Assess whether to recoup, waive, or refer for prosecution after a CDR where

SITUATION A CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE put recoupment aging versus collectability in front of issuance-system integrity manager in a child-care subsidy program with related-provider clusters. This Public Benefits / Compliance and Integrity Operations close is to recoup, waive, or refer from recoupment aging versus collectability, and the live options are To recoup, waive,, Refer for prosecution.

DECISION Issuance-system integrity manager in a child-care subsidy program with related-provider clusters must choose To recoup, waive, / Refer for prosecution using recoupment aging versus collectability after a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. Authorize To recoup, waive, now; recoupment aging versus collectability already has the discriminator after a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE. 2. Keep Refer for prosecution in force until recoupment aging versus collectability is completed after a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE for issuance-system integrity manager. 3. Treat recoupment aging versus collectability as To recoup, waive, because both readings appear after a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE. 4. Refuse a Public Benefits close: issuance-system integrity manager does not have the decision to recoup, waive, or refer turns on in recoupment aging versus collectability.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Test eligibility, recoupment, and improper-payment facts in recoupment aging versus collectability after a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE. 2. Quantify overpayment if to recoup, waive, or refer is wrong. 3. Separate a case-level error from a program-design failure in a child-care subsidy program with related-provider clusters. 4. For this Public Benefits Compliance and Integrity Operations file, read recoupment aging versus collectability against a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE and write the one fact that would move to recoup, waive, or refer for issuance-system integrity manager.

RECOMMENDATION Choose To recoup, waive, / Refer for prosecution on this Public Benefits / Compliance and Integrity Operations packet (recoupment aging versus collectability after a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE). The follow-on Compliance and Integrity Operations action is what issuance-system integrity manager does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.

COMMAND RETURNS - Bottom-line Public Benefits option on to recoup, waive, or refer, then the evidence in recoupment aging versus collectability, then the action for issuance-system integrity manager - Hypothesis scorecard against recoupment aging versus collectability: supported / rejected / untestable - Owner and next date for issuance-system integrity manager in a child-care subsidy program with related-provider clusters - What changes to recoup, waive, or refer if a CDR where treating-source evidence conflicts with a CE is later withdrawn