45 C.F.R. § 304.23

Expenditures for which Federal financial participation is not available

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

Federal financial participation at the applicable matching rate is not available for:

(a) Activities related to administering titles I, IV-A, IV-B, IV-E, X, XIV, XVI, XIX, XX, or XXI of the Act or 7 U.S.C. Chapter 51.

(b) Purchased support enforcement services which are not secured in accordance with § 304.22.

(c) Construction and major renovations.

(d) Education and training programs and educational services for State and county employees and court personnel except direct cost of short-term training provided to IV-D agency staff in accordance with §§ 304.20(b)(2)(viii) and 304.21.

(e) Any expenditures which have been reimbursed by fees collected as required by this chapter.

(f) Any costs of those caseworkers described in § 303.20(e) of this chapter.

(g) Any expenditures made to carry out an agreement under § 303.15 of this chapter.

(h) The costs of counsel for indigent defendants in IV-D actions.

(i) Any expenditures for jailing of parents in child support enforcement cases.

(j) The costs of guardians ad litem in IV-D actions.

(k) Any expenditures under § 303.6(c)(5) of this chapter for subsidized employment or payment of cash, checks, reimbursements, or any other form of payment that can be legally converted to currency provided to the noncustodial parent.

[81 FR 93567, Dec. 20, 2016, as amended at 89 FR 100809, Dec. 13, 2024]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1989–1989 · leading case: Kentucky ex rel. Cabinet for Human Resources v. United States, 16 Cl. Ct. 755 (Ct. Cl. 1989).
Kentucky ex rel. Cabinet for Human Resources v. United States, 16 Cl. Ct. 755 (Ct. Cl. 1989). “45 C.F.R. § 304.23 . Part 305 of the HHS regulations implements the statutory requirement for an audit, at least once every 3 years, of the effectiveness of the IV-D program, and for adjustments in allowance of FFP in the program.”
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.