C.F.R. » Title 45 » SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL ADMINISTRATION › PART 95—GENERAL ADMINISTRATION—GRANT PROGRAMS (PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, MEDICAL ASSISTANCE AND STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAMS) › Subpart E—Cost Allocation Plans

45 C.F.R. § 95.517

Claims for Federal financial participation

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

(a) A State must claim FFP for costs associated with a program only in accordance with its approved cost allocation plan. However, if a State has submitted a plan or plan amendment for a State agency, it may, at its option claim FFP based on the proposed plan or plan amendment, unless otherwise advised by the DCA. However, where a State has claimed costs based on a proposed plan or plan amendment the State, if necessary, shall retroactively adjust its claims in accordance with the plan or amendment as subsequently approved by the Director, DCA. The State may also continue to claim FFP under its existing approved cost allocation plan for all costs not affected by the proposed amendment.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1986–2006 · leading case: Missouri v. Bowen, 813 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1987).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Missouri v. Bowen, 813 F.2d 864 (8th Cir. 1987). · cites it 7× “45 C.F.R. § 95.517 (a). 4 If a state is dissatisfied with the disposition of its plan, it may obtain administrative review on two levels.”
State of Mo. v. Bowen, 638 F. Supp. 37 (W.D. Mo. 1986). · cites it 5× “511 did not constitute “deemed approval” of the proposed CAP amendment, but that the State could, as it said it would, begin filing claims for federal reimbursement under the proposed CAP amendment pursuant to 45 C.F.R. § 95.517 . 3 The correspondence between the parties shows…”
Nebraska, Dep't of Health & Human Svs. v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 340 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2004). “” 45 C.F.R. § 95.517 . In reviewing a CAP or CAP Amendment, DCA consults with the HHS division affected by the allocation, which in this case is the Administration for Children and Families (“ACF”).”
Nebraska Dep't of Health & Human Servs. v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 435 F.3d 326 (D.C. Cir. 2006). “See 45 C.F.R. § 95.517 (a) (limiting financial assistance to that provided “in accor *216 dance with [a State’s] approved [CAP]”).”
Colorado Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 29 F.3d 519 (10th Cir. 1994). · cites it 2× “The ACYF commissioner disallowed the revised claims, finding that they did not conform to Colorado’s CAP approved for the applicable time period, 5 see 45 C.F.R. § 95.517 (a), and that the methodology used to calculate the revised claims was flawed.”
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.