Author: Stephen Goldberg

HUD Lead Safe Housing Rule Guidance

Posted on by

The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has issued guidance to public housing authorities (PHA), Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) property owners and Project-Based Voucher (PBV) property owners regarding required actions when a child in a family receiving public housing, HCV or PBV assistance is identified as having an elevated blood level (EBLL).

The guidance identifies various actions that must be taken when a child under age 6 is identified with an EBLL, including notifying HUD, notifying the local health department if necessary, verification of the case if necessary, environmental investigation, control of the lead hazard within 30 days, notifying other residents and ongoing monitoring.  For public housing, the PHA is the responsible party.  For PBV, the property owner is the responsible party.  For HCV, the PHA is the responsible party but the property owner is responsible for certain response activities.

The guidance also reminds owners of PBV properties that receive more than $5,000 annually per unit in assistance that they must ensure that units built prior to 1978 receive a lead risk assessment, regardless of whether there are children under age 6 in residence, that occupants are informed of the result of the risk assessment, that identified lead paint hazards receive interim controls and that there is clearance by a certified risk assessor before re-occupancy.  PBV owners must also monitor and maintain any remaining lead based paint and hazard controls with annual visual inspections and reinspections with testing every two years.  (PIH Notice 2017-13, August 10, 2017.)

 

Accessibility in Special Occupancy Parks

Posted on by

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has issued guidance about application of the Americans with Disabilities Act and other disability laws to Special Occupancy Parks, which include recreational vehicle parks, incidental camping areas and tent camps.  HCD states that Special Occupancy Parks that are open to the public “likely” qualify as public accommodations and “thereby may be subject to” the Americans with Disabilities Act, the California Building Code, the Unruh Act, and the California Disabled Persons Act.

This means that Special Occupancy Parks must comply with the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act Standards for Accessible Design, including accessibility requirements for day use areas, nature trails, parking spaces, bathrooms and pools.  (Information Bulletin 2017-04, July 25, 2017.)

Child care immunization requirements

Posted on by

The California Department of Social Services has issued instructions immunization as a requirement for enrolling in child care.  SB 277 ended the personal belief exemption to mandatory immunization effective January 1, 2016.  This requirement applies to child case as explained in California Department of Education Management Bulletin 16-05.  Children who previously had a personal belief exemption from immunization will need to be immunized prior to entering kindergarten or seventh grade.  The immunization exemption for medical reasons remains.

The immunization requirement does not apply to licensed exempt child care.  If children switch from license exempt child care to licensed child care, the immunization requirement will apply.

SB 277 does not change the CalWORKs immunization requirements.  The CalWORKs requirement only applies to aided children under age six.  The personal belief and other good cause exceptions to immunizations remain for CalWORKs.  (ACL 17-86, August 11, 2017.)

CalFresh face-to-face interviews

Posted on by

The California Department of Social Services has issued instructions regarding face-to-face interviews for applications and recertifications.  7 C.F.R. § 273.2(e)(2) now gives states the option to conduct interviews for applications and recertifications by telephone.  California has been conducting telephone interviews under a federal waiver.  Now, California has accepted the option in the federal regulation to do telephone interviews.

Counties will routinely conduct telephone interviews in lieu of face-to-face interviews at application and recertification for all CalFresh households regardless of the length of the household’s certification period length.  Counties may conduct face-to-face interviews if determined necessary.  However, if an in person interview in the office would be a hardship, the county must do a home visit for the interview.   Counties must inform applicants of the opportunity to have a face-to-face interview on request.   The county must provide a notice of missed interview if the applicant or recipient misses a telephone interview.  The application process cannot be negatively affected because the county does a telephone interview.   (ACL 17-80, July 31, 2017.)

IHSS electronic timesheets

Posted on by

The California Department of Social Services has issued instructions regarding electronic timesheets for In Home Supportive Services (IHSS) providers.  IHSS timesheets can now be submitted electronically using the Electronic Timesheet Service (ETS).  The ETS allows providers and recipients to enter time worked and submit timesheets, and view the previous three months of timesheet history.

ETS is optional.  To use it, both the provider and the recipient need to enroll.  After both the provider and the recipient are enrolled, the provider submits the timesheet and the recipient approves it.  Providers will not be able to submit their timesheets for recipient approval if the timesheet has errors.  Examples of errors that will block submitting the time sheet are hours claimed exceed remaining recipient authorized hours , hours claimed exceed remaining provider assigned hours,  no remaining recipient authorized hours , no remaining provider assigned hours, hours claimed exceed weekly maximum, and hours claimed exceed monthly overtime maximum and hours exceed overtime exemption limitation.

Providers and recipients can opt-out of ETS at any time.  (ACL 17-76, July 14, 2017.)

State AFDC-FC eligibility for registered non-California guardianship orders

Posted on by

The California Department of Social Services has issued instructions implementing the court order in Ramirez v. Lightbourne, Sacramento Superior Court No. 34-2015-80002216, regarding eligibility for State AFDC Foster Care (AFDC-FC) benefits for guardians with non-California guardianship orders.  The state AFDC-FC program provides cash aid to non-relative legal guardians.  (See Welf. & Inst. Code § 11405; MPP § 45-203.)  Previously, non-relative guardians with non-California guardianship orders could only be eligible for State AFDC-FC by obtaining a California guardianship order.  Ramirez held that non-relative legal guardians with non-California guardianship orders are eligible for State AFDC-FC if the guardianship order is registered with a California court.

Counties must inform applicants for State Only Foster Care benefits who have a guardianship order issued by another state that they may be eligible for benefits either by registering their non-California guardianship order with a California court or by obtaining a new guardianship order from a California court.  (ACL 17-82, July 27, 2017.)