GAB Decision 677
August 8, 1985
New York State Department of Social Services;
Ballard, Judith A.; Garrett, Donald F. Teitz, Alexander G.
Docket Nos. 85-114 and 85-115
DECISION
In Board Docket No. 85-114 the New York State Department of Social
Services (State) appealed the disallowance by the Administration for
Children, Youth and Families, Office of Human Development Services, of
$28,078 in federal financial participation (FFP) for Title IV-E Foster
Care and Adoption Assistance claimed by the State in its Quarterly
Statement of Expenditures dated March 1, 1985 for the quarter ending
December 31, 1984. The claim contained increasing adjustments of
$18,915 FFP for foster care expenditures incurred from October 1, 1981
through December 31, 1982, and increasing adjustments of $9,163 FFP for
adoption assistance expenditures incurred from March 1, 1982 through
December 31, 1982.
In Board Docket No. 85-115 the State appealed the disallowance of $403
FFP for Title IV-E Foster Care and Adoption Assistance claimed by the
State in its Quarterly Statement of Expenditures dated December 5, 1984
(and revised December 28, 1984) for the quarter ended September 30,
1984. The claim contained an increasing adjustment of $403 FFP for
expenditures incurred during the quarter ending September 30, 1981.
The basis for disallowance in both appeals was that the claims were not
filed timely, since claims for fiscal year 1980 and later had to be
filed within two years after the calendar quarter in which the
expenditures were made, as required by section 1132 of the Social
Security Act and 45 CFR 95.7.
The State repeated the arguments pertaining to the applicability of the
relevant filing requirements which it had put forward in Board Docket
Nos. 83-170 and 83-180, decided in New York State Department of Social
Services, Decision No. 521, March 6, 1984. The State admitted that
these cases do not present any material issues of fact which distinguish
them from Board Docket Nos. 83-170 and 83-180, and requested the Board
to issue summary decisions based upon our holding in Decision No. 521.
The State submitted no new argument why Decision No. 521 was wrong.(2)
We have for convenience joined the two cases in one decision. We
conclude that the claims here are barred by statutory and regulatory
filing requirements and sustain the disallowance of $28,078 in Board
Docket No. 85-114 and $403 in Board Docket No. 85-115, respectively,
based on Decision No. 521, which we incorporate herein.
JANUARY 14, 1986