Deletion of regulations pertaining to certain social services programs under the Social Security act: Office of Human Development Services, HHS. Final rule

Pub. L 97-35, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, combined the social services programs administered under title XX of the Social Security Act in the States and in the Territories under titles 1, IV-A, X, XIV and XVI (AABD), into a single block grant known as "The Title XX Block Grant to States for Social Services." The block grant program is effective October 1, 1981. Since existing regulations governing those programs do not apply to the block grant program, this rule deletes both entire Parts and references within a Part that apply to the above grant-in-aid programs. These regulations also remove the Department's day care requirements which were issued under statutory authorities that no longer exist as a result of various changes made by Pub. L 97-35.     

Grant programs for schools and hospitals and for buildings owned by units of local government and public care institutions, amendment of regulations: Department of Energy. Final rule

The Department of Energy (DOE) today issues a final rulemaking amending existing regulations for the administration of the grant programs providing schools, hospitals, units of local government, and public care institutions with financial assistance for the purpose of reducing energy consumption. The revisions are made as a result of experience obtained during the operation of two grant cycles, and are made for the purpose of reducing the administrative burdens on institutions and States participating in these programs and providing greater flexibility to States and institutions in their implementation of the program.     

Maternal and child assistance programs; model application form--HHS, Department of Agriculture. Notice

This notice publishes a model application form that States have the option of using in full, in part, with modification or not at all. It would be used by pregnant women or by children under 6 years of age to apply for benefits simultaneously under several congressionally specified "maternal and child assistance programs": (1) The Medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act; (2) the Health Care for the Homeless grant program under section 340 of the Public Health Service Act; (3) the Maternal and Child Health (MCH) Services block grand program under title V of the Social Security Act; (4) the Migrant and Community Health Centers programs under sections 329 and 330 of the Public Health Service Act; (5) the Head Start program under the Head Start Act; and (6) the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) under section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966. This notice is published in accordance with section 6506(a) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 (OBRA '89) (Pub. L. 101-239), which requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to develop a model application form for the specified maternal and child assistance programs for publication in the Federal Register. This model application form represents a first effort to develop a joint model application form covering the programs mandated by Congress. If modifications are necessary due to changes in program requirements, or States or other user experience, they will be pursued.     

The impact of Federal Alcohol and Drug Abuse block grants on state and local government substance abuse program expenditures: the role of federal oversight

Are the federal Alcohol and Drug Abuse (ADA) block grant funds substituting for or supplementing state and local government spending on substance abuse? Using panel data on state and local government substance abuse programs, this study explores the fiscal effects of the ADA block grant money and the increased enforcement (after 1989) of federal restrictions on state spending of ADA block grants. The findings here reveal that for the current period, the federal ADA grant has no statistically significant effect on state and local government substance abuse spending both before and after 1989, and the increased enforcement of federal restrictions on the ADA grants after 1989 does not change this result. An additional finding is that lagged ADA grants have had a large effect on substance abuse spending both before and after 1989--a feature of the program not considered in previous studies.     

Child abuse and neglect prevention and treatment program--HHS. Final rule

This rule contains a new basic State grant requirement to implement the Child Abuse Amendments of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-457). As a condition of receiving State grants under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, States must establish programs and/or procedures within the State's child protective service system to respond to reports of medical neglect, including reports of the withholding of medically indicated treatment for disabled infants with life-threatening conditions. Other changes in regulations required by these Amendments will be published as a separate NPRM at a later date.     

Child abuse and neglect prevention and treatment program--HHS. Notice of proposed rulemaking

This rule proposes a new basic State grant requirement to implement the Child Abuse Amendments of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-457). As a condition of receiving State grants under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, States must establish programs and/or procedures within the State's child protective service system to respond to reports of medical neglect, including reports of the withholding of medically indicated treatment for disabled infants with life-threatening conditions. Other changes in regulations required by these Amendments will be published as a separate NPRM at a later date.     

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF). Administration for Children and Families, HHS. Final rule

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) issues regulations governing key provisions of the new welfare block grant program enacted in 1996--the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, program. It replaces the national welfare program know as Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and the related programs known as the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program (JOBS) and the Emergency Assistance (EA) program. These rules reflect new Federal, State, and Tribal relationships in the administration of welfare programs; a new focus on moving recipients into work; and a new emphasis on program information, measurement, and performance. They also reflect the Administration's commitment to regulatory reform.     

Implementation of section 403(a)(2) of Social Security Act; bonus to reward decrease in illegitimacy ratio. Administration for Children and Families, HHS. Final rule

The Administration for Children and Families is issuing a final rule describing how we will award a bonus to those States that experience the largest decreases in out-of-wedlock childbearing and also reduce their abortion rates. The total amount of the bonus will be up to $100 million in each of fiscal years 1999 through 2002, and the award for each eligible State in a given year will be $25 million or less. This incentive provision is a part of the welfare reform block grant program enacted in 1996--the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, program.     

Grants to states for construction or acquisition of state home facilities--VA. final rule

This document amends the "Medical" regulations regarding applications for grants to States for the construction or acquisition of State home facilities. VA awards grants based on a priority ranking system. Usually, the higher priority applications deplete the available funding to the extent that the lowest ranking application to be offered funding is offered only a partial grant. This final rule provides that if the lowest ranking grant application receives only a partial grant in a fiscal year and if such grant award is partial solely because VA has insufficient funds for a full grant, the application would be placed at the top of the list within its priority group for the next fiscal year. Often applicants are hesitant to accept a partial grant because of the uncertainty of receiving an additional grant the next fiscal year. This final rule will encourage States to accept a partial grant by creating the likelihood that the State would receive an additional grant in the subsequent fiscal year. Accordingly, this will help ensure that VA would be able to award grants to higher priority applicants that might otherwise reject partial funding. Also, this final rule provides that the applicant receiving partial funding and receiving priority as a proposed will not be required to submit a second application for additional funds in the subsequent fiscal year, but could be required to update information already submitted. The first application would normally be adequate because the grant award in the second fiscal year would be for the same project which received the partial grant award. Further, the final rule provides that the total amount awarded for the application may not exceed 65 percent of the total cost of the project as determined at the time of the second grant award for that grant application. This is consistent with the statutory requirement that limits grant awards to no more than 65 percent of the estimated cost construction or acquisition.     

Grants to states for construction or acquisition of state home facilities--VA. Final regulations

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending its medical care regulations, Grants to States for Construction or Acquisition of State Home Facilities (38 CFR part 17), to implement section 206 of the Veterans' Benefits and Services Act of 1988 enacted on May 20, 1988. This section changes from July 1 to August 15, the date on which VA will determine the priority of applications for construction or acquisition grants for State Extended Care Facilities for purposes of the priority list. Section 206 also provides the Secretary authority to conditionally approve an application and obligate funds for a grant is the Secretary determines that the State can meet all remaining Federal requirements within 90 days. At the same time, VA is updating the States home grant standards and veteran population of the various States set forth in these regulations. These revisions will assist the States in meeting deadlines for the priority list and subsequent grant awards.     

Consultation with state and local officiaLs prior to awarding community health center grants--PHS. Notice

Section 1923 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. 300y-2) requires that if a State does not apply for a Primary Care Block Grant under section 1924 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300y-3), or does not qualify for such a grant, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will use those funds not allotted to States participating in the block grant to make grants under section 330 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 254c) to individual community health centers (CHCs). Section 1923 also requires that the Secretary consult with the chief executive officer of the State and with appropriate local officials before making such grants for community health centers in a State. This notice describes the manner in which the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) will fulfill the requirement for consultation. In addition, it solicits comments from local officials regarding CHCs in their areas.     

Increasing Evidence-Based Programs in Criminal and Juvenile Justice: A Report from the Front Line

For the past 5 years in the United States, there has been an increased emphasis on evidence-based programs, and, in particular, the promotion of experimental designs as the highest standard of evidence. This interest has been fueled by the Federal government's demand for accountability that links budget allocation with program performance. The National Institute of Justice, the research, development and evaluation agency within the Office of Programs in the U.S. Department of Justice is undertaking a number of efforts to improve the quality of evaluation research and address the need for evidence-based programs. These efforts have focused on making improvements upfront in the grant selection process so that well-designed evaluations will be undertaken and in the management and monitoring of ongoing evaluation research grants so that implementation and design issues can be identified and addressed. Evaluability assessments is a key strategy that NIJ is relying on increasingly to identify programs that have a high likelihood of being successfully evaluated. Whether these efforts will lead to an overall increase in the rigor of NIJ-supported evaluations remains unanswered at this time. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of The National Academies or the National Institute of Justice.     

FUNDING COMMUNITY POLICING TO REDUCE CRIME: HAVE COPS GRANTS MADE A DIFFERENCE?*

Research Summary: This research examines how funding from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), has affected violent and property crime rates in the United States from 1995 to 1999. Drawing on six years of panel data, we examine the effects of three types of awards made by COPS to 6,100 law enforcement agencies serving more than 145 million citizens. We estimate their impact on crime reduction over time in jurisdictions receiving funding and controlling for baseline levels of crime, socioeconomic characteristics, city size, and population diversity and mobility. Our analyses suggest that COPS hiring and innovative grant programs have resulted in significant reductions in local crime rates in cities with populations greater than 10,000 for both violent and nonviolent offenses. Multivariate analysis shows that in cities with populations greater than 10,000, an increase in one dollar of hiring grant funding per resident contributed to a corresponding decline of 5.26 violent crimes and 21.63 property crimes per 100,000 residents. Similarly, an increase in one dollar of innovative grant funding per resident has contributed to a decline of 12.93 violent crimes and 45.53 property crimes per 100,000 persons. In addition, the findings suggest that COPS grants have had no significant negative effect on violent and property crime rates in cities with less than 10,000 population. Policy Implications: The findings of this study imply that COPS program funding to medium‐ and large‐size cities has been an effective force in reducing both violent and property crime. Federal government grants made directly to law enforcement agencies to hire additional officers and promote innovations may be an effective way to reduce crime on a national scale.     

From shared cost to block funding and beyond: the politics of health insurance in Canada

This paper takes as its starting point recent major changes in arrangements between the federal and provincial government in Canada concerning the sharing of costs for health insurance programs. The switch from a shared cost (conditional grant) to a modified block funding system was motivated by federal desires to limit and make predictable their expenditures, by provincial desires to increase the flexibility of their allocation of funds and by a mutual desire to limit any growth of health care costs as a proportion of GNP. Concerns related directly to improving medical care delivery were insignificant The changes will effectively centralize responsibility for program financing and program delivery, thus providing a powerful incentive for provincial governments to apply very strong measures to control costs. For reasons largely external to the relationship between public sector insurers and the suppliers of medical services, these attempts are unlikely to be successful in the short run. The probable impact of this difficulty on government and members of the health care delivery system is assessed.     

Executive federalism and Medicaid demonstration waivers: implications for policy and democratic process

Executive federalism emphasizes collaboration between the executive branches at the national and state levels to transform grant programs through the implementation process. In this regard, Medicaid demonstration waivers loomed large during the presidencies of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. This article documents and compares the volume and substance of section 1115 Medicaid waiver activity under the two presidencies. From the perspective of policy performance, Medicaid demonstration waivers provide modest support for the view that states serve as laboratories for policy learning in the health care arena. More broadly, the waivers have not yielded a major solution to the problem of the uninsured and are unlikely to do so. At the same time, they have not (as some have suggested) been a subterranean force for the erosion of Medicaid. To the contrary, these waivers have often enhanced health services for low-income people; above all, they have helped preserve Medicaid as an entitlement by undercutting support for those seeking to convert the program into a block grant. From the perspective of the democratic process, we find that Congress has been a more significant player in shaping waivers than the executive federalism model suggests. While the decision processes surrounding Medicaid waivers often fall short of democratic standards with respect to transparency and opportunities for public input, they still compare favorably to certain alternatives.     

FAMILY COURT IMPROVEMENT AND THE ART OF GRANTSMANSHIP: A JUDGE'S PERSPECTIVE

Many American courts face funding obstacles as they try to create and implement unified family court processes that have not been part of the traditional family court adversarial process. To create new staff positions, build and equip adequate facilities, and create and implement innovative programs, grant funding may be available to supplement what local and state governments provide. While social science research confirms that children are adversely affected by exposure to high‐conflict family litigation and domestic violence, many communities have few affordable and available resources to address these issues. This article presents lessons and principles that one court learned as it applied for a grant to design programs for high‐conflict families and families with domestic violence history.     

Consultations with state and local officials prior to awarding community health center grants--HRSA. Notice

Section 1923 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (42 U.S.C. 300y-2) requires that if a State does not apply for a Primary Care Block Grant under section 1924 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300y-3), or does not qualify for such a grant, a Secretary of Health and Human Services will use those funds not allotted to States participating in the block grant to make grants under section 330 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 254c) to individual community health centers (CHCs). Section 1923 also requires that the Secretary consult with the chief executive officer of the State and with appropriate local officials before making such grants for community health centers in a State. This notice describes the manner in which the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) will fulfill the requirement for consultation. In addition, it solicits comments from local officials regarding CHCs in their areas. A State may elect to supply comments under the system established in accordance with 45 CFR Part 100, "Intergovernmental Review of the Department of Health and Human Services Programs and Activities." (See 48 FR 29188, June 24, 1983.)     

Disaster,Displacement, and Casework: Uncertainty and Assistance after Hurricane Katrina

Casework in the United States in social welfare programs has been limited in what caseworkers can do, as what they do has been tightly structured by rules. Recently, scholars have argued that episodic assistance in disaster brings sympathy in public policy more than restriction. The sympathy after disaster brings new money, and individual assistance is in turn the subject of casework. This article relies upon interviews, observations, and government documents to assess how casework served displaced people after Hurricane Katrina. The article finds that caseworkers after Katrina were caught in a program that would end at some uncertain time, and with new and unclear rules that changed frequently, making the sympathy difficult to enact for many of the poorest people. Casework after disaster is episodic and convened by nonprofits and, after Katrina, paid for by a large grant and then written into statute. Assistance for displaced people is likely to continue, given the expectation of more disasters and rising sea levels. The question of how it is like or unlike other forms of assistance and what sympathy in policy means in helping displaced people is therefore likely to continue to matter.     

Bicameralism and Geographic Politics: Allocating Funds in the House and Senate

Because they represent different kinds of constituencies—states versus parts of states—senators and House members have different incentives in constructing federal distributive programs. In order to claim credit for providing particularized benefits, House members need to use policy tools—earmarks and narrow categorical programs—that target funds to their constituencies. Senators, by contrast, are able to claim credit for the large formula grants that distribute the bulk of intergovernmental grant money. Examining House‐Senate interactions in one of the largest distributive programs, federal aid to states for surface transportation, I show that the different bases of representation in the House and Senate structure the chambers' preferences on distributive programs and affect the outcomes of interchamber conflicts.     

MEDIATION AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

This article summarizes policies and procedures used by various courts in the United States in responding to domestic violence. Over 200 courts and services were contacted under a grant from the State Justice Institute in developing this survey. The article covers the profile of mediation services, mediator training regarding domestic violence, screening for domestic violence and protocols used.