Presentation on theme: "PBMA Conference 2006 Revenue Review Title IV-E, S 3525, TCM/MAA Slides Prepared by Al Lindeman."— Presentation transcript:
PBMA Conference 2006 Revenue Review Title IV-E, S 3525, TCM/MAA Slides Prepared by Al Lindeman
2 Basics Title IV-E –Of the Social Security Act (42 USC 671-675) http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/#sections http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/#sections Created in 1962 (AFDC) Major Revision 1980 (PL 96-272) –Administrative Claiming for “preventive activities” Significant Revision 1997 (Adoptions & Safe Families Act) Final Rule: January 25, 2000 – Revision in Audit and disallowance procedures
3 Basics PL 96-272 –Maintenance: Provides federal assistance to help pay for foster care when needed for AFDC families –Administrative: Provides federal participation in costs of services intended to eliminate the need for foster care or shorten the period of foster care
6 Basics CPOC Web Site –http://www.cpoc.orghttp://www.cpoc.org –Guidebook Procedures Forms Case plans –Brief history of title IV-E claiming –Links to CDSS documents
7 Basics Ways to Maximize Federal Funds –Maximize number of wards in foster care who are documented as eligible for federal assistance Timely court findings and orders http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/pdffiles/JRTA-4EFindings.pdf Provide good info for AFDC eligibility determination Clear documentation of reasonable candidacy –Accurately track claimable costs Sound time study procedures Sound time study practices Sound Cost Allocation Plan (DAB Decision 2010 below)
8 Basics Federal Funding Formulas –Maintenance Cost x 50% for federally eligible kids (remaining 50% split 40%/60% by state/county) –Administration Allowable costs x 50% x fed eligibility rate (fed eligibility rate = # of kids in foster care who are getting 50% of maintenance costs paid by federal $ divided by total number of kids in foster care)
9 Basics Factors Determining Federal Eligibility –Citizenship / legal residence –Court findings and orders –Home from which removed –AFDC criteria (income / resources) –Completion of case plan within 30-60 day limit (failure to meet deadline means case is 100% county cost)
10 Basics Allowable Administrative Costs –Cost of activities 45 CFR 1356.60 –On behalf of eligible children Those in foster care Reasonable candidates for foster care –DAB Decision 844 –ACYF PA 01-02 –DAB Decisions 1428 & 1783 –S 1932
11 Basics Reasonable Candidates –PA 01-02 Documentation Requirements Case Plans (based on assessments) –Division 31 CDSS Manual of Policy & Procedure –Title IV-E Guidebook (www.cpoc.org) Appendices B & B1www.cpoc.org Re-Documentation of reasonable candidacy every six months or less
12 Basics Reasonable Candidates –DAB Decisions 844 (ACYF PA 87-05) (CFL 90-91-58) 1428 (New York – Abuse/Neglect Referrals) 1783 (Missouri - Claims by contracted CBOs) 1899 (Missouri – Claims for court personnel) 2010 (Arkansas – Claims for IT services) –(http://www.hhs.gov/dab/search.html)
13 Current Unresolved Issues S 1932 –Youths in “ineligible facilities” Payment for “not more than 1 calendar month when a child moves from a facility not eligible for payments under this part” into an eligible foster care facility” (42 USC 672 (i)) –“Imminent” vs. “serious” risk of foster care (S 1932 [Sec. 7403(a)] vs. DAB Decision 1428 & CWPM Manual 8.1D, Q2)
14 Current Unresolved Issues Indian Child Welfare Act –AB 575 –Enrique O, CA 5 th Appellate District, March 2006 –Standing Order SACTO Co. Juvenile Ct. (November 28, 2005) –Distinction drawn between dependency and delinquency foster care cases - impact on federal reviews?
15 Current Unresolved Issues Who pays disallowances resulting from federal reviews? –Final Rule January 25, 2000 (Penalty levied on state as a whole) –CFL 90/91-58 (county reviewed pays) How can reviews/disallowances be initiated?
16 Potential Grant Opportunity S 3525 –Federal Grants under title IV-B –Funding for regional teams to reduce impact of substance abuse on placement populations –$500,000 to $1,000,000 per grant –Grant duration: 2 to 5 years –$40,000,000 nation wide in 2007 http://thomas.loc.gov
17 Evolving Relationships Probation / Welfare Departments / CDSS –Legacy of CFL 90/91-58 –Implications of new review and disallowance procedures introduced by “final rule” of 1/25/2000 –Implications of DAB Decision 1899
18 TCM/MAA Update Discussion –Federal Legislation? –Number of departments participating? –Are current CPOC guidelines adequate?
19 That’s All Folks Al Lindeman can be contacted at email@example.com