Department of Health and Human Services
DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD
Appellate Division
SUBJECT: New York State Department of Social Services
DATE: April 18, 1996
Docket No. A-96-081
Decision No. 1570
DECISION
The New York State Department of Social Services (New
York) appealed a determination by the Administration for
Children and Families (ACF) disallowing $46,680,231 in
claims for federal funds under title IV-E of the Social
Security Act. 1/ Title IV-E provides funding for foster
care maintenance payments on behalf of children who would
otherwise be eligible for title IV-A (Aid to Families
with Dependent Children). This case involves claims for
the administrative costs incurred for protective services
provided to children for whom there was reasonable cause
to suspect abuse or maltreatment.
New York claimed these administrative costs pursuant to
the "Title IV-E as the Primary Program Option" (IV-E
Option) of its "Services" Cost Allocation Plan (CAP)
amendment which it filed in March 1992. In this
amendment, New York proposed two options for allocating
Social Service District administrative costs for
protective services: the IV-E Option which followed the
allocation methodology previously rejected by this
Department's Division of Cost Allocation (DCA) and by the
Board in New York State Dept. of Social Services, DAB No.
1428 (1993), and the "Title IV-A Emergency Assistance to
Needy Families with Dependent Children (EAF) Option" (EAF
Option) which was developed by New York in conformance
with ACF-PA-87-05 (1987) and DAB No. 1428. On December
29, 1994, DCA approved the EAF Option, subject to certain
conditions, and disapproved the IV-E Option. New York
filed these claims pursuant to the IV-E Option to
preserve its appeal rights regarding DAB No. 1428 and the
subsequently incurred protective services costs. ACF
reimbursed New York for the claims pursuant to the EAF
Option.
The activities for which New York sought reimbursement
pursuant to the IV-E Option of this amendment were
divided into ten categories of activities typically
performed by Child Protective Services workers. 2/ New
York claimed these costs for all children who were the
subject of a State Central Registry (SCR) abuse or
maltreatment report and who had not been determined to be
ineligible for title IV-E.
Prior to New York's claiming these funds, DCA had
partially approved and partially denied a prior CAP
amendment which set forth the cost allocation methodology
which New York resubmitted to DCA in its IV-E Option of
its "Services" CAP amendment. DCA's ruling on that prior
amendment and ACF's disallowances of claims pursuant to
that prior amendment were considered by the Board in DAB
No. 1428. The Board has also issued summary decisions
based on DAB No. 1428, affirming additional disallowances
of title IV-E reimbursement for protective services. New
York State Dept. of Social Services, DAB Nos. 1442
(1993), 1470 (1994), 1503 (1994), 1513 (1995), 1522
(1995). As to this disallowance, New York requested
another summary decision upholding this disallowance
based on DAB No. 1428. Notice of Appeal dated February
26, 1996. ACF consented to entry of a summary decision.
ACF letter dated March 15, 1996.
In DAB No. 1428, the Board upheld DCA's determination
that four of the protective services activities described
by the prior CAP amendment were not allowable title IV-E
activities. The Board concluded that these four
activities were not identified in the regulations as
allowable administrative activities and were not
activities which were unique to title IV-E or which
furthered its specific, limited purposes. DCA found that
the remaining six activities were allocable to title IV-E
if performed on behalf of candidates for title IV-E. As
to these six activities, the Board upheld ACF's
determination that New York's characterization of all
children who were the subject of an SCR report as title
IV-E candidates was not consistent with title IV-E, the
regulations and ACF's policy announcement, ACYF-PA-87-05.
Because ACF was willing to reduce the disallowances in
DAB No. 1428 by the amount of costs that New York could
document in a manner consistent with DCA's decision and
the requirements of applicable authorities including
ACYF-PA-87-05, the Board remanded those disallowances to
ACF to make that reduction. In DAB Nos. 1442, 1470,
1503, and 1513, the Board also remanded the disallowances
to ACF so that it could reduce the disallowances. In DAB
No. 1522 and this case, New York represented that there
was no need for such a remand because ACF had paid the
portion of title IV-E claims determined allowable under
the EAF Option of New York's "Services" CAP amendment.
Conclusion
Accordingly, based on the analysis in DAB No. 1428, which
we incorporate in its entirety here, we uphold ACF's
disallowance of these costs.
___________________________
Judith A. Ballard
___________________________
Norval D. (John) Settle
___________________________
Donald F. Garrett
Presiding Board Member
1. New York appealed from ACF's letter of January 24,
1996 disallowing $70,758,059 in title IV-E funds. The
disallowance was composed of several categories of title
IV-E costs: foster care maintenance payments,
administrative costs for preventive services, and
administrative costs for protective services. This
decision concerns only one portion of the January 24,
1996 disallowance: administrative costs for protective
services provided by local Social Services Districts in
the amount of $46,680,231. The portions of the
disallowance concerning maintenance payments and
preventive services costs have been assigned different
DAB docket numbers and will be considered separately.
2. These activities were processing State Central
Registry forms; determining the nature, extent, and cause
of injuries; risk assessment; arranging for other
services; arranging for foster care; supervisory
consultation/conference; family court proceedings;
preparing and maintaining Welfare Management System/Child
Care Review Service documentation; preparing and
maintaining case record documentation; and case
management/monitoring services.