[29 Pa.B. 271]
[Continued from previous Web Page] § 168.18. Need for child care.
Comment: Subsection (b)(2). One commentator suggested we replace the words ''employment-related activities'' with the word ''RESET.''
Response: The Department has replaced the phrase ''employment-related activities'' activities'' with ''work-related activities'' rather than ''RESET.'' This terminology is consistent with language used throughout Chapter 168, eliminates the need to list examples of allowable activities, and is more general rather than limited to a specific program.
Comment: Subsection (b)(3). IRRC and others suggested that the Department retain the provision which allows for child care to be considered as needed when an unemployed biological or adopted parent, specified relative, or legal guardian is in the home, if the child is at risk because of suspected child abuse.
Response: The Department has reconsidered its position and has reinserted the provision in § 168.18(b)(3) as suggested. The verification process for suspected child abuse and the requirement for reporting suspected child abuse have likewise been reinserted in § 168.45.
Issue: Subsection (c). The Department has deleted this subsection in the final-form regulations. Due to an oversight, proposed amendments failed to reflect this deletion. The provision, which stated that the employed person need not be the specified relative for the family to establish a need for child care, was applicable only in the context of the TCC program. Since the TCC program is being eliminated, the provision is unnecessary. The provision retained in subsection (a) clarifies that child care must be needed to enable a member of the budget group to participate in a work-related activity.
Comment: Subsection (d). Commentators suggested that this subsection duplicates provisions in § 168.11(g) which broadened the opportunity for continued benefits during breaks not only in employment, but in other work-related activities.
Response: Section 168.11(g) has been deleted to eliminate the duplication. The provision for child care benefits during breaks, § 168.18(c) of the final-form regulations (proposed in § 168.18(d) but redesignated due to format changes), has been expanded to include breaks during any ''work-related activity.''
Comment: Subsection (e). Commentators raised concern about the provision that child care is not considered needed when the parent/caretaker owns or operates a day care service, as it fails to take into consideration the fact that space may not be available, or that the parent/caretaker may still be required to make payment for the care.
Response: The Department acknowledges that, as written, the provision inappropriately assumed that space was available. The phrase ''where care is available for the child'' has been added in § 168.18(d) of the final-form regulations (proposed in subsection (e) but redesignated due to format changes). The Department has not, however, made a change to accommodate parents/caretakers who, as owners/operators of child care facilities, charge themselves for care of their own children. While employes of day care facilities may be required to pay for care when they place their children in their places of employment, the Department does not accept the notion that owners/operators would be required to impose charges upon themselves.
§ 168.19. Child care arrangements.
Comment: Paragraph (1)(i). One commentator suggested that the provision that care be provided in accordance with State and local law be expanded to include ''Federal'' law.
Response: The Department has made the suggested change.
Comment: Paragraph (1)(ii). One commentator suggested that the provision which requires parental access be expanded to include ''without the need for prior notification.''
Response: The suggested change has been made in this subparagraph for consistency.
Issue: Paragraph (1)(iii). The Department has added a provision which requires that a child care provider be at least 18 years of age. This provision was inadvertently missed in proposed amendments and is necessary to comply with the Federal requirement under Title VI of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act.
§ 168.21. Reasons for ineligibility.
Comment: Paragraph (2). Concern was raised about the provision that made a family ineligible for child care when the total cost of care exceeded the family's gross monthly income.
Response: The Department has eliminated the proposed amendment in § 168.21(2) in its entirety.
§ 168.41. Verification requirements.
Comment: Paragraph (2). IRRC suggested that the Department eliminate reference to Chapter 133 (relating to redetermining eligibility) and adopt verification, documentation and appeal provisions used in Chapter 3040 to provide consistency between programs.
Response: As set forth in Chapter 168, child care benefits are not a ''program'' but rather a supportive service delivered to families who are eligible for the TANF program. As such, the basic provisions for verification, documentation, and appeal and fair hearings are in the TANF program. Placing additional or different criteria on a TANF family to receive a child care benefit would be unnecessarily burdensome on TANF families and create confusion and unnecessary paperwork for eligibility staff. For those reasons, the Department has retained the reference to Chapter 133.
Comment: Paragraph (2). One commentator felt that the Department should amend this section which precludes a continuation of child care benefits pending the outcome of an appeal and fair hearing, and allow families to appeal reductions or terminations of child care benefits with continued benefits while the appeal is pending.
Response: Section 168.101 has been amended to provide for continued payment of child care pending a hearing decision.
Issue: Paragraph (2) (final-form regulations). The Department has revised language in § 168.41(2) of the proposed amendments which had specified that a confirming notice would be issued and replaced it with reference to either a confirming notice or an advance notice, as appropriate.
Comment: Paragraphs (3) and (4). One commentator suggested that it would be more clear if the Department reinstated use of the term ''collateral contact'' in lieu of ''contact'' when describing verification sources and processes.
Response: The Department has made the suggested change in both paragraphs.
Issue: Paragraph (3). The Department has reordered the methods of verifying child care costs to clarify the client and the Department's responsibility for verifying eligibility information.
Comment: Paragraph (4). One commentator raised concern that the provision in § 165.44(a)(4) for use of collateral contacts when necessary to accommodate advanced payment was not repeated in this section.
Response: Language has been added to § 168.41(4) to clarify that advanced payments will be verified by collateral contact whenever necessary.
§ 168.43. Verification of a child with a disability.
Issue: The Department has renamed this section ''Verification of the disability of a child'' in the final-form regulations.
§ 168.44. Verification of an adult with a disability.
Issue: The Department has renamed this section ''Verification of the disability of a parent/caretaker'' in the final-form regulations.
§ 168.49. Verification of payment of co-payment for the employed budget group.
Comment: One commentator questioned the need to verify that co-payments have been made or that satisfactory arrangements have been made to pay overdue fees. The commentator argued that monthly verification created unnecessary red tape, and that this provision should be deleted. The commentator suggested that providers would notify the Department if they were having problems collecting fees.
Response: Personal responsibility is an essential component of welfare reform. Payment of required child care co-payment fees is a condition of eligibility for receipt of child care payments, and is part of the Agreement of Mutual Responsibility for TANF families. Verification of payment is required to ensure compliance. An assumption of compliance in the absence of a provider complaint is not acceptable, and would, in fact, shift the burden of establishing eligibility from the client to the provider. The Department has retained the provision requiring monthly verification that co-payment responsibilities have been met. Given that this verification is done in conjunction with the verification of monthly child care costs, it does not create any additional burden on the parents/caretakers or the CAO, or any additional paperwork requirements.
§ 168.51. Verification of age-appropriate immunization.
Issue: The Department has added this provision to specify that a parent/caretaker whose child is receiving child care subsidy shall sign a self-certification statement that the child has received age-appropriate immunizations.
§ 168.61. Reporting requirements.
Comment: One commentator suggested that the Department eliminate monthly reporting requirements on employed clients for child care and require only that parents report when a change has occurred in either the child care arrangements or costs.
Response: Monthly reporting is a requirement for receipt of TANF benefits by employed clients. Including child care as a component of TANF benefits is useful for the client, the provider, and the Department. Many clients participate in work-related activities with hours of participation which vary on a weekly/monthly basis. This means that the hours of child care vary also. Since the Department determines payment based on actual costs within a month, monthly reporting ensures that the Department knows what costs have been incurred.
Monthly reporting requirements have been in place for a number of years and have proven to be useful in verifying continued eligibility for payment and avoiding unnecessary overpayments. This experience has shown that clients often fail to report a change in circumstance which affects eligibility for child care benefits, such as dropping out of a training program, terminating employment or changing providers. When a client fails to report a change in circumstances, the provider often has no way of knowing that a change has occurred and continues to hold the day care slot and charge accordingly. In these situations, when the provider is enrolled in the vendor payment system, the Department may be obligated to issue payment. This has resulted in unnecessary expenditures for services a client was not entitled to, and unnecessary overpayments. Monthly reporting serves to keep this risk to a minimum.
Lastly, monthly reporting requires that the provider certify that it is operating legally and in compliance with minimal health and safety standards. While certifications are obtained initially, compliance could change over time. Monthly reporting enables the Department to verify compliance on a regular basis. For these reasons, the Department has retained the provision for monthly reporting of child care costs and arrangements.
§ 168.71. Monthly payment determination.
Comment: Paragraph (2). Commentators suggested that the provision that payment ''may be made for TANF eligible budget groups in need of child care to participate in RESET'' be replaced with ''is made . . .,'' and that the qualifying statement ''to the extent that funds are available'' be added.
Response: Language has been changed from ''may be made'' to ''is made'' throughout § 168.71 and the statement addressing availability of funds has been added in § 168.1(a). Provisions of paragraph (2) of the proposed amendments have been relocated to paragraph (1) as a result of reformatting of the final-form regulations. The term ''reset'' has been replaced with ''work-related activity'' throughout Chapter 168.
Comment: Paragraph (2). One commentator suggested that the term ''work activities'' be replaced with ''work-related activities,'' consistent with language in Act 35, and that work be identified separately from work-related activities.
Response: The Department agrees that the term ''work-related activities'' is appropriate and has made the suggested change. Since work is a component of the broader term ''work-related activity'' used throughout various chapters, the Department has not used it separately in this chapter.
Comment: Paragraph (2). One commentator requested that the Department expand the provision which waives co-payment responsibility from the date employment begins until income is adjusted against the grant, to ensure that no co-payment is required until the first pay has been received.
Response: The Department has revised language which appeared in paragraph (2) of the proposed amendments and the language has been redesignated to paragraph (1) in final-form regulations. The regulations provide that the child care co-payment is waived from the date employment begins until the date the case is determined prospectively ineligible, provided the client has reported in a timely manner. For cases which remain eligible for TANF, the co-payment is waived for the calendar month in which the first pay is received. Language regarding this provision also has been added in § 168.74 for consistency.
§ 168.72. Determining monthly child care costs.
Issue: Paragraph (1) (final form-regulations). The Department has added the provision previously located in § 168.11(h) of the proposed amendments, regarding payment of child care reasonably related to the hours of the work-related activity, to group similar information together. The Department also has added language to clarify that care during hours of sleep time is an allowable charge for which payment may be made.
§ 168.74. Determining monthly child care co-payment.
Issue: The Department has deleted reference to the cost of care as a factor in calculating co-payment and has added a reference to the co-payment sliding fee scale in Chapter 3040.
Issue: Paragraph (1). The Department has added language to clarify that the co-payment is waived for the calendar month in which the first pay is received. The co-payment is determined prospectively for the next month, excluding the TANF grant as countable income. Thereafter, the co-payment is determined based on actual income as reported on the monthly reporting form.
§ 168.81. Payment methods.
Comment: Commentators suggested that the provision that a child care payment may be issued as a direct check to the client, vendor payment, or restricted endorsement, be replaced with a child care payment is made. It was also pointed out that this section duplicates provisions contained in § 168.11(i).
Response: Language has been revised to provide that the Department ''will make'' payment as a direct check to the client, vendor payment or restricted endorsement.
Issue: Paragraph (2): Eligibility staff have asked for clarification on the appropriate payment method to be used when the client has already paid a provider who is in the vendor payment system. This situation is most likely to occur as a result of a retroactive determination of eligibility. The Department has added a provision in § 168.81(2) explaining that payment will be made to the client, and a vendor payment to the provider is not used when the client provides verification that the client has already paid the provider for the services.
§ 168.91. Restitution.
Comment: The proposed amendments proposed to not exclude child care overpayments from recoupment. A commentator raised a concern that this would result in TANF payments being reduced because of overpayments in child care.
Response: The Department has reconsidered its position on the issue of recoupment of child care benefits because the proposed amendments would have been inconsistent with § 165.91 which exempts all other supportive services from recoupment. The Department has reinserted the provision to exempt child care benefits from the cash assistance recoupment process.
§ 168.101. Appeal and fair hearing.
Issue: The Department has added a provision which provides for continued payment of child care benefits pending a hearing decision on a timely appeal unless the action under appeal is the result of a change in State or Federal law or policy, in accordance with 62 P. S. § 423(a).
Chapter 183--Discussion of Comments
§ 183.94. AFDC earned income deduction.
Comment: IRRC noted that the AFDC program is no longer in existence and that references to AFDC should be deleted.
Response: References to AFDC have been replaced with references to TANF.
Issue: Paragraphs (3)(i) and (ii). The Department has reinstated these subparagraphs to retain the provision which allows for a TANF earned income deduction when care is needed for an incapacitated adult.
Chapter 3040--Discussion of Comments
Chapter 3040 sets forth eligibility requirements for low-income families who are not receiving cash assistance benefits. The following discussion includes comments and the Department's responses. Where changes were not made as suggested, the Department has explained why in the discussion of the specific sections which follow. In addition, the Department has revised and reorganized provisions of the regulations, not in response to comments, but to add clarity, to offer consistency and to eliminate duplication of similar provisions. In the discussion that follows, the Department has identified each of these revisions as ''issues.''
§ 3040.2. Definition of subsidy.
The Department has reserved this section. Provisions previously set forth in this section and proposed changes have been relocated to § 3040.11 in final-form regulations.
Comment: Subsection (c). IRRC commented that the special conditions pertaining to subsidy for a child with a developmental disability who has reached his 13th birthday should be consistent with the provision in Chapter 165.
Response: Provisions for subsidy for a child who has a developmental disability have been relocated to § 3040.11(e). To provide consistency, the Department has modified the language to add a provision that a child continues to be eligible for subsidy until his developmental age reaches 13 years or until his chronological age reaches 19 years, whichever occurs first. The developmental disability must be documented by a licensed psychologist or a physician. In addition, the Department has eliminated the use of verification from other specialists in order to be consistent with cash assistance regulations. Section 9 of Act 35, enacted May 16, 1996, amending 62 P. S. § 432(3)(i)(c) included language requiring that an assessment of physical or mental disability be completed only by ''a physician or psychologist.''
The Department has added a provision in § 3040.11(e)(2) to allow a child who has a physical disability to receive subsidy after he reaches his 13th birthday until he is no longer disabled or until his 19th birthday, whichever comes first.
§ 3040.3. Definitions.
Based on comments and need for clarification, the Department has amended § 3040.3 to reflect the following:
''Adjusted monthly gross income''
Issue: The Department has changed the term to ''adjusted monthly income'' and has modified the definition to simplify and add clarity.
''Advance weekly family fee''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
''Adverse action''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because the definition was not complete and was not needed.
''Application''
Issue: The Department has changed the reference in the definition from a ''form approved by the Department'' to a ''Departmentally prescribed form'' to assure consistency for eligibility determination.
''Caretaker''
Issue: The Department has restored the term and modified it to include a specified relative as defined in § 151.42, or an adult with legal custody, who lives in the family's common dwelling and who has the responsibility for the child for whom subsidy is requested.
''Child Care Information Services (CCIS) agency''
Issue: The Department has added a definition of ''child care information services agency.''
''Confirming notice''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
''Co-payment ''
Comment: IRRC commented that there is a need for consistency between Chapters 168 and 3040.
Response: Consistent with provisions in Chapter 168, the Department has added the term ''co-payment,'' which is the weekly amount the family pays for child care that is subsidized.
''Cost of care''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term. The term caused confusion because the term was used in several different ways. Where the term was previously used, the term has been replaced with either ''provider's published daily rate'' or ''maximum child care allowance,'' as appropriate to the context of the provision of the regulations.
''County ceiling rate''
Comment: IRRC raised a concern about the lack of consistency between Chapter 3040 and Chapter 168 regarding the term ''county ceiling rate'' and ''maximum child care allowance.''
Response: The Department has deleted the term ''county ceiling rate'' and has used the term ''maximum child care allowance,'' which is consistent with Chapter 168.
''Disqualification''
Issue: The Department has added this term which is used in the revised sections on overpayment, repayment and disqualification.
''Eligibility agent''
Comment: IRRC commented that the Department did not clarify that the eligibility agent is the employe or representative of the LMA.
Response: The Department has modified the term to include that the eligibility agent, which is known as the LMA or CCIS, is the entity with whom the Department has a contract or subcontract and to whom the Department delegates authority to determine a family's eligibility for subsidized child care under this chapter.
''Eligibility redetermination''
Comment: IRRC commented that the Department did not clarify what factors the eligibility agent reviews for a redetermination.
Response: The Department has modified the term to clarify that only factors subject to change need to be reviewed at a redetermination.
''Employment''
Issue: The Department has clarified the definition by removing the portions of the definition that discussed the treatment of tips as part of earnings and the treatment of individuals who earn subminimum wage. These provisions were moved to § 3040.34(a)(2) regarding determining nonfinancial eligibility.
''FPIG''
Issue: The Department has added a definition for the term.
''FPL''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
''Family''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term from this section because the individuals who must be included in the family for purposes of eligibility determination are listed in § 3040.28 (relating to composition of a family). The Department's rationale for using different definitions of a family in Chapters 3040 and 168 is discussed under the comments related to Chapter 168.
''Fraud''
Issue: The Department has modified this term to more accurately reflect the use of the term in the overpayment, repayment and disqualification section.
''Full-day enrollment''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
''Income''
Issue: The Department has revised the term to more clearly identify what types of payments count as income.
''Intentional program violation''
Issue: The Department has added this term which is used in the revised sections on overpayment, repayment and disqualification.
''Legal guardian''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because an individual does not need to be a legal guardian to be a caretaker, the term used in the final-form regulations.
''Live-in companion''
Comment: IRRC and other commentators had two primary concerns. First, the proposed definition, which required that individuals be free to marry, did not reflect current lifestyles. Second, the proposed amendments did not indicate that a relationship must exist between the parent and the live-in companion.
Response: The Department has modified the term to reflect the Department's intent to identify an economic unit which includes individuals who live together as a family.
''Local management agency''
Comment: IRRC suggested the Department include a definition of ''local management agency.''
Response: The Department has added a definition of ''local management agency.''
''Maximum child care allowance''
Comment: IRRC commented that there is a need for consistency between Chapters 168 and 3040 when referring to a child care benefit.
Response: The Department has adopted the term ''maximum child care allowance'' throughout Chapter 3040 and has defined it to be consistent with Chapter 168.
''Minor''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term from its list of definitions. The Department has used the term ''minor'' when describing the composition of the family and explaining that the income of a minor does not count for determining eligibility. The description of an individual who is a minor has been added to § 3040.28(1)(i) (relating to composition of a family).
''Overpayment''
Issue: The Department has added this term which is used in the sections on overpayment, repayment and disqualification.
''Parent''
Comment: IRRC commented that the term was not consistent in Chapters 168 and 3040.
Response: The Department has determined that the term ''parent/caretaker'' can be used in both chapters and has defined parent separately from caretaker. As defined in the final-form regulations, a parent can be a caretaker, but a caretaker may be someone other than the parent of the child who is eligible for service.
''Part-day enrollment''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
''Profit from self-employment''
Issue: The Department has deleted the definition as it is unnecessary.
''Recoupment''
Issue: The Department has added this term which is used in several sections dealing with overpayment, repayment and disqualification.
''Reimbursable daily rate''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is no longer used.
''Reimbursement rate''
Issue: The Department has added the term and defined it to be the provider's verified published daily rate not to exceed the maximum child care allowance established by the Department.
''School-age child''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations. School-age children are covered for subsidized child care benefits and are included under the general eligibility requirements for the family.
''Service type''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
''Specified relative''
Issue: The Department has deleted this definition. The term is referenced in the definition of ''caretaker'' which refers to § 151.42.
''Training program''
Comment: Commentators suggested that the Department should reconsider providing subsidized child care while adult family members participate in training programs.
Response: The Department has reinstated the term, but modified the definition because the regulations permit subsidy while an adult family member who is employed participates in a training program. The Department has not reinstated the policy that allowed a family in which the parent is not employed to be eligible for subsidy while the parent is enrolled in a training program.
''Unit of care''
Comment: IRRC and other commentators raised a concern that the unit of care definition limited to one the number of providers who could care for an eligible child per day.
Response: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations. Final-form regulations do not prohibit parents from selecting more than one provider per day for a child.
''Weekly family fee''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
''Wrap-around day care program''
Issue: The Department has deleted the term because it is not used in the final-form regulations.
§ 3040.11. Provision of subsidy.
Issue: Subsection (c). The Department has deleted this subsection regarding subsidized child care not being an entitlement program because it was duplicative of § 3040.1. Subsections (d) and (e) in proposed amendments have been redesignated subsections (c) and (d) in final-form regulations.
Issue: Subsection (d) (final-form regulations). The Department has clarified that a child may receive subsidy if there is no other adult family member available to care for the child during the hours of need.
Issue: Subsection (e) (final-form regulations). The Department has restructured and relocated provisions on age limitations for eligible children proposed in § 3040.2(a) and (c) to § 3040.11(e) to group similar information together.
Issue: Subsection (f). The Department has deleted this subsection as proposed because it was unclear.
Issue: Subsection (f) (final-form regulations). The Department has added a requirement that all children who receive subsidy must have age-appropriate immunizations. This requirement has been added under the requirement in the final Federal CCDBG regulations at 63 FR 39987, to be codified in 45 CFR 98.41(a)(1)(i).
Issue: Subsection (g) (final-form regulations). The Department has added a new subsection which provides that a family must meet both financial and nonfinancial criteria to be eligible for subsidized child care. This provision was in § 3040.2(b) and has been relocated to group similar information and general requirements together.
Issue: Subsection (h) (final-form regulations). The Department has restructured information found under § 3040.2(b) of the proposed amendments and has relocated it to this subsection. This subsection provides that a family in which a parent is receiving TANF is not eligible for subsidized child care under Chapter 3040.
Issue: Subsection (i) (final-form regulations). The Department has restructured information previously found in § 3040.2(b) and has relocated it to this subsection. This subsection provides that subsidized child care may not be used as a substitute for a publicly funded educational program or a specialized treatment program.
Issue: Subsection (j) (final-form regulations). The Department has restructured information previously found in § 3040.2(b) and has relocated it to this subsection to group similar information together. This subsection includes information on the types of child care that are available.
Issue: Subsection (k) (final-form regulations). The Department has restructured information previously found in § 3040.2(a) and has relocated it to this subsection to group similar information together.
§ 3040.13. Notification on designated forms.
Issue: The Department has deleted and reserved this section because the information is included in other sections.
§ 3040.16. Confidentiality.
Issue: Subsection (a). The Department has added a provision that eligibility agents and their employes are required to keep confidential the information in the family file and use that information only for purposes directly connected to the administration of their duties.
Issue: Subsection (c) (final-form regulations). The Department has added this subsection to specify that information contained in the family file related to obtaining child support may be disclosed to the appropriate Domestic Relations Section to ensure that applicants and recipients secure all available child support. This disclosure may be necessary because the eligibility agent and the Domestic Relations Section may need to engage in dialogue to assist the parent in the process of establishing paternity and obtaining a child support order.
Issue: Subsection (d) (final-form regulations). The Department has added this subsection to require that the eligibility agent assure the confidentiality of an individual who makes a complaint about a family's eligibility for subsidy for a child.
§ 3040.17. Additional conditions or additional charges.
Issue: The Department has renamed this section ''Additional conditions and additional charges'' in the final-form regulations.
Issue: Subsection (b). The Department has clarified that prior to the provider's implementation of additional charges, the parent must be notified of the additional charges to be collected. Additional charges are not the same as the parent co-payment, but extra charges required by the provider for items such as snacks or field trips. Subsidy is not provided to the parent to help in paying these additional expenses.
Comment: Subsection (b). Several commentators questioned the Department's deletion of the provision prohibiting providers from charging extra for food services because many providers participate in the Child and Adult Care Food Program which does not allow the providers to charge extra for food.
Response: The Department has not revised this section. The provision in proposed amendments and final-form regulations which permits providers to charge for additional services does not limit the provider's responsibility to follow the rules of other programs. The Department of Education manages the Child and Adult Care Food Program and advises that the providers who participate in the Child and Adult Care Food Program are not permitted to charge the parent for food unless there is a special meal planned in which the child may choose to participate. As a result, providers who participate in the Child and Adult Care Food Program are not permitted to routinely charge subsidy-eligible parents for meals reimbursed to the provider by the Child and Adult Care Food Program.
§ 3040.18. Citizenship.
Comment: IRRC commented that the Department included citizenship requirements in more than one section in the regulations and suggested that the requirement be placed in only one section.
Response: The Department has deleted and reserved this section. Citizenship applies to all family members and therefore the Department has included and clarified the citizenship requirement in final-form regulations in § 3040.34(b)(1) (relating to nonfinancial eligibility).
Comment: IRRC and several other commentators questioned the use of the term ''permanently residing under color of law'' because it is not defined in Black's Law Dictionary.
Response: The term ''permanently residing under color of law'' in § 3040.34(b)(1) is a term of art which was developed in case law and regulations describing noncitizens who are eligible for a variety of benefits. This term encompasses individuals who are refugees, parents granted asylum and other individuals who have implicit, not explicit, permission of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to remain in the United States for an indefinite period, but have not formally been granted permanent residence as defined in 8 U.S.C.A. § 1101(20). The term does not include persons here for a temporary purpose such as students and tourists. The use of the term ''permanently residing under color of law'' in subsidized child care regulations makes this provision consistent with those applicable to cash assistance recipients, found in § 149.23.
§ 3040.19. Subsidy disruption.
Issue: Subsection (b). The Department has modified the language regarding what happens if a child's subsidy is disrupted and has clarified that if funding is not available, the subsidy is suspended until another provider has been selected and subsidy is available.
Comment: Subsection (d). IRRC and several other commentators stated that the Department should consider using the same methodology for reinstating subsidized child care benefits when funding is again available regardless of the reason for the disruption in the family's subsidy.
Response: The Department has modified the language regarding a family's placement on the waiting list. A child is placed on the waiting list according to the date of the family's initial eligibility determination if a child loses subsidized child care benefits because of a shortfall in State or Federal funding or management of funding by the eligibility agent.
§ 3040.20. Limitations and benefits.
Issue: The Department has renamed this section ''Benefits and limitations'' in final-form regulations.
Comment: Subsection (a). IRRC and other commentators questioned the Department's intent to limit access to child care based on the proposed requirement that the parent's cost of child care may not exceed a certain percentage of the gross income of the family.
Response: The Department has deleted this requirement. Because of this deletion, subsequent subsections were redesignated.
Comment: Subsection (b)(1). IRRC and other commentators questioned the provision of allowing a child only one unit of care with one provider in a 24-hour period. They indicated that the provision may prevent a school-age child from receiving before- and after-school subsidy for care from more than one provider.
Response: The Department has redesignated subsection (b) to (a) in the final-form regulations and deleted the provision allowing a child only one unit of care in a 24-hour period. The Department has modified the language to indicate that the benefit for an eligible child is up to 50 hours of child care in a 7-day period. The provision of the 50-hour benefit of child care recognizes the varying types of work shifts of parents. Many employers are lengthening the work day and shortening the work week. The 50 hours of child care in a 7-day period allows for flexibility for the parent's work week and still allows a reasonable limit to the benefit for subsidy.
Issue: Subsection (a)(2) (final-form regulations). The Department has deleted the limitation in subsection (b)(2) of proposed regulations that a subsidy-eligible child may receive a maximum of 262 units of care in a fiscal year.
Issue: Subsection (a)(2) (final-form regulations). The Department has added a new paragraph to include provisions for a child to receive care during the hours when the adult family member needs to sleep.
Comment: Subsection (a)(4) (final-form regulations). IRRC and other commentators advised that the Department should consider allowing the parent's participation in a training program as a basis for determining eligibility. Commentators pointed out that one intent of Act 35 is to encourage individuals to pursue training to enhance job skills.
Response: The Department recognizes that child care may be needed to allow a parent to participate in a training program that may enhance the parent's job skills. Therefore, the Department has added a provision in subsection (a)(4) of final-form regulations for 12 hours of additional child care to allow working parents time to attend training. The 12 hours of child care is in addition to the 50-hour benefit of child care in a 7-day period.
Issue: Subsection (b) (final-form regulations). The Department has modified the language in subsection (c) of proposed amendments to indicate that if space is not available to enroll the child at the child care facility operated by the child's parent, the child can receive subsidy at another child care facility. In registered family day care homes and homes exempt from regulation, space is always available because the operator's own children are not included in the maximum number of children permitted to be cared for by the operator under licensing requirements.
Issue: Subsection (c) (final-form regulations). The Department has added a provision to address the retroactive payment of child care benefits to a family who formerly received TANF and does not apply for child care benefits at the eligibility agent immediately after the TANF benefits end. The Department has allowed a retroactive payment of child care costs incurred to the first day of the month preceding the month that the parent who formerly received TANF benefits applied for service with the eligibility agent.
[Continued on next Web Page]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
