Items that have been deleted can be seen by clicking the Deleted link.
8.3A.8a TITLE IV-E, Foster Care Maintenance Payments Program, Eligibility, Facilities requirements, child-care institution
1.When and under what conditions can a public agency or unit of government claim reimbursement under title IV-E for multiple facilities operated as licensed public child care institutions for 25 or fewer children?
2.An inquiry from a State described a situation in which a local governmental unit is operating a residential child care facility that consists of several cottages on a common plot of land. One of the cottages, licensed by the State, has a licensed capacity of 25 or fewer children. Another cottage is also licensed, but for more than 25. The question is: are the costs of care in the cottage of 25 or less eligible for Federal financial participation (FFP), since it has an individual license and is not considered, for purposes of licensing, as a part of the other cottage housing more than 25 children?
5.If an otherwise eligible title IV-E child is placed in a child care institution that has locked living units for the child's benefit or safety, does this render the facility "physically restrictive," such that the child is ineligible for title IV-E?
6.Under section 471(a)(10)(B) of the Act, there must be at least one "onsite official...designated to be the caregiver who is authorized to apply the reasonable and prudent parent standard" as a condition of a contract the title IV-E agency enters into with a child care institution. May the onsite official(s) be someone affiliated with the child's case (such as the child care institution's case manager for the child)?
Answer: Only public child-care institutions which are clearly and definitely separate entities serving 25 or fewer children are covered under the provisions in section 472 of the Social Security Act. Child care institutions operated by a public agency or unit of government must be separate entities that are managed or administered as individual programs complete in themselves.
In addition to a license or approval for 25 or fewer children, other criteria that are indicative of an independent, discrete facility are: (a) separate budget; (b) separate on-site management, including control over personnel, i. e. hiring and firing; (c) separate control over intake and discharge; (d) separate control over development of the child care program; and (e) separate identification of program/treatment purposes and goals.
Although cottages on the same plot of land are not considered to be separate entities, physical proximity to other facilities is not in itself a factor that would disqualify an institution that has otherwise demonstrated its autonomy. For example, a county may operate several small institutions throughout the county within a short distance from each other. If they are not on a common lot and do not share the same address or history of being one institution, it is possible that the costs of care in each facility may be allowable for FFP, if all other conditions, as outlined above, are met by the institution.
Answer: No. Despite the fact the individual cottage is licensed for 25 or fewer children, it is considered to be part of a single larger institution. The cottages, as described, are located on a common plot of land and are operated and managed by a single administration. Decentralization of living units from one large building to several smaller cottages does not qualify the institution under the definition of "child-care institution" in section 472 (c) of the Social Security Act. Therefore, the costs of foster care maintenance for children living in a public institution of this type, with a total population of over 25, may not be claimed for FFP under title IV-E.
Congressional intent is clear in the Senate Committee Report (No. 96-336 p. 16): "the committee expects that the administration will closely monitor claims for reimbursement under this authority to assure that payments are not made with respect to care in large institutions which have made superficial changes, such as the establishment of a 'group home' wing within a larger institution. The committee intends that only institutions which are clearly and definitely separate entities serving 25 or fewer children will be covered by the provision."
In addition, the House Conference Report (No. 96-136 p.54) stated that foster care payments for children placed in large public institutions would be disallowed, "even though a wing on the institution, a dormitory, or a cottage on the grounds of the institution may have 25 or fewer residents."
Answer: Section 472 (c)(2) of the Social Security Act (the Act) defines "child-care institution". The word "primarily" is used to modify the use of the facility for detention purposes. The following questions are asked when determining the "primarily" issue: (a) Who operates the facility? (b) For what purposes does it exist? (c) Is it licensed or approved? If so, for what use and by whom? (d) From whom does it receive its major financial resources? (e) What type of children are residents? (f) Would it be viable without the need to house children adjudicated delinquent? (g) Is the facility physically restrictive?
In addition to these questions, the Department would look to the specific facts of a given situation. However, it is important to keep in mind that separation of serious juvenile offenders from foster care children (including status offenders) is a most significant practice issue. To expose a dependent child to the potentially negative influence of delinquent children, would usually be considered an inappropriate foster care placement decision.
Answer: Formerly, title IV-E foster care maintenance payments for placements in child-care institutions were restricted to public or private nonprofit institutions. Effective August 22, 1996 with the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, title IV-E reimbursement became available for State foster care maintenance expenditures incurred through placements made in eligible private "for-profit" child-care institutions.
Answer: Not necessarily. A facility that has locked living units may meet the Federal definition of a child care institution enabling the State to claim title IV-E on behalf of a child. The statute at section 472 (c)(2) of the Social Security Act requires the State to place the child in a child care institution that meets certain statutory and regulatory requirements. The law stipulates that a child care institution shall not include detention facilities "or any other facility operated primarily for the detention of children who are determined to be delinquent". The definition of child care institution in Federal regulations at 45 CFR 1355.20 states that:
[A] Detention facility in the context of the definition of child care institution in section 472 (c)(2) of the [Social Security] Act means a physically restricting facility for the care of children who require secure custody pending court adjudication, court disposition, execution of a court order or after commitment.
It is clear that States may not claim title IV-E for a child if the facility is "physically restrictive" in that it is used primarily to detain children who require secure custody. If a facility is not used primarily for this purpose, but the facility has some restrictions for the benefit or safety of the child, then the State may make title IV-E claims on behalf of an otherwise eligible child placed there.
While the State may claim title IV-E for a child placed in a child care institution that is secured for his or her benefit or safety, we want to note one caveat. The Departmental Appeals Board (California Department of Social Services Decision No. 960) noted in its decision that "a mixture of detention and treatment is common in juvenile law." Adding a treatment component to a facility that is used primarily to secure delinquent children does not render the child care institution consistent with the strictures of title IV-E.
Answer: Yes. Officials of the child care institution affiliated with the child's case, such as the child care institution's case manager, may be a designated "onsite" official. The person must be trained in how to use and apply the reasonable and prudent parent standard in the same manner as prospective foster parents are trained.
Please send all comments and Web feedback to Feedback.