Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 5107
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 5107.12 (2026)

Application for participation by assistance group

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
January 27, 2012
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 337 - 129th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

An assistance group seeking to participate in the Ohio works first program shall apply to a county department of job and family services using an application containing information the director of job and family services requires pursuant to rules adopted under section 5107.05 of the Revised Code and any additional information the county department requires. If cash assistance under the program is to be paid by the director of budget and management through the medium of direct deposit as provided by section 329.03 of the Revised Code, the application shall be accompanied by information the director needs to make direct deposits.

When a county department receives an application for participation in Ohio works first, it shall promptly make an investigation and record of the circumstances of the applicant in order to ascertain the facts surrounding the application and to obtain such other information as may be required. Upon the completion of the investigation, the county department shall determine as soon as possible whether the applicant is eligible to participate, the amount of cash assistance the applicant should receive, and the approximate date when participation shall begin. The amount of cash assistance so determined shall be certified to the department of job and family services in such form as the department shall prescribe. Warrants, direct deposits, or debit cards shall be delivered or made payable in the manner the department may prescribe.

To the extent required by rules adopted under section 5107.05 of the Revised Code, a participant of Ohio works first shall notify the county department immediately upon the receipt or possession of additional income not previously reported to the county department. Any failure to so notify a county department shall be regarded as prima-facie evidence of an intent to defraud.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1987–2001 · leading case: In Re McCourt, 217 B.R. 998 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re McCourt, 217 B.R. 998 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1997). · cites it 4× “This section exempts aid to dependent children payments as exempted under Ohio Rev.Code § 5107.12. Section 5107.12, in turn, applies to a specific governmental program, namely aid to dependent children which is administered by the Ohio Department of Human Services in accordance…”
State v. Edmondson, 750 N.E.2d 587 (Ohio 2001). “See R.C. 5107.12; see, also, Ohio Adm.Code 5101:1-2-10(D)(2) (an applicant’s failure to provide necessary information during the application process “shall result in a denial” of benefits).”
Ohio Bell Tel. Co. v. Antonelli, 504 N.E.2d 717 (Ohio 1987). · cites it 2× “32 of the Revised Code; “(d) Aid to dependent children payments, as exempted by section 5107.12 of the Revised Code; “(e) Poor relief payments, as exempted by section 5113.”
In Re Beagle, 200 B.R. 595 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1996). “66(A)(9)(d) is likewise unavailing as that provides for the exemption of Aid to Dependent Children payments under Ohio Revised Code § 5107.12. The description of who is eligible for Aid to Dependent Children payments is found in Ohio Revised Code § 5107.”
State v. Edmondson, 2001 Ohio 210 (Ohio 2001). “See R.C. 5107.12; see, also, Ohio Adm.Code 5101:1-2-10(D)(2) (an applicant’s failure to provide necessary information during the application process “shall result in a denial” of benefits).”
Crigger v. Crigger, 594 N.E.2d 67 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 5× “66 sets forth sources of income and property which cannot be reached in order to satisfy a judgment, and states in pertinent part: “(A) Every person who is domiciled in this state may hold property exempt from execution, garnishment, attachment, or sale to satisfy a judgment or…”
Silagy v. Bank One, Akron, N.A. (In Re Collin), 182 B.R. 763 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 1995). · cites it 2× “The court reviewed the legislative history of the aid program and stated: As used in R.C. 5107.12 and interpreted in accordance with the obvious legislative intent of the aid to dependent children statutes, the word [inalienable] must mean that such aid cannot be transferred…”
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.