Justice Agencies definition

Justice Agencies. We are not aware of any computer costs incurred by justice agencies in connection with this matching program.

Split View

AI-Powered Contracts

Draft, Review & Redline at the Speed of AI

Get StartedSchedule a Demo

Justice Agencies. Because, as described in section III, data from this computer matching program is not used to recover improper payments, we are aware of no personnel costs to justice agencies associated with this computer matching program.

Justice Agencies. Not applicable, as these matching programs are not currently used to detect and recover past improper payments and therefore do not generate collection cases for justice agencies to investigate and prosecute.  Opportunity costs (time required to apply for coverage) are quantified as $610 million per year ($42.02 per application x 14.5 million consumers enrolled in QHPs).  No data developed. Costs to the public (such as discouragement of legitimate potential participants from applying, and threats to privacy, Constitutional rights, and other legal rights) would be less significant in these matching programs than in other matching programs, because these matching programs are intended to support enrollments and are not currently used to detect and recover past improper payments.

Examples of Justice Agencies in a sentence

• VA and CMS do not anticipate any personnel costs for Justice Agencies as part of this matching program.

• Global issued Law Enforcement Analyst Certifi- cation Standards in 2006.13 Global and its partners issued Minimum Criminal Intelligence Training ▇▇▇▇- dards for Law Enforcement and Other Criminal Justice Agencies in the United States in 2004 and updated the standards to reflect the current Informa- tion Sharing Environment in 2007.

• In that spirit, the Global publication referenced earlier again serves as a useful guide Minimum Criminal Intelligence Training ▇▇▇▇- dards for Law Enforcement and Other Criminal Justice Agencies in the United States and updated them in 2007.

• The vendor’s approval status for the online technical audit-questionnaire and personnel vetting may be shared with Louisiana Criminal Justice Agencies as necessary for audit purposes.

• No. 109-162, Title XI-Department of Justice Reauthorization, Subtitle B – Improving the Department of Justice’s Grant Programs, Chapter 1 – Assisting Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Agencies, Sec.

• This file may be shared with other Division personnel and Criminal Justice Agencies but will not be part of the student’s school record.

• This file may be shared with other Department personnel and Criminal Justice Agencies but will not be part of the student’s school record.

• Justice Agencies in the United States, which outlines the minimum categories of training needed for intelligence analysts.

• Using the average historical recovery rate for Title XVI, we would expect to recover 65 percent of the overpaid dollars for a total benefit of approximately $892,919 • Justice Agencies: N/A To Clients: N/A To Third Parties: N/A These matching operations result in an overall savings of about $1,258,066,286.

• VA and CMS do not anticipate any computer costs for Justice Agencies as part of this matching program Total costs for the matching progr·am are estimated to be $479,716.

More Definitions of Justice Agencies

Justice Agencies. We assume that by enabling the FFM and Administering Entities to identify individuals who are ineligible for enrollment in Medicaid, CHIP and Basic Health Programs, or receipt of APTC or CSRs earlier than if a paper-based system was used, the matching program reduces the number and amount of cases referred to the Departments of Justice. At this time we do not have enough information to quantify these benefits. • To the General Public: We believe that the use of a centralized, streamlined, electronic computer matching program increases the general public’s confidence in state health subsidy programs, given a manual process would be laughable given present-day electronic capabilities and the pervasiveness of electronic, real-time processes. Additional benefits from the matching program to clients are also not quantifiable. By building public confidence in the state health subsidy programs, the computer matching program decreases the stigma of participating in a state health subsidy program.

Justice Agencies. We assume that by enabling the FFM and Administering Entities to identify individuals who are ineligible for enrollment in Medicaid, CHIP and Basic Health Programs, or receipt of APTC or CSRs earlier than if a paper-based system was used, the matching program reduces the number and amount of cases referred to the Departments of Justice. At this time we do not have enough information to quantify these benefits. • To the General Public: We believe that the use of a centralized, streamlined, electronic computer matching program increases the general public’s confidence in state health subsidy programs, given a manual process would be laughable given present-day electronic capabilities and the pervasiveness of electronic, real-time processes. Some consumers, particularly those with liquidity constraints, may have trouble repaying improperly paid APTC. The benefit of avoiding improper payments of APTC to these consumers is not quantifiable. Additional benefits from the matching program to clients are also not quantifiable. By building public confidence in the state health subsidy programs, the computer matching program decreases the stigma of participating in a state health subsidy program.

Justice Agencies. N/A To Clients: N/A To Third Parties: N/A To the General Public: N/A

Justice Agencies. We assume that by enabling the FFM and Administering Entities to identify individuals who are ineligible for enrollment in Medicaid, CHIP, and BHPs, or receipt of APTC or CSRs earlier than if a paper-based system was used, the Matching Program reduces the number and amount of cases referred to the Departments of Justice. At this time, we do not have enough information to quantify these benefits. • To the General Public: We believe that the use of a centralized, streamlined, electronic computer Matching Program increases the general public’s confidence in State health subsidy programs; a manual process would be laughable given present-day electronic capabilities and the pervasiveness of electronic, real-time processes. Some consumers, particularly those with liquidity constraints, may have trouble repaying improperly paid APTC. The benefit of avoiding improper payments of APTC to these consumers is not quantifiable. Additional benefits from the Matching Program to clients are also not quantifiable. By building public confidence in the State health subsidy programs, the computer Matching Program decreases the stigma of participating in a State health subsidy program.

Justice Agencies. N/A For Clients: N/A For Third Parties: N/A For the General Public: N/A $565,356.

Justice Agencies. N/A Previous matching agreements and renewals between the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) and the state agencies administering the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are as follows: