M E M O R A N D U M
TO: EES Program Administrators
FROM: Dr. Carla Whiteside-Hicks, EES Director
DATE: February 22, 2024
SUBJECT: Implementation Instructions - KEESM Revision 115
This memo provides implementation instructions and information for the following April 01, 2024, policy changes in the Kansas Economic and Employment Services Manual (KEESM).
- Child Care
- Child Care Non-Cooperation – See summary of Changes section I.A.2. With the July 1, 2023 KEESM Revision, changes were made to the way non-cooperation with Child Support Services (CSS) affects eligibility for Child Care. With that change, there was some inaccurate, contradictory language added to KEESM 2165 and 2165.3 that affected the way non-cooperation would affect eligibility for child care if the non-cooperation was for the absent parent of a child who was not receiving child care benefits at the time the non-cooperation occurred. That inaccurate, contradictory language has been removed from the KEESM with this revision. Both at application and at review, EES must ensure that the caretaker does not have unresolved non-cooperation(s) with Child Support Services regarding the absent parent of any of the children in the current nuclear family before eligibility can be established. If a non-cooperation exists, a request must be sent to the parent/caretaker allowing them 10 days to reestablish cooperation, unless the parent/caretaker clearly states that they will not cooperate. If the parent/caretaker fails to cooperate and has not established good cause, the review application will be denied and a penalty applied as appropriate. It should be noted that the examples listed in the Implementation Memo from the July 1, 2023 change were and are still correct. However, some additional examples are needed to illustrate the correct way to deal with various non-cooperation scenarios.
Examples:
- Mom applies for Child Care. The nuclear family consists of Mom and her two children, Susie and Sam. The children have different absent fathers. Assistance is only being requested for Susie. In processing the application, the worker discovers that there is an existing non-cooperation that has not been resolved from 2 years ago when the family was receiving Food Assistance. That non-cooperation was regarding Sam’s father. In this situation, the application should be pended, allowing 10 days for cooperation. Cooperation must be established before Child Care can be approved. If the non-cooperation is not resolved, the application will be denied.
- Same situation as example 1, except Mom is requesting Child Care for both Susie and Sam.
In this situation, again, the application should be pended, allowing 10 days for cooperation. Cooperation must be established before Child Care can be approved. If the non-cooperation is not resolved, the application will be denied.
- Ongoing Child Care case with the nuclear family consisting of Mom and her two children, Ronnie and Rosie, each with different absent fathers. Child Care benefits are being received only for Ronnie. Mom submits a review application at the end of the current eligibility period, again requesting Child Care for Ronnie. When the worker processes the review it is discovered that at some point during the current eligibility period, Mom failed to cooperate with CSS regarding Ronnie’s absent parent and has not reestablished cooperation. A request is sent allowing Mom 10 days to reestablish cooperation, but she fails to do so. This review application should be denied and a penalty should be applied.
- Same situation as example 3, except when Mom submits her review application, she only requests Child Care for Rosie. A request is sent allowing Mom 10 days to reestablish cooperation, but she fails to do so. In this situation again, the review application should be denied and a penalty should be applied.
- Same situation as example 3, except when Mom submits her review application, she requests Child Care for both Ronnie and Rosie. A request is sent allowing Mom 10 days to reestablish cooperation, but she fails to do so. This situation would also result in the review application being denied and a penalty being applied.
- Mom applies for Child Care. The nuclear family consists of Mom, her two children Susie and Sam who have different absent fathers, and Mom’s nephew David. She’s requesting Child Care for all three children. In processing the application, the worker discovers that there is an existing non-cooperation that has not been resolved from 2 years ago when the family was receiving Food Assistance. The non-cooperation was regarding Sam’s father. In this situation, the application should be pended, allowing 10 days for cooperation. Cooperation must be established before Child Care can be approved for Susie and Sam. If cooperation is not resolved, Child Care would be denied for Susie and Sam, but approved for David, as Mom is not a parent or cohabiting partner of a parent to David.
- Ongoing Child Care Case with the nuclear family consisting of Mom and her two children, Ronnie and Rosie who have different absent fathers, and Mom’s niece Mary. Child Care benefits are being received for all three children. Mom submits her review application at the end of the current eligibility period, again requesting Child Care for all three children. When the worker processes the review it is discovered that at some point during the current eligibility period, Mom failed to cooperate with CSS regarding Ronnie’s absent parent and has not reestablished cooperation. A request is sent allowing Mom 10 days to reestablish cooperation regarding the absent parent of Ronnie and Rosie, but she fails to do so. This review application would be denied for Ronnie and Rosie with a penalty applied, but approved for Mary since Mom is not a parent or cohabiting partner of a parent to Mary.
- Ongoing FA and Child Care case with the nuclear family consisting of Mom and her 2 children, Patty and Paul. She is receiving Child Care benefits only for Patty. During the Child Care eligibility period, Mom fails to cooperate regarding the absent father of Paul. Mom’s needs are removed from the FA case. At the end of the Child Care eligibility period, Mom submits her review application, and while processing it, the worker finds that Mom remains in non-cooperation status regarding Paul’s absent father. Since Paul is a part of the nuclear family, cooperation must be reestablished before additional benefits can be approved. A request is sent allowing Mom 10 days to reestablish cooperation, but she fails to do so. This review application will be denied, and Mom must reestablish cooperation with CSS before eligibility for Child Care can be re-established. However, no penalty would be applied to this case, as Paul was not receiving Child Care benefits.
- Mom applies for Child Care. The nuclear family consists of Mom and her two children Aaron and Andrew. In processing the application, the worker finds that there is an old unresolved non-cooperation regarding the absent father of an older child, Abby, who is 18 and no longer a part of the nuclear family. Abby’s absent father is not the father of Aaron and Andrew. Since Abby is not a member of the current nuclear family, this non-cooperation does not affect eligibility for Child Care and if otherwise eligible, Child Care would be approved.
- Mom applies for Child Care. The nuclear family consists of Mom and her two children, Susie and Sam. The children have different absent fathers. Assistance is only being requested for Susie. In processing the application, the worker discovers that there is an existing non-cooperation that has not been resolved from 2 years ago when the family was receiving Food Assistance. That non-cooperation was regarding Sam’s father. In this situation, the application should be pended, allowing 10 days for cooperation. Cooperation must be established before Child Care can be approved. If the non-cooperation is not resolved, the application will be denied.
- Child Care Non-Cooperation – See summary of Changes section I.A.2. With the July 1, 2023 KEESM Revision, changes were made to the way non-cooperation with Child Support Services (CSS) affects eligibility for Child Care. With that change, there was some inaccurate, contradictory language added to KEESM 2165 and 2165.3 that affected the way non-cooperation would affect eligibility for child care if the non-cooperation was for the absent parent of a child who was not receiving child care benefits at the time the non-cooperation occurred. That inaccurate, contradictory language has been removed from the KEESM with this revision. Both at application and at review, EES must ensure that the caretaker does not have unresolved non-cooperation(s) with Child Support Services regarding the absent parent of any of the children in the current nuclear family before eligibility can be established. If a non-cooperation exists, a request must be sent to the parent/caretaker allowing them 10 days to reestablish cooperation, unless the parent/caretaker clearly states that they will not cooperate. If the parent/caretaker fails to cooperate and has not established good cause, the review application will be denied and a penalty applied as appropriate. It should be noted that the examples listed in the Implementation Memo from the July 1, 2023 change were and are still correct. However, some additional examples are needed to illustrate the correct way to deal with various non-cooperation scenarios.
- Food Assistance
This memo provides implementation instructions and information for the following April 1, 2024 policy changes:
On December 14, 2023, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) published the final rule for Race and Ethnicity Data Collection. This rule revised SNAP regulations (7 CFR 272.6(g)) that cover the collection and reporting of race and ethnicity data by State agencies. The final rule removes the option for State agencies to use visual observation as an acceptable alternative method to collect race and ethnicity data. The following guidance provides direction on how to collect and enter this data on KEES.
Race and ethnicity information indicated on the application shall be used. If the information is not voluntarily provided by the household on the application, the worker must ask the applicant to identify their racial/ethnic origin during the interview. However, the following stipulations are necessary when the self-identification process is used in either the application process or the interview:
- Applicants shall be assured by the worker that information is used for statistical purposes only in determining if the program is administered without discrimination. Racial/ethnic data shall have no effect on an applicant’s eligibility to participate and it will not be used for discriminatory purposes.
- The applicant shall be advised that the information is used to ensure that benefits are available to all eligible persons regardless of race, color, or national origin.
- Applicants shall be advised that the information given will be confidential and, should they decide not to provide this information, such a decision will not have an adverse effect on determining their eligibility.
- Applicants shall be assured by the worker that information is used for statistical purposes only in determining if the program is administered without discrimination. Racial/ethnic data shall have no effect on an applicant’s eligibility to participate and it will not be used for discriminatory purposes.
Race and ethnicity reported by applicant will be entered on KEES demographic page. If individual does not disclose race and/or ethnicity information on the application or during the interview, the “unknown” option for race and ethnicity will be entered on the KEES demographic.
Page Last Updated: 6/12/24 2:29 PM