GAB Deicision 150
February 24, 1981 Indiana Department of Public Health; Docket No.
79-206-IN-CS Ford, Cecilia; Garrett, Donald Settle, Norval
This is an appeal of a disallowance of $6,951.44 in Federal financial
participation (FFP), claimed by the State of Indiana under Title IV-D of
the Social Security Act (the Act) for the costs of application forms
(DPW Form 60). The Regional Representative of the Office of Child
Support Enforcement (Agency) concluded that the forms were used at the
intake level for applicants for assistance under Title IV-A of the Act
and the costs were not chargeable to Title IV-D.
Based on the State's submissions and the Agency's response, it
appeared that the Agency position was correct. A preliminary analysis
was set out in the Board's Order, issued December 18, 1980, directing
the State to show cause why the disallowance should not be upheld. No
timely response was received, and the State, by telephone conversation
on January 26, 1981, informed a Board staff member that it would not be
responding to the Board's Order.
Background
Title IV-A of the Act provides for financial assistance to needy
dependent children and the parents or relations with whom they are
living under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program.
Title IV-D of the Act provides for the enforcement of child support
obligations owed by absent parents to their children. The Indiana State
Department of Public Welfare (the State or IDPW) administers both the
Title IV-A and Title IV-D programs in Indiana.
Section 402(a) of Title IV-A states, in part,
A State plan for aid and services to needy families with children
must --
(11) provide for prompt notice (including the transmittal of all
relevant information) to the State child support collection agency . .
. of tthe furnishing of aid to families with dependent children with
respect to a child who has been deserted or abandoned by a parent . . .
(26) provide that, as a condition of eligibility for aid, each
applicant or recipient will be required --
(A) to assign the State any rights to support from any other person
such applicant may have . . . .
Title IV-A regulations at 45 CFR 235.70 and 232.11 basically restate
the above notice and assignment requirements.
45 CFR 304.20, part of the regulations implementing Title IV-D
requirements, states:
(a) Federal financial participation at the 75% rate is available for:
(1) Necessary expenditures under the State Title IV-D plan for the
child support enforcement services and acitivities specified in this
section and Sec. 304.21 provided to individuals from whom an assignment
of support rights has been obtained pursuant to Sec. 232.11 of this
title;
(2) Collection services pursuant to Sec. 302.51 (e)(i) of this
chapter; and
(3) Parent locator services for individuals eligible pursuant to Sec.
302.33 of this title . . . .
The IV-A program must provide certin information to the IV-D program,
and as a result these programs are somewhat related, but the program
requirements are not interchangeable.
Discussion
The IDPW and Agency positions were fully stated in the Board's Order
to Show Cause, dated December 18, 1980. The State's major arguments
were (1) pages 2 and 8 of DPW Form 60 have their orgin in two IV-D
forms, DPW Forms 425 and 426; (2) more than 50% of the cost of the DPW
Form 60 can be attributed to IV-D requirements since more carbons of
pages 2 and 8 are needed; and (3) since an estimated 90% of all AFDC
cases are referred to IV-D, a minimum 50% charge to IV-D is appropriate.
The Agency's position was (1) the costs of the predecessor forms that
were charged to IV-D may have been incorrectly charged; and (2)
although pages 2 and 8 are sent to the IV-D program, they are designed
to meet IV-A requirments and must be charged to that program.
In its response to the appeal the Agency stated, "The cost of
printing page 2 of DPW Form 60 would be eligible for funding if the form
were used by the IV-D program personnel as an intake document. However,
page 2 is used by the State of Indiana as part of the intake process for
the IV-A program and to meet the IV-a program's responsibilities under
section 402(a)(11) of the Act." (Agency Response, p. 10.) The State was
provided an opportunity to disupute this position in response to the
Board's Order and has not done so.
Page 8 of DPW Form 60 provides for an assignment of support rights
subject to "Section 402(1)(26) of Title IV-D of the Social Security Act
as amended." The Board's Order pointed out that it appeared that the
State had made a mistake as to the authority requiring that page and
that the cite should refer to Section 402(a)(26) of the Act, which is
part of Title IV-A and not Title IV-D. The State has not responded, and
we find that the proper reference should be to Title IV-A.
The State has tried to characterize these costs as Title IV-D Costs,
and has an incentive to do so since it could then obtain FFP at the 75%
rate rather than at the Title IV-A 50% rate. There is no support,
however, for the State's assertion that these costs should be attributed
to Title IV-D services within the meaning of 45 CFR 304.20.
Conclusion
Based on the Agency's argument and on our own analysis of pages 2 and
8 of DPW Form 60, we conclude that the costs of the form were not for
child support services within the meaning of Title IV-D but rather were
attributable to the notice and assignment requirements of Title IV-A.
Accordingly, the appeal of the State of Indiana is denied.
OCTOBER 04, 1983