Rule2023-21081
Separate Licensing or Approval Standards for Relative or Kinship Foster Family Homes
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 28, 2023
Effective
November 27, 2023
Issuing agencies
Health and Human Services DepartmentChildren and Families Administration
Abstract
This rule finalizes revisions to the definition of "foster family home" proposed on February 14, 2023 (here after referred to as the February 2023 NPRM). Title IV-E agencies may choose to claim title IV-E federal financial participation (FFP) for the cost of foster care maintenance payments (FCMP) on behalf of an otherwise eligible child who is placed in a relative or kinship licensed or approved foster family home when the agency uses different licensing or approval standards for relative or kinship foster family homes and non-relative/ non-kinship foster family homes. In addition, the final rule requires title IV-E agencies to periodically review the amount of FCMPs to also ensure that the agency provides a licensed or approved relative or kinship foster family home the same amount of FCMP that would have been made if the child was placed in a non-related/non-kinship foster family home.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 187 (Thursday, September 28, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 187 (Thursday, September 28, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66700-66709]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21081]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
45 CFR Part 1355 and 1356
RIN 0970-AC91
Separate Licensing or Approval Standards for Relative or Kinship
Foster Family Homes
AGENCY: Children's Bureau (CB); Administration on Children, Youth and
Families (ACYF); Administration for Children and Families (ACF);
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule finalizes revisions to the definition of ``foster
family home'' proposed on February 14, 2023 (here after referred to as
the February 2023 NPRM). Title IV-E agencies may choose to claim title
IV-E federal financial participation (FFP) for the cost of foster care
maintenance payments (FCMP) on behalf of an otherwise eligible child
who is placed in a relative or kinship licensed or approved foster
family home when the agency uses different licensing or approval
standards for relative or kinship foster family homes and non-relative/
non-kinship foster family homes. In addition, the final rule requires
title IV-E agencies to periodically review the amount of FCMPs to also
ensure that the agency provides a licensed or approved relative or
kinship foster family home the same amount of FCMP that would have been
made if the child was placed in a non-related/non-kinship foster family
home.
DATES: This rule is effective on November 27, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen McHugh, Director, Policy
Division, Children's Bureau, (202) 205-8618. Telecommunications Relay
users may dial 711 first. Email inquiries to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e88b8a8b8785858d869c9ba8898b8ec680809bc68f879e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="debdbcbdb1b3b3bbb0aaad9ebfbdb8f0b6b6adf0b9b1a8">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Background
III. Overview of February 2023 NPRM Comments
IV. Section-by-Section Responses to Comments
V. Regulatory Process Matters
VI. Tribal Consultation Statement
I. Statutory Authority
This rule is published under the authority granted to the Secretary
of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) by section 1102 of the
Social Security Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. 1302. Section 1102 of the Act
authorizes the Secretary to publish regulations, not inconsistent with
the Act, as may be necessary for the efficient administration of the
functions with which the Secretary is responsible under the Act.
II. Background
Each state and tribal licensing entity is responsible for
establishing and maintaining licensing or approval standards for foster
family homes. The Act requires only that such standards established by
the state or tribe are reasonably in accord with recommended standards
of national organizations for foster family homes related to admission
policies, safety, sanitation, protection of civil rights, and use of
the reasonable and prudent parenting standard (section 471(a)(10)(A) of
the Act), and that the caregiver fully meet federal requirements under
section 471(a)(20) of the Act (concerning criminal background checks
for all foster parents). The Act permits a title IV-E agency to waive
non-safety-related licensing or approval standards for relative foster
family homes on a case-by-case basis (section 471(a)(10)(D) of the
Act). The Act also requires title IV-E agencies to provide a periodic
review of licensing or approval standards and amounts paid as foster
care maintenance payments (FCMP) and adoption assistance to assure
their continuing appropriateness (section 471(a)(11) of the Act; 45 CFR
1356.21(m)).
In 2000, ACF promulgated regulations that interpreted the Act to
require that each state establish and apply its licensing or approval
standards to all relative and non-relative foster family homes (45 CFR
1355.20). In the years following promulgation of the 2000 rule,
research (Miller, Jennifer, ``Creating a Kin-First Culture,'' American
Bar Association, July 1, 2017) concluded that children in foster care
often do best when placed with relatives and kin because: (1) family
connections are critical to healthy child development and a sense of
belonging; (2) relative and kinship care helps to preserve children's
cultural identity and relationship to their community; and (3) children
living with relatives experience fewer behavioral problems and higher
placement stability rates compared to children living with non-
relatives in foster care (88 FR 9414; (Child Welfare Information
Gateway. (2022). Kinship care and the child welfare system. U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children
and Families, Children's Bureau. <a href="https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/f-kinshi/">https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/f-kinshi/</a>); Generations United and National Indian Child Welfare
Association. (2020). TOOLKIT--American Indian and Alaska Native
Grandfamilies: Helping Children Thrive Through Connection to Family and
Cultural Identity. <a href="http://www.gu.org">www.gu.org</a> and <a href="http://www.nicwa.org">www.nicwa.org</a>; (``How can we
prioritize kin in the home study and licensure process, and make
placement with relatives the norm?'' Casey Family Programs, 2020).
Congress subsequently amended title IV-E of the Act to prioritize
placements with and involvement of relatives when a child is removed
from their home (sections 471(a)(19) and (29) of the Act).
Consistent with the research cited above and Congress's amendments,
ACF published the February 2023 NPRM proposing to allow a title IV-E
agency to adopt one set of licensing or approval standards for all
relative or kinship foster family homes that is different from the
licensing or approval standards used for non-relative/non-kin foster
family homes. ACF determined relative and kinship care is often the
best option for children in foster care. However, current licensing
standards may serve as a barrier to such placements (Miller,
[[Page 66701]]
``Creating a Kin-First Culture,'' July 1, 2017; Children's Defense
Fund. Recommendations to Ensure Children's Well-being through Support
of Kinship Caregivers; (``How can we prioritize kin in the home study
and licensure process, and make placement with relatives the norm?''
Casey Family Programs, 2020). For example, relatives and kin who
provide care for a child in foster care may be denied a foster family
home license or approval because they have not met strict licensing
standards, including non-safety standards that the state may waive
under current federal law. Thus, the relative or kin caregiver is not
eligible for FCMPs. Another example is that many states require the
same time-consuming and intensive foster parent training classes for
relatives and kin as they do for non-relatives. However, relative and
kin caregivers may require a different level or type of foster parent
training to take care of their kin, particularly when they already know
the child for whom they are going to provide care. Non-relative foster
parents may need training about how to integrate a child into a home
with which the child is unfamiliar, or how to determine the child's
interests and skills. Similarly, in contrast with non-relative foster
parents, who prepare for the arrival of children in foster care over
months and years, relatives often receive a request to care for a child
in emergency situations. In addition, relatives become licensed to care
for a child who is a relative, not because they want to be a foster
parent to children in foster care. Therefore, relative and kin
licensing standards that allow for training that is condensed and more
relevant to relative and kinship families along with the necessary
essential agency support for foster parents could pave the way to
remove barriers to licensing relatives Allowing title IV-E agencies to
adopt separate standards for relatives and kin could remove some
barriers to licensing and increase the number of licensed or approved
relative or kinship foster family homes receiving services and
financial resources (88 FR 9413; Foster Family-based Treatment
Association. The Kinship Treatment Foster Care Initiative Toolkit.
Hackensack, NJ: Foster Family-Based Treatment Association, 2015, Page
14; U.S. Government Accountability Office, Child Welfare and Aging
Programs: HHS Could Enhance Support for Grandparents and Other Relative
Caregivers (GAO-20-434), July 2020)).
In anticipation of a final rule, the February 2023 NPRM encouraged
title IV-E agencies to consider adopting licensing or approval
standards for all relative or kinship foster family homes that place as
few burdens on such families as possible, such as standards that meet
only the requirements in sections 471(a)(10)(A) and (a)(20) of the Act,
and not additional standards the agency requires non-relative foster
family homes to meet (88 FR 9413). As noted above, the Act requires
only that such standards established by the state or tribe are
reasonably in accord with recommended standards of national
organizations for foster family homes related to admission policies,
safety, sanitation, protection of civil rights, and use of the
reasonable and prudent parenting standard (section 471(a)(10)(A) of the
Act), and that the caregiver fully meet federal requirements under
section 471(a)(20) of the Act (concerning criminal background checks
for all foster parents). Or, the agency could implement state or tribal
licensing standards for all relative or kinship foster family homes to
extend age limits for relative or kinship foster care providers; allow
relative children to share sleeping spaces; disregard certain income,
transportation, literacy, language, and education requirements; and
remove disqualifications for non-child-related past crimes such as
issuing bad checks (Beltran and Redlich Epstein, Improving Foster Care
Licensing Standards around the United States: Using Research Findings
to Effect Change, February 2013; ``How can we prioritize kin in the
home study and licensure process, and make placement with relatives the
norm?'' Casey Family Programs, 2020.).
Equity Impact
This final rule advances the Administration's priority of equity
for those historically underserved and adversely affected by persistent
poverty and inequality by providing a support to low-income prospective
relative caregivers, many of whom are families of color, are from
underserved rural areas, or are members of other communities in which
long-term systemic factors such as poverty hamper families from making
intergenerational progress.
This final rule would especially provide a support to low-income
prospective relative caregivers, many of whom are families of color,
are from underserved rural areas, or are members of other communities
in which long-term systemic factors such as poverty hamper families
from making intergenerational progress. Ethnically and culturally
diverse populations are disproportionately represented in relative and
kinship families. ``While Black or African American individuals
represent just 13% of the U.S. population, they make up nearly a
quarter of all children in households where a grandparent is
responsible for the needs of the child'' (Advisory Council to Support
Grandparents Raising Grandchildren with Assistance from the HHS
Administration for Community Living. Supporting Grandparents Raising
Grandchildren (SGRG) Act, Initial Report to Congress. Washington, DC:
Author, p. 4, November 16, 2021.). ``Similarly, American Indian and
Alaska Natives make up only 1.3% of the U.S. population, but their
representation in grandparent-led households where the grandparent is
providing for most of their needs, is more than double that rate (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2019). The available data on grandparents responsible
for grandchildren suggests that underserved racial and ethnic
populations are disproportionately taking responsibility for
grandchildren.'' (Advisory Council to Support Grandparents Raising
Grandchildren with assistance from the HHS Administration for Community
Living. [November 16, 2021]. Supporting Grandparents Raising
Grandchildren (SGRG) Act, Initial Report to Congress. Washington, DC:
Author, p. 12). Moreover, many individuals in these communities face
simultaneous, multiple barriers when attempting to provide care to a
relative who has been removed from their home.
Policies that expand access to FCMPs can have an especially strong
impact on underserved groups. Encouraging and removing barriers to
kinship placement also is consistent with cultural norms of some
underserved groups that traditionally rely more heavily on kin and
family in times of need. For example:
<bullet> Children age 3 to 5 who are the subject of a child
maltreatment report in rural areas and those in households with incomes
less than 50 percent of federal poverty level were more likely to be
placed in informal kinship settings than similarly situated children in
urban areas (Walsh, W.A. Informal Kinship Care Most Common Out-of-Home
Placement After an Investigation of Child Maltreatment [Fact Sheet no.
24]. Durham, NH: University of New Hampshire, Carsey Institute, 2013.).
<bullet> African American families rely on extended family and
other informal systems of care not only because these informal systems
are cultural strengths, but because African American children
historically were excluded from public and private sector child welfare
programs and supports (U.S.
[[Page 66702]]
Government Accountability Office, Child Welfare and Aging Programs: HHS
Could Enhance Support for Grandparents and Other Relative Caregivers
(GAO-20-434), July 2020).
<bullet> Traditionally, grandparents and other family members
assume integral roles in raising children within American Indian/Alaska
Native communities. This type of extensive familial support system
helps parents to pass on to their children the knowledge of customs,
culture, and language essential to community survival and well-being
(Capacity Building Center for Tribes. Engaging and Supporting Native
Grandfamilies. 2022. <a href="https://tribalinformationexchange.org/files/products/GrandfamiliesResourceList2022.pdf">https://tribalinformationexchange.org/files/products/GrandfamiliesResourceList2022.pdf</a>; Lewis, Jordan & Boyd, Keri
& Allen, James & Rasmus, Stacy & Henderson, Tammy. (2018). ``We Raise
our Grandchildren as our Own:'' Alaska Native Grandparents Raising
Grandchildren in Southwest Alaska. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Gerontology. 33. 10.1007/s10823-018-9350-z.).
III. Overview of February 2023 NPRM Comments
We received submissions from 207 commenters about the February 2023
NPRM. We reviewed and analyzed the public comments and considered them
in finalizing this rule. The comments are available in the docket for
this action on <a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. We received comments from 27 state and
local government child welfare agencies; 10 American Indian/Native
American Tribes, tribal consortia and tribal organizations (``tribes'')
and entities representing tribal interests; 72 national advocacy,
public interest, philanthropic and professional organizations; 20
service providers; 2 educational associations; 9 members of Congress;
and 67 individuals. Almost all commenters supported issuing a final
rule and many requested clarifications, which we address in the
Section-by-Section response to comments.
Summary of Comments by Type
Summary of Comments from Individuals. We heard from 67 individuals,
most of whom identified themselves as relatives and kin with lived
experience as caregivers. A few of the individual commenters said they
were non-related foster parents and other individuals not identifying
as caregivers. We appreciate the willingness of relatives, kin, non-
related caregivers, and other individuals to share personal details of
their lived experiences to help inform this rulemaking. The relative
and kin commenters, most of whom identified themselves as grandparents
caring for their grandchildren, overwhelmingly expressed that their
experiences caring for a child who cannot safely remain with their
parent(s) resulted in the best possible outcomes for the child and was
critical to keeping their families together. They also said that such a
decision was not made without considerable hardship. Relative and kin
commenters noted challenges with meeting foster family home licensing
standards for reasons such as too many people were living in the home
or there were not enough beds or rooms for the children. They also
discussed incurring financial hardship partly because they were not
receiving financial support from the title IV-E agency. The relative
and kin commenters said that caring for a child resulted in them
delaying retirement, depleting savings and retirement funds, incurring
attorney fees, substantial child care costs, and in some cases, the
commenters said they had to file for bankruptcy and experienced home
foreclosure.
Summary of Comments from Tribes and Entities Representing Tribal
Interests. All ten of the tribes, tribal organizations, consortia and
organizations representing tribal interests that commented on the
February 2023 NPRM supported the proposal for separate licensing or
approval standards for relatives and kin. They cited various reasons
including the necessity of involving relatives and kin in the
determination of what is in the best, short and long term interests of
tribal children; the importance of relative and kin placements in
maintaining an Indian child's connection to their culture, heritage,
and traditions and the importance of this connection to building
relationships that will continue throughout the child's lifetime;
supporting tribal relative and kinship families with resources and
services; removing barriers to families interested in providing
relative foster care to tribal children; and because placements with
relatives and kin support strong attachment and bonding that can
generate profound and long lasting benefits to the child. Commenters
also said that this proposal provides an opportunity for state and
tribal title IV-E agencies to collaborate on the development of
separate licensing or approval standards that align the needs of Indian
children and families with varied lived experiences and from different
socioeconomic backgrounds. For example, commenters mentioned that
states and tribes could collaborate on training options that are
culturally appropriate. Many tribal commenters also said that placement
with relatives and kin when safely possible is consistent with the
Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA), emphasizing the importance of
the extended family in Native American cultures where definitions of
families are often broader and can include people who are not blood
relatives but may be members of the same clan. Finally, commenters
emphasized that ensuring relative and kinship foster family homes
receive FCMPs equal to those provided to non-related foster family
homes is necessary to support a child's needs to grow up safe,
nurtured, and strong.
Summary of Comments from States and Local Government Agencies.
Nearly every state child welfare agency that submitted a comment
supported the proposal for separate licensing or approval standards for
relatives and kin noting that it builds on the efforts many of the
agencies have already implemented to establish a ``kin-first'' culture
that prioritizes relative and kin placements. Nearly all state agencies
that commented expressed an intention to adopt separate licensing or
approval standards for relatives and kin once the rule is final. A few
state and local government non-child welfare agencies also submitted
comments in support of the proposal.
Summary of Comments from National Advocacy, Public Interest,
Philanthropic, Professional Organizations and Members of Congress.
Seventy-two national advocacy, public interest, philanthropic and
professional organizations supported the proposal because of the
benefits it offers to children in out-of-home care, as explained in
greater detail in the paragraph below. Nine members of Congress
supported issuing a final rule and several suggested that states work
collaboratively with relatives/kin and organizations that support
relative/kinship caregivers on developing separate licensing standards
for relatives and kin to ensure that the lived experiences of those
caregivers are appropriately reflected in the new licensing standards.
General Comments in Support of the February 2023 NPRM
Summary of Comments on the Benefits of the Final Rule.
Overwhelmingly, commenters believed that the separate licensing
standards will ensure the safety, permanency and well-being of children
in out-of-home care. For example, commenters said the proposal:
[[Page 66703]]
<bullet> Aligns with research that demonstrates the benefits and
improved life-long outcomes for children placed with relatives and kin.
For example, one commenter cited to research that children and young
people in kinship care experience improved placement stability, higher
levels of permanency, and decreased behavioral problems (Epstein,
(2017) Kinship Care is Better for Children and Families). Another
commenter cited to research that found children raised by family
members (as compared to non-kin foster parents) have better behavioral
and mental health outcomes, rate their situation more favorably, and
are more likely to report feeling loved (Generations United. (2016).
Children Thrive in Grandfamilies: <a href="http://www.grandfamilies.org/Portals/0/16-ChildrenThriveinGrandfamilies.pdf6">www.grandfamilies.org/Portals/0/16-ChildrenThriveinGrandfamilies.pdf6</a> AARP. (2022).
<bullet> Supports relative and kin placements because they are more
trauma-responsive and help maintain and support family, school,
community and cultural connections for children in foster care.
<bullet> Increases the number of available out-of-home placement
resources and prevents unnecessary group or child care institution
(also known as congregate care) placements.
<bullet> Allows title IV-E agencies to craft licensing or approval
standards that align with tribal values, culture, and traditions which
emphasize the importance of the extended family to keep children safe
and support family healing.
<bullet> Removes bureaucratic barriers to licensing and approving
relative and kinship foster family homes by, for example, reducing the
number of variances and waivers a title IV-E agency must individually
approve, which may result in a more streamlined process and timely
licensing or approval of relatives/kin.
<bullet> Helps alleviate financial hardships experienced by
relative and kinship foster families. For example, one of the
commenters explained that in their state, a child living with a
traditional foster parent receives between $544 to $656 per month,
whereas a child living with an unlicensed relative caregiver only
receives $388. This disparity directly affects the ability of relative
caregivers to meet the needs of these children. Another commenter
explained that in one state, seniors 65-84 who are below the median
income earn, at most, $41,700 annually. If they take in two children or
youth for half a year, their daily costs for caring for those children
essentially drive their income to within $1,000 of the poverty line for
a family of four ($27,756). Yet another commenter explains that in
their state, fewer than 30 percent of relative foster family homes were
licensed and the only financial resources available to these families
were eligible for was non-needy TANF, which is $654 per month to care
for three children, compared to the FCMP of $2,016-$2,430 per month to
care for three children (or higher for higher levels of need).
<bullet> Additionally, almost all commenters that addressed the
proposal in Sec. 1356.21(m) stated that the amount paid to a licensed
or approved relative or kinship foster family home should be the same
amount that would have been made if the child was placed in a licensed
or approved non-relative/kin foster family home. Almost all states that
commented confirmed they already provide equitable FCMPs to relative
and kinship foster family homes and non-related foster family homes.
Comments About the Equity Impact of the Rule. Many commenters
expressed that the proposal would expand access to FCMPs, which can
have an especially strong impact on underserved groups because
encouraging and removing barriers to kinship placement also is
consistent with cultural norms of some underserved groups that
traditionally rely more heavily on kin and family in times of need.
Some commenters noted the final rule may generate opportunities for
states to collaborate with groups disproportionately represented in
foster care placements when developing separate licensing or approval
standards. Several commenters expressed support for the February 2023
NPRM stating that it will align with the racial, cultural, and ethnic
norms of African American, American Indian and Alaskan Native children
and families. A few commenters emphasized that the rule may also
benefit youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,
queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+), and who are often placed in
institutional or congregate care. One commenter pointed out that for
LGBTQI+ youth, delaying or denying their placement with the people who
know and love them because their kin cannot meet licensure standards
denies the youth a critical lifeline.
Comments Not in Support of the February 2023 NPRM
Less than a dozen individual commenters did not support allowing
separate licensing standards for relative and kinship foster family
homes. A few individuals expressed concerns that standards for relative
and kinship placements are already too minimal, and that this would
impact the children placed with them, creating the potential for
placement disruption and repeated trauma. Rather, they suggested the
requirements for relative placements should increase instead of
decrease because relatives and kin are often unprepared for the kinds
of trauma children and youth who are in foster care have experienced.
In addition, a few commenters who did not support the proposal
expressed the view that it is the duty of title IV-E agencies to ensure
that each child is provided with a safe and loving foster home,
regardless of the caregiver's connection to the child and that if a
relative is taking in a child, the relative should meet the same
standards as other licensed or approved and paid foster parents. We
address these comments in section IV below.
Recommendations for Separate Licensing Standards for Relative and
Kinship Foster Family Homes
Many commenters from advocacy, public interest, and professional
associations expressed agreement with ACF's recommendations that
separate licensing or approval standards for relatives and kin only
include the requirements in the Act. Specifically, those commenters
agree that for relative and kinship licensing standards, title IV-E
agencies should not prohibit licensing due to crimes committed beyond
those enumerated in section 471(a)(20) of the Act. A couple of
commenters noted that in some states, licensing or approval standards
prohibit foster parents from becoming licensed or approved due to
convictions for crimes that extend beyond those required by the Act,
such as misdemeanors that may have occurred in the relative's or kin's
youth.
Comments Outside the Scope of the Regulation
We received several comments outside the scope of this regulation,
and therefore, we are unable to address most of those comments. These
types of comments included: specific individual scenarios related to
eligibility to receive FCMPs, payment or licensing issues; informal
kinship care involving children who are not under the placement and
care responsibility of the title IV-E agency; recommendations for
access and availability of specific kinship services; questions about
licensing procedures for relatives that want to care for both related
and non-related children; interstate placements; application of
additional non-discrimination procedures; questions about how the
requirements in section 471(a)(10) of the Act would apply to
[[Page 66704]]
separate licensing standards and the ACF National Model Standards;
recommendations for developing model standards; implementation of
retrospective analysis and data collection using regulatory outcome
measures; implementation and financial challenges for county
administered states; and de-linking eligibility for title IV-E FCMPs
from the 1996 Aid to Families with Dependent Children income and
eligibility standards in section 472 of the Act. However, we will
address the comments raised on claiming title IV-E FCMPs before all
title IV-E requirements for foster family homes are met in the Section-
by-Section Response to Comments so we can clarify the requirements.
IV. Section-by-Section Responses to Comments
We respond to the comments we received in response to the February
2023 NPRM in this section-by-section discussion.
Section 1355.20 Definitions
The definition of ``foster family home'' no longer contains
``[f]oster family homes that are approved must be held to the same
standards as foster family homes that are licensed,'' and ``the term
may include group homes, agency-operated boarding homes or other
facilities licensed or approved for the purpose of providing foster
care by the state or tribal agency responsible for approval or
licensing of such facilities.'' The definition now includes: ``Agencies
may establish one set of foster family home licensing or approval
standards for all relative or kinship foster family homes that are
different from the set of standards used to license or approve all non-
relative foster family homes.''
We did not receive any specific recommendations for revisions to
the definition of foster family home, therefore, we are not making any
substantive changes to the proposal. We are, however, making a
technical correction to the second sentence of the definition to add
the terminology ``or approval'' for consistency with the rest of the
paragraph. The regulation text would read as follows: ``The licensing
or approval authority must be a state authority in the state in which
the foster family home is located, a tribal authority with respect to a
foster family home on or near an Indian Reservation, or a tribal
authority of a tribal title IV-E agency with respect to a foster family
home in the tribal title IV-E agency's service area.''
As described earlier, we received very few comments that did not
support the proposal, and numerous comments in support of the revisions
to the definition of foster family home to allow for separate licensing
and approval standards for relatives and kin from non-relatives/kin. In
addition, there were commenters who provided suggestions and
recommendations for changes to regulations that are outside the scope
of this proposal, but we address them here.
Comment: A few commenters expressed concern that states would
develop separate licensing standards for relatives and kin that will
impose more requirements than for non-relatives and non-kin standards.
They requested explicit language that kinship licensing standards
cannot be more stringent or demanding than non-relative foster family
licensing.
Response: This is not the intent of the proposal as we fully
explained in the preamble to the February 2023 NPRM. However, foster
family home licensing and approval standards are determined by states
and tribes. ACF does not have authority to mandate standards beyond
what is required by the Act.
Comment: Many of the commenters recommended expanding the
definition of relative and kin to include individuals related to a
child by tribal custom. They explained that tribal custom often defines
who is considered a relative in tribal communities and many relatives
and kin already have existing relationships established with their
relative children. Some commenters recommended a broader expansion of
the definition of relative and kin to include individuals who may not
have a relationship with the child but may have strong relationships
established with the child's family.
Response: We would like to clarify that ACF did not propose a new
definition of relative or kin. As stated in the February 2023 NPRM,
title IV-E agencies have discretion to define ``relative'' and ``kin''
when determining to whom they will apply the relative licensing and
approval standards. We encourage agencies to define relative and kin in
a way that is inclusive of tribal custom and adopt a broad definition
of relative and kin for purposes of licensing and approval standards.
Comment: One commenter expressed concern that the rule would newly
require full licensure for relative and kin placements by including
language that ``anything less than full licensure or approval is
insufficient for meeting Title IV-E eligibility requirements'' and the
ability to seek reimbursement for foster care maintenance payments. A
few commenters expressed the opposite concern that the standards for
relative and kinship placements are already too minimal.
Response: We would like to clarify that it is not a new requirement
for any foster parent to be fully licensed or approved in order for an
otherwise eligible child who is placed with that foster parent to meet
title IV-E eligibility requirements. Full licensure or approval is
already required in the regulatory definition of ``foster family home''
and the February 2023 NPRM did not propose to amend it.
Comment: The same commenters suggested the requirements for
relative placements should increase instead of decrease because
relatives and kin are often unprepared for the kinds of trauma children
and youth who are in foster care have experienced and that this would
impact the children placed with them, creating the potential for
placement disruption and repeated trauma.
Response: As we explained in section II above and in the NPRM at 88
FR 9414, research demonstrates that children living with relatives
experience higher placement stability rates compared to children living
with non-relatives in foster care. Further, the vast majority of
commenters agree that relative and kin placements are more trauma-
responsive and help maintain and support family, school, community and
cultural connections for children in foster care.
Comment: A few commenters who did not support the proposal
expressed the view that it is the duty of title IV-E agencies to ensure
that each child is provided with a safe and loving foster home,
regardless of the caregiver's connection to the child and that if a
relative is taking in a child, the relative should meet the same
standards as other licensed or approved and paid foster parents.
Response: We agree that in order to receive federal foster care
maintenance payments for title IV-E eligible children, title IV-E
agencies must ensure that all licensed or approved foster family homes
meet the same safety requirements in sections 471(a)(10) and (20) of
the Act.
Comment: Many commenters requested that ACF clarify when title IV-E
agencies can begin to claim FFP for FCMPs made on behalf of children
placed in relative foster family homes that are pursuing licensing or
approval under separate standards. The commenters suggested that ACF
allow a title IV-E agency to adopt separate licensing or approval
standards wherein the agency may begin claiming FFP for children placed
with relatives and kin, often in emergency circumstances, once in-state
criminal background checks
[[Page 66705]]
show that the applicant does not have a relevant felony conviction and
the fingerprint background check of the national criminal database has
been initiated.
Response: While the suggestions are outside the scope of the
February 2023 NPRM, we would like to clarify that title IV-E agencies
may claim foster care maintenance payment costs from the first day of
the child's placement in the month in which all title IV-E eligibility
criteria are met. However, in accordance with the statute: (1) anything
less than full licensure or approval is insufficient for meeting title
IV-E eligibility requirements as the foster family home must be fully
licensed or approved as meeting the standards the agency establishes in
accordance with the definition of ``foster family home'' and; (2) title
IV-E FCMPs can be claimed for an eligible child only for the days that
the foster parents' criminal records check have been completed and the
records reveal that the parents did not commit any prohibited felonies
in section 471(a)(20)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act. (See the Children's
Bureau Child Welfare Policy Manual section 8.4F, Q/A #38).
Section 1356.21(m) Review of Payments and Licensing Standards
Section 1356.21(m) requires that during a title IV-E agency's
periodic review of FCMPs and licensing standards as required in
471(a)(11) of the Act, the agency must also review the amount paid to a
licensed or approved relative or kinship foster family home to ensure
it is the same amount that would have been paid if the child was placed
in a licensed or approved non-relative foster family home. As described
earlier, we received numerous comments supporting equal FCMPs to
licensed or approved relative and kinship foster family homes and non-
relative/kin foster family homes and are therefore not making any
changes in the final rule.
V. Regulatory Process Matters
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health, and safety effects; distributive impacts; and equity).
Executive Order 13563 is supplemental to, and reaffirms the principles,
structures, and definitions governing regulatory review as established
in Executive Order 12866, emphasizing the importance of quantifying
both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and
of promoting flexibility. This rule meets the criteria for a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and subject
to OMB review. Based on ACF's estimates of the likely costs associated
with this rule, OMB designated this rule as a significant regulatory
action under section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094. The estimated cost and transfer impacts of this
regulatory proposal are provided below (see the sections titled
``Federal cost estimate with implementation of this final rule'' and
``Estimated costs of this final rule to title IV-E agencies'').
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (see 5 U.S.C. 605(b) as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act)
requires federal agencies to determine, to the extent feasible, a
rule's impact on small entities, explore regulatory options for
reducing any significant impact on a substantial number of such
entities, and explain their regulatory approach. This rule does not
affect small entities because it is applicable only to state and tribal
title IV-E agencies. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required for this rule.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4) was
enacted to avoid imposing unfunded federal mandates on state, local,
and tribal governments, or on the private sector. That threshold level
is currently approximately $177 million. This rule does not contain
mandates that would impose spending costs on state, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate, or on the private sector, in excess of
the threshold.
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 2000 requires federal agencies to determine whether a policy or
regulation may negatively affect family well-being. If the agency
determines a policy or regulation negatively affects family well-being,
then the agency must prepare an impact assessment addressing seven
criteria specified in the law. This regulation does not impose
requirements on states or families. This regulation will not have any
impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution.
Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132 prohibits an agency from publishing any rule
that has federalism implications if the rule either imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on State and local governments and is not
required by statute, or the rule preempts State law, unless the agency
meets the consultation and funding requirements of section 6 of the
Executive Order. This rule does not have federalism impact as defined
in the Executive Order. Shortly after publication of the NPRM, we held
a briefing session with states and tribes and any other interested
partners on the contents of the NPRM.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) seeks to
minimize government-imposed burden from information collections on the
public. In keeping with the notion that government information is a
valuable asset, it also is intended to improve the practical utility,
quality, and clarity of information collected, maintained, and
disclosed.
The Paperwork Reduction Act defines ``information'' as any
statement or estimate of fact or opinion, regardless of form or format,
whether numerical, graphic, or narrative form, and whether oral or
maintained on paper, electronic, or other media (5 CFR 1320.3(h)). This
includes requests for information to be sent to the government, such as
forms, written reports and surveys, recordkeeping requirements, and
third-party or public disclosures (5 CFR 1320.3(c)). There is no burden
to the Federal government or to title IV-E agencies as a result of this
final regulation. First, it is optional for a title IV-E agency to
develop separate licensing standards for relative and kinship foster
family homes. If the agency elects to do so, there are no new reporting
requirements. Second, title IV-E agencies are already required by
section 471(a)(11) of the Act to conduct periodic reviews of the rates
and standards related to FCMPs. Therefore, the final rule does not
impose any new reporting requirements. Finally, title IV-E agencies
were required to make changes consistent with Division E, Title VII of
Public Law 115-123, the Family First Prevention Services Act.
Therefore, the technical change will bring federal regulations up to
date with title IV-E of the Act and does not impose any new reporting
requirements.
[[Page 66706]]
Annualized Cost to the Federal Government
Total Projections to Implement Final Rule. The estimate for the
final rule was derived using fiscal year (FY) 2019 data from the
Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) on
title IV-E relative foster family home placements and FY 2019 claiming
data from the Form CB-496 ``Title IV-E Programs Quarterly Financial
Report (Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, Guardianship Assistance,
Prevention Services and Kinship Navigator Programs).'' We did not use
FY 2020 or 2021 data from AFCARS because such data would likely reflect
anomalies due to the COVID-19 public health emergency period.
ACF estimates that, as a result of this final rule, there will be
annual increases in the number of title IV-E relative foster family
home placements and annual increases in federal costs for FCMPs and
administration. ACF estimates that the final regulation will cost the
federal government $28,753,988 in title IV-E FFP for FCMPs and
administration, the first year after the rule becomes final and $3.085
billion over a total of 10 years.
Assumptions: ACF made several assumptions when calculating the cost
of FCMPs and administrative costs for this final rule.
<bullet> First, we anticipate that without implementation of the
final rule, the annual caseload growth rate (i.e., the increase in
title IV-E relative and non-relative foster family home placements)
will be one percent, and the annual title IV-E claiming growth factor
will be two percent. We retain this same annual two percent claiming
growth factor in estimating the FFP to implement the final rule because
relative and non-relative foster family homes receive the same amount
of title IV-E FCMPs.
<bullet> Second, we assume a varied implementation rate of
placements in title IV-E eligible relative and kinship foster family
homes that are licensed and approved under separate standards. The
estimate assumes a slow rate of change because agencies may not
immediately decide to implement new or revised relative foster family
home licensing or approval standards. In addition, states and tribes
vary on whether policy, regulation or statutory change must precede
such changes.
<bullet> Finally, the title IV-E participation rate for relative
foster family home placements was 27.6 percent in FY 2019. Conversely,
the title IV-E participation rate for other foster care placements was
47.7 percent in FY 2019. We assume that this percentage will increase
for relative and kin foster family home placements over time as a
result of the final rule because it allows different licensing or
approval standards for relative and kin and non-relative foster family
home placements to mitigate barriers that relatives and kin would
otherwise face. We also assume that the difference in the title IV-E
participation rate of relatives and non-relatives is almost entirely
due to the use of the same licensing or approval standard for both
relative and non-relative foster family home placements. We anticipate
incremental changes in the title IV-E participation rate for relative
and kinship foster family home placements over a total of 10 years, and
that by year 10, this rate would increase to 41.7 percent.
Comment: One commenter disagreed with the way ACF determined the
rate at which kinship foster family placements would increase under the
proposed rule and the growth rate factor.
Response: We made no changes to the annualized cost to the Federal
government in the final rule. As described in the Assumptions, the
growth rate factor we used to identify projected caseload over the ten-
year estimate period consists of two separate factors. The first factor
is the overall rate of change for relative and non-relative placements
in title IV-E eligible foster care children in care, for which we
reviewed caseload data for past periods. The second factor is the
extent to which relative and non-relative foster care placements are
determined as title IV-E eligible. To the extent that title IV-E
agencies implement separate standards in the final rule, the
eligibility rate for relative home placements will increase in each
year based on the expected implementation level. We projected the
implementation level based on our experiences with the implementation
for other program changes.
Comment: One commenter pointed out that the proposal does not
consider in its analysis how adoption of a kinship licensing standard
would potentially shift caseloads and costs from informal care paid
through federal Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF) funding (via
TANF child-only cases) to formal care paid through state and federal
matching FCMPs via IV-E funding. The commenter requested that ACF
assess these fiscal impacts in its final rulemaking.
Response: The cost analysis prepared for the February 2023 NPRM
addresses costs under the title IV-E foster care program. We also note
that while the TANF program does, to some extent, allow use of funds
for payment of foster care maintenance payments for a child in foster
care when placed with a relative, those funds are provided through a
block grant that would not be reduced if some such cases were no longer
being paid through TANF funds. Therefore, the rule would not result in
a cost impact for the TANF program.
Average title IV-E FCMP and administrative costs per child. To
determine the FY 2019 average FFP cost per child, we divided the total
number of children in foster care in FY 2019 receiving title IV-E
maintenance payments (170,446) by the total FFP claimed on the Form CB-
496 for this time period. This resulted in an average title IV-E FCMP
cost of $9,240 per child; and an average title IV-E administrative cost
of $12,907 (this is the baseline FFP). We used the annual average per
child costs to calculate the FFP that would be claimed over a total of
10 years with and without implementation of the rule. We made an
assumption that 15 percent of the increased relative placement title
IV-E caseload in each year would have already been subject to title IV-
E claiming for administrative cost purposes (without the rule) based on
current law that allows these costs for the period specified in the
law, up to 12 months, that an application for licensure is pending (see
section 472(i)(1)(A) of the Act).
Federal cost estimates without implementation of the rule.
Line 1. Estimates of the number of title IV-E relative foster
family home placements. As of September 30, 2019, there were 36,953
title IV-E relative foster family home placements. Applying our
assumptions, on line 1 on the table below, we display the annual
increases in title IV-E relative placements without implementation of
the rule for 5 different years, beginning with FY 2023 and ending with
FY 2032.
Lines 2 through 5. Estimates of FFP for title IV-E relative foster
family home placements. To determine increases in the annual FCMP and
administrative costs of title IV-E relative foster family home
placements, we multiplied the average annual federal cost per child
(lines 2 and 3) by the annual number of title IV-E relative foster home
placements on line 1. On the table below, line 4 displays the increased
FCMP costs and line 5 displays increased administrative costs for 5
different years beginning with 2023 and ending with 2032. The baseline
FCMP costs for 2019 is $9,240 x 36,953 = $341,462,572. The baseline
administrative costs for 2019 is $12,907 x 36,953 = $476,934,437.
[[Page 66707]]
Federal cost estimate with implementation of this final rule.
Lines 6 and 7. Number of title IV-E relative foster family home
placements. On line 6 of the table below, we estimate the annual
increases in title IV-E relative foster family home placements as a
result of this final rule. We used a caseload growth rate of 5 percent
in year 1, 15 percent in year 2, 25 percent in year 3, 45 percent in
year 5. By year 10, this implementation rate is expected to reach 70
percent based on our assumptions described earlier. On line 7 of the
table below, we determined the annual number of new title IV-E relative
foster family home placements as a result of the regulation. To
calculate the annual number of new title IV-E relative foster family
home placements due to implementation of the final rule, we subtracted
the projected caseload without application of the final rule on line 1
from the projected caseload of the rule on line 6. For example, in 2023
there would be 1,392 new title IV-E relative foster family home
placements: 38,714-37,323 = 1,392.
Lines 8 through 10. Annual federal costs of title IV-E relative
foster family home placements. Lines 8 and 9 display the annual
increases in FCMPs and administrative costs for the new title IV-E
relative foster family home placements (on line 6) resulting from this
final rule. To determine the annual federal cost of the NPRM on lines 8
and 9, we multiplied the annual number of new title IV-E relative
foster family home placements on line 6 by the average child costs for
FCMPs and administration on lines 2 and 3. This information is
displayed for 5 different years beginning with 2023 and ending with
2032. For example, on line 8, the cost in 2023 for FCMPs is
approximately $13,117,787 (1,392 children x $9,425 average FCMP). Line
10 displays the annual incremental federal costs of this final rule.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ten year total
2019 Baseline 2023 (Year 1) 2024 (Year 2) 2025 (Year 3) 2027 (Year 5) 2032 (Year 10) cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimates without regulatory changes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Number of title IV-E relative 36,953 37,323 37,696 38,073 38,838 40,819 ................
placements @ 1% growth...............
2. Avg. title IV-E FCMP FFP claim per $9,240 $9,425 $9,614 $9,806 $10,202 $11,264 ................
child @ 2% claiming growth factor....
3. Avg. title IV-E Administrative cost $12,907 $13,165 $13,428 $13,696 $14,250 $15,733 ................
FFP claim per child @ 2% claiming
growth factor........................
4. FCMP cost.......................... $341,462,572 $351,774,691 $362,398575 $373,343,289 $396,233,652 $459,790,346 $4,036,424,435
5. Administrative cost................ $476,934,437 $491,337,785 $506,176,589 $521,463,509 $553,435,395 $642,207,572 $5,637,835,507
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated FFP with regulatory changes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 2023 2024 2025 2027 2032 Ten year
(Year 1) (Year 2) (Year 3) (Year 5) (Year 10) total cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Number of title IV-E relative 36,953 38,714 41,849 45,042 51,609 61,680 ................
placement @ varied caseload growth
rates................................
7. Total annual increase in title IV-E .............. 1,392 4,153 6,970 12,771 20,861 ................
relative placements..................
8. Annual increase in FCMP costs...... .............. $13,117,787 $39,926,838 $68,344,565 $130,295,804 $234,976,401 $1,304,789,018
9. Increase in administrative costs... .............. $15,636,201 $50,233,323 $89,758,368 $175,938,591 $324,690,283 $1,780,051,762
10. Total incremental increase in FFP. .............. $28,753,988 $90,160,161 $158,102,933 $306,234,395 $559,666,684 $3,084,840,780
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title IV-E agency estimates with regulatory changes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 2023 2024 2025 2027 2032 Ten year
(Year 5) (Year 10) total cost
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Maintenance Portion--Incremental .............. $10,054,421 $30,602,817 $52,384,220 $99,868,132 $180,102,915 $1,000,084,711
Non-Federal Share (Using FY 2019 Avg.
FMAP rate of 56.61%).................
12. Administration Portion-- .............. $15,636,201 $50,233,323 $89,758,368 $175,938,591 $324,960,283 $1,780,051,762
Incremental Non-Federal Share (50%
FFP).................................
13. Total Incremental Increase in Non- .............. $25,690,622 $80,836,140 $142,142,587 $275,806,723 $504,793,199 $2,780,136,473
Federal Share........................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated costs of this final rule to title IV-E agencies. Title
IV-E agencies may claim reimbursement for the federal cost of FCMPs and
administrative costs, and the title IV-E agency pays its share with
state or tribal funds. Line 11 displays the agency's estimated FCMP
costs and line 12 displays the estimated agency costs for
administration. Line 13 displays the total incremental increase in cost
for the state/tribal share. This information is displayed for 5
different years beginning with 2023 and ending with 2032. The estimates
provided are calculated using the national average federal medical
assistance percentage (FMAP) rate of 56.61 percent for FY 2019 and an
administrative cost FFP rate of 50 percent. This proposal is optional;
therefore, agencies are not required to incur any costs.
Accounting Statement
From a society-wide perspective, many of the effects estimated
above are transfers. We did not receive any comments on the estimation
of the portion that represents new resource use attributable to the
proposed rule. As shown in the table below, for this final rule the
full amounts are categorized as transfers--from either the federal
government or Title IV-E agencies to Title IV-E participants.
[[Page 66708]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Units
Primary estimate -------------------------------------------------
Category (millions) Discount rate Period covered
Year dollars (%) (years)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Budget Transfers $439 2019 7 10
(annualized)......................
362 2019 3 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From/To............................ From: Federal government To: Title IV-E participants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Transfers (annualized)....... 395 2019 7 10
326 2023 3 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From/To............................ From: Title IV-E agencies To: Title IV-E participants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Tribal Consultation Statement
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments, requires agencies to consult with Indian tribes
when regulations have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes and either impose substantial
direct compliance costs on tribes or preempt state law. Similarly,
ACF's Tribal Consultation Policy says that consultation is triggered
for a new rule adoption that significantly affects tribes, meaning the
new rule adoption has substantial direct effects on one on more Indian
tribes, on the amount or duration of ACF program funding, on the
delivery of ACF programs or services to one or more Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes. This final rule does not meet either
standard for consultation. Rather, it provides tribal title IV-E
agencies an option for implementing separate licensing or approval
standards for relative and kinship foster family homes. Accordingly, a
tribal title IV-E agency can adopt separate licensing or approval
standards for relative or kinship foster family homes but is not
required to do so. Shortly after publication of the NPRM, we held a
briefing session with title IV-E agencies and any other interested
partners on the contents of the NPRM. In developing this final rule, we
considered comments submitted by Indian tribes, tribal organizations
and consortia, and organizations that represent tribal interests.
Jeff Hild, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Administration for
Children and Families, approved this document on, 2023.
List of Subjects
45 CFR Part 1355
Administrative costs, Adoption Assistance, Child welfare, Fiscal
requirements (title IV-E), Grant programs--social programs, Statewide
information systems, Adoption and foster care, Child welfare, Grant
programs--social programs.
45 CFR Part 1356
Adoption and foster care, Child welfare, Grant programs--social
programs.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 93.658,
Foster Care Maintenance; 93.659, Adoption Assistance; 93.645, Child
Welfare Services--State Grants).
Dated: September 22, 2023.
Xavier Becerra,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, ACF amends 45 CFR parts
1355 and 1356 as follows:
PART 1355--GENERAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 1355 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 620 et seq., 42 U.S.C. 670 et seq.: 42
U.S.C. 1302.
0
2. In Sec. 1355.20 amend paragraph (a) by revising the definition of
``Foster family home'' to read as follows:
Sec. 1355.20 Definitions.
(a) * * *
Foster family home means, for the purpose of title IV-E
eligibility, the home of an individual or family licensed or approved
as meeting the standards established by the licensing or approval
authority(ies), that provides 24-hour out-of-home care for children.
The licensing or approval authority must be a state authority in the
state in which the foster family home is located, a tribal authority
with respect to a foster family home on or near an Indian Reservation,
or a tribal authority of a tribal title IV-E agency with respect to a
foster family home in the tribal title IV-E agency's service area.
Agencies may establish one set of foster family home licensing or
approval standards for all relative or kinship foster family homes that
are different from the set of standards used to license or approve all
non-relative foster family homes. Anything less than full licensure or
approval is insufficient for meeting title IV-E eligibility
requirements. Title IV-E agencies may, however, claim title IV-E
reimbursement during the period of time between the date a prospective
foster family home satisfies all requirements for licensure or approval
and the date the actual license is issued, not to exceed 60 days.
* * * * *
PART 1356--REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO TITLE IV-E
0
3. The authority citation for part 1356 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 620 et seq., 42 U.S.C. 670 et seq.; 42
U.S.C. 1302.
0
4. Amend Sec. 1356.21 by revising paragraphs (m)(1) and (2), and
adding paragraph (m)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 1356.21 Foster care maintenance payments program implementation
requirements.
* * * * *
(m) * * *
(1) The amount of the payments made for foster care maintenance to
assure their continued appropriateness, and that the amount made to a
licensed or approved relative or kinship foster family home is the same
as the amount that would have been made if the child was placed in a
licensed or approved non-relative foster family home;
[[Page 66709]]
(2) The amount of the payments made for adoption assistance to
assure their continued appropriateness; and
(3) The licensing or approval standards for child care institutions
and foster family homes.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-21081 Filed 9-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-73-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 28, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.