- CWPM Home
- 1. AFCARS
- 2. CAPTA
- 3. Independent Living
- 4. MEPA/IEAP
- 5. Monitoring
- 6. CCWIS
- 7. Title IV-B
- 8. Title IV-E
- 9. Tribes/Indian Tribal Organizations
- Search the Child Welfare Policy Manual
- Additional Resources
- User Guide
- Withdrawn Child Welfare Policies
- References
- Print the Manual
- Additions to the Manual
- Deletions to the Manual
- Modifications to the Manual
- Cumulative Change History of Questions & Answers
8.3A.9c. TITLE IV-E, Foster Care Maintenance Payments Program, Reasonable Efforts, Qualifying Language in Court Orders
Answer
No. It is not permissible for a title IV-E agency to use such restrictive language in making the required judicial findings. When a judicial determination is qualified by language stating or implying that it has been made for the purpose of Federal funding only or that it has no precedential effect, then a bona fide judicial determination has not been made. An official notation that a finding is for a limited purpose only suggests that it must be "re-made" in order for it to become valid.
This policy is consistent with legislative history and was addressed in the preamble to the 2000 regulations, which quote S. Rep. No. 336, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 16 (1980) and make the point that the required judicial determinations should not become "...a mere pro forma exercise in paper shuffling to obtain Federal funding..." (pg. 4056, 65 Fed. Reg.).
Court orders containing judicial determinations qualified by restrictive language such as that described above will not satisfy title IV-E eligibility requirements for Federal financial participation (FFP).
Source/Date
7/6/05; (3/2/20)
Legal and Related References
Social Security Act - Sections 471(a)(15)(B), 472(a)(2)(A)(ii), and 479B