Measuring Improper Authorizations for Payment in the Child Care Program:
Improper Authorization for Payment Data Collection Instructions [Approved August 31, 2007]

Download editable Word document (1.66 MB) or view in PDF (766KB) in PDF format.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING STATE IMPROPER AUTHORIZATIONS FOR PAYMENT REPORT

All States are required to complete and submit this report in accordance with these instructions on behalf of the State agency administering the Child Care and Development Fund.

Due Dates: This report must be submitted every three federal fiscal years on or before June 30 of the reporting year.

Distribution: Submit by email a copy of the State Improper Authorizations for Payment Report to the Regional Child Care Manager in your ACF Regional Office. The original signature page (with original signatures) must also be submitted to the Regional Child Care Manager.

Part I. Program Assurances and Certifications

States insert identifying information and signature of the agent authorized to assure and certify that:

1. The data collection process, including case record reviews, adhered to all requirements of the "Measuring Improper Authorizations for Payment in the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Program" instructions and regulations at 45 CFR 98 Subpart K;

2. The reviews were not conducted by persons who make or approve the eligibility determinations or be under the supervision of persons responsible for eligibility determinations;

3. All reviewers have been trained to ensure that the review process is consistent with State policies and that there is consistency within the State in interpretation of what is an error;

4. The State agrees to retain Record Review Worksheets, Data Entry Forms, the State Improper Authorizations for Payment Report and any revisions, and any other records pertinent to the case reviews and submission of error rate reports for five years from the date of submission of the State Improper Authorizations for Payment Report or final revision submitted, whichever date is later; and

5. The State understands that this information, including the sampled case records and calculations, are subject to Federal review.

Part II. Error Measures Reporting

General Instructions

Round all entries to the nearest dollar. Omit cents. If .50 cents or more round up to the nearest dollar. If .49 cents or less round down to the nearest dollar. Note that the term "authorization" means subsidies authorized during eligibility determination/redetermination. (See Glossary.)

1. Number of cases sampled – The sample size for all states is set at 271 (or 276) cases.

2. Total amount of authorizations for payment in cases selected for sampling in the review period – Compute the sum of all authorizations for payment for the 271 (or 276) sampled cases. The amount of payment authorized is captured on Line 10 of each of the 271 Data Entry Forms.

3. Total number of sampled cases with improper authorizations for payment – Compute the sum of all cases with either an Overauthorization or Underauthorization. This would be the total number of cases with an amount other than "0" in Line 7 of the Data Entry Form.

4. Total amount of improper authorizations for payment for the review period – Compute the sum of all improper authorizations for payment listed in Line 7 of the Data Entry Form.

4A. Total amount of improper underauthorizations for payment for the review period - Compute the sum of all improper authorizations for payment listed in Line 7 of the Data Entry Form that also have a "U" listed in Line 8 of the Data Entry Form.

4B. Total amount of improper overauthorizations for payment for the review period - Compute the sum of all improper authorizations for payment listed in Line 7 of the Data Entry Form that also have an ")" listed in Line 8 of the Data Entry Form.

5. Total number of improper authorizations for payment due to missing or insufficient documentation – Compute the sum of all cases with a “Yes” coding in Line 9 of the Data Entry Form.

6. Percentage of cases with an error – Divide the total number of all cases with an error (any case with an error coding in Line 6 of the Data Entry Form) by 271 (or 276) and multiply by 100.

7. Percentage of cases with an improper authorization for payment – Divide the total number of all cases with an authorization error (see #3 above) by 271 (or 276) and multiply by 100.

8. Percentage of improper authorizations for payment (for the review period) – Compute the sum of all amounts listed in Line 7 of the Data Entry Forms (see #4 above) divided by the sum of all authorizations for payment for the 271 (or 276) sampled cases (see #2 above) multiplied by 100. Add Underauthorizations to (not subtract from) the total of Overauthorizations.

9. Average amount of improper authorization for payment – Compute the sum of all amounts listed in Line 7 of the Data Entry Forms (see #4 above) divided by the total number of cases with an amount other than zero in Line 7 of the Data Entry Form (see # 3 above).

10. Estimated annual amount of improper authorizations for payment– Multiply the percentage of authorizations made in error for the review period (see # 8 above) by the total dollar amount of child care authorizations during the 12 month review period to reflect the proportion of these funds that are CCDF funds..

If a State combines (pools) funds and conducted its review based on a sample drawn from a universe of cases served by these pooled funds, the State shall calculate the total dollar amount of child care authorizations in one of two ways:

• By applying the pooling factor found on the more recent ACF-800 reporting form to calculate the total dollar amount; or
• By applying a pooling factor different from that found on the most recent ACF-800 reporting form.

10A.Check the appropriate response.

1. Review not based on a sample drawn from pooled funds.
2. Review based on a sample drawn from pooled funds and state has applied the pooling factor found on the most recent ACF-800 reporting form.
3. Pooling factor from the most recent ACF-800 reporting form, if applicable.

10B. If the State checks #1 or #2 in 10A, skip 10B and proceed to #11. If the State did not check #1 or #2 in 10A, complete #1 and #2 in 10B.

1. Pooling factor different from that found on the ACF-800 reporting form.
2. Explain the derivation of this pooling factor.

11. Number of replacement cases used each month of the 12 month review period and reason for each replacement. If there are more than three replacement cases in a single month, and there are more than three reasons are used for a single month, the State places an asterisk after the name of the month and includes the additional information below the table.

Part III. State Response to Error Measures Findings:

Using the coordination process selected, States provide narrative responses, or enter data into tables provided, in Part III.

Note: States complete and submit Part III A only as part of their first cycle reporting. States complete and submit Part III B only for all subsequent reporting cycles.

Part III A. (for first reporting cycle only)

States complete Part III A and include it as part of their first "State Improper Authorizations for Payment Reports." This first report is the only report for which Part III A is completed.

12A. In addition to the State assurance and certification that the improper authorizations data collection process, including case record reviews, adhered to all requirements of the "Measuring Improper Authorizations in the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Program" instructions, describe your fieldwork preparation, sampling method, and record review process.

13A. Estimate the portion of improper authorizations for payment that is attributable to missing or insufficient documentation. Provide examples of the most frequently missed or insufficient documentation.

Provide examples of the most frequently identified causes of the improper authorizations other than missing or insufficient documentation.

14A. What are the actions that will be taken to correct the causes of improper authorizations identified during the case record review process in order to reduce errors in the future?

15A. What is the amount of actual improper payments the State expects to recover as a result of the review (if any)? Base this amount on the total amount of improper overauthorizations for payment for the review period, found in 4B.

16A. Describe the information systems and other infrastructure that assist the State in identifying and reducing improper authorizations and improper payments. If the Lead Agency does not have these tools, describe actions to be taken to acquire the necessary information systems and other infrastructure.

17A. Detail the actions the State is taking or plans to take to ensure that the Lead Agency and eligibility workers will be accountable for reducing improper authorizations and improper payments? Describe any Federal or State statutory or regulatory barriers which may limit the State’s corrective action in reducing and recovering improper payments.

18A. What are the error rate targets to be used in the next reporting cycle? Enter the targets for percentage of cases with an error, percentage of cases with an improper authorization for payment, percentage of improper authorizations for payment, average amount of improper authorization for payment, and estimated annual amount of improper authorizations for payment into the table provided. It is expected that the State targets will anticipate continual improvement.

Part III B. (for reporting cycles after the first reporting cycle only)

States complete Part III B and include it as part of all "State Improper Authorizations for Payment Reports" after the first report is submitted.

12B. In addition to the State assurance and certification that the improper authorizations data collection process, including case record reviews, adhered to all requirements of the "Measuring Improper Authorizations in the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Program" instructions, describe your fieldwork preparation, sampling method, and record review process.

13B. Estimate the portion of the percentage of improper authorizations for payment that is attributable to missing or insufficient documentation. Provide examples of the most frequent identified missing or insufficient documentation.

Provide examples of the most frequently identified causes of the improper authorizations other than missing or insufficient documentation.

14B. What are the actions that will be taken to correct those causes in order to reduce errors in the future?

15B. What is the amount of actual improper payments the State expects to recover as a result of the review (if any)? Base this amount on the total amount of improper overauthorizations for payment for the review period, found in 4B.

16B. Describe the information systems and other infrastructure that assist the State in identifying and reducing improper authorizations. If the Lead Agency does not have these tools, describe actions to be taken to acquire the necessary information systems and other infrastructure.

17B. Detail the actions the State is taking or plans to take to ensure that the Lead Agency and eligibility workers will be accountable for reducing improper authorizations and improper payments? Describe any Federal or State statutory or regulatory barriers which may limit the State’s corrective action in reducing and recovering improper payments.

18B. Provide the error rate targets for the prior and current cycles and targets for the next cycle for: percentage of cases with an error, percentage of cases with an improper authorization for payment, percentage of improper authorizations for payment, average amount of improper authorization for payment, and estimated annual amount of improper authorizations for payment. Enter the data into the table provided. It is expected that State targets will anticipate continual improvement.

19B. Describe if the State met targets set in the previous cycle and, if not, provide an explanation of why the State did not meet its targets.

20B. Discuss causes of errors and improper authorizations identified in the prior cycle and subsequent actions that were taken to reduce error rates.