AFDC Filing Units policies that were in effect in 1996 are used to determine the financial eligibility of any child(ren) for CTS. In some situations, the Buening decision may need to be applied. This occurs when the presence of a stepparent or non-marital co-parent ( NMCP ) causes an assistance group to erroneously fail CTS financial eligibility due to income.
The Buening decision requires that we determine whether a half-sibling of a CTS child meets the definition of a “dependent” child. Any half-sibling that is a dependent child must be included in the filing unit. A dependent child is a needy child that is deprived of parental care (his/her other parent is not in the home) and support. If the NMCP or stepparent, along with the child(ren)-in-common, has sufficient income or assets to support both the NMCP or stepparent and the child(ren)-in-common, the child(ren) is not needy and should not be included in the filing unit.
The Buening decision needs to be applied in cases where there is a NMCP
or stepparent and a child-in-common in the home and all of the following
criteria are met:
The parent with whom the CTS child(ren) lives is receiving SSI.
The CTS child(ren)’s other parent is absent from the home.
The parent receiving SSI has a child(ren)-in-common with the NMCP or stepparent who is living in the house.
Use the AFDC financial eligibility criteria to determine whether the child-in-common is dependent.
Example 1: Cheryl is
receiving SSI and has a minor child, Randy. Randy’s father does not live
in the home. Cheryl is living with her boyfriend, Eric, with whom she
has a daughter, Mandy.
Mandy is considered a dependent child because the $200 income of Eric and Mandy is under the budget test income limit for a group size of two ($440, Area 1).
Randy must be tested for CTS as a group size of three because Mandy is dependent half-sibling. Eric, Randy and Mandy are in one filing unit for CTS. They pass CTS, because the combined income is under the budget test income limit ($517.60, Area 1) for a group size of three.
Note: Had Randy’s eligibility been determined solely for him, he would have failed CTS eligibility for having income in excess of the $248.80 budget test limit for a group of one. |
Example 2: April is receiving
SSI and has a minor child, Betty. Betty’s father does not live in the
home. April is living with her boyfriend, Carl, with whom she has a daughter,
Rachel. April has $200 in monthly income, Carl has $400, Betty has $200, and
Rachel has $200. Assets do not exceed the $1000 asset limit. Betty fails for CTS as a group size of three, because the combined income is over the budget test income limit ($517.60, Area 1) for a group size of three.
Rachel is not a dependent child, because the $600 income of Carl and Rachel is over the budget test income limit for a group size of two ($440, Area 1). Test Betty for CTS as a group size of one. She would pass because her income is under the budget test income limit for a group size of one ($248.80).
Note: Betty would have failed CTS in CARES as a group size of three, because the combined income of $800 would have been over the budget test income limit ($517.60 Area 1) for group size three. |
Example 3: Amanda is
receiving SSI and has a minor child, Cindy. Cindy’s father does not live
in the home. Amanda is living with her boyfriend, David, with whom
she has a daughter, Michelle. Amanda has $200, and Michelle has $250. Assets do not exceed the $1000 asset limit.
David, Cindy and Michelle are in one filing unit for CTS, because Michelle does not qualify as a dependent child. They fail CTS, because the combined income is over the income limit ($517.60, Area 1) for a group size of three.
Michelle is not considered a dependent child because her financial needs
are met (the income of David and Michelle is over the budget test income
limit for a group size of two of $440.00). David, Cindy, and Michelle must be in one filing unit. Cindy is ineligible for CTS, because the combined $600 income is over the budget test limit ($517.60, Area 1) for a group of three. |
This page last updated in Release Number: 02-01
Release Date: 01/01/02
Effective Date: 01/01/02
|