20 April 1995
Kevin M. FitzGerald, Director Division of Social Services
N.C. Department Of Human Resources 325 N. Salisbury Street Raleigh, NC 27603-5905
RE: Advisory Opinion: Access To Records By Social Services Board; Access By Individual Board Members; Access By Individual Board Member To Records In Which He Has A Personal Interest; G.S. §7A-675(c), §108A-9, §108A-11, §108A-80
Dear Mr. FitzGerald:
You have asked for a formal Attorney General Opinion regarding the right of county social services board members to access client records. The Formal Opinion Committee, which consists of nine senior members of the Attorney General’s staff, has determined that this response should be in the form of an advisory opinion. Be advised that the only difference between a formal opinion and an advisory opinion is that a formal opinion is published. An advisory opinion, like a formal opinion, is the opinion of the Attorney General.
The specific questions you have asked are as follows:
- What records and files of a county department of social services may be inspected and reviewed by the county board of social services?
- Would the answer to the above question be the same for review and inspection of records and files by individual board members of the county board of social service.
- If the answer is different, what differences would apply?
- Would the answer to the above question be the same for review and inspection of records and files by individual board members of the county board of social service.
- May individual members review and inspect county department of social services records and files in which they have an individual personal interest such as protective services files regarding their own children or AFDC records regarding family members?
Federal regulations require that states receiving federal funds for public assistance programs protect client records from disclosure. 42 U.S.C. §602(a)(9); 42 CFR §431.301; 7 CFR §272.1(c). North Carolina protects client records by G.S. §108A-80, which provides that information concerning persons applying for or receiving public assistance or social services is confidential and may only be disclosed for ". . . purposes directly connected with the administration of the programs of public assistance and social services in accordance with federal rules and regulations and the rules and regulations of the Social Services Commission or the Department." General Statute §108A-11 provides for inspection of records by social services board members. The statute states:
Every member of the county board of social services may inspect and examine any record on file in the office of the director relating in any manner to applications for and provision of public assistance and social services authorized by this Chapter. No member shall disclose or make public any information which he may acquire by examining such records.
Social services board members have the right to access clients records collectively or individually as long as they do so pursuant to their duties as board members. See G.S. §108A-9. However, once a social services board member views client case file material, he may only share that information with other social services board members and relevant persons within the department of social services (dss). Moreover, board members must bear in mind that the North Carolina Administrative Code requires the director of the dss to safeguard confidential client information. The policies and procedures of the director regarding the protection of confidential client information must be followed by all persons with access, including social services board members.
The confidentiality of records of juveniles under protective custody or under placement of the court are protected by G.S. §7A-675(c). Although juvenile cases are in a general sense considered to be within the ambit of social services and G.S. §108A-80, G.S. §7A-675(c) provides very specific protection regarding confidentiality. Therefore, social services board members do not have access to juvenile case files because those files are governed by Chapter 7A. Dss directors may in their discretion bring individual juvenile records before the social services board for their review.
Social services board members have no right to access files in which they have a personal interest. A public officer, whether elected or appointed, owes an undivided duty to the public whom he serves. He is not permitted to place himself in a position which will subject him to conflicting duties or expose him to the temptation of acting in any manner other than in the best interests of the public. 63A Am. Jur.2d Public Officers and Employees § 321 (1984).
A social services board member who examines and reviews files in which he has a personal interest places himself in conflict with his public duties. He is in effect serving two masters, i.e., himself and the public. This is unethical and serves to undermine the public’s trust in its officials. Anderson v. Zoning Commission of City of Norwalk, 157 Conn. 285, 253 A.2d 16 (1968). The State has a substantial, compelling interest in restricting the unethical practices of its employees and public officials, not only for the internal integrity of the administration of government, but also for the purpose of maintaining public confidence in state and local government. The State of Ohio v. Nipps, 66 Ohio App.2d 17, 419 N.E.2d 1128 (1979).
MICHAEL F. EASLEY Attorney General
Ann Reed
Senior Deputy
Robert J. Blum Special Deputy Attorney General