question 33B to determine if asking

respondents to report names of shelters can be used to assess the

completeness of the survey's list of shelters.

Section 2, Questions 11-23, 28-32

Section 3, Questions 41-55

These questions are needed to understand the circumstances

affecting the respondent in the period immediately before becoming

homeless. They have been compiled from similar questions asked in the

1987 Urban Institute study, the DC*MADS study, and other studies. These

previously used questions were augmented by questions or item content

which pretests revealed to be necessary to give a reasonable

understanding of the respondent's experiences. They will reveal the

proximate causes of each individual's current homeless episode (or

their last homeless episode if they are not now homeless but have been

homeless in the past).

HHS considers these questions to be essential and the VA considers

them highly desirable. Other agencies whose mission includes efforts to

prevent homelessness as well as ameliorate it may also consider them

desirable. An understanding of proximate causes can help guide the

development of preventive strategies.

Section 2, Questions 11-15

Section 3, Questions 41-44

These questions are either identical to or minor modifications of

questions asked in the 1987 Urban Institute study. We modified the

wording of some questions to make sure that the respondent and the

researcher mean the same thing by their answers (e.g., on Question 13,

some women living with their children will say they live alone, because

they do not live with a spouse or boyfriend. We want to be sure that

``alone'' means ``alone.'')

Section 2, Questions 16 a and b

Section 3, Questions 45 a and b

These questions are modified versions of a question asked in the

1987 Urban Institute study. We changed the format from obtaining only a

single response to probing for all relevant responses and then asking

the respondent to identify the primary reason. This eliminates the

difficulty in interpreting single responses such as Respondent 1 saying

``couldn't pay the rent,'' Respondent 2 saying ``lost my job,'' and

Respondent 3 saying ``Was doing drugs,'' when all three could not pay

the rent because they lost their jobs because they were doing drugs.

Section 2, Questions 17-19

Section 3, Questions 46-47c

These questions were not in the 1987 Urban Institute study.

Subsequent research by NIDA (1992) indicates that many homeless

people spend a considerable amount of time in institutions or in

temporary arrangements with friends or family between the interview

date and the time when they last had a permanent place to stay

(Question 11). In other words, they are not literally homeless during

the whole period since they last had a permanent place to stay. The

answers to these questions will let us determine how much of the time

they were literally homeless.

Section 2, Question 20

We want this question included to learn whether respondents have

any experience in the housing market on their own. Never having been a

primary tenant has been shown (Weitzman, 1989) to differentiate

homeless from never-homeless families.

Section 2, Questions 21-23

Section 3, Questions 48-50

HHS requested these questions. Local studies (Piliavin, Sosin, and

Westerfelt, 1986; Sosin, Colson and Grossman, 1988) have shown

seriously elevated rates of childhood experiences in foster care among

the adult homeless. The answers to these questions will help identify

the prevalence of childhood out-of-home placement and runaway behavior

among the adult homeless population for the first time on a national

sample. High prevalence could indicate a preventive role in programs

within HHS responsibility.

Section 2, Questions 28-32

Section 3, Questions 51-55

These questions are of interest to Department of Agriculture--

Farmers Home Administration (FmHA), FEMA, and HHS' Health Care for the

Homeless program--the federal agencies supporting emergency services.

Answers to these questions will provide some explanation of the

movement of homeless people from one type of community to another, such

as the push of no services or no jobs in the community left behind and

the pull of expected services and economic opportunities in the

community where respondents are interviewed. They will also help

identify the conditions that generate homelessness, which may not be

the same conditions as those in the community where homeless people are

interviewed.

Section 4: Demographics

Questions 56-64a

All the sponsoring agencies consider basic demographic questions

which describe the population to be essential. In addition, Question 60

may help explain a lack of participation in the labor force at the time

of the interview, and Questions 61a, 61b, 62a and 62b provide data

about possible educational difficulties and deficits in addition to the

simple fact of ``last grade completed.'' They may help define possible

prevention strategies.

Questions 58, 64, and 64a

Questions 58 asks for the respondent's date of birth. The date of

birth serves a very important purpose of eliminating duplicate

interviews. A unique identifier is created using the respondent's date

of birth, gender, and one or two other variables. The data set is then

searched for duplicates. Because the sampling and data collection

design calls for multiple visits to each provider site, and because one

homeless person could be found in more than one sample frame (e.g., in

both soup kitchens and shelters), unduplicating is central to the

process of estimating the size of the population.

Question 64a asks for the respondent's social security number.

Question 64b asks for the first five digits of the respondent's social

security number if they refuse to give their entire Social Security

Number in response to question 64a. These are being collected as one of

the other unduplicating variables. The Bureau of the Census, HHS, and

the other sponsoring agencies will hold this information in the

strictest of confidence and will ensure it is available only to

researchers at HHS, the other sponsoring agencies and Bureau of the

Census staff.

[[Page 44555]]

Section 5: Children and Education

Questions 65-71h

ED and HHS consider these questions to be essential. Answers to

this set of questions will show the degree to which homelessness has

split families, and which children have been separated from their

parent(s). This information is important for planning reunification,

housing, and other needs of homeless families.

The information is of primary interest to ED, and the questions

about school attendance and barriers are directly relevant to ED's

agency mission under the McKinney Act and Congressional directives to

gather this information and report it to Congress.

Questions 71b and 71d

We added the pre-school content of these questions for children

ages 3-5 at the specific request of HHS. ED requested the other content

of these questions.

Questions 71g, 71h

We added the questions about day care at the specific request of

HHS.

Question 72

All participating agencies consider this question, on the

composition of homeless households to be essential.

Question 73

HHS specifically requested that this question be included on the

questionnaire. A pregnancy experienced by a precariously housed woman

has been shown to make her more vulnerable to literal homelessness

(Weitzman, 1989).

Section 6: Employment

Questions 74-79

HHS considers these questions to be essential, and the VA considers

them desirable. Where the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) routinely

asks questions with appropriate content in its national surveys, we

adopted the BLS working for this survey so answers for the homeless can

be compared with nationally representative data.

Section 7: Sources of Income and Service Use

Questions 80-84

HHS considers all questions in this section to be essential. VA

also considers Question 80 essential. These questions describe receipt

of benefits, other income sources, and total income for the month

before the interview. They also describe respondent experiences with a

variety of HHS, USDA, and local government benefits, including any

change of benefits that might have played a role in the respondent

becoming homeless.

Section 8: Veteran Status

Questions 85-89

The VA submitted these questions and considers them essential. In

particular, they have no other national source of data in war zone or

combat exposure (Questions 87 and 88), which may play a critical role

in the need for services as an antecedent of homelessness.

Section 9: Food Intake

Questions 90-93

These questions are considered essential by HHS and USDA.

Questions 94a-95b

The Census Bureau needs these questions to estimate the proportion

of persons receiving food that are poor but housed and those who are

homeless.

The Census Bureau requires Question 95b to determine if asking

respondents to report names of soup kitchens can be used to assess the

completeness of the survey's list of soup kitchens.

Section 10: Current Physical Health

Question 96

HHS and VA consider this item essential.

Questions 97-117

HHS considers questions 97-107 to be essential. For many questions,

the set of items to be asked about were specified by agency personnel

(e.g., specific health conditions for Question 96, specific service

sites for Question 99; all of Questions 101 and 103).

The VA needs information about the use of VA facilities. The VA

considers the VA-relevant information in Question 99 essential, as it

will assist them in determining whether veterans are using other

medical facilities to the exclusion of, or in addition to, VA

facilities.

Section 11: Victimization and Imprisonment

Questions 118a-120c

HHS, ED and VA requested that these questions be included on the

questionnaire. Several divisions of HHS specifically requested all of

the components of Question 120, and question 118c (juvenile detention).

A great deal of evidence suggests that parental neglect and abuse

(asked about in Questions 120a-c) is implicated in runaway behavior and

youth homelessness (Robertson, 1991). It is also obviously a precursor

of childhood out-of-home placement, which in turn is associated with

both youth and adult homelessness. (Piliavin, Sosin and Westerfelt,

1986; Sosin, Colson and Grossman, 1988). The answers to these questions

will reveal the degree to which the present homeless population has

these experiences in their background as potential contributing factors

to their homelessness.

Section 12: Mental Health

Questions 121a-126c

HHS considers these questions essential. The remaining agencies

completing the ratings considered them highly desirable. Given the

evidence for serious mental illness among sizable proportions of the

homeless population, these questions will provide data to understand

how mental illness relates to the many other factors included in the

interview protocol, including use of services and benefit receipt.

Questions 121a-124

Questions 121a-124 are taken directly from the Psychiatric section

of the Addiction Severity Index (ASI), an instrument developed by NIAAA

to assess addictions and related conditions. These questions form a

scale; answers are summed to form a score, which can be compared to

national norms for this segment of the ASI. The ability to compare

homeless people's responses to a national norm will let us determine

where homeless people fit on the continuum of mental health problems.

All items in Questions 121a-124 must be present to construct the scale

score.

Questions 125-126c

Questions 125-126c are also taken from the ASI, with minor

modifications as accepted by NIMH's Program for the Homeless Mentally

Ill. They give evidence of treatment patterns (or lack thereof), and

will supply NIMH with an estimate of unmet service need, as well as the

usual sources of care sought by the homeless mentally ill.

Section 13: Chemical Dependency

Questions 127a-150

HHS considers these questions essential. The remaining agencies

completing the ratings consider them highly desirable. Given the

evidence for substance abuse among sizable proportions of the homeless

population, these questions will provide data to understand how

alcoholism and drug abuse relate to the many other factors included in

the interview protocol--especially antecedents of homelessness.

[[Page 44556]]

Questions 127a-132, 142-144

Questions 127a-132 and 142-144 are taken directly from the

Addiction Severity Index (ASI, McLellan et al., 1991, see above). These

questions form several scales; answers are summed to form scores, which

can be compared to national norms and norms for treatment populations

for this segment of the ASI. The ability to compare homeless people's

responses to national norms and norms for treatment populations will

let us determine where homeless people fit on the continuum of chemical

dependency problems. All items in Questions 127a-132 and 142-144 must

be present to construct the scale score, and NIAAA has strongly

expressed an interest in seeing the scales included in their entirety

on this interview protocol.

Questions 135-139, 147-150

Questions 135-139 (for alcohol treatment) and 147-150 (for drug

treatment) are also taken from the ASI, with minor modifications as

accepted by NIAAA/NIDA. They give evidence of treatment patterns (or

lack thereof), and will supply NIMH with an estimate of unmet service

need, as well as the usual sources of care sought by homeless substance

abusers.

Questions 133, 144

The items in these questions are taken from the Short Michigan

Alcoholism Screening Test (Question 122--Selzer, Vinokur, and van

Rooijen, 1975) and the Drug Abuse Screening Test (Question 132--

Skinner, 1982). Both of the original instruments are too long to

include in this study in their entirety (24 and 28 items,

respectively). However, the inclusion of some measure of symptomatology

related to substance abuse was felt to be important, to detect the

level of functional impairment related to substance abuse among those

who never sought treatment as well as among those who have. In each

case the eight items selected are those with the highest correlations

with the total scale score for the original scale (r=.7 or higher).

Scores based on these selected items should function in virtually the

same way as scores we would obtain if we used all of each instrument.

Questions 134, 145

These questions assess the respondent's age when heavy alcohol or

drug use began. We are including these questions to assure that we will

know the duration of the respondents' substance abuse problems. Answers

to these questions augment the information on the earliest and most

recent treatment, and will provide a more complete picture of the

respondents' involvement with alcohol and drugs.

Question 151

This question is asked so that respondents can provide their

general impressions on the availability and quality of services in

their community.

3. Efforts to Minimize Burden

Not applicable. Respondents are individuals at service sites who

cannot respond with computer tapes or disks. We are also minimizing the

burden of the FEMA Local Board Contact Persons, government contacts,

service providers and knowledgeable local persons by giving them the

combined listing of service providers to review as opposed to asking

them to list all service providers in their area.

4. Efforts to Identify Duplication, and Use of Available Information

HUD consulted with other government agencies and outside experts

and determined that the proposed national NSHAPC will be the only

current, national data source with detailed information on the types

and availability of programs and services offered and on the

characteristics of literally homeless persons who use services. The

most recent national data is the 1987 Urban Institute Study.

In March 1987, the Urban Institute conducted a survey of homeless

persons who used services in cities of 100,000 or more. The NSHAPC is

intended to parallel and extend the methodology used by the Urban

Institute in the 1987 survey to capture a higher proportion of the

literally homeless population who use services.

a. The NSHAPC will include additional geographical coverage. Cities

with populations of 100,000 or less and areas outside of cities will be

included in the survey sample. (The 1987 Urban Institute survey only

included cities with populations over 100,000.)

b. The NSHAPC will include additional topic coverage. The client

questionnaire covers more topics and in greater depth than was covered

in the 1987 Urban Institute Survey. There are also some questions

similar to those in the 1987 survey so that a comparison may be made

between the results of the two surveys. (The 1987 Urban Institute

survey only asked about drug treatment. The NSHAPC asks about drug

treatment, as well as, types and frequencies of drugs used, and

information about mental health.)

c. The interview period for client interviews for the national

survey will be one month. The interview period for the Urban

Institute's 1987 survey was one week.

While the results from the Urban Institute's 1987 survey provide

characteristics of homeless persons who used services, it does not

include the NSHAPC's additional emphasis on geographical and topic

coverage as described in A.4. The 1987 study did not provide any

information on the types of programs and services offered. The Urban

Institute survey is also almost 10 years old. More recent information

is needed. Thus, there is no similar information available that could

be used or modified for use for the purposes described.

5. Minimizing Burden on Small Businesses

The Census Bureau plans on using the combined files from Federal

agencies and national organizations and advocacy groups to generate

listings of service providers for each sample area in the survey and

mail the listings to all service providers contacted by telephone and

all knowledgeable local persons. The knowledgeable local persons and

service providers will be asked to review the listing for completeness

of all service providers in their area and to add any missed service

providers to the list. The state homeless coordinator will only be

asked to review the listing of service provider (Form NSHAPC 100M). The

Census Bureau believes the file will provide an initial comprehensive

listing of service providers currently offering services to the

homeless thus reducing the burden of the service providers, government

contacts, and knowledgeable local persons. No small businesses will be

contacted.

6. Consequences of Less Frequent Collection

Not applicable. This is a one-time survey. Phase 1 will be

conducted from October 2, 1995 to January 15, 1996, and Phase 2 from

January 21 to March 30, 1996.

7. Consistency With 5 CFR 1320.6

The Census Bureau will collect these data in a manner consistent

with the guideline in 5 CFR 1320.6.

8. Consultations Outside the Agency

Consultations have been made with the following people:

Dr. Martha, Burt, The Urban Institute, 2100 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20037, Tel: (202) 857-8551

Ms. Lorraine Reilly (formerly of), The Urban Institute, 2100 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037, Tel: (202) 857-8551

Dr. Michael Dennis, Research Triangle Institute, Center for Social

Research and

[[Page 44557]]

Policy Analysis, P.O. Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194,

Tel: (919) 541-6429

Dr. Greg Owen, Wilder Foundation, Wilder Research Center, 1295

Bandana Blvd., North--Suite 210, St. Paul, MN 55108-5197, Tel: (612)

647-4612

Ms. Joanne Wiggens, U.S. Dept. of Education, 600 Independence

Avenue, SW--Room 4143, Washington, DC 20202, Tel: (202) 401-1958

Mr. Tom Fagen, U.S. Dept. of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW--

Room 2043, Washington, DC 20202, Tel: (202) 401-1682

Mr. John Pentecost, USDA--FmHA, Room 5345--South, MFHD--PD,

Washington, DC 20250, Tel: (202) 720-8983

Mr. Tom Sanders, USDA--FmHA, Room 5343--South, MFHD--PD, Washington,

DC 20250, Tel: (202) 720-1626

Ms. Amy Donoghue, USDA--FmHA--PAS, 3101 Park Center Drive--Room

1130, Alexandria, VA 22302, Tel: (703) 305-2920

Ms. Jean Whaley, Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh

Street, SW--Room 7267, Washington, DC 20410, Tel: (202) 708-1234

Ms. Jane Karadbil, Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, 451

Seventh Avenue, SW--Room 8112, Washington, DC 20410, Tel: (202) 708-

1537

Mr. Lafayette Grisby (formerly of), Dept. of Labor, Room N-5637, 200

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210, Tel: (202) 535-0677

Mr. John Heinberg, Dept. of Labor, Room N-5637, 200 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210, Tel: (202) 535-0682

Mr. David Lah, Dept. of Labor, Room N-5637, 200 Constitution Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20210, Tel: (202) 535-0682

Mr. Pete Dougherty, Homeless Programs Specialist, Dept. of Veterans

Affairs, 801 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, Tel: (202)

273-5716

Mr. Eric Lindblom (IIIC) (formerly of), Office of Mental Health,

Dept. of Veterans Affairs, 801 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC

20420, Tel: (202) 535-7311

Dr. Robert Rosenheck, MD, VA Medical Center, NEPEC--182, 950

Campbell Avenue, West Haven, CT 06516, Tel: (203) 937-3850

Ms. Cynthia Taeuber, Office of the Deputy Director, Bureau of the

Census, Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-4358

Ms. Annetta Clark, Special Places/Group Quarters Team, Office of the

Assistant Division Chief, Population Division, Bureau of the Census,

Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-2378

Ms. Denise Smith, Special Places/Group Quarters Team, Office of the

Assistant Division Chief, Population Division, Bureau of the Census,

Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-2378

Dr. Charles H. Alexander, Demographic Statistical Methods Division,

Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-4290

Mr. David Hubble, Victimization and Expenditure Branch, Demographic

Statistical Methods Division, Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC

20233, Tel: (301) 457-4239

Ms. Marjorie Dauphin, Victimization and Expenditure Branch,

Demographic Statistical Methods Division, Bureau of the Census,

Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-4190

Ms. Miriam Rosenthal (formerly of), Victimization and Expenditure

Branch, Demographic Statistical Methods Division, Bureau of the

Census, Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-4270

Mr. David Hornick, Victimization and Expenditure Branch, Demographic

Statistical Methods Division, Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC

20233, Tel: (301) 457-4190

Mr. John Bushery, Quality Assurance and Evaluation Branch,

Demographic Statistical Methods Division, Bureau of the Census,

Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-1915

Ms. Andrea Meier, Quality Assurance and Evaluation Branch,

Demographic Statistical Methods Division, Bureau of the Census,

Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-1983

Mr. Michael McMahon, Field Division, Bureau of the Census,

Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-4901

Mr. Chester Bowie, Demographic Surveys Division, Bureau of the

Census, Washington, DC 20233, Tel: (301) 457-3773

Mr. Steven Tourkin, Methods, Procedures and Quality Control Branch,

Demographic Surveys Division, Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC

20233, Tel: (301) 457-3791

Ms. Jacquie Lawing, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic

Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451

Seventh Street, SW, Suite 7204, Washington, DC 20410, Tel: (202)

708-2070

Mr. Mark Johnston, Senior Advisor on Homelessness, Department of

Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Suite 7274,

Washington, DC 20410, Tel: (202) 708-5528

Mr. Mike Roanhouse, Office of Special Needs Assistance, Department

of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Suite

7258, Washington, DC 20410, Tel: (202) 708-1234

Mr. James Hoben, Office of Policy Development and Research,

Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20410, Tel: (202) 708-0574

Mr. Keith Lively, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Program

Systems, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence

Avenue, SW., Room 447D, Washington, DC 20201, Tel: (202) 690-8774

Mr. Gerald Britten (formerly of), Deputy Assistant Secretary for

Program Systems, Department of Health and Human Services, 200

Independence Avenue, SW., Room 447D, Washington, DC 20201, Tel:

(202) 690-8774

Ms. Mary Ellen O'Connell, Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation, 200 Independence Avenue SW., Room 447D,

Washington, DC 20201, Tel: (202) 260-0391

Mr. Fred Osher (formerly of), Office of Programs for the Homeless

Mentally Ill, National Institute of Mental Health, Dept. of Health

and Human Services, Parklawn Bldg., Room 3C06, 5600 Fishers Lane,

Rockville, MD 20857, Tel: (301) 443-3706

Mr. Walter Leginski, Homeless Programs Branch, Center for Mental

Health Services, Parklawn Building, room 11c-05, Rockville, MD 20857

Dr. Robert Huebner, Ph.D., Health Services Research Branch, National

Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Dept. of Health and Human

Services, Willow Building, Suite 505, 600 Executive Boulevard,

Rockville, MD. 20892-7003, Tel: (301) 443-0786

Mr. Steve Bartolomei-Hill, Human Service Policy, Office of the

Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Dept. of Health and

Human Services, Hubert H. Humphrey Bldg., Room 410E, 200

Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20201, Tel: (202) 690-7148

Ms. Rhoda Davis, Office of Supplemental Security Income, Dept. of

Health and Human Services, Altmeyer Building, 6401 Security Blvd.,

Baltimore, MD 21235, Tel: (410) 965-6210

Ms. Terry Lewis, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families,

Administration for Children and Families, Dept. of Health and Human

Services, Mary E. Switzer Bldg., Room 2426, 330 C Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20201, Tel: (202) 205-8051

Dr. Joan Turek Brezina, Ph.D., Program Systems, Office of the

Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Dept. of Health and

Human Services, Hubert H. Humphrey Bldg., Room 444F, 200

Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20201, Tel: (202) 690-6141

Mr. Mike Jewell (formerly of), Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Planning and Evaluation, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Hubert

H. Humphrey Bldg--Room 447D, 200 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20201, Tel: (202) 690-7316

Ms. Peg Washnitzer, Office of Community Services, Administration for

Children and Families, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Aerospace

Bldg., 7th Floor, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447,

Tel: (202) 401-2333

Mr. Richard Chambers, Division of Intergovernmental Affairs, Health

Care Financing Administration, Dept. of Health and Human Services,

Hubert H. Humphrey Bldg., Room 410B, 200 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20201, Tel: (202) 690-6257

Ms. Joan Holloway, Health Resources and Services Administration,

Public Health Services, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Parklawn

Bldg., Room 9-12, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, Tel: (301)

443-8134

Ms. Marsha A. Martin (formerly of), Executive Director, Interagency

Council on the Homeless, 457 Seventh Street, NW., Washington, DC,

Tel: (202) 708-1480

[[Page 44558]]

Mr. George Ferguson, Interagency Council on the Homeless, 457

Seventh Street, NW., Washington, DC, Tel: (202) 708-1480

Ms. Della Hughes, National Network of Runaway and Youth Services,

1319 F Street, N.W., Suite 401, Washington, DC 20004, Tel: (202)

783-7949

Ms. Vera Johnson, SASHA Bruce Center Runaway Shelter, 1022 Maryland

Avenue, NE., Washington, DC 20002, Tel: (202) 675-9340

As a result of these consultations, all issues were resolved.

9. Assurance of Confidentiality

The provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 USC 552a) assure the

confidentiality of the data from this survey.

During Phase 2 of the national survey, the field representatives

will inform all service providers and respondents verbally of the

confidentiality of their responses and the voluntary nature of the

NSHAPC along with other information required by the Privacy Act of 1974

at the time of initial contact. As can be seen on the NSHAPC

questionnaire cover sheets (Attachment A), a statement of

confidentiality assurance is printed at the top of the form. Careful

procedures are followed by the Bureau of the Census to assure privacy

during the interview, and to protect the confidentiality of materials

generated during the course of the interview. Every Bureau of the

Census employee takes an oath and is subject to a jail sentence and a

fine for improperly disclosing any information that would identify an

individual or household. All field representatives are trained to

interview respondents in private. All questionnaires associated with

the NSHAPC national survey will be kept under secured conditions by the

Bureau of the Census.

10. Justification for Sensitive Questions

The NSHAPC 200(A) questionnaire has the following sensitive

questions:

Section 9--Question 94

Question 94 asks respondents how they get their food and where they

eat. The field representatives will read the response categories to the

respondent. One of the possible answers is ``trash cans''. When

planning services to feed the homeless population, it is critical to

understand where they get their food. We need to know the number of

persons who eat from trash cans.

Section 10--Question 96

Question 96 asks respondents about their medical condition. The

field representatives will read the response categories to the

respondent. Possible responses include ``test positive for ``HIV'',

``have AIDS'', and ``use drugs intravenously''. There is increasing

concern about the number of homeless persons with these conditions.

Information about these, and other conditions, is essential when

planning health care services for the homeless.

Section 11--Questions 119 c and d and 120 a-c

These questions ask about parental neglect and abuse. A great deal

of evidence suggest that parental neglect and abuse asked about in

questions 120a-c is implicated in runaway behavior and youth

homelessness. The answers to these questions will reveal the degree to

which the present homeless population has these experiences in their

background as potential contributing factors to their homelessness.

11. Cost

The total estimated cost for Phase 1 of the national survey is

$1,950,000. Cost for Phase 1, Steps 1 and 2 is $1,500,000. Cost to

collect detailed program and service level data (Step 3) is $450,000.

We compiled this estimate using individual estimates developed within

each Census Bureau division involved in this survey. Estimates are

based on the size of the sample and the length of the questionnaires.

Administrative overheads, design, printing, and mailing costs are

included.

The total estimated cost for Phase 2 is $2,200,000. The only cost

to the service providers and the service users (clients) is the time it

takes to complete the questionnaire.

12. Estimate of Respondent Burden

We estimate the average time to complete the NSHAPC-200A, Service

User Questionnaire to be 45 minutes. These estimates are based on in-

house testing and out-house testing of the questionnaire by the Census

Bureau. This is a total of 2,850 hours.

13. Reason for Change in Burden

Not Applicable. This is a new survey. There are, therefore, 0 hours

in the current OMB inventory.

14. Project Schedule

Beginning on October 1, 1995, the Census Bureau plans on

telephoning all service providers within sample areas to collect basic

information about programs offered. After the phone calls are

completed, the Census Bureau will mail the listings of service

providers by sample area and the NSHAPC--L(2)L letter to providers

contacted by telephone. A subsample of providers will also be asked to

provide more detailed information about the services they offer. After

conducting the CATI interviews, the Census Bureau will mail the

appropriate questionnaires, NSHAPC Form 100B to 100L, to the providers

in sample.

Census Bureau personnel also will contact individuals from federal

and state governments, agencies, organizations and knowledgeable local

persons and ask them to review the lists of service providers. The

Census Bureau will conduct these operations during October 1995 to

January 1996.

B. Collection of Information Employing Statistical Methods

1. Universe and Respondent Selection

The Census Bureau will conduct the national survey in 76 primary

sampling areas. The Census Bureau will interview all service providers

in the sample areas to collect basic information about the programs

offered. This is a total of 25,000 interviews. The Census Bureau will

select a subsample of providers within those areas and conduct detailed

mail interviews for the programs and services offered by the provider.

This is a total of 5,000 providers.

Phase 1 of the survey will provide information on the types of

programs and services available to homeless people. Phase 2 of the

survey will provide estimates and detailed characteristics about

homeless service users, including the literally homeless. Most research

to date has been conducted in urban and suburban areas. For such areas,

there is a growing consensus among researchers that a service-based

survey design with sampling over time (vs one-time sampling) will give

a good representation of the homeless population. For nonmetropolitan

areas, the consensus is that an expansion of the types of service

providers is needed to cover the homeless adequately. The Department of

Agriculture asked us to increase the number of sample areas and the

Census Bureau identified ways to design the survey to produce

reasonably precise estimates of rural homelessness. However, it should

be noted that the procedures for measuring rural homelessness will be

less sophisticated than our procedures in urban areas. There is much to

learn about rural areas and the NSHAPC is an excellent opportunity to

collect information about rural homelessness. In the nonmetropolitan

areas the sampling frame is the set of Community Assistance Program

(CAP) ``Catchment Areas'', wherever they exist. CAP catchment areas are

counties or local areas grouped together to receive

[[Page 44559]]

funding and provide services to the needy and are served by a CAP

agency. Our preliminary research indicates that CAP agencies are a good

source for lists of services in the nonmetropolitan areas they cover.

In a few nonmetropolitan areas where CAPs do not exist, the sampling

frame is the set of counties or groups of counties.

2. Procedures for Collecting Information

Sampled Service Providers

The Census Bureau will conduct the survey in 76 sample areas; this

is the first stage of sampling. Within each sample area, a

comprehensive list of service providers will be developed. All

providers will furnish basic, core information on programs offered.

Phase 1 also includes a second stage of sampling where a subset of

service providers will be selected within each sample area to be asked

more detailed information about their programs and services.

Sample of Clients (Service Users)

In Phase 2, a sample of clients will be selected for interviewing.

To facilitate the sampling, we are asking providers to complete Form

NSHAPC **, Roster for Provider Facility. This form will help ensure all

clients at the housing programs are listed. This is a three-stage

sample, where the first-stage sample corresponds to the same 76

geographic areas discussed above for the provider-interview sample. In

the second stage, a sample of providers will be selected in each sample

area but only in designated programs. In the third stage, a sample of

the clients at each of the sample provider facilities will be selected.

Estimation

In Phase 1, the estimates needed for proportions of providers

falling in different categories.

The estimates needed from Phase 2 consist of proportions of clients

falling in different categories. The base for these proportions can be

derived in two ways:

a. Weighted estimates of the average number of persons using

services on any given day in February;

b. Weighted estimates of the total number of persons using services

at any time during February.

Other estimates can be derived from these. For example, the weights

applied to obtain estimates (a) or (b) could be used for estimates only

of those service-using persons who are homeless according to different

definitions of homelessness. For the national survey, it is likely that

we will give a range of estimates, corresponding to different

assumptions about coverage and multiplicity biases.

The weights for (a) will be standard survey weights based on the

selection probability, with adjustments for nonresponse. There will be

a ``multiplicity'' adjustment to reduce the relative weight of people

who have more than one chance of selection because they use more than

one type of program, for example, both shelters and soup kitchens, as

determined from the questionnaire.

For (b) we are considering three estimation methods. One purpose of

the pretest was to get information to evaluate these methods.

Method 1: The weight will be proportional to the number of

consecutive days prior to the interview (up to 28 days) that the person

did not use a shelter (for the shelter sample) or soup kitchen (for the

soup kitchen sample), and likewise for other types of programs. For

example, a person who says this is their first night in any shelter in

the last 28 days will be given a weight 28 times the typical weight of

a person who was in a shelter the night before. (Intuitively, the

method assumes that for every person we find who is just entering

homelessness, there are 27 others whom we miss because we did not

happen to interview them on their first day.) There is a precise

mathematical justification for the method as giving an unbiased

estimate of the total number of service users during 28-day periods

centered around February, making some assumptions that overall patterns

of service use are fairly constant throughout the month.

This is intended to be our primary method. The potential drawback

of this method would be if the pretest finds too many people who are

just starting to use services after a long absence, resulting in too

many large weights. Limited research from 1990 census evaluation

projects suggests that this should not be a problem. However, if this

turns out to be a problem we would either use the Method 2 or use

Method 1 with a 7-day ``window'' instead of a 28-day ``window''.

Method 2: The weight will be inversely proportional to the number

of days in the last week the client used a shelter (for the shelter

sample) or soup kitchen (for the soup kitchen sample), and likewise for

other types of programs. This is the procedure used in the 1987 Urban

Institute study. We will ask this question for comparability with that

survey. This approach has two disadvantages. First, even if the

questions are answered accurately, the method has a mathematical bias

unless each person has the same pattern of service use each week.

Second, it is not reasonable to ask a person for his/her average

shelter use for an entire month, so the method cannot give direct

estimates for the total number using services during a period longer

than a week.

Method 3: Capture-recapture. We are not using capture-recapture

estimation. It would require selecting the sample independently each

day, so that there would be a chance that a person or small shelter

might come into sample numerous times.

The Urban Institute and the Census Bureau developed the survey

design. As part of Joint Statistical Agreements between the Urban

Institute and the Census Bureau, the following operational papers were

developed. Each are available from the Census Bureau of request.

Joint Statistical Agreement 91-30

--Developing a Provider List--November 27, 1991

--Methodological Issues and Options--November 27, 1991

--Options for Evaluating Coverage in Urban Areas--December 10, 1991

--Ranking of Data Items by Federal Agencies--December 10, 1991

Joint Statistical Agreement 92-01

--Draft Questionnaire and Agency Data Needs--March 26, 1992

--Developing Provider Lists for a National Homeless Survey--March 26,

1992

--Proposed Methodology for a National Homeless Survey--March 26, 1992

--Questions for Unduplicating and for Estimating a Month-Long Point

Prevalence and Annual Prevalence--March 26, 1992

--Developing Estimates of the Number of Service Providers in Different

Strata--April 10, 1992

--Options for Evaluating Survey Coverage in Urban Areas, and

Preliminary

--Information on Rural Areas--April 10, 1992

Joint Statistical Agreement 92-04

--Mechanics of List Development and Additional Field and Survey

Procedures--August 14, 1992

--Estimates of Service Providers and Users in Non-MSA Areas, and

Options for

--Evaluating Survey Coverage in These Areas--August 4, 1992

3. Method to Maximize Response

a. Survey Frame for Client Interviews

New research indicates the greatest improvement in coverage of the

homeless population is through

[[Page 44560]]

sampling this population over time. (e.q., soup kitchens and shelters)

and outreach programs during a four-week period. The NSHAPC survey

design uses a service-based methodology. A ``service user'' is anyone

who uses generic services or shelters, soup kitchens, or other services

for the homelsss. The survey frame will include shelters, soup

kitchens, outreach programs, and possibly other programs. A ``non-

service user'' is anyone who does not use any of these services.

According to the 1987 Urban Institute study, the shelter frame

covers homeless people who use shelters, which may be 35 to 40 percent

of the homeless on any given night, and about 50 percent over the

course of a week. If conducted on a one-night basis, the shelters'

sampling frame taken by itself will miss many homeless who use shelters

infrequently, homeless service users who do not use shelters but do use

soup kitchens and other services, and homeless people who do not use

any services. If data collection involves repeated samples from the

same shelters over the course of a week or a month, a considerably

higher proportion of the homeless (perhaps as high as 70 percent) is

likely to be captured through a methodology based on shelters.

The soup kitchen sampling frame, taken by itself over the course of

a week, will capture a proportion of very poor people residing in

conventional dwellings who may turn out to be at imminent risk of

homelessness. According to the 1987 Urban Institute study, 43 percent

of soup kitchen users are not literally homeless. When shelter and soup

kitchen frames are combined during the course of a week, the shelter

and soup kitchen frames will probably cover about 70 percent of the

literally homeless and a small but unknown proportion of the service-

using at-risk population. When data collection covers a month (as

planned for the national survey), the coverage will be even greater--

perhaps as high as 85-90 percent of the literally homeless.

In many cities, the array of services for the homeless include one

or more outreach programs. These programs may be operated by a shelter,

soup kitchen, drop-in center, health care center, neighborhood center,

or other service facility. Their target population is homeless people

who do not routinely use shelters or soup kitchens. The outreach

programs typically distribute food, and sometimes blankets or warm

clothing. Outreach teams typically follow a route that covers the known

locations frequented by homeless street people, or where homeless

street people assemble at the time they know the ``food wagon'' will

come by. Including outreach programs in a design as a sampling frame

allows one to maintain the control and efficiency associated with

sampling service programs and their users, while still reaching the

``reachable'' proportion of the street homeless population. Outreach

programs are probably the best single source of information about the

hidden street population and the most cost effective opportunity to

make contact with the street population. Additional enumeration of

street locations and encampments yields little overall coverage

improvement when shelters, soup kitchens, and outreach programs are

interviewed over time.

The NSHAPC is designed to cover as much of the literally homeless

population as possible and still meet the cost considerations of the

sponsors. From previous research, it appears that up to 90 percent

coverage of the literally homeless population is achievable with the

shelter/soup kitchen/outreach programs methodology conducted during a

winter month. This service-based methodology will be considerably

cheaper and easier than implementing a street enumeration to attempt to

get the last 10 percent. In addition, even if the resources were

committed to achieve full coverage, there is no guarantee we would get

the last 10 percent.

b. Incentives to Participate in the Survey

Private university researchers, usually with funding from federal

grants, have conducted past homeless surveys. In the past, researchers

have paid respondents to participate in a survey, usually about $20.

The NSHAPC survey will impose an extra burden on the service providers

who are asked to participate in the survey since they will: participate

in pre-contact meeting(s) with Census Bureau regional office staff;

provide space at their facility for the Census Bureau's field

representatives to interview sample persons on scheduled days and at

scheduled times; and administer cash payments to the survey

respondents. The NSHAPC survey also will impose an extra burden on the

selected sample of homeless persons because they will be asked to

remain at the service provider's facility for an interview that may

take 45 minutes and respond to personal questions. Given these

circumstances, we feel it is appropriate to offer a monetary incentive

of $200 to each service provider and $10 to each respondent to

guarantee their cooperation in the survey.

While there is no research specifically on the effects of paying

the homeless, there is a strong research basis for the use of monetary

incentives to increase the cooperation of economically disadvantaged

populations. Two studies using random assignment have carefully

examined the impact of incentives on survey cooperation.

The first study, by Stuart H. Kerachsky and Charles D. Mallor

(1981), examined the use of incentives in surveys of Job Corps

participants and a comparison group. Five thousand eight hundred people

participated in the study. The survey population consisted of

economically disadvantaged youths aged 16-21 at the beginning of the

study. (The survey respondents were interviewed 3 times over 18

months). Survey respondents were offered either no incentive or a $5

payment for their participation in the 30 minute survey. (The 1991

equivalent value of the incentive payment is approximately $15.)

The impact of the monetary incentives was determined by comparing

the survey response rates and other outcomes for the experimental group

(the $5 incentive group) to those for the control group (the $0

incentive group). The most notable findings from this survey on the

effect of respondent payments are:

Response rates increased by offering a monetary incentive.

[More people were located (10 percent) and completed the survey (5

percent) when an incentive was offered.]

Item nonresponse rates decreased. (Fewer ``Don't Know''

responses.)

The cost per completed interview was smaller for the group

that was offered an inventive.

The second study, by the Educational testing Service (1991),

examined the use of monetary incentives in the pilot test of the

National Adult Literacy Survey. The sample population of 2,000 included

a nationally representative sample of adults aged 16 and older living

in households. The sample persons completed a 15 minute background

questionnaire and a timed 45 minute test of literacy skills. The

respondents received a monetary incentive of $0, $20, or $35 for

participating in the survey. The impact was of the monetary incentives

was determined by comparing the survey response rates and other

outcomes for the experimental groups (the $20 and $35 incentive groups)

to those for the control group (the $0) incentive group). The most

notable findings from this survey on the effect of respondent payments

are:

Response rates for economically disadvantaged, minority,

and high school dropout populations are

[[Page 44561]]

significantly improved by offering monetary incentives.

The use of monetary incentives reduced item nonresponse

and data collection costs.

Many other studies have been done and articles written

documenting the effect of monetary incentives on response rates.

A study by Miller, Kennedy, and Bryant (1972) of the 1971

Health and Nutrition Examination Survey showed that offering a monetary

incentive increased the response rate from 70 percent to 82 percent.

A study by Chromy and Horvitz (1978) suggests that

response rates were found to be unacceptably low when no monetary

incentive was used. However, the participation rate increased from 70

to 85 percent with the use of monetary incentives.

A study by Berk, Mathiowetz, Ward, and White (1988)

discusses how monetary incentives improved the response rates of

adults.

During 1991 and 1992, the University of Michigan Survey Research

Center, examined the effects of monetary incentives on the willingness

of youth to participate in the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System

(YRBS) interview and on their motivation to answer YRBS questions as

accurately and truthfully as possible. The study involved focus groups

with about 6 to 8 teenagers (ages 12-19) in each group. The focus

groups included teenagers from a range of ages, racial, and ethnic

backgrounds and both sexes. In order to assess the impact of monetary

incentives on respondent participation and the motivation group,

interviews with both the youth and their parents occurred. A split

sample experiment was conducted during the pretest interviews in order

to more formally assess the effect of monetary incentives on respondent

participation. The most notable findings from the YRBS on the effect of

respondent payments are:

Youth who are aware that they will be paid for completing

an interview are more likely to agree to participate (the cooperation

rate increased from 79 percent to 90 percent because of the respondent

being paid for participating in the survey).

Note: The youth group participants stated that monetary

compensation (the youth received $20 for participating in the study)

was important to their keeping their appointments to participate in

the study.

Youth feel that monetary compensation increases the

seriousness with which they approach the task of answering questions

and increases the accuracy and truthfulness of their responses. This

point is particularly relevant, given the personal nature of the NSHAPC

questionnaire (i.e., drug and alcohol use and mental health status) and

the fact that the NSHAPC questionnaire will be administered at the

service provider facilities.

The first two studies show that the response rates for economically

disadvantaged populations, which include homeless persons who use

services, are significantly improved by offering monetary incentives.

While the University of Michigan survey only dealt with the effects of

monetary incentives on youth, the results not only show that youth

respondents are more willing to cooperate when they receive payment but

that the parents of the youth also feel that payment is beneficial in

obtaining the respondents' participation. The results from this survey

are noteworthy since the respondents for the NSHAPC will include both

youth and adults.

No surveys have been conducted with homeless persons to actually

compare the response rates of homeless persons who receive a monetary

incentive for participation to those homeless persons who do not

receive a monetary incentive for participation. However, there have

been numerous studies conducted dealing with the homeless population,

in which respondents were paid.

In a paper presented at the Fannie Mae Annual Housing conference in

Washington, DC on May 14, 1991, Dr. Michael Dennis of the Research

Triangle Institute presented a chronological summary of ten relevant

studies on homelessness completed since 1983. (See Attachment D for a

list of these studies.) In all ten studies, the respondents received

payment for participating in the study. In February 1991, the Research

Triangle Institute conducted the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area Drug

Study (DC*MADS) and paid participants $10 along with offering them

coffee, juices, Pop Tarts, and/or toothbrushes for taking the time to

participate in the survey. The Research Triangle Institute also gave a

$35 food donation to the service providers each morning they sampled at

the provider's facility. In October 1991, the Wilder Foundation

completed a statewide enumeration of homeless persons in Minnesota.

Respondents received a $5 cash payment for the half-hour interview.

These past practices of paying respondents has direct implications

on the NSHAPC survey design and on response rates of the NSHAPC. The

success of the survey is dependent upon the cooperation of the service

providers and respondents.

(1) Cooperation of Service Providers

Most service providers require (or prefer) respondents to be

compensated for their participation in the survey. Paying the service

providers is also critical to guarantee their cooperation. The

cooperation of the service providers is essential for the following

reasons:

(a) Providers determine if the voluntary survey will be conducted

at the facility. They also determine logistical arrangements for

conducting the interview.

(b) Providers must agree to allow respondents to remain at the

facility (e.g., after eating) to be interviewed. Normally, persons are

required to immediately leave the site once services are provided.

(c) Providers often have significant influence with homeless

persons seeking their services.

(2) Respondent Cooperation

The survey design of the NSHAPC requires sampling persons at the

facility. Paying respondents is critical to ensure that designated

sample persons remain at the facility to be interviewed once they have

used the services offered. Without payment, there is little incentive

for respondents to remain on site for an interview that may take 45

minutes and asks personal questions, such as drug and alcohol use,

mental health status, living conditions, victimizations, and

imprisonment.

In our consultations with outside experts in this field, all

persons indicated that paying respondents to participate in the survey

was critical to achieving acceptable response rates. All experts agree

that we should expect high nonresponse rates if respondents are not

compensated for their participation.

To ensure the cooperation of the service providers and the

respondents, we recommend that a Memorandum of Understanding (see

Attachment E) be entered into by the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the

service facility. Under this agreement, the Census Bureau will

compensate the service providers for their help. For example, the

Census Bureau will ask the service provider to:

Participate in pre-contact meeting(s) with Census Bureau

regional office staff to make logistical arrangements to conduct the

survey.

Make space available at the facility to interview sample

persons.

Agree to allow the field representatives to conduct

interviews on scheduled days and at scheduled times

[[Page 44562]]

according to the statistical sampling schemes designed for the NSHAPC.

Administer cash payments of $10 to survey respondents.

Administering cash payments this way alleviates safety concerns about

placing the field representatives and survey respondents at risk of

crime.

We believe that the studies summarized here make a strong case for

the use of monetary incentives to guarantee the cooperation of the

service providers and the respondents.

4. Contacts for Statistical Aspects and Data Collection

The following individuals are being consulted on statistical

aspects of the survey design:

Dr. Martha Burt, The Urban Institute, 2100 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20037, Tel: (202) 857-8551

Dr. Michael Dennnis, Research Triangle Institute, Center for Social

Research and Policy Analysis, PO Box 12194, Research Triangle Park,

NC 27709-2194, Tel: (919) 541-6429

Dr. Charles H. Alexander, Demographic Statistical Methods Division,

Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC 20233, (301) 457-4290

The Census Bureau will collect the data for this survey. Mr. Steven

Tourkin is responsible for the collection of all data and is the Census

Bureau contact person for the survey.

Mr. Steven C. Tourkin, Demographic Surveys Division, Bureau of the

Census, Washington, DC 20233, (301) 457-3791

BILLING CODE 4210-62-M

[[Page 44563]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.000

[[Page 44564]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.001

[[Page 44565]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.002

[[Page 44566]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.003

[[Page 44567]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.004

[[Page 44568]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.005

[[Page 44569]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.006

[[Page 44570]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.007

[[Page 44571]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.008

[[Page 44572]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.009

[[Page 44573]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.010

[[Page 44574]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.011

[[Page 44575]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.012

[[Page 44576]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.013

[[Page 44577]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.014

[[Page 44578]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.015

[[Page 44579]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.016

[[Page 44580]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.017

[[Page 44581]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.018

[[Page 44582]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.019

[[Page 44583]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.020

[[Page 44584]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.021

[[Page 44585]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.022

[[Page 44586]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.023

[[Page 44587]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.024

[[Page 44588]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.025

[[Page 44589]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.026

[[Page 44590]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.027

[[Page 44591]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.028

[[Page 44592]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.029

[[Page 44593]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.030

[[Page 44594]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.031

[[Page 44595]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.032

[[Page 44596]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.033

[[Page 44597]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.034

[[Page 44598]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.035

[[Page 44599]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.036

[[Page 44600]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.037

[[Page 44601]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.038

[[Page 44602]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.039

[[Page 44603]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.040

[[Page 44604]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.041

[[Page 44605]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.042

[[Page 44606]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.043

[[Page 44607]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.044

[[Page 44608]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.045

[[Page 44609]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.046

[[Page 44610]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.047

[[Page 44611]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.048

[[Page 44612]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.049

[[Page 44613]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.050

[[Page 44614]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.051

[[Page 44615]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.052

[[Page 44616]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.053

[[Page 44617]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.054

[[Page 44618]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.055

[[Page 44619]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.056

[[Page 44620]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.057

[[Page 44621]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.058

[[Page 44622]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.059

[[Page 44623]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.060

[[Page 44624]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.061

[[Page 44625]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.062

[[Page 44626]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.063

[[Page 44627]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.064

[[Page 44628]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.065

[[Page 44629]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.066

[[Page 44630]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.067

[[Page 44631]]

[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN28AU95.068

[FR Doc. 95-21111 Filed 8-25-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210-62-C