[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 [www.gpo.gov]
[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 [email protected].

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. https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/f-kinshi/); 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. www.gu.org and www.nicwa.org; (``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:
     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.).
     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).
     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. https://tribalinformationexchange.org/files/products/GrandfamiliesResourceList2022.pdf; 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 Regulations.gov. 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]]

     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: www.grandfamilies.org/Portals/0/16-ChildrenThriveinGrandfamilies.pdf6 AARP. (2022).
     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.
     Increases the number of available out-of-home placement 
resources and prevents unnecessary group or child care institution 
(also known as congregate care) placements.
     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.
     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.
     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).
     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.
     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.
     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.
     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