Home » 2013 Issues » November 06, 2013 » CFS-32-13-00007-A Prohibition of Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression
CFS-32-13-00007-A Prohibition of Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression
11/6/13 N.Y. St. Reg. CFS-32-13-00007-A
NEW YORK STATE REGISTER
VOLUME XXXV, ISSUE 45
November 06, 2013
RULE MAKING ACTIVITIES
OFFICE OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES
NOTICE OF ADOPTION
I.D No. CFS-32-13-00007-A
Filing No. 1002
Filing Date. Oct. 22, 2013
Effective Date. Nov. 06, 2013
Prohibition of Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following action:
Action taken:
Amendment of sections 180.5 and 82-1.5 of Title 9 NYCRR; amendment of sections 421.3, 421.4, 421.16; and addition of section 441.24 to Title 18 NYCRR.
Statutory authority:
Executive Law, sections 503 and 532-e; and Social Services Law, sections 20(3)(d), 462(1), 372-b(3), 372-e(2), 378(5), 409 and 409-a
Subject:
Prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression.
Purpose:
Prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression in essential social services.
Text or summary was published
in the August 7, 2013 issue of the Register, I.D. No. CFS-32-13-00007-P.
Final rule as compared with last published rule:
No changes.
Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
Public Information Office, Office of Children and Family Services, 52 Washington Street, Rensselaer, NY 12144, (518) 473-7793
Initial Review of Rule
As a rule that requires a RFA, RAFA or JIS, this rule will be initially reviewed in the calendar year 2016, which is no later than the 3rd year after the year in which this rule is being adopted.
Assessment of Public Comment
The Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) received two comments on the proposed regulations regarding changes to Parts 180 and 182-1 of Title 9 of the NYCRR, and Parts 421, 423 and 441 of Title 18 of the NYCRR to include protections for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered and Questioning (LGBTQ) Individuals, one from a group comprised of various LGBTQ advocates and another from two members of the Legislature.
One commenter recommended that the regulations clarify the definition of gender identity. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because the Office believes that the terms in question are presently adequately defined.
Both commenters noted that the proposed changes to Part 421 only address discrimination against prospective adoptive parents, and do not address adoption services provided to biological parents, youth or other family members. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment. OCFS intends to address these comments in an administrative directive to be released by OCFS.
Both commenters also noted that the non-discrimination language in different sections of the proposed regulations varies and suggest that they be changed to be consistent. One commenter specifically suggested that OCFS amend Part 441.19 broaden the non-discrimination clause in this section. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS believes that the changes to Part 441.24 adequately address these concerns.
One commenter requested that OCFS clarify the expectations of provider agencies and mandate training for staff on working with LGBTQ youth and adults. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
One commenter suggested that OCFS require provider agencies to adopt a grievance procedure for discrimination based complaints. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
Another comment suggested that OCFS require provider agencies to perform an annual review and report regarding their compliance with non-discrimination regulations. Additionally, this comment suggested that OCFS should take actions including termination of contracts or barring providers from being utilized unless they create a grievance procedure for discrimination based complaints and report upon this annually. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
One commenter suggested that OCFS include a non-discrimination policy in the list of policies that child care agencies are required to maintain under 18 NYCRR 441.4. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
One commenter suggested that OCFS should additionally amend Part 441.4 to require provider agencies to inform employees about nondiscrimination regulations and monitor their compliance with them. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
One commenter suggested that OCFS amend Part 441.8 to include discrimination as a part of the definition of abuse or maltreatment of children. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS believes that the existing language in Part 441.8 would adequately address these concerns.
Another commenter suggested that OCFS amend Part 423.4 to make it consistent with other sections. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
One commenter suggested that OCFS amend Part 441.15 to include a prohibition against discrimination in special services provided by contractors or service providers outside of the provider agency. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
One commenter suggested that OCFS amend Parts 180.5(b)(2)(iii) to specifically require supervisors in detention facilities to be responsible for protecting youth from discrimination. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment to provide detention facilities flexibility in how they effectuate this regulation.
One commenter suggested that OCFS amend Part 182-1.5 to require training on cultural awareness. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because OCFS did not want to impose an additional mandate on agencies.
One commenter suggested alternate language for the nondiscrimination clause proposed for Part 182-1.5. The regulations were not revised in response to this comment because the Office believes that the existing language is adequately worded.
