HHS05 Improving Protection for Children Receiving Child Care from Unlicensed Providers

Summary
Current state policies regarding criminal background clearances for unlicensed, subsidized child care do not provide adequate protections for children due to delays in obtaining information on providers with criminal or child abuse backgrounds. Limiting payments to providers prior to completing the background screening process will improve protection for children receiving child care.

Background
California’s welfare-to-work program, CalWORKs, provides families with paid child care while they are working or participating in CalWORKs activities. Families may choose unlicensed—or license-exempt—child care providers who are either relatives or individuals taking care of their children and one other family’s children in the child’s or provider’s home. [1]

Sixty-two percent of CalWORKs recipients in the initial stage of participation choose license-exempt care. [2] License-exempt providers who wish to receive payments for subsidized child care under CalWORKs or California Department of Education programs are required to be screened for the TrustLine registry—the state’s registry of in-home child care providers who have passed a criminal and child abuse background check. County welfare departments and other subsidized care payment agencies use the TrustLine program to request background investigations. [3] The state pays the cost of the TrustLine background checks at $155 per person. [4]

The California Department of Social Services (DSS) estimates that in Fiscal Year 2004–2005, it will use the TrustLine program to screen 26,844 cases for CalWORKs and other subsidized child care. [5] The estimated cost for the TrustLine program in FY 2004–2005 is $4.5 million. [6]

The TrustLine system is designed to protect children being cared for by unlicensed providers while giving parents the choice of using family, friends and neighbors to care for their children. At the same time, CalWORKs endeavors to make sure that parents have access to child care as quickly as possible so that they can work or participate in CalWORKs activities.

The Health and Human Services Team has found that parents participating in the CalWORKS program may obtain services from providers who are being paid by the state for providing child care services for a year or more while their background check is being completed. [7] This situation has come about primarily because the state is subject to federal fiscal sanctions for not achieving specified CalWORKs work/participation rates, which are expected to increase under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program reauthorization this year. [8]

TrustLine processes
To continue getting paid, unlicensed providers must apply to the TrustLine Registry through their local child care resource and referral (R&R) agency within 28 days from the date they begin providing DSS CalWORKs child care. [9] Providers must complete a paper TrustLine application and be fingerprinted at the R&R agency or a local law enforcement office. Applicants also must state on their application under penalty of perjury whether they have been convicted of a crime, and then must provide specific information about that crime.

Although providers may be fingerprinted manually, 90 percent are fingerprinted via an electronic technology that transfers images of fingerprints in seconds through the Live Scan system run by Sylvan/Identix, a private vendor. [10] The local R&R agencies mail the TrustLine application and manual fingerprints to the DSS Community Care Licensing Division, which then sends the fingerprint cards to Sylvan/Identix to be scanned and electronically transmitted to the California Department of Justice (DOJ). DSS manually enters TrustLine application information into its TrustLine database.

DOJ matches fingerprints against its California Criminal History system and matches names against the Child Abuse Central Index, then electronically transmits fingerprints to the FBI for matching against the FBI Criminal History system. [11] Eighty-five percent of all child care fingerprints have no criminal record match. DOJ processes these fingerprints in one-to-three days. Eight percent of the time there is a match with complete information, which DOJ processes within 7–14 days. The other 7 percent of the time, there is a match with incomplete information, which can take from one month to a year or longer to process depending on the ability of local agencies to provide the missing information. [12]

DSS receives match or clearance information back from DOJ electronically and then, in the case of a criminal record match, determines whether the crime is exemptible or requires further investigation before making that determination. Sometimes DSS needs information from an applicant, but because the provider is receiving payment for child care, he or she has little incentive to assist in expediting the application. DSS may take from one-to-seven days to process applications with no criminal match, and up to six months for cases requiring further investigation or additional information. [13] In the case of a child abuse record match, DSS must investigate each one to determine whether the provider poses a risk to the child. [14]

The current system experiences delays due to several factors including the manual inputting of TrustLine applications, the necessity of retrieving information from local agencies, and the time it takes to investigate convictions, child abuse reports and arrests. Follow-up on child abuse reports is labor-intensive. Arrests are especially problematic, requiring on-site interviews with victims, witnesses, and alleged perpetrators. DSS is unable to investigate certain types of arrest-only cases due to the amount of time they take and their overall workload. In the meantime, these providers continue to receive child care payments. [15]

TrustLine results
Of the 24,097 applications for TrustLine in 2003, 12 percent were denied clearances due to criminal or child abuse records that were not exempted. These applicants received child care payments for between two months to a year because of the policy of paying unlicensed providers for child care services pending background check clearance. [16] Another 2,170 applications were still pending clearance as of May 27, 2004, presumably because the state was still investigating the applicants’ criminal or child abuse records. [17]

Between January 1, 1998, and December 8, 2003, the Kern County Office of Education paid more than $2.8 million to 650 providers who were ultimately denied TrustLine registration. [18] No data could be found on whether any children were harmed pending TrustLine’s denial of an applicant due to a criminal record or history of child abuse.

Notifications of background check results
Community Care Licensing electronically notifies the California Child Care Resource and Referral (R&R) Network weekly with information on applications it has cleared, denied, or closed. [19] Licensing also generates an automated letter to the applicant. The R&R Network notifies the local R&R agency by letter if the record is clear. If the case is denied or closed, the network notifies the local R&R agency and the payment agency—either the county welfare department or another payment agency—via UPS to document that they received the information, and then follows up with the payment agency to make sure payment has stopped. The network doesn’t use e-mail because of confidentiality concerns. [20] UPS notifications cost almost $18,000 per year. [21] Costs for U.S. mail notifications cannot be broken out separately.

If Community Care Licensing has not yet entered the application data into its database, its notification to the R&R Network does not include any associated child care payment information. In those cases, the network notifies the county welfare department, the local R&R agencies, and all subsidized child care payment agencies in the applicant’s county so that no future referrals are made to that provider, and payment is stopped. [22]

Automation improvements
Community Care Licensing plans to implement a process that was tested in Kern County where Sylvan/Identix inputs the TrustLine application with the fingerprints at the front end of the process. [23] When the provider application and fingerprints are entered upfront, the application data will be on Community Care Licensing’s database at the time DOJ information is received.

Community Care Licensing indicated that the documents to change the current Sylvan/Identix contract to implement the new process are in the approval process. DSS, the Health and Human Services Agency, the Department of General Services and the Department of Finance must approve the contract. [24]

The R&R Network wants to update its database to add fields to match those in the Community Care Licensing TrustLine database including the name of the licensing analyst, and the reasons for closures such as incomplete application. [25] Now, providers call the network to get information, which requires network staff to call Community Care Licensing and then call the provider back. If the network’s system had the information, network staff would not have to call DSS, and the customer would get better service. For the past two years, DSS has declined to share this information with the Network over concerns about confidentiality. Community Care Licensing reports that it is now working with the network to determine if it can electronically release the information to them. [26]

Other states’ practices
Other states’ practices and licensing standards for unlicensed child care providers vary widely. Background checks are one part of how states address license-exempt care. For example:

  • Wisconsin requires criminal background checks before child care begins except for “provisional” providers who may provide care under limited circumstances for up to six months followed by an in-home inspection; [27]
  • Florida requires only child abuse screenings on license-exempt providers, but only has 10 percent license-exempt care; [28]
  • Illinois requires only a child abuse background check and pays pending the results; however, the child abuse check takes only 10 days; [29]
  • Minnesota requires all license-exempt providers, including relatives, to have child abuse and criminal background checks, and counties have the option of paying providers pending the results; [30]
  • In Michigan, exempt providers must pass child abuse and criminal background checks before payment; [31]
  • Pennsylvania requires both child abuse and criminal background checks, and pays pending background check results; [32] and
  • North Carolina has only 3 percent unlicensed care. [33] License-exempt providers can get paid pending the results of the criminal background check only if no other child care is available. North Carolina also does background checks on relatives. [34]

Conclusions
The current system does not meet one of its key objectives—protecting children from providers with criminal or child abuse backgrounds that put children at risk. The manner in which the state has implemented this process is inconsistent with this objective because it allows persons with prior criminal or child abuse records to provide subsidized child care until their records are obtained and investigated, processes that can take more than a year to complete.

    Recommendations
    To make the TrustLine process operate as it was intended, the state should limit payments pending TrustLine background check clearances, and make the background clearance process more efficient.

  1. The Governor should work with the Legislature to limit approval of child care provider reimbursements pending TrustLine clearance to the standard processing time for clear records (60 days to allow for manual fingerprint delays).

  2. By March 2005, the Health and Human Services Agency, or its successor, should amend its regulations (Eligibility and Assistance Standards Manual Section 47- 620.11) to require applications for TrustLine clearance—including fingerprints—be made within two weeks of the beginning of child care service instead of the current requirement of 28 days.

    3. These recommendations would shorten the period of time child care is paid while the state is waiting for additional information on crimes or child abuse, or investigating individual circumstances. These recommendations will affect only 15 percent of all applicants—those who have criminal or child abuse records (and possibly some minimal number with manual fingerprints). The CalWORKs goal is met for 85 percent of the caseload, and parents have additional time to consider other child care choices. Changing the payment policy will encourage providers to get fingerprinted more quickly and use Live Scan, and will increase pressure on administrative agencies to make Live Scan more readily available statewide.

  3. The Governor should work with the Legislature to deny payment to providers pending background check clearance if the applicant has declared on his or her application that he or she has been convicted of a crime.

    4. This recommendation would increase protection for children. Although the state may exempt some convictions, local agencies cannot make these distinctions. If parents are informed upfront that child care will not be paid to persons convicted of a crime prior to a TrustLine clearance, they can make other arrangements pending receipt of the clearance, which could take several months.

  4. The Department of Social Services (DSS) should expedite the approval of the expanded TrustLine contract—based on the Kern County test program—to eliminate delays in processing and matching applications and fingerprints, improve data quality, and free staff resources for other higher priority work.

  5. DSS should share additional information electronically with the California Child Care Resource and Referral Network that would allow the network to help applicants to better understand their rights and resolve their questions. This information includes the name of the licensing analyst who can answer the applicant’s questions about his/her application and whether the violation is exemptible.

    6. This recommendation would improve customer service and would not compromise confidentiality since DSS contractually requires the network to meet the same standards of confidentiality that are required of the department. [35]

  6. DSS should inform the California Child Care Resource and Referral Network to use e-mail for notifications of clear or closed status to expedite notifications and save money. E-mails could be sent with receipts to ensure that payment agencies received and opened them.

    7. This recommendation would save $18,000 by eliminating UPS and some undetermined additional cost savings by eliminating U.S. Postal Service notifications.

Fiscal Impact
These recommendations will improve program effectiveness and customer service. There are no savings from earlier denials of child care providers since child care would be provided by a different provider. Minimal savings would derive from a reduction in telephone calls by the R&R Network to DSS, a reduction in manual data entry in DSS, and elimination of mailing costs for the network associated with denials and clearances. The total savings cannot be estimated at this time.

Endnotes
[1] Health & S.C. Section 1596.792.
[2] Percentage of Children in CalWORKs Stage 1 License Exempt Child Care by County (SFY 2001–2002), Source: CW 115 and CW 115A, released August 26, 2003. California Department of Social Services.
[3] Aunts, uncles, and grandparents are exempt from TrustLine requirements under Health & S.C. 1596.66 and 1596.67.
[4] Telephone interview with Karen Cagle, chief, CalWORKs and Food Stamp Bureau, Estimates and Fiscal Policy Branch, California Department of Social Services (Sacramento, California, May 19, 2004).
[5] Child Care—Trustline, Local Assistance Estimates—May Revise of the 2004–05 Governor’s Budget, Estimate Methodologies, Fiscal Policy & Estimates Branch, Financial Management & Contract Branch, Administration Division, California Department of Social Services, page 135 (annualized), http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/localassistanceest/may04/EstimateMethodologies.pdf (last visited June 8, 2004). Fifteen thousand are CalWORKs Stage 1 (California Department of Social Services), and 12,000 are California Department of Education subsidized child care including CalWORKs Stages 2 and 3. The California Performance Review A Government for the People for a Change 309
[6] The $4.5 million cost is funded by $3 million federal funds, $300,000 General Fund, and $1.2 million reimbursements from CDE federal funds. May 2004 Revise, Fiscal Policy & Estimates Branch, Financial Management & Contract Branch, Administration Division, California Department of Social Services, Child Care—TrustLine, page 135, http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/localassistanceest/may04/EstimateMethodologies.pdf (last visited June 8, 2004). Source of reimbursement information is from telephone interview with Karen Cagle, chief, CalWORKs and Food Stamp Bureau, Estimates and Fiscal Policy Branch, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, California (May 19, 2004).
[7] By contrast, in the licensed child care system, providers must have their criminal records and child abuse records cleared before they are authorized to provide care (Health & S.C. 1596.871).
[8] Presentation by Mark Greenberg, Director of Policy, Center for Law and Social Policy, March 11, 2003, to California Department of Social Services. CalWORKs is the name of California’s TANF program.
[9] California Department of Social Services regulations, Eligibility and Assistance Standards Manual Section 47-620.11, http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/getinfo/pdf/eas15.pdf (last visited June 14, 2004). Resource and Referral agencies are local agencies designated by statute with the responsibility for taking initial TrustLine applications. They perform a variety of other responsibilities in the child care system, including referring families to child care providers. California Department of Education CalWORKs applicants have 14 days pursuant to Alternative Payment Agency Funding Terms and Conditions, Definition of Registration, according to e-mail from Cecelia Fisher-Dahms, consultant, Child Development Division, California Department of Education (April 19, 2004).
[10] Telephone interview with Linda Nissen, manager, Allied Office Support Section, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, California (March 19, 2004).
[11] If there is no criminal record, the FBI takes one–two days to respond. If there is a criminal record, because the FBI is dealing with 50 different state systems, the process can extend out for a very long time. Department of Justice does not know what the hit rate is for FBI records, but believes it is a lower percentage than in California because fewer people have lived out-of-state. Telephone interview with Tina Medich, assistant bureau chief, Division of Criminal Justice Information Systems, Bureau of Criminal Identification and Information, Department of Justice, Sacramento, California (March 24, 2004). According to telephone interview with Debbie Hesse, assistant bureau chief, California Justice Information Services Division, Department of Justice, Sacramento, California, less than 4 percent of the applications are matches with the Child Abuse Central Index records (April 13, 2004).
[12] Summary chart from Tina Medich, assistant bureau chief, Division of Criminal Justice Information Systems, Bureau of Criminal Identification and Information, Department of Justice (March 24, 2004).
[13] Telephone re-interviews with Linda Nissen, manager, Allied Office Support Section, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services (April 13, 2004), and Sophie Cabrera, chief, Bureau of Investigations, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, California (April 14, 2004).
[14] Health & S.C. Sections 1596.607(3) and 1596.877.
[15] Telephone re-interview with Sophie Cabrera, chief, Bureau of Investigations, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, California (April 19, 2004).
[16] Telephone re-interview with Cindy Mall, senior program manager, California Resource and Referral Network, San Francisco, California (April 15, 2004).
[17] Two e-mails from Cindy Mall, senior program manager, California Resource and Referral Network (May 27, 2004).
[18] Letter from Larry E. Reider, Kern County superintendent of schools, to Jack Scott, California State Senator (April 14, 2004).
[19] The California Child Care Resource and Referral Network is a private, non-profit organization designated by State law as the intermediary for handling TrustLine clearances and denials from the California Department of Social Services. It also follows up with the department on application status checks in response to inquiries and provides support to local Resource and Referral agencies that are the intake agencies for TrustLine. Applications may be closed for administrative reasons such as failure of an applicant to respond to information, bad fingerprints with additional fingerprints taken, application withdrawn, etc.
[20] Telephone interview with Cindy Mall, senior program manager, California Resource and Referral Network, San Francisco, California (March 23, 2004).
[21] E-mail from Cindy Mall, senior program manager, California Resource and Referral Network, San Francisco, California (April 15, 2004).
[22] Telephone interview with Cindy Mall, senior program manager, California Resource and Referral Network (March 23, 2004).
[23] Telephone interview with Cindy Mall, senior program manager, California Resource and Referral Network, San Francisco, California (March 23, 2004), for description of pilot system. Telephone interview with Linda Nissen, manager, Allied Office Support Section, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, California (March 19, 2004), for department’s intentions.
[24] E-mails from Linda Nissen, manager, Allied Office Support Section, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services (June 15, 2004).
[25] Telephone interview with Cindy Mall, senior program manager, California Resource and Referral Network, San Francisco, California (March 23, 2004).
[26] Telephone re-interview with Linda Nissen, manager, Allied Office Support Section, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, California (April 13, 2004).
[27] Wisconsin Child Care and Development Fund State Plan (2003–2005). http://www.dwd.state.wi.us/dws/programs/childcare/pdf/ccdf_plan051003.pdf, pp. 28, 30 (last visited June 15, 2004).
[28] Florida Child Care and Development Fund Plan for FFY 2004–2005, draft, http://www.schoolreadiness.org/files/ccdf-_final_version1.pdf, p. 18 (last visited June 8, 2004).
[29] Telephone interview with Linda Saterfield, bureau chief, Office of Child Care & Family Services, Illinois Department of Human Services, Springfield, Illinois (April 21, 2004).
[30] Telephone interview with Cherie Kotilinek, manager, Child Care Assistance, Minnesota Department of Human Services, St. Paul, Minnesota (April 12, 2004), and follow-up e-mail (June 16, 2004).
[31] Child Care and Development Fund Plan for Michigan for FFY 2004–2005, http://www.michigan.gov/documents/FIA-CDC-State_Plan_64017_7.pdf, p. 47 (last visited June 8, 2004).
[32] Telephone interview with Kathryn J. Holod, child care administrator, Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, Office of Children, Youth & Families, Bureau of Child Day Care Services, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania (April 6, 2004).
[33] Percentages of license-exempt care are from federal (FFY 2001) Child Care and Development Fund reports to the Administration for Children and Families, Health and Human Services Department, ACF 800, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ccb/research/01acf800/FY2001Tables1.xls, (Table 4) (last visited June 15, 2004).
[34] North Carolina Child Care and Development Fund Plan for FY 2004–2005, http://149.168.194.28:8000/pdf_forms/2003_ccdf_final.pdf, pp. 17, 55, 57 (last visited June 8, 2004).
[35] Telephone interview with Linda Nissen, manager, Allied Office Support Section, Community Care Licensing, California Department of Social Services, Sacramento, California (April 13, 2004).