State Hearing Decision - Hearing Decisions

STATE HEARING DECISION CONTINUATION8. The appellant was given an appointment with Richland County Success director 7/5/11,the appellant did not keep the appointment.9. In July the appellant requested a friend check on her apartment in Richland County.10. The appellant testified she remained in Erie County due to eviction from apartment inRichland County.11. The appellant requested money from Richland County CSB (Children Service Board) inJune 20, 2011 for relocation to Erie County.CONCLUSIONS OF POLICY:Policy:Ohio Admin. Code § 5101:1-3-11 (2008) outlines Ohio Works First work activities.Paragraph (E) states “If a work eligible individual or member of an assistance group fails orrefuses, without good cause, to comply in full with a provision of a self sufficiency contract theCDJFS shall sanction the work eligible individual and the assistance group pursuant to rule5101:1-3-15 of the Administrative Code. Paragraph (F) states that “For each failure, refusal orabsence, the CDJFS shall determine if good cause exists.Ohio Admin. Code § 5101:1-3-15(2008) (B) outlines the three-tier sanctions and explains thelength of time of the sanction for each occurrence. Sanction policy relevant to Food Assistanceindividuals is outlined in Ohio Admin. Code §5101: 4-3-09 (2007).ANALYSIS:Here the appellant disputed the fact that she was a resident of Erie County. However, alldocumentation and testimony indicates that the appellant had moved to Erie County and that theappellant never reported this move to Richland County. During testimony the appellant said thatshe had been told by Richland CSB (Child Service Board) to return to Erie County to settle herproblem of domestic violence with her estranged husband.However, the documentation from the CSB does not support this claim. Documentation receivedfrom the agency shows a request from the appellant for moving cost. Furthermore, the request isdated June 20, 2011 and does not indicate that the money is needed to flee from a dangeroussituation. The appellant testified that she was in fear for the lives of herself and the childrenwhile in Richland County. The county testified that they were aware of problems in the homebut not to the extent that the appellant revealed during the hearing. The county also testified thatif this information was given to them by the appellant that they would have assigned her to asecure WEP site.The appellant has never provided proof of deaths in her family nor as she produced any form ofverification that would allow good cause for the missed days in June and July of 2011. At thetime of the proposed sanction the appellant was still a client of Richland County and had signeda legal and binding Self-sufficiency contract. In the absence of good cause documentation, I findthe sanction imposed by Richland County to be correct.HEARING OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATIONS:Based upon the applicable policy and the record before me, I recommend that appealnumbers 1712444 (OWF) 1712443 (PAF) be OVERRULED.Page 2 of 3