California Department of Social Services - State Hearings Division
Notes from the Training Bureau - March 11, 1996

Item 96-03-01A
Administrative Disqualification Hearing (ADH) -- Definition of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) Intentional Program Violation (IPV)

To establish a respondent committed an AFDC IPV, the county must show the respondent intentionally made statements or took actions "for the purpose of establishing or maintaining the family’s eligibility for AFDC or for increasing or preventing a reduction in the amount of grant..." (MPP §22-305.42)

According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, this element may be established by documents showing the respondent’s acknowledgment that failure to fully report information could affect the amount of benefits the family is eligible to receive. The CA 7 and the SAWS 2A initially meet this requirement:

The CA 7 states:

I understand that:

Facts I report may result in benefits going up, down, or being stopped.

The SAWS 2A states:

I certify that I have received "Important Information for Applicants and Recipients for Cash Aid..." ... I also understand the penalties for giving wrong or incomplete facts, failing to report facts or situations which may affect my eligibility or benefits for Cash Aid...

The county may satisfy this AFDC IPV requirement by producing documents with the above language (or similar language from other versions or different forms) bearing the respondent’s signature, especially if the respondent fails to attend the hearing. The respondent may rebut this evidence by testimony, at the hearing, that aid was not obtained for this purpose. The burden may then shift to the county to produce additional evidence (e.g. testimony from the eligibility worker) to refute the respondent’s testimony.