[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":3,"doc-seo-303410-105":53,"doc-detail-303410-en":126},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,14,19,24,29,34,39,44,49],{"id":8,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":11,"show_sort_weight":12,"slug":13},11,1,"Template","Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":15,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":16,"show_sort_weight":17,"slug":18},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":20,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":21,"show_sort_weight":22,"slug":23},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":25,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":26,"show_sort_weight":27,"slug":28},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":30,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":31,"show_sort_weight":32,"slug":33},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":35,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":36,"show_sort_weight":37,"slug":38},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":40,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":41,"show_sort_weight":42,"slug":43},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":45,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":46,"show_sort_weight":47,"slug":48},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":50,"doc_module":9,"doc_module_name":10,"category_name":51,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":52},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":54,"data":55},"ok",{"site_id":56,"language":57,"slug":58,"title":59,"keywords":60,"description":61,"schema_data":62,"social_meta":119,"head_meta":121,"extra_data":123,"updated_unix":125},105,"en","state-of-wisconsin-division-of-hearings-and-appeals-decision-case-cco-212039","STATE OF WISCONSIN Division of Hearings and Appeals - Decision - Case # CCO-212039","","Decision by the Division of Hearings and Appeals in Wisconsin addresses a child care assistance overpayment for Milwaukee Early Care Administration. The petitioner challenged the agency’s determination that she received excess Wisconsin Shares payments during specified months in 2021 through 2023. The record reviews employment and verification reports, discrepancies with state wage data, and whether the petitioner was engaged in approved activities while receiving subsidies. The decision considers statutory and administrative requirements mandating recovery regardless of agency error.",{"@graph":63,"@context":118},[64,80,101],{"@type":65,"itemListElement":66},"BreadcrumbList",[67,71,74,77],{"item":68,"name":69,"@type":70,"position":9},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":72,"name":10,"@type":70,"position":73},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/",2,{"item":75,"name":41,"@type":70,"position":76},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/letters/",3,{"item":78,"name":59,"@type":70,"position":79},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/state-of-wisconsin-division-of-hearings-and-appeals-decision-case-cco-212039/303410/",4,{"url":78,"name":59,"@type":81,"image":82,"author":87,"headline":59,"publisher":90,"fileFormat":93,"inLanguage":57,"description":61,"dateModified":94,"datePublished":95,"encodingFormat":93,"isAccessibleForFree":96,"interactionStatistic":97},"DigitalDocument",{"url":83,"@type":84,"width":85,"height":86},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/state-of-wisconsin-division-of-hearings-and-appeals-decision-case-cco-212039/303410.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":88,"@type":89},"Rhys","Person",{"url":68,"name":91,"@type":92},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-05","2026-09-19",true,{"@type":98,"interactionType":99,"userInteractionCount":76},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":100},"ViewAction",{"@type":102,"mainEntity":103},"FAQPage",[104,110,114],{"name":105,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":107},"What issue did the hearing focus on in case CCO-212039?","Question",{"text":108,"@type":109},"Whether the Department correctly determined that the petitioner received a child care overpayment under applicable Wisconsin statutes and administrative code provisions.","Answer",{"name":111,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":112},"How did the agency calculate the overpayment amounts?",{"text":113,"@type":109},"The agency issued notices identifying two sets of months in which the petitioner received payments while not working or participating in another approved activity, resulting in specified overpayment totals for those periods.",{"name":115,"@type":106,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Why did the agency reject the documents the petitioner submitted as evidence?",{"text":117,"@type":109},"The decision states the documents were provided only after the agency informed the petitioner which months were determined to be overpaid, and the agency did not accept them for stated reasons in the record.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":78,"og:type":120,"og:title":59,"og:site_name":91,"og:description":61},"article",{"robots":122,"canonical":78},"index,follow",{"doc_id":124,"site_id":56},303410,1790880776,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":127},{"doc_id":124,"user_id":128,"nickname":88,"user_avatar":129,"doc_module":9,"category_id":40,"category_name":41,"doc_title":59,"doc_description":61,"doc_content":130,"file_id":131,"file_url":132,"file_type":133,"file_size":134,"view_count":76,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":9,"is_downloadable":9,"audit_status":9,"page_count":47,"language":135,"language_code":57,"site_id":56,"html_lang":57,"table_of_contents":136,"faqs":137,"seo_title":138,"seo_description":61,"update_tm":139,"read_time":73},687207024643,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","FH  \nSTATE OF WISCONSIN Division of Hearings and Appeals  \nIn the Matter of  \nDECISION  \nCase \\#: CCO-212039  \nPRELIMINARY RECITALS  \nPursuant to a petition filed February 1, 2024, under Wis. Admin. Code, §HA 3.03, to review a decision by Milwaukee Early Care Administration to recover child care assistance, a hearing was held on April 29, 2024, by telephone. A hearing set for March 26, 2024 was rescheduled so the matter could be consolidated with a concurrent child care sanction case. After the Department concluded its case, petitioner did not respond when prompted. Two attempts were made to re-call her while on the record; both bounced directly to voice mail. Petitioner made no further attempts to contact the judge following the hearing’s end.  \nThe issue for determination is whether the Department correctly determined a child care overpayment.  \nPARTIES IN INTEREST:  \nPetitioner:  \nRespondent:  \nDepartment of Children and Families  \n201 West Washington Avenue  \nMadison, WI 53703  \nBy: Atty. Joey Roeth  \nMilwaukee Early Care Administration  \n1220 W. Vliet St 2nd Floor, 200 East  \nMilwaukee, WI 53205  \nADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE:  \nBrian C. Schneider  \nDivision of Hearings and Appeals  \nFINDINGS OF FACT  \n1. Petitioner (CARES \\#) is a resident of Milwaukee County.  \nCCO-212039  \n2. Petitioner received child care assistance through the Wisconsin Shares program during the period 2021 through 2023. During the period she reported being employed by , 32 hours per week, from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm, with some minor variations in the hours and times. She submitted employer verification forms with each renewal and application. Initial forms were submitted in September, 2021 and October, 2021  \n3. In August, 2022, petitioner sent in a change report that employment with  , 32 hours per week, ended. Petitioner had not previously reported working for   \n4. On September 22, 2022, as part of a renewal petitioner sent in another verification form showing her employer to be , with the same work hours.  \n5. On August 16, 2023, petitioner submitted another renewal, still reporting her employer as  \n\n|  |  | . |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n\n6. In October, 2023, petitioner reported that she was working for , with a start date of August 17, 2023.  \n7. Throughout this entire period petitioner was authorized for Shares assistance for her son, based upon her employment reports and verification.  \n8. The Department began to investigate petitioner’s work history after noting discrepancies in the state wage data base.  \n9. Petitioner began to work for  on January 9, 2020. The job ended November  \n20, 2020. Petitioner worked for  from February 28 through July 29, 2022. Those are the only two jobs that appear on the state data base.  \n10. By two notices dated January 10, 2024, the agency informed petitioner that she was overpaid $4,806 .52 from November 1, 2021 through September 30, 2022 (specifically November, 2021 through February, 2022 and August through September, 2022), claim no. , and $2,203 .12 from March 1 through July 31, 2023 (specifically only June and July, 2023), claim no.  . The claims were for all child care assistance paid during those periods because petitioner was not working or in another approved activity during those periods, and they are listed as being caused by intentional program violations by petitioner.  \n11. The agency did not include the period March through July, 2002 in the overpayment because petitioner worked for  then (although she did not report the work there) . Other periods of time were not included because petitioner did not use Shares assistance during the periods.  \nDISCUSSION  \nWis. Stat., §49.195(3), provides as follows:  \nA county, tribal governing body, Wisconsin works agency or the department shall determine whether an overpayment has been made under s. 49.19, 49.148, 49.155 or  \n49.157 and, if so, the amount of the overpayment…. Notwithstanding s. 49.96, the department shall promptly recover all overpayments made under s. 4","cbCaijVRPLByLAt8","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaijVRPLByLAt8","pdf",152431,"English","# Preliminary Recitals\n# Findings of Fact\n## Employment and verification history\n## Overpayment notices and amounts\n# Discussion\n## Statutory basis for recovery\n## Eligibility and approved activities\n## Agency treatment of submitted documents","[{\"question\":\"What issue did the hearing focus on in case CCO-212039?\",\"answer\":\"Whether the Department correctly determined that the petitioner received a child care overpayment under applicable Wisconsin statutes and administrative code provisions.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the agency calculate the overpayment amounts?\",\"answer\":\"The agency issued notices identifying two sets of months in which the petitioner received payments while not working or participating in another approved activity, resulting in specified overpayment totals for those periods.\"},{\"question\":\"Why did the agency reject the documents the petitioner submitted as evidence?\",\"answer\":\"The decision states the documents were provided only after the agency informed the petitioner which months were determined to be overpaid, and the agency did not accept them for stated reasons in the record.\"}]","STATE OF WISCONSIN Division of Hearings and Appeals - Decision - Case # CCO-212039 | PDF",1789803252]