salaries and benefits for support staff performing activities in direct support of a program. In addition, line 6.m. includes eligible costs associated with the expenditures of funds from the Fraud Incentive Allocation provided the counties by [California Department of Social Services]. Since the incentive allocation is issued and tracked separately from the CalWORKs allocation and these costs are not necessarily benefits that are designed to meet ongoing basic needs or supportive services provided to families who are not employed, we have reported these costs under the category.” Since fraud and abuse prevention activities are ‘other’ ‘non-assistance’ included within the definition of costs,” it seems as if the expenditures related to “administrative California’s Incentive Allocation” should be reported under (line 6.j.) “Fraud “Administration” on the ACF-196 instead of (line 6.m.). “Other” Colorado, which described the expenditures reported under TANF Program Expenses simply as administration,” changed it description to moment sampling of TANF “Program “Random County level program administration for caseworkers who have direct contact with clients” after we requested additional information. Finally, Nevada clarified its description of “Program management and related expenditures” included things as salaries and benefits for “such TANF Employment Services workers and direct administrative costs associated with providing TANF services such as costs for supplies, utilities, and rental and maintenance of office space.” Additional Expenditures For expenditures that did not fit any of the predetermined subcategories, the ACF-196(SUP) provided additional rows so that States were able to list these additional expenditures. Twenty-four States reported expenditures for additional expenditures. This category totaled $77,284,364 representing 8.8 percent of non-assistance for April-June 2011. “other” The largest activity reported by a State under Additional Expenditures was New York’s case management services, which it describes as, involved with planning, linking, “Activities counseling, and monitoring/evaluating the client and/or family's position in achieving Examples of these activities are assessing current needs and evaluating services to prescribe, referring for services, setting and discussing client goals, discussing and evaluating
salaries and benefits for support staff performing activities in direct support of a program. In addition, line 6.m. includes eligible costs associated with the expenditures of funds from the Fraud Incentive Allocation provided the counties by [California Department of Social Services]. Since the incentive allocation is issued and tracked separately from the CalWORKs allocation and these costs are not necessarily benefits that are designed to meet ongoing basic needs or supportive services provided to families who are not employed, we have reported these costs under the ‘other’ ‘non-assistance’ category.” Since fraud and abuse prevention activities are included within the definition of “administrative costs,” it seems as if the expenditures related to California’s “Fraud Incentive Allocation” should be reported under “Administration” (line 6.j.) on the ACF-196 instead of “Other” (line 6.m.). Colorado, which described the expenditures reported under TANF Program Expenses simply as “Program administration,” changed it description to “Random moment sampling of TANF County level program administration for caseworkers who have direct contact with clients” after we requested additional information. Finally, Nevada clarified its description of “Program management and related expenditures” included “such things as salaries and benefits for TANF Employment Services workers and direct administrative costs associated with providing TANF services such as costs for supplies, utilities, and rental and maintenance of office space.” Additional Expenditures For expenditures that did not fit any of the predetermined subcategories, the ACF-196(SUP) provided additional rows so that States were able to list these additional expenditures. Twenty-four States reported expenditures for additional expenditures. This category totaled $77,284,364 representing 8.8 percent of “other” non-assistance for April-June 2011. The largest activity reported by a State under Additional Expenditures was New York’s case management services, which it describes as, “Activities involved with planning, linking, counseling, and monitoring/evaluating the client and/or family's position in achieving Examples of these activities are assessing current needs and evaluating services to prescribe, referring for services, setting and discussing client goals, discussing and evaluating
cra-june2011.docx