Current Suspected Overdose Deaths in Delaware for 2021: Get Help Now!
In re: DCIS No. Redacted Redacted
Redacted, pro se, Claimant
Patricia Diggs, Social Worker/Case Manager, Division of Social Services
Verna Watson, Social Worker Supervisor, Division of Social Services
Redacted ("Claimant") opposes a decision by the Division of Social Services ("DSS") to deny her application for TANF benefits. She maintains that while she quit her position, it was because she could not afford childcare. The Claimant also questioned her food stamp benefit, but at hearing agreed that she had been paid the correct amount. Food Stamp benefits are not at issue in this case.
The Division of Social Services ("DSS") contends that Claimant quit her position without good cause and was therefore ineligible for TANF benefits at the time of application.
The Claimant received two Notices to Deny Your TANF dated August 9, 2004. (Exhibits 3 & 4).
The Claimant completed a request for a fair hearing, which was received by DSS on August 11, 2004, requesting that benefits continue pending a hearing, if eligible. Because this was a denial, benefits were not eligible to be continued.
The Claimant was sent a certified letter dated August 17, 2004, stating that a fair hearing would be held on September 21, 2004. The hearing was conducted on that date in New Castle, DE.
This is the decision resulting from that hearing.
On August 9, 2004 Claimant re-applied for TANF benefits after her case had been closed in July 2004. By the time that she had re-applied, she had already quit her job at Integrity Staffing (sometimes hereinafter referred to as "Integrity"). The reason given for the job quit was that she was unable to afford childcare even though she was making $15.00 per hour. She had taken the job because she believed that DSS would be covering some of her childcare expenses. Pursuant to DSS policy, DSS had issued a Verification of Employment form (Form 170) to Integrity that was returned to them on July 23, 2004. (Exhibit 5) The verification form indicated that the Claimant's employment had started on June 28, 2004 and ended on July 22, 2004, and that she had quit her job. As such, when the Claimant applied for TANF benefits on August 9, 2004, DSS issued a Notice to Deny Your TANF based upon the job-quit information. DSS explored a "good cause" exception to the job quit and determined that "good cause" did not exist for the Claimant to terminate her employment, as she did have childcare at the time of her job quit.
Pursuant to DSS regulations, DSS is responsible for investigating the client's reason for non-compliance with the TANF work requirements to determine if the client had "good cause" for their non-compliance. In this case, DSS investigated this matter and determined that "good cause" did not exist for the job quit.
DSS has provided credible evidence that the Claimant quit her position, and that the decision to terminate benefits should be sustained because DSS performed a "good cause" determination and found that Claimant did not have "good cause" for quitting her job at Integrity as required under DSS policy. When faced with the childcare issue, the Claimant should have contacted her worker before quitting her job.
Therefore, the decision by DSS to deny Claimant's application for TANF benefits based upon the Claimant quitting her job with Integrity Staffing is sustained on the record.
For these reasons, the decision of the Division of Social Services to deny Claimant's application for TANF benefits is AFFIRMED.
Date: October 21, 2004
MICHAEL L. STEINBERG
THE FOREGOING IS THE FINAL DECISION OF THE DIVISION OF SOCIAL SERVICES
Patricia Diggs, DSS
Verna Watson, DSS
EXHIBITS FILED IN OR FOR THE PROCEEDING