Chapter 5: Ongoing Requirements

Policy: Division 45 AFDC-FC MPP 201.11

This chapter covers ongoing responsibilities of the eligibility staff, after initial determination.

1. Foster Care (FC) Eligibility AFDC–FC Redeterminations/Annual Reviews
2. Permanency Planning Hearing
3. Claiming Changes (FFP to Non-Federal)
4. Foster Care (FC) Eligibility Foster Care New Episodes – Reassessment of Federal/Non-Federal Determination

Policy: ACL 22-16, ACL 11-10, MPP 45-202, WIC 11401.5

NOTE: Current redetermination requirements are described in ACL 22-16 which supersedes guidance in CDSS regulations.

The county shall review the child’s payment eligibility annually.
― The annual review shall include an examination of any circumstances of a foster child that are subject to change and could affect the child’s potential eligibility or payment amount, including but not limited to authority for placement, eligible facility, and age. The FC 2 is to be used for this purpose.
― The SOC 158A is to be completed and submitted to eligibility staff any time there is a change in authority for placement, placement changes, or when there is a change in payee.
― Annual deprivation redeterminations are no longer required by the Administration for Children and Families, this means specific sections of the Statement of Facts Supporting Eligibility for AFDC-FC form (FC 2), used for all non-federal and federal AFDC-FC cases, are no longer required at annual redetermination.
― Federal AFDC-FC Title IV-E eligibility linkage, deprivation, income, and property determination is a onetime determination per foster care episode.
― Foster care placing agencies are reminded that no new AFDC eligibility determination is conducted following a temporary absence from placement, including trial home visits, or other change of placement.
― A new AFDC eligibility determination is only made when there is a termination of dependency and then a subsequent return to foster care.
― If a foster care episode was initially found to be federally eligible based on deprivation and removal factors, but the youth is not currently living in an eligible foster care placement, federal funding may resume, when the youth is placed or resides in an eligibility home or facility. No additional eligibility determination or evaluation of the child’s income or resources is required.
― When a child returns home, for what is expected to be a permanent period, and dependency is dismissed should a subsequent removal occur due to further abuse and neglect, a new AFDC-FC eligibility determination is required.
― The second eligibility determination would be considered as a new foster care episode.
― An eligibility redetermination is not required when a minor child or nonminor dependent (NMD) in foster care receives income or property after the initial linkage determination has been completed.
― For youth who turn 18 while under an order for foster care placement, no redetermination shall be conducted solely due to the youth turning 18 years old. When youth are continuously in foster care, their income and resources need not be reconsidered.
 

Policy: Division 45 AFDC-FC: MPP 45-101, MPP 45-201, MPP 45-301, MPP 45-310, ACL 01-33, Section 472(a)(2)(A)(ii) [42 U.S.C. 672], ACL 11-69, Assembly Bill 212.

The following ongoing court order requirements are required for federal AFDC-FC eligibility only:

1. First Permanency Hearing Findings: Eligibility staff must verify on the court order that the court made a finding that the agency has made “reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan” within 12 months of the “date the child entered foster care.” The date the child entered foster care is defined as the earlier of the following dates:
   a. The date of the first judicial finding that the child has been subjected to child abuse or neglect or
   b. Sixty days from the date of removal from the home.
   c. Language in a court order such as “the allegations in the petition are sustained” meets the requirement that the child has been subjected to abuse and neglect. This court finding generally occurs at the jurisdictional or dispositional court hearing (these hearings are often combined).
   d. If this finding is not made timely, the child ceases to be eligible for federal AFDC-FC at the end of the 12th month after he or she entered care and remains ineligible until the finding is made.
2. Ongoing Permanency Hearing Findings: Eligibility staff must verify on the court order that the court continues to make a finding that the agency has made “reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan” every 12 months from the date of the original permanency planning hearing.
   a. If this finding is not made timely, the child ceases to be eligible for federal AFDC-FC at the end of the 12th month after the last hearing and remains ineligible until the finding is made.

Case example:
― Child entered foster care January 15, 2021.
― The “reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan” should have been made by January 15, 2022.
― The finding was not made until February 1, 2022.
― Federal foster care payments must cease for the month of January. However, since the finding was made in February 2022, Federal AFDC-FC payments can resume so there would be no break in aid.

Policy: ACL 01-33

Even though the federal determination of linkage to AFDC is a one-time determination, there are situations that can impact the claiming of federal funds. These involve situations where only the claiming of federal funds must cease and others where, based on the child’s movement in and out of placement, federal foster care eligibility must be examined. Situations in which eligibility must be examined include the following examples below:
― The child was removed, all requirements for federal eligibility were met, the child is placed in a resource family home that is not a relative/fictive relative. The resource parent decides to become the legal guardian, dependency is dismissed but the service case remains open, and the guardian is cooperating with the services.

• This case would change to a non-federal AFDC-FC funded case as the authority for placement is now guardianship and that is not a valid authority under federal foster care rules.

― The finding of “reasonable efforts” to finalize the child’s permanency plan was not made in a timely manner resulting in the need to change the funding to non-federal only until the finding is made.

• Example: Child entered FC on March 2, 2022.
• On May 28, 2023, the finding of reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan was obtained.
• The child is NOT eligible for federal Title IV-E payments for April 2023. Federal AFDC-FC payment may resume in May 2023 when the finding was made.

Policy: ACL 01-33, MPP 45-200, ACL 11-64

Foster Care Episodes

When a child is removed from the home, it is the goal of child welfare/probation to have the child safely return to their family of origin. The child can be returned in a variety of ways, some of which result in the need for a new federal/non-federal eligibility determination.
― The SOC 158A is used to record any changes in the child’s status and/or dates related to court hearings and petitions, including changes in placement.
― If it is not clear to the eligibility staff why court actions were taken or, for example, when there are court hearing continuances, additional communication and clarifying information with the social worker/ probation officer (or other staff identified in your county to resolve issues) may need to be sought in order to determine if continued eligibility and/or Title IV-E funding is impacted.

Trial Home Visits

Policy: ACL 01-33
The term “trial home visit” is used in federal guidance to describe circumstances under which a child may be returned to the home of a parent(s) on an extended visit without disrupting the federal eligibility status. It is considered the same foster care episode and no new eligibility/linkage determination is required. If there is a court order extending the trial home visit beyond six months, and the trial home visit does not exceed the time frame indicated in the court order, the child retains AFDC-FC eligibility upon returning foster following the trial home visit, without a new eligibility determination.

Dismissal of Dependency/Wardship

A new petition for removal gets filed and a new eligibility determination (including linkage is required) when:
― In a case where a youth in foster care is sent home, and
― The court dismisses dependency/wardship, and
― The child is then removed again due to new allegations of abuse and neglect or due to a status offense.
This subsequent removal from the home would be consider a new foster care episode.

Supplemental Petition for More Restrictive Placement (387 Petition)

If a child has been declared a dependent or ward of the court and there is a need to place the child into a more restrictive placement, a 387 petition is filed.
― There is no new eligibility/linkage determination required assuming it is only a change in placement and the child is continually in foster care.
― Check if the facility meets all licensing requirements including those added for STRTPs under FFPSA.
― Change the payee and update the SOC 158A.

Child Returned Home Under Court Ordered Family Maintenance (FM) Services

― When a court orders a child to be returned to the parent(s) under family maintenance services, if the social worker / probation officer feels the child needs to be re-removed, they would file a 387 petition.
― If the court grants the petition, this would signify a new eligibility determination is required.

388 Petition

A 388 Petition is used to request a modification in a court order and can be filed by any interested person. It cannot be used to remove a child from their current home.
― A 388 petition is usually initiated by the parent stating that circumstances have changed or there is new evidence and that it would be in the best interests of the child to modify the court order.
― A sibling or other relative can also use it to request contact or a change in visitation.
― The filing of a 388 petition would not result in a new federal/non-federal determination.
― When dependency/wardship is dismissed and the foster care case closed, a 388 petition cannot be used to reinstate the original eligibility determination.

County eligibility staff should also become familiar with other court orders, specifically use of Nunc Pro Tunc, court orders. This Latin term means now for then and refers to action taken by a court that applies retroactively to correct earlier court rulings. Nunc Pro Tunc orders are not accepted in the federal AFDC-FC Program. For more information, refer to ACL 01-33 Policy.