Administration for Children and Families (ACF) - Child Care and Development Fund
High-priority program
Program level Payment Integrity results
Sponsoring agency: Department of Health and Human Services
The Child Care and Development Fund program is a federally funded, state-administered block grant program with each state having maximum flexibility in developing the Child Care and Development Fund programs and policies that best suit the needs of children and families within that state. States tailor their review of errors to reflect the policies and procedures unique to their state and therefore, states have varying requirements for establishing and verifying a client’s eligibility.
View on Federal Program InventoryPROGRAM METRICS
$18,699 M
in FY 2025 outlays, with a
95.1%
payment accuracy rate
-
Improper payment estimates over time
View as:
Chart toggle amounts:Proper paymentsOverpaymentUnderpaymentTechnically improperUnknown
Payment Integrity results
-
FY 2025 improper payment estimates
Chart legend and breakdown
Payment accuracy rate
Improper payment rate
Unknown payment rate
Sampling & estimation methodology details
Sampling timeframe:
10/2023 - 09/2024
Confidence interval:
90% to <95%
Margin of error:
+/-5.0
Causes
In some sampled cases, required eligibility verification materials—such as income documentation, employment or education verification, and provider authorization records—were either incomplete, outdated, or not retained in the file. When case records lacked the documentation needed to confirm eligibility, payments could not be validated during the review process, resulting in improper or unknown payments.
Administrative errors in applying eligibility policies were an additional contributor to improper payments. Errors included incorrect calculations of family income, calculation of care needed, and incorrect assessment of family copayments.
| Overpayment root cause | Overpayment amount |
|---|---|
| Amount of overpayments within the agency's control | $0.0 M |
| Amount of overpayments outside the agency's control | $845.47 M |
| Amount of overpayments that occurred because the data/information needed to validate payment accuracy prior to making a payment does not exist | $0.0 M |
| Amount of overpayments that occurred because of an inability to access the data/information needed to validate payment accuracy prior to making a payment | $0.0 M |
| Amount of overpayments that occurred because of a failure to access data/information needed to validate payment accuracy prior to making a payment | $845.47 M |
| Underpayment root cause | Underpayment amount |
|---|---|
| Amount of underpayments | $75.99 M |
| The amount of underpayments that occurred because the data/information needed to validate payment accuracy prior to making a payment does not exist | $0.0 M |
| The amount of underpayments that occurred because of an inability to access the data/information needed to validate payment accuracy prior to making a payment | $0.0 M |
| The amount of underpayments that occurred because of a failure to access data/information needed to validate payment accuracy prior to making a payment | $75.99 M |
| The amount of improper payments that were paid to the right recipient for the correct amount but were considered technically improper because of failure to follow statute or regulation | $0.0 M |
| The amount that could either be proper or improper but the agency is unable to determine whether it was proper or improper as a result of insufficient or lack of documentation | $0.0 M |
Prevention
States reporting in FY 2025 plan to initiate corrective measures including the development or enhancement of eligibility and case-management systems and the issuance of updated guidance and training to eligibility staff. Several states also plan to review and update their policy and procedures manuals to address identified vulnerabilities and ensure clearer guidance for front-line staff. In addition, some states are holding structured meetings with eligibility agencies to discuss errors, clarify requirements, and develop sustainable approaches to eliminating repeat error types. States also conduct ongoing monitoring, audit activities, and quality-assurance reviews as part of their long-term strategy for preventing improper and unknown payments. These state-level corrective actions are expected to continue into FY 2026.
At the federal level, HHS employed training as a central corrective action throughout FY 2025. In addition, HHS conducted virtual site visits with states needing targeted support to address identified root causes of errors. These oversight and technical assistance activities will continue through FY 2026 based on state needs. During these activities, HHS provided technical assistance on policy and procedural changes required to meet the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act of 2014, ensuring that states understand and implement the statutory requirements that reduce improper payment risks.
To further strengthen accountability and program integrity, HHS conducted joint case reviews with reporting states during FY 2025, bringing together both state and federal partners to identify process weaknesses and ensure consistent interpretation of eligibility requirements. Additionally, HHS funded the Office of Child Care’s National Center on Subsidy Innovation and Accountability, which continues to provide focused TA to states and territories on program integrity. This federal support is ongoing and is expected to continue through FY 2026, ensuring that states have continuous access to expertise and resources to prevent future improper and unknown payments.
HHS’s planned actions for the Child Care and Development Fund program are adequate because the agency receives detailed information from each reporting state on the root causes of errors and the corresponding corrective actions taken under state-specific policies. Using this information, HHS has provided—and will continue to provide—targeted technical assistance tailored to the identified causes of errors in each state. Historically, training and targeted technical assistance have been the primary strategies for reducing improper and unknown payments in the program. The program has consistently maintained an error rate below the statutory threshold, demonstrating that this approach is effective.
Corrective actions are also prioritized based on risk, particularly for states with improper payment rates exceeding the statutory 10-percent threshold. These states must submit a formal Corrective Action Plan, triggering heightened federal oversight and targeted technical assistance from HHS. This prioritization model ensures resources are directed to areas where noncompliance or systemic weaknesses pose the greatest risk. The adequacy of these corrective actions is reflected in the CCDF program’s consistently low improper payment rate and HHS’s ability to sustain performance below statutory limits.
| Payment type | Mitigation strategies taken | Mitigation strategies planned |
|---|---|---|
| Overpayments | Training | Training |
| Underpayments | Training | Training |
| Eligibility element/information needed | Description of the eligbility element/information |
|---|---|
| Contractor or Provider Status | Status or standing of contractor or provider, including recipient eligibility to provide medical services |
Additional information
The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) program is a federally funded, state-administered block grant program that gives states flexibility to design programs and policies that best suit the needs of children and families in their states. States tailor their review of errors to reflect the policies and procedures unique to their state and therefore, states have varying requirements for establishing and verifying a client’s eligibility.
For this reason, there is not a common lexicon for root cause data/eligibility themes across states and current CCDF program regulations do not require states to collect and report the root cause of errors in pre-determined categories. The data used to calculate and report improper payments data is collected by the states and aggregated at the federal level, and states are not required to report dollar amounts associated with individual root causes. Therefore, while the specific root causes of errors and associated corrective actions are identified by each reporting state under the policies unique to the state, the errors are consolidated into one control cause category for this aggregate reporting at the federal level. Although this approach limits the level of detail available in nationwide reporting, it preserves state flexibility and supports targeted corrective actions that reflect each state’s program design.
Reduction target
4.67 %HHS has the internal controls, human capital, information systems, and related infrastructure needed to reduce improper and unknown payments to a level at which further reductions would exceed the cost of additional corrective actions. The agency leverages dedicated federal administrative funds to support a skilled workforce, maintain and modernize IT and data systems, and strengthen program oversight and accountability functions. Additionally, HHS invests in comprehensive training and technical assistance for Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) recipients—funded at up to one-half of one percent of the program’s appropriation—to improve state and territory capacity to implement effective prevention, detection, and reporting practices. These combined resources and supports ensure that HHS can monitor program integrity efficiently and cost-effectively, maintaining improper payments at a tolerable rate consistent with statutory and administrative requirements.
The most recent budget submissions request will maintain current resources to support payment integrity efforts within CCDF. Funding is directed toward maintaining the capacity to detect, prevent, and reduce improper payments, as well as to support states in implementing stronger eligibility verification and program integrity controls. The budget also emphasizes investments in technical assistance and training for states to improve compliance with federal requirements. These resources aim to ensure that CCDF funds are used appropriately and reach the families and providers for whom they are intended.
HHS employs a multilayered approach to ensure that executive managers, program officials, and, where appropriate, state and local governments are held accountable for meeting improper payment reduction goals. Each year, HHS conducts a comprehensive assessment of internal controls in accordance with OMB Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Controls, including Appendix C, which specifically addresses payment integrity improvement. As part of this process, senior officials in each HHS office must complete and sign an Internal Control and Risk Management Certification, affirming their responsibility for maintaining effective controls that prevent, detect, and reduce improper payments. Operating Divisions also submit annual assurance statements, which require leadership to evaluate and attest to the adequacy of internal controls over operations, financial reporting, and compliance—including controls related to payment accuracy.
Beyond federal leadership accountability, HHS ensures that states, local governments, tribes, and nonprofit organizations receiving federal funds meet accountability standards through the Single Audit process. Entities that expend at least $1,000,000 in federal awards are required to undergo an annual Single Audit. These audits evaluate if recipients have effective controls in place and if federal funds, including Child Care grants, are spent in accordance with applicable requirements. Findings from Single Audits and HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) audits are used to identify overpayments and may result in the repayment of disallowed costs, complementing enforcement mechanisms for improper payment recovery.
HHS further reinforces accountability by using audit results, monitoring activities, and internal reviews to guide corrective action expectations for both internal leadership and external recipients. Executive managers and program offices are expected to address identified weaknesses promptly, and failure to do so can influence performance evaluations and oversight decisions. Collectively, these steps create a robust framework that emphasizes oversight, prevention, and timely recovery of overpayments, ensuring all levels of program administration are responsible for maintaining strong payment integrity.