Skip Navigation
  • Robocall Hotline:(844)-8-NO-ROBO
  • All Other Complaints:(877)-5-NO-SCAM
  • Outside NC:919-716-6000
  • En Español:919-716-0058

Social Services; Confidentiality of Public Assistance Records

October 23, 1979

Subject:

Social Services; Confidentiality of Public Assistance Records; G.S. 108-45

Requested By:

Dr. Sarah T. Morrow, Secretary North Carolina Department of Human Resources

Question:

Is it lawful, under applicable State and federal laws and regulations, for a county department of social services to disclose names and other information concerning persons receiving public assistance to the Evaluation Section of the North Carolina Department of Human Resources or its contractual agent in order that an evaluation and report on the expenditure of State funds for the homemaker/chore services program may be done?

Conclusion:

Yes.

It is our understanding that the General Assembly of North Carolina specifically requested an evaluation and report by the Department of Human Resources on the expenditure of State funds for the homemaker/chore services program provided under Title XX of the Social Security Act. The responsibility for making this evaluation and report has been assigned to the Evaluation Section of the Department of Human Resources. In order to discharge this responsibility, the Evaluation Section will require access to the records of Title XX public assistance recipients within the county departments of social services.

Pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section 2003(d)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42

U.S.C. § 1397b(d)(1)(B)), the federal regulations found at 45 C.F.R. 205.50, and G.S. 108-45(a), public assistance records generally (and Title XX records in particular) are enveloped with confidentiality except for purposes directly connected with the administration of the various programs of public assistance. It is our interpretation of these provisions that county departments of social services may legally release names and other information concerning persons receiving Title XX public assistance that are contained in the records of the department since the purpose for acquiring this information is without a doubt directly connected with the administration of a program of public assistance (i.e., Title XX). Moreover, in view of our conclusion, there is no need for the county department of social services to obtain the consent of the recipient prior to the release of the information sought.

We reach the same conclusion should the Evaluation Section decide to contract with another agency outside the Department of Human Resources to conduct the actual evaluation provided the contract contains a provision prohibiting disclosure of the information gathered to third parties. The purpose in collecting the information remains the same irrespective of who does the collecting. Additionally, with the contractual prohibition against disclosure, the agency conducting the evaluation is subject to standards of confidentiality comparable to those governing the county departments of social services. Accordingly, under the authority of the federal regulation found at 45 C.F.R. § 205.50(a)(2)(ii), it would be lawful for the county departments of social services to release to the contractor information concerning individuals receiving Title XX public assistance.

Rufus L. Edmisten Attorney General

William Woodward Webb Special Deputy Attorney General