-

-

§2012. Definitions.<br /> (m).<br />   (1)“Household” means—<br />     ~~(A) an individual who lives alone or who, while living with others, customarily purchases food and prepares meals for home consumption separate and apart from the others; or.~~<br />     ~~(B) a group of individuals who live together and customarily purchase food and prepare meals together for home consumption.~~<br />   ~~(2)Spouses who live together, parents and their children 21 years of age or younger who live together, and children (excluding foster children) under 18 years of age who live with and are under the parental control of a person other than their parent together with the person exercising parental control shall be treated as a group of individuals who customarily purchase and prepare meals together for home consumption even if they do not do so.~~<br />   ~~(3)Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), an individual who lives with others, who is sixty years of age or older, and who is unable to purchase food and prepare meals because such individual suffers, as certified by a licensed physician, from a disability which would be considered a permanent disability under section 221(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 421(i)) or from a severe, permanent, and disabling physical or mental infirmity which is not symptomatic of a disease shall be considered, together with any of the others who is the spouse of such individual, an individual household, without regard to the purchase of food and preparation of meals, if the income (as determined under section 2014(d) of this title) of the others, excluding the spouse, does not exceed the poverty line, as described in section 2014(c)(1) of this title, by more than 65 per centum.~~.   (4)In no event shall any individual or group of individuals constitute a household if they reside in an institution or boarding house, or else live with others and pay compensation to the others for meals.<br />     ~~(5)For the purposes of this subsection, the following persons shall not be considered to be residents of institutions and shall be considered to be individual households:~~<br />     ~~(A)Residents of federally subsidized housing for the elderly, disabled or blind recipients of benefits under title I, II, X, XIV, or XVI of the Social Security Act [42 U.S.C. 301 et seq., 401 et seq., 1201 et seq., 1351 et seq., 1381 et seq.].~~<br />     ~~(B)Individuals described in paragraphs (2) through (7) of subsection (j), who are residents in a public or private nonprofit group living arrangement that serves no more than sixteen residents and is certified by the appropriate State agency or agencies under regulations issued under section 1616(e) of the Social Security Act [42 U.S.C. 1382e(e)] or under standards determined by the Secretary to be comparable to standards implemented by appropriate State agencies under that section.~~<br />     ~~(C)Temporary residents of public or private nonprofit shelters for battered women and children.~~<br />     ~~(D)Residents of public or private nonprofit shelters for individuals who do not reside in permanent dwellings or have no fixed mailing addresses, who are otherwise eligible for benefits.~~<br />     ~~(E)Narcotics addicts or alcoholics, together with their children, who live under the supervision of a private nonprofit institution, or a publicly operated community mental health center, for the purpose of regular participation in a drug or alcoholic treatment program.~~

N/A

§2015. Eligibility disqualifications

(b) Fraud and misrepresentation; disqualification penalties; ineligibility period; applicable procedures (1) Any person who has been found by any State or Federal court or administrative agency to have intentionally (A) made a false or misleading statement, or misrepresented, concealed or withheld facts, or (B) committed any act that constitutes a violation of this chapter, the regulations issued thereunder, or any State statute, for the purpose of using, presenting, transferring, acquiring, receiving, or possessing program benefits shall, immediately upon the rendering of such determination, become ineligible for further participation in the program—

(i) for a period of 1 year upon the first occasion of any such determination;

(ii) for a period of 2 years upon—

(I) the second occasion of any such determination; or

(II) the first occasion of a finding by a Federal, State, or local court of the trading of a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of title 21) for benefits; and

(iii) permanently upon—

(I) the third occasion of any such determination;

(II) the second occasion of a finding by a Federal, State, or local court of the trading of a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of title 21) for benefits;

(III) the first occasion of a finding by a Federal, State, or local court of the trading of firearms, ammunition, or explosives for benefits; or

(IV) a conviction of an offense under subsection (b) or (c) of section 2024 of this title involving an item covered by subsection (b) or (c) of section 2024 of this title having a value of $500 or more.

During the period of such ineligibility, no household shall receive increased benefits under this chapter as the result of a member of such household having been disqualified under this subsection.

(2) Each State agency shall proceed against an individual alleged to have engaged in such activity either by way of administrative hearings, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing at the State level, or by referring such matters to appropriate authorities for civil or criminal action in a court of law.

(3) Such periods of ineligibility as are provided for in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall remain in effect, without possibility of administrative stay, unless and until the finding upon which the ineligibility is based is subsequently reversed by a court of appropriate jurisdiction, but in no event shall the period of ineligibility be subject to review.

(4) The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as the Secretary may deem appropriate to ensure that information concerning any such determination with respect to a specific individual is forwarded to the Office of the Secretary by any appropriate State or Federal entity for the use of the Secretary in administering the provisions of this section. No State shall withhold such information from the Secretary or the Secretary's designee for any reason whatsoever.

(d) Conditions of participation (1) Work requirements.— (2) A person who otherwise would be required to comply with the requirements of paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be exempt from such requirements if he or she is (A) currently subject to and complying with a work registration requirement under title IV of the Social Security Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 602), or the Federal-State unemployment compensation system, in which case, failure by such person to comply with any work requirement to which such person is subject shall be the same as failure to comply with that requirement of paragraph (1); (B) a parent or other member of a household with responsibility for the care of a dependent child under age six or of an incapacitated person; (C) a bona fide student enrolled at least half time in any recognized school, training program, or institution of higher education (except that any such person enrolled in an institution of higher education shall be ineligible to participate in the supplemental nutrition assistance program unless he or she meets the requirements of subsection (e) of this section); (D) a regular participant in a drug addiction or alcoholic treatment and rehabilitation program; (E) employed a minimum of thirty hours per week or receiving weekly earnings which equal the minimum hourly rate under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended (29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1)), multiplied by thirty hours; or (F) a person between the ages of sixteen and eighteen who is not a head of a household or who is attending school, or enrolled in an employment training program, on at least a half-time basis. A State that requested a waiver to lower the age specified in subparagraph (B) and had the waiver denied by the Secretary as of August 1, 1996, may, for a period of not more than 3 years, lower the age of a dependent child that qualifies a parent or other member of a household for an exemption under subparagraph (B) to between 1 and 6 years of age.

(g) Residents of States which provide State supplementary payments

(r) Disqualification for certain convicted felons

https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fadvance.lexis.com%2Fdocumentpage%2F%3Fpdmfid%3D1000516%26crid%3D7401058a-68f6-4e70-a7c7-4fb791d8b655%26nodeid%3DABBAACAAIAAQ%26nodepath%3D%2FROOT%2FABB%2FABBAAC%2FABBAACAAI%2FABBAACAAIAAQ%26level%3D4%26haschildren%3D%26populated%3Dfalse%26title%3D26-2-710.%2BAdministrative%2Breview.%26indicator%3Dtrue%26config%3D014FJAAyNGJkY2Y4Zi1mNjgyLTRkN2YtYmE4OS03NTYzNzYzOTg0OGEKAFBvZENhdGFsb2d592qv2Kywlf8caKqYROP5%26pddocfullpath%3D%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fstatutes-legislation%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A61P5-WWH1-DYDC-J415-00008-00%26ecomp%3D7gf59kk%26prid%3D5ffa8ac6-97a6-419b-8092-cdb5d3896894&group=world

This overrules the newer CCR that attempts (maybe, it's confusing wording) to stop continued benefits at the end of the current certification period which would be ridiculous and have no sound logic

C.R.S. § 19-1-103

(119) “Residual parental rights and responsibilities” means those rights and responsibilities remaining with the parent after legal custody, guardianship of the person, or both, have been vested in another person, agency, or institution, including but not limited to the responsibility for support, the right to consent to adoption, the right to reasonable parenting time unless restricted by the court, and the right to determine the child’s religious affiliation.

(120) “Responsible person”, as used in part 3 of article 3 of this title 19, means a child’s parent, legal guardian, or custodian or any other person responsible for the child’s health and welfare.

(139) “Termination of the parent-child legal relationship”, as used in articles 3 and 5 of this title 19, means the permanent elimination by court order of all parental rights and duties, including residual parental rights and responsibilities, as provided in section 19-3-608.

1) "custody" has long been abolished in CO. The term as it was used is unusably vague legally. It's replaced by Allocation of Parental Responsibilities which is made up of 1)physically living with providing day to day in-person care, and 2) a set of "decion-making" jurisdictions, one of which is "legal decision-making".

2) the statute states "physical possession" not "physical custody", which, as stated above, not a recognized legal contruct in CO and non-sensically vague. "physical possession" is less ambiguous and obvious to mean day to day physical in-person control

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

"one" reinforces that the list of exceptions are "OR' conditions and only "one" is requried

If they were cognizant enough to include in the rule for SNAP; we can assume they would've been cognizant enough to include it in TANF if they wanted it.

Click the X on the fields if search results are too small. I did this on freetext search and it fixed it. As if there were hidden text or a space entered.

In May 2018, Colorado’s General Assembly showed significant support for Family First with the passage of the Child Welfare Reform Bill, which created the Delivery of Child Welfare Services Task Force.

The Administrative Review Division (ARD) The ARD manages the qualitative case review portion of Colorado's child welfare quality assurance system. The ARD's vision is to create a safe and promising future for children and at-risk adults, by strengthening the communities, families, and systems that work to make that future possible. ARD is a neutral third party that facilitates case reviews, gathers, and analyzes data, publish research, and provides training and technical assistance to affect change in practice,

In addition to these specific areas, the ARD's qualitative case review instrument has

sets designed to measure the quality of case practice in the following areas:

Mental health

Substance abuse Educational stability and progress

Frequency and quality of contacts with the child/youth and parents

Engagement of the child/youth and parents in case planning Adequacy of visitation between the child/youth and their siblings and parer

Timeliness of Title IV-E eligibility

Find more on trauma informed care, because requires inclusion of whole family, necessary expertise, constantly argues it's necessary for misdiagnosis/treatment resulting in damage, danger, no-reunification (destruction of family), and inclusion of whole family

Caskey is now BCDHHS Director

Child Protection Review Teams -- CPRT The final CPRT meeting has taken place. No additional reviews will be scheduled. Recent legislation, Concerning the Optional Creation of a Child Protection Team by a County, http://statebillinfo.com/bills/bills/17/2017A_016_signed.pdf was enacted to address the evolution of the child welfare system and to recognize the multiple layers of review that now exist across child welfare systems.

For further information or questions, contact Terrie Ryan-Thomas, tryan-thomas@bouldercounty.org .

ALL OF THIS BOLD - Caseworkers must be familiar with evidence-based programs - not only need to know what services are available, but also the target population - so they can make appropriate referrals - eligibility should not be a driver of these decisions, but rather the needs and goals of the child, youth and family

Citizen Review Panel What is The Citizen Review Panel? The Citizen Review Panel (CRP) is an independent group of Boulder County citizens who review complaints regarding unresponsiveness or unprofessional conduct by Boulder County Housing and Human Services’ Family and Children Services employees. Panel members are appointed by Boulder County Commissioners. No employees of the Boulder County Department of Housing and Human Services or the Colorado Department of Human Services are on the panel

SNAP Director (which is under Div of Economic Security) karla.maraccini@state.co.us

Boulder, Colorado; State Senator and Rep: Senator Stephen Fenberg

Senate District 18 E-mail: stephen.fenberg.senate@coleg.gov Webpage: Stephen Fenberg Representative Judy Amabile

House District 49 E-mail: judy.amabile.house@coleg.gov Webpage: Judy Amabile

scaskey@bouldercounty.org

Boulder County benefits eligibility division

trauma-informed treatment model

services to correct the assessed problem or to attain the highest practicable mental and psychosocial well-being;

42 CFR § 483.40 - Behavioral health services.

Trauma-informed care seeks to: * Realize the widespread impact of trauma and understand paths for recovery; * Recognize the signs and symptoms of trauma in patients, families, and staff; * Integrate knowledge about trauma into policies, procedures, and practices; and *** Actively avoid re-traumatization.**

https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aapacn.org%2Farticle%2Ftrauma-informed-care-what-it-is-and-isnt%2F&group=world

Is this why eating is causing instant sleepiness? Non-digestive vessels vasoconstrict and shut off too much cerebral blood flow, then nerves instantly have reduced firing/waste and CO2 build up/diminished mitochondria output/oxidative buildup/ &or then resultant inflammatory triggering cytokine increase?

Vessel endothelial enormous surface area, manipulator of blood flow vasoconstrictor system, and cytokine producer/influencer, and high vulnerability sensitivity to viral infection/corruption...and then it's role or adjacent system and the immediate available Google research on COVID affecting> the vascular elastin system and corrupted elevated production of destructive elastases resulting in reduced vascular compliance then resulting too narrow "pulse pressure" band essentially creating arteriosclerosis.

Also, make sure to be thinking of the entire vascular system not as one system, but subsided by dynamic changing gated sections and inspect signaling creating changing locations and amounts of high/low pressure zones. Also, keep in mind 3 things about BP: 1, when taken with a cuff it is only measuring a reading at the elbow. 2, is a reading from the artery and not giving any direct data from vein part of the system. 3, BP is not the same as blood flow. So I conceive that you could read a good BP, but actual flow could be completely inadequate.

Remember analogy, vascular system is just like car AC system, or any pressurized hydraulic system, or even actually electric circuits. Meaning that there is a high pressure side, the load component(s), and a low pressure side. Also remember veins act as the reservoir tank, and when they constrict it is injecting more blood into the system to, if functioning correctly, allow higher performance and meet increase load demand. It also, therefore has less direct effect on whole system BP vs artery constriction because it's downstream of the load. Arterial constriction conversely has immediate direct effect on systolic BP as it is essentially putting a wall directly downstream of the heart. Therefore, regardless if diastolic pressure is zero or high, when the heart contacts, the pressure shoots straight up.

A working theory component: my pulmonary vein is inappropriately constricting too much. That causes high back up pressure at alveoli. Exercise then induces veinous reservoir injection and increased blood volume into the "working system" further increasing pressure. Possibly arterious had already been fully dilated at rest in order to compensate and then when exercise happens, it can't be dilated further to increase blood flow throughout and BP increases further all behind the pulmonary vein "dam". However it doesn't present as right side heart failure like might initially be guessed (with leg and belly edema) because the right side heart is not failing...yet. So it contains any further backflow and the alveoli are the weakest point and taking the most abuse and pressure is relieved as pulmonary edema. And therefore what may be present is if we look for it, we'll find that actual blood throughput output exiting the heart is too low. And this can exist with a normal ejection fraction because the heart is functioning correctly and pumping the right percentage of what is a low starting volume. And also this can support why right ventricle is showing first signs of enlarging because it's being overpressured and stretching out (enlarging). And this can support why normal BP readings are measured at the arm because it can completely handle the abnormally low blood volume being received in the downstream location it's at. And then therefore this further supports why BP is normal but HR is riding the high limit at rest and then instantly jumps on exertion AND why dizziness happens because the artery system was already maxed out dilation at rest and for any amount of exertion, increasing HR because of the immediate too fast rise in tissue hypoxia due to too low blood supply the brain keeps driving up HR to meet demand. Total result upon exercise: supply continues to more and more not meet demand, HR rises faster and faster to try to inadequately compensate, physically become weaker especially after high output anaerobic every supply deleted in 1-3 minutes and there is no aerobic capacity cavalry with it's O2 rushing in to take over and that's when I fall off the cliff> HR spikes even faster, chest pain immediately jumps, lung edema turns on full tilt as the HR spikes and the resulting pressure is forced to "spray out of the gaskets (alveoli), and brain blood O2 supply immediately becomes super inadequate and the dizziness and need to fall over is the instant result effect. And since dysfuntioning cerebral vasoconstriction is likely the cause or highly involved in migraines, this also supports why the headaches come. ... And perhaps this explaining the rest pain and how it increases with dex and exertion because blood flow o2 becomes inadequate. Then causing lactic acid waste and CO2 buildup... (ie pain). And then it, like all body tissues being deprived necessary blood flow trigger cytokine inflammation response. ... And then, fuck it, maybe this IS chronic fatigue syndrome, and IS long covid explaining PEM, explaining why every symptom imaginable in any combination permutation is being shown, is explaining the observed elevated varing soups of cytokinesis, explaining all variety of tissue damage depending on any person's unique amount of total hit and their particular systems vulnerabilities and ultimately how far down they went on the increasing spiralling cascading systems failure towards total shutdown, and explains why measures at addressing the variety of manifestations are all somewhat helpful, but inadequate and varing efficacy from patient to patient because they are all too downstream of the root cause trunk of the symptom tree where the need to relieve vascular over constriction is the root or next to the root of the symptom tree that is common to all patients. If this were all to be accurate, then the seed would be what caused the break in vasoconstrictor system and repairing/killing it, or perhaps it's a PC bootstrap phenomenon where the simple uncomplex virus was just enough bios code to place innocuous wrenches in any of machines of the systems and then those malfunctioning systems took over control in their new malfunctioning patterns and became the new bosses that are infact the disease, you become your disease, and the initial virus seed has long been killed/departed (they're the ultimate down the road end game that is the totally corrupted bcdhhs that will then exist now as a new monstrous organism slowly lingering and depleting itself and eventually all resources at which point it will have finally killed itself after it destroyed the once thriving self sustaining world it lived in. COVID then is the teenage abusive bf or mean drunk father from their past, that put in motion what would become decades and generations of monsters, years and years after they had been long since gone). And maybe this explains the phasing leaving and returning it symptoms. Because when enough if the symptoms start to be reset/repaired, that starts spiraling the spread of the shutdown of the corruption back to health, but if the spiral up isn't strong enough to overcome the consequential reactive spiral down response, the monster returns and the rebellion is quashed. And so explains why the overall, in every system, stronger less vulnerabilities less armor chinks youth are able to quash with ease the spiral down with their incumbent exceptional spiral up response. .... And aside, this explains why dysautonomia has become a top suspect. And explains why POTS has become almost synonymous with long COVID and CFS.

Haylie is not providing any information to the judge, e.g.: - harboring not addressed - intake lied - intake failed to meet promise - intake actually DROVE removal, as in "negative reasonable efforts" - intake did not provide allegations at first contact or ever; and also therefore, 2., did not collect response, and necessary danger data and necessary services/needs data - intake did not provide, therefore, a credible report informing court of true nature - intake offered no FFPSA designated services nor Core Services Program services - intake provided no list of services offered/provided, no list of identified needs, no explanation of how it succeeded or failed - magistrate did not examine, inquire, or document specifically and detailed the reasonable efforts in "The Prevention Plan"...I've seen no Prevention Plan and certainly not filed with the court - Visitation scheduler: 1) not competently trained in youth or resist and refuse; only 1.5 years licensed (probably no clinical practice) and self identified adult addiction, 2)provided no scientific backing for recommendations, omitted context to misrepresent truth, did not identify needs, provided no plan to resolve/address those needs especially science-backed (and found to be an intern), 3)was 3+ weeks late for 1wk due date - caseworker was assigned over a month later and is mandated to be immediate at time of 1st hearing - CASA was not assigned until 4 months later and i've still never heard from them - caseworker was told must provide allegations report and still did not and would not - family needs assessment was never done, certainly not in my presence, nor with my collaboration and agreement, if in the background there is one it is a lie or of completely insufficient quality and was not reported to me when asked for. It was not done even close to 60 day (therefore also does not meet mandate of "timely") deadline (and if it's dated as such it is a complete BS non-assessment only for the purposes of making it show up on a log as done). It does not identify needs/problems (most importantly resist/refuse) that brought forth D&N, it does not identify services that address the particular needs (most importantly a resist/refuse doctor; also actively blocked FUP) (and therefore nothing is science based "trauma informed" as mandated), it does not mandate what must be changed/achieved and the marker for that achievement; I still was not given Service Plan when I pried and pried for clear list of items that brought forth D&N-what was needed to change/achieved to end State's involvement-what services were/could/wanted to be done - DHS has failed to investigate it's actions of abuse to confirm/deny; which in the case that abuse did not happen 2. has failed to meet "timely" mandate of services to medically assess and treat resist/refuse and 3. failed "reasonable efforts to reunify" mandate - DHS has not only 1. failed mandate to offer/make available/refer & monitor and ensure execution of services/ (e.g. Core, FFPSA, "unique to family needs", "public or private/community bases", "evidenced based", "trauma informed...further defined in CCR as "complete situation assessment/treatment, whole family") they 2. made ME responsible for REFERRING THEM and with an expectation it likely WOULD NOT BE PURSUED, 3. was essentially told Core Services wasn't real (was ignored and then simply would not answer when i asked directly in-person about "Core Services" and changed the subject) when I specifically asked, 4. mocked when I gave science backed warning of imminent and severe risk and necessary doctor services needed - court did not set adjudication until 2+ months past federally mandated 90 day MAXIMUM (and is written as "should be much sooner and ASAP", and 2. almost 4 months after 20th District's filed D&N management commitment plan - Independent Assessment: did not meet many many mandates (see email to Haylie on objection to recommendation) - QI did not include family, claims 6 attempts to call but did not as mandated provide evidence of attempts, State did not meet mandate to make sure family was included in the process and ACTIVELY KEPT MOM & DAD & ATTORNEYS as mandated of the mandated Family and Permancy Team Meeting; did not complete in 10/14 day CDHS mandate nor did complete in 30 day federal requirement (which is also contractually owed by ASO); never held a 2nd Team meeting as requested (which resulted in a ruling based on false argument that would have been quashed in the meeting and also the QI realizing and changing her recommendations with the knowledge that the false claim was not only indeed false but that the credibility of information provided by state & CYF was now in question; and ultimately a result of a QI would have full & true understanding of medical need and severity and harm befalling child and family and would have urgently recommended necessary interventions which had so long been failed to be recognized/provided by State) - Court nor State was informed of fundamental FFPSA law as is absolutely expected to be known by a Child Welfare Judge and Child Welfare Attorney and Child Welfare Agency, at QRTP Assessment Review Hearing and made ruling on completely false law justification that child is not legally allowed to remain at the QRTP [b/c of course she is, which is the whole point of the hearing, b/c it's up to judge to determine if she should stay or not regardless of IA summary report recommendations

• TANF
• Child support
• DUI and warrant
• Car title
• Disability
• FUP

JUSTIA

Colorado Judicial -self help

2016 Congressional Research Service

ChatGTP Appeal Notice for Joshua https://chat.openai.com/share/d1789e39-8511-4902-ba21-154c6d648702

2020 Congressional Research Service

26(b)"Legal Holiday" Defined.

Pro se handbook

https://prose.flabarappellate.org/chapter-10-extraordinary-writs-civil/

Pro-se

Take this in combination with my previously made arguments of ccr meeting convenience, using electronic mail, law stating lack of receipt of notice as good cause....as well as ccr rules about good cause includes homelessness and disability. *Look for precedent on good cause (hell, look for a source of precedents and law interpretation period, and then look up perfect on everything,.. reopening appeal, BCE, reparations, damages, fcs case)

Also, at minimum for strategy to reopen: use anything as an avenue for an action to be taken, then appeal it using misconduct as a just and request an opinion on the interpretation interpretation of law (if can't just directly ask the higher court to make a ruling as part of the lessor request). Mechanism thoughts: 1. With TANF final decision, ask for a reconsider or file a motion asking for both an order to reinstate snap as well as an interpretation of the law that the household in its ENTIRETY is included under BCE. 2. Going direct to higher court- I think can choose either. Might have read that COA lacks ability to order/remand/compel, technically speaking.

Good to know. Plus, the county did not take advantage of this

See amendments notes below

Call it email if you want

Perfectly valid serving method allowed by law, state has one, both a court e system as well as regular email.

I had a known address. And I had also provided an option.

Lashley was not my last known address, my email address was my last known address.

General delivery was not my address, it was discussed that it may be used as an option, "an alternative method which I gave consent to" which mandated notifying me by phone or email.

Per 77d, judgement order MUST be served

https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.law.cornell.edu%2Frules%2Ffrcp%2Frule_77&group=world

Really Haley?? You could not argue that,

1) there was no genuine dispute over the material facts....over "what happened, AND what realities/possibilities/options/resources/outcomes exist" ????

2) that I was not entitled to "judgment" regardless of "material facts being in dispute" OR NOT "in dispute". For starters, a for a trial review of the facts regarding the determination of grounds that have been brought forth, not brought forth, and mis-presented, and additional are due and necessitate the compelling process of discovery in order to assure provision of, and of which a collection is already known by respondent and counsel to exist which the court has not been made of and who's determined clarity resulting from the analytical vetting the trial will provide holds the potential power to not just determine whether the state had grounds, but regardless of that outcome, to help all parties determine collaboratively and aided by the authoritative might of the court how the state can best provide help and services going forward, including if appropriate removing themselves from intruding a moment further in this family's lives and liberties. .... FACTS I'VE BEEN SHOUTING AT YOU FROM DAY ONE AND IN A MILLION EMAILS TO YOU OR BEEN CCED. YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON, BY WAY OF UNLAWFUL COMPETENCY OR NEGLECT TO YOUR CASE, YOUR DUTY TO SELF INFORM, AN ENTRUSTED BY AND SWORN TO THE PEOPLE OATH, AND YOUR KNOWN DUTY TO THE DEADLY VALUE, PURPOSE, AND CONSEQUENCE OF YOUR POST, a post for which you are additionally compelled to perform by, albeit less importantly, a meaningful wage.

Higher heart rate has to compensate

If it's destroying pericytes, then it's compounding the microclot/perfusion problem. The pericytes can't dilate to increase supply and they leak. Also they can't contact to ramp BP (POTS?)

shall make available

all eligible families

qualified staff...or purchase them

...Class Maximum Sentence class 1 - 364 days imprisonment, not more than a one thousand dollar fine, or both

not on the list...they are not child welfare

not on the list

Reasonable Efforts - not so much RE as it's criminal malpractice. Jackie released confidential case information, purposefully AND misrepresented it. Also CCR 7.601 protect confidentiality. 12 CCR 2509-7 https://hyp.is/UaaebvvTEe2eeDeCZWyDVw/docdrop.org/download_annotation_doc/12-CCR-2509-7-43cgo.pdf

If I intentionally did it, I'd be afforded a trial before any removal of benefits. AND

The evidence against me, which the burden is on the agency, would need to be clear and convincing. .... “Clear and convincing” means evidence which is stronger than a “preponderance of evidence” and which is unmistakable and free from serious or substantial doubt

Jesus......fucking.....christ

SHALL BE INITIATED

Reading the case notes of a TANF meeting is not on the list of "Verified Upon Receipt".

Antus told Jackie I was applying for SNAP

Need for verification

annotated this section here: https://hyp.is/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcasetext.com%2Fregulation%2Fcolorado-administrative-code%2Fdepartment-500-department-of-human-services%2Fdivision-2503-income-maintenance-volume-3%2Frule-9-ccr-2503-6-colorado-works-program%2Fsection-9-ccr-2503-6-3609-colorado-works-notice-payments-overpayment-intentional-program-violations-and-fraud-dispute-resolution-appeal-and-state-level-fair-hearing%2Fsection-9-ccr-2503-6-36097-appeal-and-state-level-fair-hearing%2Fsection-9-ccr-2503-6-360973-protections-to-the-individual&group=world

uhhhm....because um, that's our policy

Lauren, whomever she is, did not say a word. AND,

She obviously had knowledge of the case because she was CCed on all the email exhibits

Elizabeth Antus was obviously the one who initiated because she was the one emailing FCS

....really?

...really?

is there a white girl club collusion going on here

"!" ...Really?

FUP

Boulder County Organizational Chart. The line items in each box (at least for DHHS) are the names of the divisions

You don't even know what that word legally means.

custody custody custody. everyone throwing around that word like they know what it means. Tracy..."custody". Jackie..."custody". Antus...."custody.

You don't do you? ....but reunification "is the goal" right Jackie?

"AT ALL" ?? and all caps??

Jackie (FCS) is prohibited from sharing any information about the case

Reasonable Efforts - not so much RE as it's criminal malpractice. Jackie released confidential case information, purposefully AND misrepresented it. Also CCR 7.601 protect confidentiality. 12 CCR 2509-7 https://hyp.is/UaaebvvTEe2eeDeCZWyDVw/docdrop.org/download_annotation_doc/12-CCR-2509-7-43cgo.pdf

Reasonable Efforts - not so much RE as it's criminal malpractice. Jackie released confidential case information, purposefully AND misrepresented it. Also CCR 7.601 protect confidentiality. 12 CCR 2509-7 https://hyp.is/UaaebvvTEe2eeDeCZWyDVw/docdrop.org/download_annotation_doc/12-CCR-2509-7-43cgo.pdf

Program Integrity Coordinator job description

Program Integrity is a whole separate fraud specialist team...and they STILL don't know the laws

Benefits during appeal

$125, set, 2.8, 30mm

$200, set, 2.8, 35mm

$59, set no tire, 23mm

$149, set, 2.8, 35mm

$200, set (1 tire), 2.4, 25mm

$40, rear wheel, 2.4, 29mm?

Code of Colorado Regulations 500 - Department of Human Services 2506 - Food Assistance Program (Volume 4B) Rule 10 CCR 2506-1 - RULE MANUAL VOLUME 4B, FOOD ASSISTANCE Section 10 CCR 2506-1-4.600 - ONGOING CASE MANAGEMENT Section 10 CCR 2506-1-4.606 - PUBLIC ASSISTANCE (PA) HOUSEHOLD CHANGES

B. When there is a change in a PA case and the local office has sufficient information to make the corresponding SNAP adjustment, the local office shall follow the guidelines listed below.

1. If the change in household circumstances requires a reduction or termination of both PA and SNAP, the following action will be required:

b. If a household requests a fair hearing any time prior to the effective date of the Notice of Adverse Action, and its certification period has not expired, the household's participation in the program shall be continued on the basis authorized immediately prior to the Notice of Adverse Action, unless the household specifically waives continuation of benefits. Continued benefits shall not be issued for a period beyond the end of the current certification period. c. If the household appeals only a PA adverse action and is granted interim relief, SNAP benefits authorized prior to the adverse action shall continue or be restored. However, the household must reapply if the SNAP certification period expires before the hearing process is completed.

REGARDING TANF: as stated in the state plan and no doubt somewhere in the CCR- "If the appellant is receiving financial assistance, medical assistance, social services, or basic cash assistance under the Colorado Works Program at any time a conference or hearing is requested, all benefits will continue, pending the outcome of the State level fair hearing "

Letter from CDHS to the Governor of Colorado - Di, Ph, D., Malone, O., Ritter, B., Governor, K., & Beye. (2008). OFFICE OF CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES G. [LINK]