45 C.F.R. § 1303.24

Maintaining records

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A program must maintain child records in a manner that ensures only parents, and officials within the program or acting on behalf of the program have access, and such records must be destroyed within a reasonable timeframe after such records are no longer needed or required to be maintained.

(b) A program must maintain, with the child records, for as long as the records are maintained, information on all individuals, agencies, or organizations to whom a disclosure of PII from the child records was made (except for program officials and parents) and why the disclosure was made. If a program uses a web-based data system to maintain child records, the program must ensure such child records are adequately protected and maintained according to current industry security standards.

(c) If a parent places a statement in the child record, the program must maintain the statement with the contested part of the child record for as long as the program maintains the record and, disclose the statement whenever it discloses the portion of the child record to which the statement relates.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1995–1996 · leading case: Meriden Cmty. Action Agency v. Shalala, 880 F. Supp. 882 (D.D.C. 1995).
Meriden Cmty. Action Agency v. Shalala, 880 F. Supp. 882 (D.D.C. 1995). · cites it 3× “” 45 C.F.R. § 1303.24 (a) (1990). After the hearing, the presiding officer would prepare an initial decision, which could be appealed to the HHS official who was authorized to make the grant in question.”
Meriden Cmty. Action Agency v. Donna E. Shalala, Sec'y of the United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 80 F.3d 524 (D.C. Cir. 1996). “§ 3105 to preside over Head Start hearings, see 45 C.F.R. § 1303.24 (a) — the court held that HHS’ actual interpretation of the “full and fair healing requirement,” as reflected in the prior regulations and in pi’actice under those regulations, was that no formal adjudication…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.