[Federal Register: December 17, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 242)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 77361-77366]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17de02-22]
[[Page 77361]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Health and Human Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Administration for Children and Families
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
45 CFR Part 260
Charitable Choice Provisions Applicable to the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families Program; Proposed Rule
[[Page 77362]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
45 CFR Part 260
RIN 0970-AC12
Charitable Choice Provisions Applicable to the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families Program
AGENCY: Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule would implement the Charitable Choice
statutory provisions at section 104 of the Personal Responsibility and
Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) as amended. These
provisions apply to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
program administered by the Administration for Children and Families
(ACF). The proposed rule applies to State and local governments that
administer or provide TANF services and benefits through contracts with
organizations or with certificates, vouchers, or other forms of
disbursement, as well as to faith-based organizations that receive, or
apply to receive such funding. It is ACF's policy that, within
constitutional church-state guidelines, faith-based organizations
should be able to compete on an equal footing for TANF funding, and ACF
supports the participation of faith-based organizations in the TANF
program.
DATES: Consideration will be given to comments received by February 18,
2003.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding
this proposed rule to April Kaplan, Administration for Children and
Families, Office of Family Assistance, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., 5th
floor, Washington, DC 20447. Comments will be available for public
inspection Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. at the above
address. You may also transmit comments electronically via the Internet
at: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/hypernews/topics21.htm. To download an
electronic version of the rule, you should access http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/budget.html
.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: April Kaplan, (202) 401-5138.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Statutory Authority
This proposed regulation is issued under the authority granted to
the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) by 42 U.S.C.
1302, and 42 U.S.C. 604a. Section 1302 of 42 U.S.C. authorizes the
Secretary to publish regulations that may be necessary for the
efficient administration of the functions for which he is responsible
under the Social Security Act (the Act). Section 604a of Title 42 of
the United States Code sets forth provisions authorizing States to use
faith-based groups, as well as other nongovernmental charities,
community groups and private organizations, to provide benefits and
services under the TANF program that help families achieve self-
sufficiency and includes certain conditions related to such authority.
Section 417 of the Social Security Act provides that the Federal
government may not regulate or enforce State conduct under the TANF
provisions authorized in Title IV-A, except to the extent expressly
provided by law. Section 417 applies only to Federal regulation or
enforcement of provisions in Title IV-A of the Act. Because this
proposed rule implements provisions in PRWORA, rather than the TANF
provisions in Title IV-A, the limitations set forth in section 417 do
not apply. These proposed regulations are drafted in a manner that
provides States with maximum flexibility, while complying with the
Charitable Choice statutory provisions.
II. Background
Title I of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) (Pub. L. 104-193) sets forth
certain ``Charitable Choice'' provisions clarifying State authority to
use religious organizations to provide benefits and services that help
families achieve self-sufficiency under the TANF program (hereinafter
referred to as ``TANF Charitable Choice provisions.'') In addition to
giving families a greater choice of TANF-funded providers, these
provisions set forth certain requirements to ensure that religious
organizations are able to compete on an equal footing for funds under
the TANF program, without impairing the religious character of such
organizations and without diminishing the religious freedom of TANF
beneficiaries.
President Bush has made it one of his Administration's top
priorities to ensure that Federal programs are fully open to faith-
based and community groups in a manner that is consistent with the
Constitution. It is the Administration's view that faith-based
organizations are an indispensable part of the social services network
of the United States. Faith-based organizations, including places of
worship, nonprofit organizations, and neighborhood groups, offer scores
of social services to those in need. The TANF Charitable Choice
provisions are consistent with the Administration's belief that there
should be an equal opportunity for all organizations--both faith-based
and nonreligious--to participate as partners in Federal programs to
serve Americans in need.
III. Regulatory Provisions
The TANF Charitable Choice provisions contain important protections
both for religious organizations that receive funding and for the
individuals who receive their services. This proposed rule would
implement the Charitable Choice provisions applicable to State and
local governments, and to religious organizations in their use of TANF
funding. The objective of this proposed rule is to ensure that the TANF
program is open to all eligible organizations, regardless of their
religious affiliation or character, and to establish clearly the proper
uses to which funds may be put and the conditions for receipt of
funding.
Under the proposed rule a new section 260.34, ``What conditions
apply to the Charitable Choice provisions of TANF?'' would be added to
existing TANF rules. Introductory language would address the
applicability of the Charitable Choice provisions of TANF.
Specifically, the rules would provide that Charitable Choice applies
whenever a State or local government uses Federal TANF funds or expends
State or local funds claimed to meet the maintenance-of-effort (MOE)
requirements of TANF to procure services and benefits from
nongovernmental organizations, or redeems certificates, vouchers, or
other forms of disbursement from them in connection with the TANF
program. When State or local funds are used to meet the TANF
maintenance-of-effort requirements, the provisions apply irrespective
of whether the State or local funds are co-mingled with Federal funds,
segregated, or expended in separate State programs. The proposed rules
also clarify that, pursuant to section 104(k) of PRWORA, nothing in the
Charitable Choice requirements shall be construed to preempt any
provision of a State constitution or State statute that prohibits or
restricts the
[[Page 77363]]
expenditure of State funds in or by religious organizations.
When the term ``assistance'' is used in the Charitable Choice
provisions, it broadly refers to all kinds of help, services and
benefits and is broader than the definition of ``assistance'' found
under section 260.31 of this part. Thus, the Charitable Choice
provisions apply to any and all of the services and benefits available
to clients through contracts, certificates, vouchers, or other forms of
disbursement of TANF funds. However, because the Charitable Choice
provisions refer only to State and local governments, they do not apply
to Tribal governments operating TANF programs under section 412 of the
Social Security Act.
The proposed rule also would make the following specific additions
to the TANF rules:
[sbull] Equal Treatment for Religious Organizations. Under the TANF
Charitable Choice provisions, organizations are eligible to participate
in the TANF program without regard to their religious character or
affiliation, and organizations may not be excluded from the competition
for TANF funds simply because they are religious. Specifically,
religious organizations are eligible to compete for funding on the same
basis, and under the same eligibility requirements, as all other
nonprofit organizations. The Federal government, and State and local
governments administering funds under the TANF program, are prohibited
from discriminating against organizations on the basis of religion or
their religious character.
[sbull] Restriction on Religious Activities by Organizations that
Receive Direct TANF Funding. Paragraph (b) of section 260.34 of the
proposed rule describes limitations on the use of TANF funding provided
directly to an organization by a governmental entity or an intermediate
organization that has the same duties as a governmental entity, as
opposed to those funds that an organization receives as the result of
the genuine and independent private choice of a beneficiary.\1\
Specifically, TANF and MOE funds that are provided directly to a
participating organization may not be used to support inherently
religious activities, such as worship, religious instruction, or
proselytization. If an organization engages in such activities, the
activities must be offered separately, in time or location, from the
programs or services for which it receives direct TANF or MOE funds,
and participation must be voluntary for the beneficiaries. This
requirement ensures that such funds are not used to support inherently
religious activities. Thus, direct TANF and MOE funds may not be used,
for example, to conduct prayer meetings, studies of sacred texts, or
any other activity that is inherently religious.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In the Charitable Choice context, the term ``direct''
funding is used to describe funds that are provided ``directly'' by
a governmental entity or an intermediate organization with the same
duties as a governmental entity, as opposed to funds that an
organization receives as the result of the genuine and independent
private choice of a beneficiary. In other contexts, the term
``direct'' funding may be used to refer to those funds that an
organization receives directly from the Federal government (also
known as ``discretionary'' funding), as opposed to funding that it
receives from a State or local government (also known as
``indirect'' or ``block grant'' funding). In these proposed
regulations, the term ``direct'' has the former meaning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This restriction does not mean that an organization that receives
direct TANF or MOE funds cannot engage in inherently religious
activities. It simply means that such an organization cannot fund these
activities with direct TANF funds. Additionally, an organization cannot
fund these activities with funds that are used to meet the MOE
requirements, since those funds must be spent consistent with the
Charitable Choice requirements. Thus, faith-based organizations that
receive direct TANF or MOE funds must take steps to separate, in time
or location, their inherently religious activities from the TANF or
MOE-funded services that they offer.
In addition, any participation by a program beneficiary in such
religious activities must be voluntary. An invitation to participate in
an organization's religious activities is not in itself inappropriate.
However, directly-funded religious organizations must be careful to
reassure program beneficiaries that they will receive help even if they
do not participate in these activities, and that their decision will
have no bearing on the services they receive. In short, any
participation by recipients of services in such religious activities
must be voluntary and understood to be voluntary.
These restrictions on inherently religious activities do not apply
where TANF or MOE funds are provided to religious organizations as a
result of a genuine and independent private choice of a beneficiary. A
religious organization may receive such funds as the result of a
beneficiary's genuine and independent private choice if, for example, a
beneficiary redeems a voucher, coupon, certificate, or similar funding
mechanism that was provided to that individual using TANF or MOE funds
under a program that is designed to give that individual a choice among
providers. Thus, religious organizations that receive TANF funds to
provide services as a result of a beneficiary's genuine and independent
private choice need not separate, in time or location, their inherently
religious activities from the TANF funded services they provide,
provided they otherwise satisfy the requirements of the program.
[sbull] Religious Character and Independence of Religious
Organizations. Paragraph (c) of the proposed rule clarifies that a
religious organization that participates in the TANF program retains
its independence from Federal, State, and local governments, provided
that it does not use direct TANF or MOE funds to support inherently
religious activities. It may continue to carry out its mission,
including the definition, practice and expression of its religious
beliefs. Among other things, religious organizations may use their
facilities to provide TANF-funded services, without removing religious
art, icons, scriptures, or other symbols. In addition, a TANF-funded
religious organization may retain religious terms in its organization's
name, select its board members on a religious basis, and include
religious references in its organization's mission statements and other
governing documents.
[sbull] Employment Practices. Under paragraph (d), the proposed
rule clarifies that the receipt of TANF or MOE funds does not affect a
participating religious organization's exemption provided under 42
U.S.C. 2000-e regarding employment practices. Title VII of the Federal
Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides that a religious organization may,
without running afoul of Title VII, hire employees who share its
religious beliefs. This provision helps enable faith-based groups to
promote common values, a sense of community and unity of purpose, and
shared experiences through service--all of which can contribute to a
religious organization's effectiveness. It thus helps protect the
religious liberty of communities of faith. The TANF Charitable Choice
provisions thus reflects the recognition that a religious organization
may determine that, in order to define or carry out its mission, it is
important that it be able to take its faith into account in making
employment decisions.
[sbull] Nondiscrimination Against Beneficiaries. The proposed rule
also contains provisions that apply to the individuals who receive
TANF- or MOE-funded services. The first of these is found under
paragraph (e) of the proposed rule, which clarifies that religious
organizations are prohibited from discriminating against beneficiaries
or potential beneficiaries
[[Page 77364]]
on the basis of religion or religious belief. Accordingly, religious
organizations, in providing services funded in whole or in part by TANF
or MOE, may not discriminate against current or prospective program
beneficiaries on the basis of religion, a religious belief, a refusal
to hold a religious belief, or a refusal to actively participate in a
religious practice.
[sbull] Notice, Referral, and Provision of Services from
Alternative Providers. Paragraph (f) of section 260.34 of the proposed
rule clarifies that individuals who are receiving or may receive TANF
or MOE-funded services may object to the religious character of that
provider, in which case they are entitled to receive services from an
alternative provider. In such cases, the State or local agency must
refer the individual to an alternative provider of services within a
reasonable period of time, as defined by the State. That alternative
provider must be reasonably accessible and have the capacity to provide
comparable services to the individual. Such services shall have a value
that is not less than the value of the services that the individual
would have received from the program participant to which the
individual had such objection. The alternative provider need not be a
secular organization. It must simply be a provider to which the program
beneficiary has no religious objection. Because of the comprehensive
nature and range of services provided under TANF, we are explicitly
leaving it to the States' discretion how best to define and achieve
these statutory objectives.
A client's right to alternative services is best implemented when
he or she is informed and referral procedures for alternative services
are in place. Therefore, the proposed rule outlines the
responsibilities of religious organizations, and State or local
governments, with respect to notice, referral, and provision of
services from alternative providers.
Notice. Under the proposed rule, States and local governments shall
ensure that notice is provided to beneficiaries and prospective
beneficiaries regarding alternative services. The notice should clearly
articulate the program beneficiary's right to a referral, within a
reasonable period of time, as defined by the State, to an alternative
service provider. That alternative provider must be reasonably
accessible and have the capacity to provide comparable services to the
individual. Such services shall have a value that is not less than the
value of the services that the individual would have received from the
provider to which the individual had such objection, as reasonably
determined by the State agency. While the responsibility for providing
the alternative service rests with the State or local agency, each
participating organization has a responsibility to help clients know
and understand their rights.
Referral. If an individual objects to the religious character of
the organization providing services they are receiving, the State or
provider must refer the individual, within a reasonable period of time,
as defined by the State, to an alternative provider of services. That
alternative provider must be reasonably accessible and have the
capacity to provide comparable services to the individual. Such
services shall have a value that is not less than the value of the
services that the individual would have received from the program
participant to which the individual had such objection, as determined
by the State. In making a referral, the State or local government, and
religious organization, in consultation with the recipient, should
consider alternative providers reasonably available in the geographic
area.
We encourage State and local governments and contracting
organizations to develop and implement reasonable procedures for
tracking referred clients to make sure that the individual makes or has
an opportunity to make contact with the alternative provider to which
the individual is referred.
Provision of Alternative Services. The responsibility for providing
the alternative services rests with the ``the appropriate Federal,
State, or local government'' that administers the program. As discussed
above, the State or local agency must refer the individual to an
alternative provider of services within a reasonable period of time, as
defined by the State. That alternative provider must be reasonably
accessible and have the capacity to provide comparable services to the
individual. Such services shall have a value that is not less than the
value of the services that the individual would have received from the
program participant to which the individual had such objection, as
determined by the State.
ACF recognizes that a range of methods may fulfill these
responsibilities, and therefore does not seek to prescribe a single,
inflexible referral system that States must adopt. Rather, we encourage
State agencies, working in concert with local governments and program
providers, to develop systems to comply with the requirements, monitor
compliance, identify compliance problems, and take necessary corrective
actions. It is important that the State agency and religious
organizations work cooperatively to develop systems to comply with this
provision, monitor compliance, identify compliance problems and take
necessary corrective actions.
[sbull] Fiscal Accountability. Under paragraph (g) of the proposed
rule, we outline the financial responsibility incurred through the
receipt of TANF funds. Religious organizations that contract to provide
TANF services or benefits are subject to the same requirements as other
nongovernmental organizations to account, in accordance with generally
accepted auditing and accounting principles, for the use of such funds.
Religious organizations may segregate their TANF accounts from
nongovernmental funds for other activities. If religious organizations
choose to segregate their funds in this manner, only the segregated
funds are subject to audit by the government under the TANF program.
[sbull] Effect on State and Local Funds. The TANF Charitable Choice
requirements apply to ``a State program funded under part A of title IV
of the Social Security Act,'' or under the TANF program. Section 104 of
PRWORA also applies to ``any other program established or modified
under title I or title II of this Act that permits contracts with
organizations; or permits certificates, vouchers, or other forms of
disbursement to be provided to beneficiaries as a means of providing
assistance.'' Title I of PRWORA encompasses all the TANF provisions,
including the requirement at section 409(a)(7) that States expend State
or local funds on eligible families for activities that serve TANF
purposes. These State contributions are known as maintenance-of-effort,
or MOE, contributions. Therefore, under the proposed rules at paragraph
(h), the Charitable Choice provisions apply whenever a State or local
government uses Federal TANF funds or expends State or local funds
claimed to meet the ``maintenance-of-effort'' (MOE) requirements of the
TANF program to procure services and benefits from nongovernmental
organizations, or redeems certificates, vouchers, or other forms of
disbursement. In other words, when State or local funds are used to
meet the TANF MOE requirements, the Charitable Choice provisions apply
irrespective of whether the State or local funds are co-mingled with
Federal funds, segregated, or expended in separate State programs. The
proposed rules also clarify that, pursuant to section 104(k) of PRWORA,
nothing in
[[Page 77365]]
the Charitable Choice requirements shall be construed to preempt any
provision of a State constitution or State statute that prohibits or
restricts the expenditure of State funds in or by religious
organizations.
[sbull] Treatment of Intermediate Organizations. Finally, paragraph
(i) of the proposed rule provides that, if a nongovernmental
organization (referred to here as an ``intermediate organization''),
acting under a contract or other agreement with the Federal government
or a State or local government, is given the authority under the
contract or agreement to select other nongovernmental organizations to
provide services under the program, the intermediate organization must
ensure that there is compliance with the Charitable Choice provisions.
The intermediate organization retains all other rights of a
nongovernmental organization under the Charitable Choice provisions.
IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
No new information collection requirements are imposed by these
regulations, nor are any existing requirements changed as a result of
their promulgation. Therefore, the requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), regarding reporting and
record keeping, do not apply.
V. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The Secretary certifies, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), as enacted by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354), that this rule will not
result in a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The primary impact is on State governments. State governments
are not considered small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
VI. Regulatory Impact Analysis
Executive Order 12866 requires that regulations be reviewed to
ensure that they are consistent with the priorities and principles set
forth in the Executive Order. The Department has determined that this
rule is consistent with these priorities and principles. This rule is
considered a ``significant regulatory action'' under the Executive
Order, and therefore has been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
VII. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that a covered agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before
promulgating a rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result
in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one
year.
The Department has determined that this rule would not impose a
mandate that will result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million in any one year.
VIII. Congressional Review
This regulation is not a major rule as defined in 5 U.S.C. chapter
8.
IX. Assessment of Federal Regulation and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 requires Federal agencies to determine whether a proposed
policy or regulation may affect family well being. If the agency's
determination is affirmative, then the agency must prepare an impact
assessment addressing seven criteria specified in the law. These
regulations will not have an impact on family well being as defined in
the legislation.
X. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, Federalism, requires that Federal agencies
consult with State and local government officials in the development of
regulatory policies with federalism implications. Consistent with
Executive Order 13132, we specifically solicit comment from State and
local government officials on this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 260
Grant programs--social programs, Loan programs--social programs,
Public assistance programs.
Dated: December 12, 2002.
Tommy G. Thompson,
Secretary of Health and Human Services.
For the reasons discussed above, title 45 CFR chapter II is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 260--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 45 CFR part 260 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 601, 601 note, 603, 604, 606, 607, 608,
609, 610, 611, 619, and 1308.
2. Section 260.30 is amended to add the following two definitions
in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 260.30 What definitions apply under the TANF regulations?
* * * * *
Direct funding or funds provided directly means funding that is
provided to an organization directly by a governmental entity or an
intermediary organization that has the same duties as a governmental
entity, as opposed to funding that an organization receives as the
result of the genuine and independent private choice of a beneficiary.
* * * * *
Religious organization means a nonprofit religious organization.
* * * * *
3. A new Sec. 260.34 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 260.34 What conditions apply to the Charitable Choice provisions
of TANF?
These Charitable Choice provisions apply whenever a State or local
government uses Federal TANF funds or expends State and local funds
used to meet maintenance-of-effort requirements of the TANF program to
procure services and benefits from nongovernmental organizations, or
provides TANF beneficiaries with certificates, vouchers, or other forms
of disbursement redeemable from such organizations. However, nothing in
this section shall be construed to preempt any provision of a State
constitution or State statute that prohibits or restricts the
expenditure of State funds in or by religious organizations.
(a) (1) Religious organizations are eligible, on the same basis as
any other organization, to participate in TANF programs as long as
their TANF or MOE-funded services are provided consistent with the
Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First
Amendment to the United States Constitution.
(2) Neither the Federal government nor a State or local government
in its use of TANF or MOE funds shall discriminate against an
organization that applies to provide, or provides, TANF services or
benefits on the basis of the organization's religious character or
affiliation.
(b) No TANF or MOE funds provided directly to participating
organizations may be expended for inherently religious activities, such
as worship, religious instruction, or proselytization. If an
organization conducts such activities, it must offer them separately,
in time or location, from the programs or services for which it
receives direct TANF funds under this part, and participation must be
voluntary for the beneficiaries of those programs or services.
(c) A religious organization that participates in the TANF program
will retain its independence from Federal, State, and local governments
and may continue to carry out its mission,
[[Page 77366]]
including the definition, practice and expression of its religious
beliefs, provided that it does not expend TANF or MOE funds that it
receives directly to support any inherently religious activities, such
as worship, religious instruction, or proselytization. Among other
things, faith-based organizations may use space in their facilities to
provide TANF-funded services without removing religious art, icons,
scriptures, or other symbols. In addition, a TANF-funded religious
organization retains the authority over its internal governance, and it
may retain religious terms in its organization's name, select its board
members on a religious basis, and include religious references in its
organization's mission statements and other governing documents.
(d) The participation of a religious organization in, or its
receipt of funds from, a TANF program does not affect that
organization's exemption provided under 42 U.S.C. 2000e-1 regarding
employment practices.
(e) A religious organization that receives TANF or MOE funds shall
not, in providing program services or benefits, discriminate against a
TANF applicant or recipient on the basis of religion, a religious
belief, a refusal to hold a religious belief, or a refusal to actively
participate in a religious practice.
(f) If an otherwise eligible TANF applicant or recipient objects to
the religious character of a TANF service provider, the recipient is
entitled to receive services from an alternative provider. In such
cases, the State or local agency must refer the individual to an
alternative provider of services within a reasonable period of time, as
defined by the State agency. That alternative provider must be
reasonably accessible and have the capacity to provide comparable
services to the individual. Such services shall have a value that is
not less than the value of the services that the individual would have
received from the program participant to which the individual had such
objection, as defined by the State agency. The alternative provider
need not be a secular organization. It must simply be a provider to
which the recipient has no religious objection. States may define and
apply the terms ``reasonably accessible,'' ``a reasonable period of
time,'' ``comparable,'' ``capacity,'' and `` value that is not less
than.'' The appropriate State or local governments that administer
TANF-funded programs shall ensure that notice of their right to
alternative services is provided to applicants or recipients. The
notice must clearly articulate the recipient's right to a referral and
to services that reasonably meet the timeliness, capacity,
accessibility, and equivalency requirements discussed above.
(g) Religious organizations that receive TANF funds are subject to
the same regulations as other nongovernmental organizations to account,
in accordance with generally accepted auditing/accounting principles,
for the use of such funds. Religious organizations may keep any TANF
funds they receive for services segregated in a separate account from
nongovernmental funds. If religious organizations choose to segregate
their funds in this manner, only the TANF funds are subject to audit by
the government under the program.
(h) This section applies whenever a State or local organization
uses TANF funds to procure services and benefits from nongovernmental
organizations, or redeems certificates, vouchers, or other forms of
disbursement from them whether with Federal funds, or State and local
funds claimed to meet the maintenance-of-effort requirements of section
409(a)(7) of the Social Security Act. When State or local funds are
used to meet the TANF MOE requirements, the provisions apply
irrespective of whether the State or local funds are co-mingled with
Federal funds, segregated, or expended in separate State programs.
(i) Preemption. Nothing in this section shall be construed to
preempt any provision of a State constitution or State statute that
prohibits or restricts the expenditure of State funds in or by
religious organizations.
(j) If a nongovernmental intermediate organization, acting under a
contract or other agreement with a State or local government, is given
the authority under the contract or agreement to select nongovernmental
organizations to provide TANF or MOE-funded services, the intermediate
organization must ensure that there is compliance with the Charitable
Choice provisions. The intermediate organization retains all other
rights of a nongovernmental organization under the Charitable Choice
provisions.
[FR Doc. 02-31674 Filed 12-12-02; 4:32 pm]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-P