98-5179. Implementation of Section 403(a)(2) of Social Security Act Bonus To Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy  

  • [Federal Register Volume 63, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 1998)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 10264-10272]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 98-5179]
    
    
    
    [[Page 10263]]
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    Part II
    
    
    
    
    
    Department of Health and Human Services
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    Administration for Children and Families
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________________________________
    
    
    
    45 CFR Part 283
    
    
    
    Implementation of Section 403(a)(2) of Social Security Act Bonus To 
    Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy; Proposed Rule
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 1998 / Proposed 
    Rules
    
    [[Page 10264]]
    
    
    
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
    
    Administration for Children and Families
    
    45 CFR Part 283
    
    RIN 0970-AB79
    
    
    Implementation of Section 403(a)(2) of Social Security Act Bonus 
    To Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy
    
    AGENCY: Administration for Children and Families, HHS.
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Administration for Children and Families proposes to issue 
    regulations describing how we will award a bonus to those States that 
    experience the largest decreases in out-of-wedlock childbearing and 
    also reduce their abortion rates. The total amount of the bonus will be 
    $100 million in each of fiscal years 1999 through 2002, and the award 
    for each eligible State in a given year will be $25 million or less.
        This incentive provision is a part of the new welfare reform block 
    grant program enacted in 1996--the Temporary Assistance for Needy 
    Families, or TANF, program.
    
    DATES: You must submit comments by May 1, 1998. We will not consider 
    comments received after this date in developing the final rule.
    
    ADDRESSES: You may mail or hand-deliver comments to the Administration 
    for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 
    370 L'Enfant Promenade, S.W., 7th Floor West, Washington, D.C. 20447. 
    You may also transmit comments electronically via the Internet. To 
    transmit comments electronically, or download an electronic version of 
    the proposed rule, you should access the ACF Welfare Reform Home Page 
    at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/news/welfare and follow the instructions 
    provided.
        We will make all comments available for public inspection at the 
    Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 7th Floor West, 901 D 
    Street, SW, Washington, DC 20447, from Monday through Friday between 
    the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.
        We will only accept written comments. In addition, all your 
    comments should:
         be specific;
         address only issues raised by the proposed rule, not the 
    law itself;
         where appropriate, propose alternatives;
         explain reasons for any objections or recommended changes; 
    and
         reference the specific section of the proposed rule that 
    you are addressing.
        We will not acknowledge the comments. However, we will review and 
    consider all comments that are germane and received during the comment 
    period.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelleen Kaye, (202) 401-6634, or Ken 
    Maniha, (202) 401-5372.
        Deaf and hearing-impaired individuals may call the Federal Dual 
    Party Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. 
    Eastern time.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Table of Contents
    
    I. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation 
    Act
    II. Summary of the Bonus Provision
        A. Legislative History
        B. The Bonus Award
    III. Regulatory Framework
        A. Consultations
        B. Related Regulations Under Development
        C. Statutory Context
        D. Regulatory Reform
        E. Departmental Activities Related to Out-of-Wedlock Births
    IV. Section-by-Section Discussion of the NPRM
    V. Regulatory Impact Analyses
        A. Executive Order 12866
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
        C. Paperwork Reduction Act
        D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    
    I. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation 
    Act
    
        On August 22, 1996, President Clinton signed ``The Personal 
    Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996''--or 
    PRWORA--into law. The first title of this new law (Pub. L. 104-193) 
    establishes a comprehensive welfare reform program designed to change 
    the nation's welfare system dramatically. The new program is called 
    Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, in recognition of its 
    focus on moving recipients into work and time-limited assistance.
        PRWORA repeals the existing welfare program known as Aid to 
    Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which provided cash assistance 
    to needy families on an entitlement basis. It also repeals the related 
    programs known as the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training 
    program (JOBS) and Emergency Assistance (EA).
        The new TANF program went into effect on July 1, 1997, except in 
    States that elected to submit a complete plan and implement the program 
    at an earlier date.
        This landmark welfare reform legislation dramatically affects not 
    only needy families, but also intergovernmental relationships. It 
    challenges Federal, State, Tribal and local governments to foster 
    positive changes in the culture of the welfare system and to take more 
    responsibility for program results and outcomes.
        This new legislation also gives States the authority to use Federal 
    welfare funds ``in any manner that is reasonably calculated to 
    accomplish the purpose'' of the new program. It provides them broad 
    flexibility to set eligibility rules and decide what benefits are most 
    appropriate, and it offers States an opportunity to try new, far-
    reaching ideas so they can respond more effectively to the needs of 
    families within their own unique environments.
    
    II. Summary of the Bonus Provision
    
    A. Legislative History
    
        One of the greatest concerns of Congress in passing the PRWORA was 
    the negative effect of out-of-wedlock births. This concern is reflected 
    in the Congressional findings at section 101 of PRWORA. Here, Congress 
    describes the need to address issues relating to marriage, the 
    stability of families, and the promotion of responsible fatherhood and 
    motherhood. It cites: the increasing number of children receiving 
    public assistance; the increasing number of out-of-wedlock births; the 
    negative consequences of an out-of-wedlock birth to the mother, the 
    child, the family, and society; and the negative consequences of 
    raising children in single-parent homes.
        Section 101 concludes:
    
        Therefore, in light of this demonstration of the crisis in our 
    Nation, it is the sense of the Congress that prevention of out-of-
    wedlock pregnancy and reduction in out-of-wedlock birth are very 
    important Government interests and the policy contained in Part A of 
    title IV of the Social Security Act (as amended by section 103(a) of 
    this Act) is intended to address the crisis.
    
        Congressional concern is also reflected in the goals of the TANF 
    program and the provision entitled Bonus to Reward Decrease in 
    Illegitimacy. One purpose of the TANF program, as stated in section 
    401(a)(3) of the Social Security Act, is to ``prevent and reduce the 
    incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical 
    goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies.''
        In enacting this separate bonus provision to reward decreases in 
    out-of-wedlock childbearing, Congress intended to provide greater 
    impetus to State efforts in this area and encourage State creativity in 
    developing effective solutions.
    
    [[Page 10265]]
    
    B. The Bonus Award
    
        This rulemaking addresses the provision in the new law to reward 
    States for high performance through the ``Bonus to Reward Decrease in 
    Illegitimacy.'' (See section 403(a)(2) of the Social Security Act (the 
    Act)).
        In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the ``Bonus'' refers to the 
    Bonus to Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy and the ``ratio'' refers to 
    the ratio of out-of-wedlock births to total births.
        As specified in section 403(a)(2) of the Act, we will award a total 
    of $100 million annually, in each of fiscal years 1999 through 2002. 
    The amount of the bonus for each eligible State in a given year will be 
    $25 million or less. For the purposes of this award, States include the 
    50 States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the 
    Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam and 
    American Samoa, (as provided in section 419(a)(5)). However, the 
    criteria for determining eligibility and size of the bonus for Guam, 
    American Samoa and the Virgin Islands are different than the criteria 
    for the remaining States, as specified in section 403(a)(2).
        We would base the bonus award on birth and abortion data for the 
    State population as a whole, not on data for TANF or other more limited 
    populations.
        Briefly, we propose to award the bonus as follows:
         We would calculate the ratio of out-of-wedlock births to 
    total births for each State for the most recent two-year period for 
    which data are available and for the prior two-year period. To compute 
    these ratios, we would use the vital statistics data reported annually 
    by States to the National Center for Health Statistics.
         For States other than Guam, American Samoa or the Virgin 
    Islands, we would identify the five States that had the largest 
    proportionate decrease in their ratios between the most recent two-year 
    period for which data are available and the prior two-year period. 
    These States would be potentially eligible.
         For Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands, we would 
    identify which had a comparable decrease in their ratios (i.e., a 
    decrease at least as large as the smallest decrease among the other 
    qualifying States). These additional States would also be potentially 
    eligible. We call to your attention that bonus funds for Puerto Rico, 
    Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands are not subject to the 
    mandatory ceilings in section 1108(c)(4) of the Act.
         We would notify the potentially eligible States that, to 
    be considered for the bonus, they need to submit data on the number of 
    abortions.
         We would determine which of the potentially eligible 
    States also experienced a decrease in their rate of abortions for the 
    most recent calendar year compared to 1995, the base year specified in 
    the Act. These States would receive a bonus award.
    
    III. Regulatory Framework
    
    A. Consultations
    
        In the spirit of both regulatory reform and PRWORA, we implemented 
    a broad and far-reaching consultation strategy prior to the drafting of 
    all proposed regulations for the TANF program. We discussed major 
    issues related to this rulemaking with outside parties at numerous 
    meetings.
        We held two types of consultations. First, we raised issues related 
    to this bonus award in the general TANF consultation meetings with 
    representatives of State and local government; non-profit, advocacy, 
    and community organizations; foundations; and others. Second, we held 
    consultations with technical, statistical and substantive experts 
    focused specifically on these bonus provisions. We spoke with a number 
    of different audiences including representatives of the National 
    Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems 
    (NAPHSIS); the Maternal and Child Health Technical Advisory Group 
    (coordinated by the American Public Welfare Association primarily to 
    advise the Health Care Financing Administration of the Department of 
    Health and Human Services on policy matters); and other interested 
    agencies and organizations (e.g., the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the 
    NOW Legal Defense Fund, and Catholic Charities USA).
        The purpose of these discussions was to gain a variety of 
    informational perspectives about the potential benefits and pitfalls of 
    alternative regulatory approaches. We solicited both written and oral 
    comments, and we worked to ensure that concerns raised during this 
    process were shared with both the staff working on individual 
    regulatory issues and key policy makers.
        These consultations were very useful in helping us identify key 
    issues and evaluate policy options. However, we would like to emphasize 
    that we are issuing these regulations as a proposed rule. Thus, all 
    interested parties have the opportunity to voice their concerns and to 
    react to specific policy proposals. We will review comments we receive 
    during the comment period and will take them into consideration before 
    issuing a final rule.
    
    B. Related Regulations Under Development
    
        The NPRM to address the work, accountability, and data collection 
    and reporting provisions of the new TANF program was published on 
    November 20, 1997.
        Over the next several months, we expect to issue other related 
    proposed rules. The upcoming NPRMs will cover high performance bonuses, 
    Tribal work and TANF programs, and child poverty rates.
    
    C. Statutory Context
    
        These proposed rules reflect PRWORA, as enacted, and amended by the 
    Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Pub.L. 105-33). This latter legislation 
    included some technical changes and an adjustment to the formula if 
    Guam, the Virgin Islands, or American Samoa is eligible for a bonus.
    
    D. Regulatory Reform
    
        In its latest Document Drafting Handbook, the Office of the Federal 
    Register supports the efforts of the National Performance Review and 
    encourages Federal agencies to produce more reader-friendly 
    regulations. In drafting this proposed rule, we have paid close 
    attention to this guidance. Individuals who are familiar with prior 
    welfare regulations should notice that this package incorporates a 
    distinctly different, more readable style.
    
    E. Departmental Activities Related to Out-of-Wedlock Births
    
        The Department has undertaken several initiatives in recognizing 
    the importance of reducing out-of-wedlock childbearing. These include 
    activities focused on the total population, as well as the teen 
    population. In 1995, the Department published the Report to Congress on 
    Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing. This volume provides an extensive 
    compilation of many statistics on issues related to out-of-wedlock 
    childbearing, as well as a literature review on the causes, 
    consequences, and strategies to reduce childbearing outside of 
    marriage. In that same year, the Department published ``Beginning too 
    Soon: Adolescent Sexual Behavior, Pregnancy and Parenthood,'' a report 
    prepared by Child Trends, Inc.
        Recently, the Department has developed the National Strategy to 
    Prevent Teen Pregnancy, as required in section 905 of PRWORA. This 
    strategy targets both girls and boys, and it contains both program and 
    research
    
    [[Page 10266]]
    
    initiatives. Section 905 of PRWORA also required that the Department 
    assure that at least 25 percent of communities in this country have 
    teen pregnancy prevention programs in place. The National strategy 
    sends the strongest possible message to all teens that postponing 
    sexual activity, staying in school, and preparing for work are the 
    right things to do. It strengthens ongoing efforts across the nation by 
    increasing opportunities through welfare reform; supporting promising 
    approaches; building partnerships; improving data collection, research, 
    and evaluation; and disseminating information on innovative and 
    effective practices.
        The Department is also administering the State Abstinence Education 
    Program as authorized by section 912 of the PRWORA. This program 
    authorizes $50 million per year beginning in FY 1998. By July 1997, 
    every State had applied for this money to build on their State efforts 
    to prevent teen pregnancy.
    
    IV. Section-By-Section Discussion of the NPRM
    
    What Does This Part Cover? (Sec. 283.1)
    
        This section of the proposed rule provides a summary of the content 
    of part 283. Part 283 covers how we would determine which States 
    qualify for the bonus award, what data we would use to make this 
    determination, and how we would determine the amount of the award.
    
    What Definitions Apply to This Part? (Sec. 283.2)
    
        Section 283.2 proposes definitions of the terms used in part 283. 
    Some of these definitions assign a one-word term to represent a 
    frequently used phrase. For example, ``Bonus'' is defined to mean the 
    Bonus to Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy authorized under section 
    403(a)(2) of the Act.
        We also define key technical terms used in calculating the bonus 
    award for clarity and precision. For example, we define the ``most 
    recent calendar year for which abortion data are available'' as the 
    year that is two calendar years prior to the current calendar year. We 
    also propose to define abortions to include both medically and 
    surgically induced pregnancy terminations. This is consistent with the 
    way data are collected in most States.
        You will note that we use the term ``we'' throughout the regulation 
    and preamble. The term ``we'' means the Secretary of the Department of 
    Health and Human Services or any of the following individuals or 
    agencies acting on her behalf: the Assistant Secretary for Children and 
    Families, the Regional Administrators for Children and Families, the 
    Department of Health and Human Services, and the Administration for 
    Children and Families.
    
    What Steps Will We Follow To Award the Bonus? (Sec. 283.3)
    
        This section of the proposed rule describes the process we propose 
    to follow for identifying which States would be eligible for the bonus 
    and what the amount of the bonus would be. This process is based on the 
    definition of ``eligible State'' in section 403(a)(2)(C)(i)(I)(aa). 
    This definition indicates that a State must have a qualifying decrease 
    in its ratio and also experience a decrease in its abortion rate. We 
    propose to award the bonus based on decreases in ratios and abortion 
    rates throughout the State. We would not award the bonus based on 
    limited populations, e.g., teens or public assistance recipients.
        Competition for the bonus is voluntary, and this rule places no 
    mandates on States with respect to data collection. Also, where 
    possible, this NPRM proposes to use existing data sources or data that 
    are the least burdensome to collect and report.
        In determining eligibility for the bonus, we first would consider 
    States other than Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. Among 
    these States, we propose to identify which five States have the largest 
    decrease in their ratios. We would then determine whether Guam, 
    American Samoa and the Virgin Islands have decreases in their ratios at 
    least as large as the smallest decrease among the other qualifying 
    States. If so, they too would be potentially eligible for the bonus. We 
    would not consider any other States for bonus eligibility, regardless 
    of whether these potentially eligible States ultimately qualify for the 
    bonus or not.
        When calculating decreases in the ratios, we would use the vital 
    statistics data for total births and out-of-wedlock births that States 
    submit to the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Vital 
    statistics data include information on virtually all births occurring 
    in the United States and are already reported by State health 
    departments to NCHS through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program 
    (VSCP). Hospitals and other facilities report this information to the 
    State health departments on a standard birth certificate, following 
    closely the format and content of the U.S. Standard Certificate of Live 
    Birth. The States process all of their birth records and send their 
    files to NCHS in electronic form in a standard format. The mother of 
    the child or other informant provides the demographic information on 
    the birth certificate, such as race, ethnicity, age, and her marital 
    status at the time of birth.
        We chose vital statistics data to measure births because we viewed 
    them as the most reliable and standard data available across States. 
    Also, using vital statistics data from NCHS would allow us to measure 
    the same years for all States and would give States a reasonable and 
    standard time frame in which to submit the data. This is particularly 
    important for birth data because we would rank States on their decrease 
    in the ratio.
        We also determined that obtaining these data directly from NCHS 
    rather than from the individual States would avoid a duplicate 
    information collection activity and would be less burdensome for the 
    States and for us. In most cases, States would not need to provide any 
    new data or information related to births beyond what they already 
    submit to NCHS.
        As specified in section 403(a)(2) of the Act, once we have 
    identified the potentially eligible States with the largest decreases 
    in their ratios, we would notify those States that, to be considered 
    for eligibility for the bonus award, they must submit the necessary 
    data on the number of abortions for both 1995 and the most recent year.
        We concluded that there is no need for all States to submit data on 
    abortions, based on the definition of ``eligible State'' in section 
    403(a)(2)(C)(i)(I)(aa). A State cannot qualify for the bonus unless it 
    is potentially eligible based on its decrease in the ratio. Even if 
    some potentially eligible States later become ineligible based on their 
    abortion data, all States who were previously ineligible based on their 
    birth data would remain ineligible. We see no purpose in requesting 
    abortion data from States that are not potentially eligible. Requesting 
    data from only the potentially eligible States would be less burdensome 
    for States and for us.
        Each of the potentially eligible States that submits abortion data 
    and also experiences a decrease in its abortion rate relative to 1995 
    would be eligible to receive the bonus. If a State does not submit the 
    necessary abortion data or has not experienced a decrease in its 
    abortion rate, it would be ineligible.
        We want to call attention to the fact that, as specified in section 
    403(a)(2)(C)(i)(I)(bb) of the Act, the comparison year for the abortion 
    rate will be 1995 for every bonus year. Any State that is potentially 
    eligible for the bonus and does not submit the 1995 abortion data along 
    with the other
    
    [[Page 10267]]
    
    required information within two months of notification by ACF would be 
    ineligible for the bonus that year.
        It is important to note that, based on the definition of ``eligible 
    State'' in section 403(a)(2)(C)(i)(I)(aa), we propose to rank States 
    only on the basis of their ratios. States do not compete with respect 
    to their abortion rates. Once a State is ranked on decreases in the 
    ratio and determined to be potentially eligible, changes in its 
    abortion rate would affect only its own eligibility. A State's abortion 
    rate has no affect on the eligibility of any other State. Thus, while 
    abortion data affects whether an individual State receives the bonus, 
    competition among States for the bonus depends primarily on the birth 
    data.
        Section 403(a)(2)(B) of the Act specifies that the total amount of 
    the bonus in each year shall be $100 million. The amount of the bonus 
    awarded to each State will depend on the number of eligible States, and 
    whether Guam, American Samoa or the Virgin Islands are among the 
    eligible States. In no case will the amount of a State's bonus be more 
    than $25 million.
    
    If a State Wants To Be Considered for Bonus Eligibility, What Birth 
    Data Must It Submit? (Sec. 283.4)
    
        This section of the proposed rule describes in more detail what 
    data a State must have submitted to NCHS for each year in the 
    calculation period as a first step in qualifying for the bonus. As 
    specified in section 403(a)(2)(C)(I)(i)(aa) of the Act, the calculation 
    period for each bonus year covers four years, i.e., the most recent two 
    calendar years for which NCHS has final data and the prior two calendar 
    years. Consider the hypothetical example where bonus eligibility is 
    being determined in July of 1999 and the most recent year for which 
    NCHS has final data for all States is 1997. In this example, the 
    calculation period would be calendar years 1997, 1996, 1995, and 1994.
        If a State did not change its method for determining marital status 
    at any time during the calculation period, it would not need to submit 
    any additional information beyond the information submitted to the NCHS 
    as part of the vital statistics program. States must have submitted 
    these vital statistics files for each year in the calculation period. 
    Among other elements, these files must contain the number of total 
    births and out-of-wedlock births that occurred in the State. NCHS would 
    use these data to tabulate the number of total and out-of-wedlock 
    births occurring to residents of each State.
        While the determination of marital status at the time of birth is 
    fairly standard across States, there is some variation. Most States use 
    a direct question on marital status, while a few infer marital status 
    based on various pieces of information.
        Section 403(a)(2)(C)(i)(II)(aa) of the Act requires us to disregard 
    changes in data due to changed reporting methods. Accordingly, we 
    propose in paragraph (b) of this section that, if a State changed its 
    method of determining marital status during the calculation period, the 
    State must provide additional information to NCHS in order to 
    demonstrate the effect of that change. The information that States must 
    provide includes the years(s) of the change and data resulting from a 
    replication of the prior methodology, i.e., data showing what the 
    numbers of out-of-wedlock births would have been if such a change had 
    not occurred. Examples of such changes include replacing an inferential 
    procedure with a direct question on marital status, or changing the 
    data from which marital status is inferred.
        In providing the information on the prior methodology, the State 
    must replicate as closely as possible the method for determining 
    marital status in the previous year. The State must submit this 
    alternative calculation of the number of out-of-wedlock births for 
    years in which the determination of marital status is different from 
    that in the prior year. The State would also have to submit 
    documentation to NCHS describing the change in determination of marital 
    status and how it made the alternative calculation.
        Consider the following hypothetical example of determining bonus 
    eligibility in 1999:
        A State changes from an inferential procedure to a direct question 
    on marital status in 1996 and then leaves its procedure unchanged. This 
    State would need to submit vital statistics data on total and out-of 
    wedlock births for each year in the calculation period. This State 
    would also need to submit an alternative measure showing what the 
    number of out-of-wedlock births would have been in 1996, using the 
    earlier inferential procedure. The State would not need to submit 
    alternative measures for any other years in the calculation period. 
    NCHS would use the information for 1996 to calculate an adjustment 
    factor for other relevant years in the calculation period. For FY 2000 
    and subsequent bonus years, the State would not need to submit any data 
    beyond the basic vital statistics files, as long as it made no further 
    change in its procedures.
        This alternative calculation of the number of births and 
    documentation is necessary only if a State chooses to be considered for 
    the bonus. It is not required as part of the Vital Statistics 
    Cooperative Program.
        We propose in paragraph (c) of this section that, for changes that 
    occurred prior to 1998 or prior to final rule publication, the State 
    has one year after final rule publication to submit the required 
    information. For changes that occur during or after 1998 and after 
    final rule publication, a State must submit the information with its 
    vital statistics data for that year. This policy would help ensure that 
    timely information is available when we determine bonus eligibility.
    
    How Will We Use These Birth Data To Determine Bonus Eligibility? 
    (Sec. 283.5)
    
        This section of the proposed rule explains how we would identify 
    which States have the largest decrease in their ratios. We would do 
    this by using data provided by NCHS on total births and out-of-wedlock 
    births for each State. In States that changed their methods of 
    determining marital status, NCHS would have adjusted the number of out-
    of-wedlock births to disregard the effect of those methodology changes. 
    This adjustment would be based on information provided by the States.
        In paragraph (b) we propose to use the NCHS data to calculate the 
    ratio for each State that has submitted the required data. As specified 
    in the Act, this ratio would equal the number of out-of-wedlock births 
    during the most recent two years divided by the number of total births 
    for the same period. We would also calculate this ratio for the prior 
    two-year period. Both ratios would be calculated to three decimal 
    points.
        We would then calculate the proportionate change in the ratios. 
    This proportionate change would equal the ratio from the most recent 
    two-year period, minus the ratio for the previous two-year period, all 
    divided by the ratio from the previous two-year period. A negative 
    result would indicate a decrease in the ratio. A positive result would 
    indicate an increase in the ratio, and mean the State was not eligible 
    for a bonus. We would calculate these ratios to three decimal places.
        We also considered measuring the absolute change in the ratio. The 
    absolute change would equal the ratio from the most recent period minus 
    the ratio from the prior period.
        We believe the proportionate change is a better measure than the 
    absolute change because it would allow States starting with high and 
    low ratios to compete more fairly. This is because a
    
    [[Page 10268]]
    
    State starting with a low ratio could have more difficulty achieving a 
    given absolute decrease in ratios compared to a State starting with a 
    high ratio. For example, a State starting with a ratio of .100 would 
    need to cut its ratio in half to achieve an absolute decrease of .050 
    points. On the other hand, a State starting with a ratio of .500 would 
    need to cut its ratio by only a tenth to achieve the same absolute 
    decrease. Using the proportionate change in ratios rather than the 
    absolute change in ratios helps to mitigate this potential difficulty 
    by measuring the change relative to the State's ratio in the base 
    period.
        In paragraph (c) we propose to rank States with respect to the 
    proportionate change between their two ratios. For States other than 
    Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands, we would identify the five 
    States with the largest decrease in their ratios. These States would be 
    potentially eligible. The number of such States potentially eligible 
    for the bonus would be fewer than five if fewer than five States show 
    decreases in their ratios.
        If a tie exists that would result in more than five such States 
    being potentially eligible, we would calculate the percentage change to 
    enough decimal places to eliminate the tie.
        We would then determine whether Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin 
    Islands have a comparable decrease in their ratios (i.e., a decrease at 
    least as large as the smallest decrease among qualifying States other 
    than Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands). These identified 
    States would be potentially eligible for the bonus.
    
    If a State Wants To Be Considered for Bonus Eligibility, What Data on 
    Abortions Must It Submit? (Sec. 283.6)
    
        This section of the proposed rule describes the data a State also 
    must submit on abortions in order to qualify for the bonus. As noted 
    above, only those States that are potentially eligible based on their 
    ratios would need to submit abortion data in each year. Other States 
    cannot be eligible and, therefore, do not need to submit abortion 
    numbers.
        Under the proposed definitions at Sec. 283.2, the term ``abortion'' 
    includes both medically and surgically induced pregnancy terminations. 
    In most cases, States already collect these data.
        To be considered for the bonus, we propose, in paragraph (a), that 
    States must submit to ACF data and information on the number of 
    abortions for calendar year 1995 within two months of notification by 
    ACF that they are potentially eligible. Under section 403(a)(2) of the 
    Act, their data must count all abortions; it cannot be based on sub-
    populations, such as recipients of public assistance or Medicaid.
        In paragraph (b), we propose that the potentially eligible States 
    must also submit documentation demonstrating when they obtained their 
    1995 data on abortions. An eligible State must have obtained its 1995 
    abortion data by the end of 1997, or within 60 days of final rule 
    publication, whichever is later. Prompt collection of these data should 
    help to improve the reliability of the abortion data submitted for 
    1995.
        For comparison and calculation purposes, in paragraph (c) we 
    propose that potentially eligible States also must submit data on the 
    number of abortions for the most recent year for which abortion data 
    are available. We define the term ``most recent year for which abortion 
    data are available'' in Sec. 283.2(e) to mean the year that is two 
    calendar years prior to the current calendar year. For example, if we 
    are determining bonus eligibility in calendar year 1999, the State 
    would need to submit abortion data for calendar year 1995 and calendar 
    year 1997. We define the period this way in order to measure the same 
    year for all States. Based on information received during the 
    consultation phase, we concluded that two years was a reasonable time 
    frame in which to obtain the data. A time frame of longer than two 
    years would not result in timely data, and a time frame shorter than 
    two years could be difficult for some States to meet.
        The information the State must submit for 1995 and the most recent 
    year is either the number of all abortions performed within the State, 
    or the number of all abortions performed within the State on in-State 
    residents. We would accept either measure. However, we prefer the 
    second measure because the population of in-State residents is more 
    relevant for the intent of this provision. We assume that State 
    policies to reduce out-of-wedlock childbearing will affect in-State 
    residents most directly. We received numerous comments during our 
    external consultation that the measure should be based on in-State 
    residents, if possible.
        We understand, however, that some States collect data only on total 
    abortions that occurred within the State and do not separately identify 
    abortions provided to in-State or out-of-State residents. While such 
    States could begin to collect the data on a State-resident basis in the 
    future, their 1995 data would not be collected on this basis. We 
    investigated whether a State could adjust its 1995 data to make it 
    comparable to future data based on in-State residents. After extensive 
    consultation, we concluded this would not be technically feasible.
        Therefore, this proposed rule offers potentially eligible States 
    the option to measure either total abortions that occurred within the 
    State or abortions only among in-State residents that occurred within 
    the State. However, the State must use the same definition to measure 
    abortions in later years as it chooses for 1995. For example, if a 
    State submitted data on total abortions performed in the State in 1995, 
    it also must submit data on total abortions performed in the State in 
    1999.
        While a State would be ineligible for the bonus if it changed its 
    number of reported abortions in this respect, it could change its 
    reporting in other respects and still be potentially eligible. For 
    example, a State could change its procedures for contacting abortion 
    providers. This flexibility would allow States to improve their 
    abortion reporting systems without making them ineligible for the 
    bonus.
        Under this proposed rule, States would also have flexibility to 
    choose the source of the abortion data they submit. This flexibility 
    would allow States that do not already have their own reporting system 
    in place to compete for the bonus using data from other sources.
        While the States would have some flexibility to change their 
    abortion reporting over time, the State would have to adjust for 
    effects of these changes. In paragraph (d), as provided in section 
    403(a)(2)(C)(i)(II)(bb) of the Act, we propose that States must adjust 
    the measure (the number of abortions) so as to exclude increases or 
    decreases that result from changes in data reporting relative to 1995, 
    i.e., changes in the source of the data or the methodology. We propose 
    also that the Governor, or his or her designee, must certify that the 
    State has made the appropriate adjustments.
        These abortion reporting restrictions, including the need to adjust 
    for changes in data reporting and the need to define the population 
    consistently over time, apply only to the number of abortions reported 
    to ACF for purposes of this bonus. Therefore, the number of abortions 
    reported for purposes of the bonus might or might not equal the number 
    of abortions reported in public health statistics.
        This proposed rule does not specify what methodology States must 
    use to adjust for changes in data collection. After extensive 
    consultation, we do not believe it is feasible to design a single 
    methodology that would address all possible changes in data reporting. 
    In addition, based on comments from our
    
    [[Page 10269]]
    
    external consultation, we understand that some State privacy laws 
    restrict the types of abortion provider information that can be 
    reported. We considered more specific reporting requirements as a way 
    of ensuring a more uniform methodology, but they appeared to conflict 
    with these State confidentiality laws.
        Our aim in this section of the NPRM is to obtain from States the 
    best quality and most standard abortion data possible. We believe this 
    is necessary for the fair and equitable distribution of these bonus 
    awards. We also believe, however, that this proposed rule provides 
    States with important flexibility that would make it technically 
    feasible for States to submit the necessary data if they choose to 
    compete for the bonus. We believe that this flexibility would better 
    incorporate State program knowledge and expertise in measuring 
    abortions.
        This flexibility could introduce variation in measurement of 
    abortions across States for purposes of the bonus and could raise 
    concern about fair competition for the bonus. However, these concerns 
    are greatly mitigated by the fact that States are not competing with 
    each other on their abortion rates. As noted above, a State's abortion 
    rate affects its own qualification only, not the qualification of any 
    other State. Furthermore, the disqualification of any State, based on 
    its abortion data, does not result in additional States becoming 
    eligible.
        A State cannot be eligible for the bonus unless it submits the 
    necessary abortion data. However, as competition for the bonus is 
    voluntary, this provision places no requirement on States to submit 
    these data.
    
    How Will We Use These Data on Abortions To Determine Bonus Eligibility? 
    (Sec. 283.7)
    
        This section of the proposed rule describes how we would use the 
    abortion data to identify which States are eligible for the bonus. To 
    be eligible, a State must meet all the requirements noted above and 
    must demonstrate a decrease in its abortion rate as described below.
        In paragraph (a), we propose to use the abortion data that States 
    provide to calculate a rate of abortions. This rate would equal the 
    number of abortions in a State for the most recent year, divided by the 
    number of total resident births for the same year as reported by NCHS. 
    This statistic is also known as the ``abortion to live birth ratio.'' 
    It is a standard statistic used to measure abortions and incorporates 
    the same denominator as the ratio. We would calculate the rate to three 
    decimal places.
        In paragraph (b), we propose to compare this rate for the most 
    recent year to the rate for 1995, calculated in the same way, and to 
    identify which of the potentially eligible States experienced decreases 
    in their abortion rates relative to 1995. Only those States 
    experiencing decreases relative to 1995 would be eligible for the 
    bonus. We would always compare a State's abortion rate to its 1995 
    rate, as specified in section 403(a)(2)(C)(i)(I)(bb) of the Act.
    
    What Will Be the Amount of the Bonus? (Sec. 283.8)
    
        This section of the proposed rule explains how we would determine 
    the amount of the bonus for eligible States. These amounts are 
    specified in section 403(a)(2)(B) of the Act. For Guam, American Samoa 
    or the Virgin Islands, the award would be 25 percent of their mandatory 
    ceiling amount as defined in section 1108 of the Act. Any bonuses paid 
    to the these States would be subtracted from the total award of $100 
    million, and the remainder would be divided among the other qualifying 
    States up to a maximum award of $25 million. If Guam, American Samoa 
    and the Virgin Islands were not among the qualifying States, the bonus 
    for each State would be $20 million if five States qualified and $25 
    million if fewer States qualified. If Guam, American Samoa or the 
    Virgin Islands were among the qualifying States, the award for each 
    State would be some lesser amount. The bonus amount for any State will 
    never exceed $25 million per year.
    
    What Do Eligible States Need To Know To Access the Bonus Funds? 
    (Sec. 283.9)
    
        This section of the proposed rule provides additional details on 
    how we would pay the bonus and how States may use the bonus award. We 
    propose in paragraph (a) to pay the award to the Executive Office of 
    the Governor. We believe that the Governor, as Chief Executive Officer 
    of the State, is responsible not only for the TANF block grant program 
    but for the well-being of all citizens of the State, including efforts 
    related to reducing out-of-wedlock childbearing for the population as a 
    whole.
        Since a bonus is part of a State's Family Assistance Grant, a State 
    may use these funds only for purposes listed in sections 404 (use of 
    funds) and 408 (prohibitions; requirements) of the Act. These sections 
    of the law, including their constraints and limitations, apply to all 
    funds received under section 403 of the Act.
    
    V. Regulatory Impact Analyses
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        Executive Order 12866 requires that regulations be drafted to 
    ensure that they are consistent with the priorities and principles set 
    forth in the Executive Order. The Department has determined that this 
    proposed rule is consistent with these priorities and principles. This 
    proposed rulemaking implements statutory authority based on broad 
    consultation and coordination.
        The Executive Order encourages agencies, as appropriate, to provide 
    the public with meaningful participation in the regulatory process. As 
    described elsewhere in the preamble, ACF consulted with State and local 
    officials, their representative organizations, and a broad range of 
    technical and interest group representatives.
        We discuss the input received during the consultation process in 
    the ``Supplementary Information'' section of the preamble and in the 
    section-by-section discussion of the proposed rule. To a considerable 
    degree, this NPRM reflects the information provided by, and the 
    recommendations of, the groups with whom we consulted.
    
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
    
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. Ch. 6) requires the 
    Federal government to anticipate and reduce the impact of rules and 
    paperwork requirements on small businesses and other small entities. 
    Small entities are defined in the Act to include small businesses, 
    small non-profit organizations, and small governmental agencies. This 
    rule will affect only States. Therefore, the Secretary certifies that 
    this rule will not have a significant impact on small entities.
    
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        This rule does not contain information collection activities that 
    are subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and 
    Budget. The birth data on which we will base the computation of the 
    bonus are currently available from the NCHS. Therefore, no new data 
    collection is required to measure out-of-wedlock birth ratios. The 
    abortion data would be solicited for up to eight States only, and, 
    therefore, does not meet the criteria for OMB review and approval.
    
    D. 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
    
    [[Page 10270]]
    
    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.
        We have determined that this proposed 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. Accordingly, we have not prepared a 
    budgetary impact statement, specifically addressed the regulatory 
    alternatives considered, or prepared a plan for informing and advising 
    any significantly or uniquely impacted small government.
    
    List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 283
    
        Health statistics, Family planning, Maternal and child health, 
    Public assistance programs.
    
        Dated: September 19, 1997.
    Olivia A. Golden,
    Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Children and Families.
        Approved: November 24, 1997.
    Donna E. Shalala,
    Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
    
        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we propose to add part 
    283 to chapter II of title 45 of the CFR to read as follows:
    
    PART 283--IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 403(a)(2) OF THE SOCIAL 
    SECURITY ACT, BONUS TO REWARD DECREASE IN ILLEGITIMACY
    
    Sec.
    283.1  What does this part cover?
    283.2  What definitions apply to this part?
    283.3  What steps will we follow to award the bonus?
    283.4  If a State wants to be considered for bonus eligibility, what 
    birth data must it submit?
    283.5  How will we use these birth data to determine bonus 
    eligibility?
    283.6  If a State wants to be considered for bonus eligibility, what 
    data on abortions must it submit?
    283.7  How will we use these data on abortions to determine bonus 
    eligibility?
    283.8  What will be the amount of the bonus?
    283.9  What do eligible States need to know to access the bonus 
    funds?
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 603.
    
    
    Sec. 283.1  What does this part cover?
    
        This part explains how States may be considered for the Bonus to 
    Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy as authorized by section 403(a)(2) of 
    the Social Security Act. It describes the data on which we will base 
    the bonus, how we will make the award, and how we will determine the 
    amount of the award.
    
    
    Sec. 283.2  What definitions apply to this part?
    
        The following definitions apply to this part:
        Abortions means induced pregnancy terminations, including both 
    medically and surgically induced pregnancy terminations.
        Act means the Social Security Act.
        Bonus refers to the Bonus to Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy, as 
    set forth in section 403(a)(2) of the Social Security Act.
        Calculation period refers to the four calendar years used for 
    determining the decrease in the out-of-wedlock birth ratios for a bonus 
    year. (The years included in the calculation period change from year to 
    year.)
        Most recent two-year period for which birth data are available 
    means the most recent two calendar years for which the National Center 
    for Health Statistics has obtained final birth data by State.
        Most recent year for which abortion data are available means the 
    year that is two calendar years prior to the current calendar year. 
    (For example, for eligibility determinations made during calendar year 
    1999, the most recent year for which abortion data are available would 
    be calendar year 1997.)
        NCHS means the National Center for Health Statistics, in the 
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health 
    and Human Services.
        Number of out-of-wedlock births for the State means the final 
    number of births occurring outside of marriage to residents of the 
    State, as reported in NCHS vital statistics data.
        Number of total births for the State means the final total number 
    of births to residents of the State, as reported in NCHS vital 
    statistics data.
        Rate of abortions means the number of abortions reported by the 
    State in the most recent year for which abortion data are available 
    divided by the State's total number of resident births reported in 
    vital statistics for that same year. (This measure is also more 
    traditionally known as the ``abortion to live birth ratio.'')
        Ratio refers to the ratio of out-of-wedlock births to total births, 
    as defined in Sec. 283.5(b).
        State means the 50 States of the United States, the District of 
    Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin 
    Islands, Guam, and American Samoa, as provided in section 419(a)(5) of 
    the Act.
        Vital statistics data means the data reported by State health 
    departments to NCHS, through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program 
    (VSCP).
    
    
    Sec. 283.3  What steps will we follow to award the bonus?
    
        (a) For each of the fiscal years 1999 through 2002 we will:
        (1) Calculate the ratios for the most recent two years for which 
    data are available, and for the prior two years, as described in 
    Sec. 283.5. We will do this for every State that submits the necessary 
    vital statistics data to NCHS, as described in Sec. 283.4.
        (2) Calculate the proportionate change between these two ratios, as 
    described in Sec. 283.5.
        (3) Identify as potentially eligible those States that have 
    qualifying decreases in their ratios, using the methodology described 
    in Sec. 283.5. We will identify fewer than five States if fewer than 
    five States experience decreases in their ratios. We will identify more 
    than five States if Guam, American Samoa or the Virgin Islands, in 
    addition to five other States, have qualifying decreases in their out-
    of-wedlock birth ratios.
        (4) Notify these potentially eligible States that we will consider 
    them for the bonus if they submit data on abortions as stated in 
    Sec. 283.6.
        (5) Identify which of the potentially eligible States that 
    submitted the required data on abortions have experienced decreases in 
    their rates of abortion relative to 1995, as described in Sec. 283.7. 
    These States will receive the bonus.
        (b) We will determine the amount of the grant for each eligible 
    State, based on the number of eligible States, and whether Guam, 
    American Samoa or the Virgin Islands are eligible. No State will 
    receive a bonus award greater than $25 million in any year.
    
    
    Sec. 283.4  If a State wants to be considered for bonus eligibility, 
    what birth data must it submit?
    
        (a) To be considered for a bonus, the State must have submitted 
    data on out-of-wedlock births as follows:
        (1) The State must have submitted to NCHS final vital statistics 
    data files for all births occurring in the State. These files must 
    show, among other elements, the number of total births and the number 
    of out-of-wedlock births occurring in the State. These data must 
    conform to the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program contract for all 
    years in the calculation period. This contract specifies, among other 
    things, the guidelines and time-lines for submitting vital statistics 
    data files.
        (2) The State must have submitted these data for the most recent 
    two years for which NCHS reports final data, as well as for the 
    previous two years.
        (b) If a State has changed its method of determining marital status 
    for the
    
    [[Page 10271]]
    
    purposes of these data, the State also must have met the following 
    requirements:
        (1) The State has identified all years for which the method of 
    determining marital status is different from that used for the previous 
    year.
        (2) For those years identified under paragraph (b)(1) of this 
    section, the State has replicated as closely as possible the previous 
    year's method for determining marital status at time of birth, and the 
    State has reported to NCHS the resulting alternative number of out-of-
    wedlock births.
        (3) The State has also submitted to NCHS documentation on what the 
    changes in determination of marital status were for those years and how 
    it determined the alternative number of out-of-wedlock births for the 
    State.
        (4) For methodology changes that occurred prior to 1998 or final 
    rule publication, the State must have submitted the information 
    described in paragraphs (b)(1), (2) and (3) of this section within 1 
    year of final rule publication. For such changes occurring during or 
    after 1998 and after final rule publication, the State must have 
    submitted such information according to the same deadline that applies 
    to its vital statistics data for that year.
    
                                                      Deadline for Information on Changes in Data Reporting                                                 
                                                                                                                                                            
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                            
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    If Change in Data Collection       Prior to 1998                 Prior to final rule           During 1998, after final      After 1998, after final    
     Occurred:                                                                                      rule                          rule                      
    Then Deadline for Information on   Within 1 year of final rule   Within 1 year of final rule   NCHS deadlines                NCHS deadlines             
     Alternative Data is:                                                                                                                                   
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Sec. 283.5  How will we use these birth data to determine bonus 
    eligibility?
    
        (a) We will use the number of out-of-wedlock births and total 
    births among women living in each State provided by NCHS as follows.
        (1) If a State has not changed its method of determining marital 
    status, these numbers will be based directly on their vital statistics 
    data files.
        (2) For years when the determination of marital status has been 
    changed during the calculation period, NCHS will provide the number of 
    out-of-wedlock births from vital statistics as well as an adjustment 
    factor to disregard the effects of this change.
        (b) We will use these data provided by NCHS to calculate the 
    decrease in the ratios for each State, as follows:
        (1) We will calculate the ratio as the number of out-of-wedlock 
    births for the State during the most recent two-year period for which 
    NCHS has final birth data divided by the number of total births for the 
    State during the same period. We will calculate, to three decimal 
    places, the ratio for each State that submits the necessary data on 
    total and out-of-wedlock births described in Sec. 283.4.
        (2) We will calculate the ratio for the previous two-year period 
    using the same methodology.
        (3) We will calculate the proportionate change in the ratio as the 
    ratio of out-of-wedlock births total births for the most recent two-
    year period minus the ratio of out-of-wedlock births to total births 
    from the prior two-year period, all divided by the ratio of out-of 
    wedlock births to total births for the prior two-year period. A 
    negative number will indicate a decrease in the ratio and a positive 
    number will indicate an increase in the ratio.
        (c) We will identify which States have a decrease in their ratios 
    large enough to make them potentially eligible for the bonus, as 
    follows:
        (1) For States other than Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin 
    Islands, we will use this calculated change to rank the States and 
    identify which five States have the largest decrease in their ratios. 
    Only States among the top five will be potentially eligible for the 
    bonus. We will identify fewer than five such States as potentially 
    eligible if fewer than five experience decreases in their ratios. We 
    will not include Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands in this 
    ranking.
        (2) If we identify more than five States due to a tie in the 
    decrease, we will recalculate the ratio and the decrease in the ratio 
    to as many decimal places as necessary to eliminate the tie. We will 
    identify no more than five States.
        (3) For Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands, we will use 
    the calculated change in the ratio to identify which of these States 
    experienced a decrease at least as large as the smallest qualifying 
    decrease identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. These 
    identified States will be potentially eligible for the bonus also.
        (4) We will notify the potentially eligible States, as identified 
    under paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section that they must submit 
    the information on abortion rates specified under Sec. 283.6 if they 
    want to be considered for the bonus.
    
    
    Sec. 283.6  If a State wants to be considered for bonus eligibility, 
    what data on abortions must it submit?
    
        (a) To be considered further for bonus eligibility, each 
    potentially eligible State, as identified under Sec. 283.5, must then 
    submit to ACF data and information on the number of abortions for 
    calendar year 1995 within two months of this notification. This number 
    must measure either of the following:
        (1) For calendar year 1995, the total number of abortions performed 
    by all providers within the State; or
        (2) For calendar year 1995, the total number of abortions that were 
    performed by all providers within the State on the total population of 
    State residents only. This is the preferred measure.
        (b) States must have obtained these data on abortions for calendar 
    year 1995 by the end of calendar year 1997, or within 60 days of 
    publication of the final rule on the bonus, whichever is later. Within 
    two months of notification by ACF of potential eligibility, the State 
    must submit records documenting when it obtained the abortion data for 
    calendar year 1995.
        (c) The State also must submit data on the number of abortions for 
    the most recent year for which abortion data are available, as defined 
    in Sec. 283.2. In measuring the number of abortions, the State must use 
    the same definition, either under paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this 
    section, for both 1995 and the most recent year.
        (d) The State must adjust the number of abortions reported to ACF 
    in any year to exclude increases or decreases due to changes in data 
    collection or methodology relative to the number of abortions reported 
    to ACF for 1995. The Governor, or his or her designee, must certify to 
    ACF that such adjustments have been made.
    
    
    Sec. 283.7  How will we use these data on abortions to determine bonus 
    eligibility?
    
        (a) For those States that have met all the requirements under 
    Secs. 283.1 through 283.6, we will calculate the rate of abortions for 
    calendar year 1995 and for the most recent year for which abortion data 
    are available. These rates will equal the number of abortions reported 
    by the State to ACF for the applicable year, divided by total births
    
    [[Page 10272]]
    
    among women living in the State reported by NCHS for the same year. We 
    will calculate the rates to three decimal places.
        (b) If ACF determines that the State's rate of abortions for the 
    most recent year for which abortion data are available is less than the 
    rate for 1995, and, if the State has met all the requirements listed 
    elsewhere under this part, the State will receive the bonus.
    
    
    Sec. 283.8  What will be the amount of the bonus?
    
        (a) If, for a bonus year, none of the eligible States is Guam, 
    American Samoa or the Virgin Islands, then the amount of the grant 
    shall be:
        (1) $20 million if there are five eligible States; or
        (2) $25 million if there are fewer than five eligible States.
        (b) If for a bonus year, Guam, the Virgin Islands, or American 
    Samoa is an eligible State, then the amount of the grant shall be:
        (1) In the case of such a State, 25 percent of the mandatory 
    ceiling amount as defined in section 1108 of the Act; and
        (2) In the case of any other State the amount of the grant shall be 
    $100 million, minus the total amount of any bonuses paid to Guam, the 
    Virgin Islands, and American Samoa, and divided by the number of 
    eligible States other than such territories, not to exceed $25 million.
    
    
    Sec. 283.9  What do eligible States need to know to access the bonus 
    funds?
    
        (a) We will pay the bonus to the Executive Office of the Governor 
    of the eligible State.
        (b)(1) States must use the bonus to carry out the purposes of the 
    Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block Grant in section 404 of 
    the Social Security Act.
        (2) These funds are also subject to the limitations in, and 
    requirements of, sections 404 and 408 of the Act.
    
    [FR Doc. 98-5179 Filed 2-27-98; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4184-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
03/02/1998
Department:
Children and Families Administration
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
98-5179
Dates:
You must submit comments by May 1, 1998. We will not consider comments received after this date in developing the final rule.
Pages:
10264-10272 (9 pages)
RINs:
0970-AB79: Bonus to Reward Decrease in Illegitimacy Ratio
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/0970-AB79/bonus-to-reward-decrease-in-illegitimacy-ratio
PDF File:
98-5179.pdf
CFR: (9)
45 CFR 283.1
45 CFR 283.2
45 CFR 283.3
45 CFR 283.4
45 CFR 283.5
More ...