Congress extended authorization for the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program in December 2022 (P.L.117-328). HRSA encourages MIECHV Program awardees to review this page to learn more about the reauthorization and how HRSA will implement changes to the Program. This page also includes answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs).
- FY24 MIECHV: RFI on Additional Matching Funds Webinar Recording, Presentation Slides (PDF - 564 KB) (August 2023)
Jump to the following sections:
New MIECHV Program grant funding
Data collection
Reducing administrative burden
Virtual home visiting
Targeted, intensive home visiting services
FAQs
New MIECHV Program grant funding
Starting in fiscal year 2024 (FY24), HRSA will give eligible states and jurisdictions one MIECHV Program grant, that includes base funds, matching funds (if applied for), and additional matching funds (if available). All MIECHV Program requirements apply to each part of the award. To get a MIECHV Program grant, eligible awardees must meet the Maintenance of Effort requirement.
Base funds
Congress increased appropriations for the MIECHV Program to be distributed through base funds and matching funds. HRSA will distribute the funds in one MIECHV Program award according to the formulas outlined in statute.
HRSA calculates base funds according to each state or jurisdiction’s share of children under the age of 5. HRSA will use the most recent U.S. Census data available before FY23 to determine this share. The law requires that the MIECHV Program award for each state or territory include at least $1 million in base funds.
Guardrails require HRSA to award each state or territory no less than 90% of their funding from FY21 and no more than 110% of their funding from FY21.
Matching funds
Matching funds will be available beginning in FY24, with increasing amounts through FY27. The federal government will contribute 75% of the funding and states and jurisdictions will contribute 25% in non-federal funds. This means that the federal government will contribute $3 for every $1 contributed in non-federal funds, up to certain limits determined by law. HRSA calculates the federal contribution based on each state or jurisdiction’s share of children under 5 whose families have incomes below the federal poverty level. HRSA will use the most recent U.S. Census data available before FY23 to determine this share. Each state or jurisdiction must meet a minimum matching funds amount to receive the federal contribution, which increases each fiscal year. For more information about state-specific minimum and ceiling amounts for state and federal matching funds from FY24 – FY27, please contact your HRSA Project Officer.
Definition of non-federal funds for matching funds
For the purposes of providing MIECHV Program matching funds under 42 U.S.C. 711(c)(4)(B), the amount of the grant payable to the eligible entity for the fiscal year will be increased up to certain specified “matching” amounts determined in reference to amounts of federal and non-federal funding outlined in this section.
Obligations of non-federal funding, for this purpose, are amounts committed by the eligible entity to support home visiting services delivered in compliance with specified MIECHV requirements, reported to the Secretary, and not counted toward meeting the awardee’s MIECHV Program Maintenance of Effort requirement under 42 U.S.C. 711(f). The MIECHV requirements for which such funds are obligated must be related to improvements in outcomes for individual families and core components of the MIECHV Program. These include all of the following:
- Implementation of service models meeting HHS criteria for evidence of effectiveness (or up to 25% used for implementing and evaluating promising approaches)
- Providing targeted, intensive home visiting services to eligible families
- Prioritizing services to high-risk populations
Non-federal funds must be obligated by the eligible entity and may consist of amounts made available by state appropriations or other state funding sources, local governments, and/or private entities (including funds made available by gifts, donations, or transfers). Non-federal obligated amounts may consist of cash and/or third-party in-kind contributions. The awardee must report obligated amounts to the Secretary through HRSA in the form and frequency determined by the agency.
- Non-federal funds for the purposes of matching must comply with 45 CFR Part 75 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for HHS Awards, including the following requirements:
- Non-federal funds must be necessary and reasonable for the accomplishment of project or program objectives.
- Non-federal funds used for matching cannot be included as contribution for any other federal award. Costs paid for using non-federal funds may not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements for any other federally financed program in either the current or a prior period.
- Funds paid by the federal government for another federal award cannot be applied as a source of non-federal matching funds unless federal statute specifically makes an allowance.
- Matching funds must be verifiable from the non-federal entity’s records and must be adequately documented.
Additional matching funds
Starting in FY25, awardees can apply for additional matching funds. These funds include any matching funds that HRSA did not distribute to awardees in the previous fiscal year, as well as any matching funds that were not used by awardees in prior fiscal years and were returned to HRSA. To apply for additional matching funds in FY25, should any become available, awardees must submit a statement expressing interest in receiving additional matching funds by September 6, 2023. For future years, awardees may submit a statement of interest in response to the annual MIECHV Program Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO). For more information, please contact your HRSA Project Officer.
HRSA will distribute additional matching funds using the same principles as matching funds. However, the federal share of additional matching funds will be based on the proportion of children under 5 under the poverty line in states that expressed interest in receiving those funds.
Maintenance of Effort (MOE)
To meet the MOE requirement, each awardee must obligate state general funds at an amount more than or equal to what they reported spending on evidence-based home visiting and home visiting initiatives in either FY19 or FY21, whichever is less. You can find the amounts for each state and jurisdiction in the notice published in the Federal Register on June 23, 2023. HRSA cannot award base or matching funds to awardees that do not meet the MOE requirement.
Data collection
Reauthorization of the MIECHV Program makes program and performance data more visible by requiring an annual report to Congress and the creation of a new web-based outcomes dashboard. For more information on MIECHV performance data, visit the MIECHV Data & Continuous Quality Improvement page.
Annual report to Congress
Each year, HRSA must share information with Congress about how awardees spend MIECHV grant funds. Most of the information included in the Report will be pulled from existing performance data and other reporting requirements.
Share of the funding expenditure by model
One of the requirements for the Report to Congress is the share of grants spent on each home visiting model. To meet this requirement, HRSA will require awardees to report the dollar amount of the formula funding spent on each home visiting model in Final Reports, starting with the FY21 Final Report.
For FY21 Final Report, awardees will provide the dollar amount and percentage of the FY21 formula funding expended on each evidence-based home visiting model or promising approach implemented. To determine the share of the expenditure for each model/promising approach, general guidelines include:
- At awardee level, the share of funding expenditure should include service delivery costs and any other costs that are easily identifiable and allocable to a specific model, for example, model-specific fees, data systems, training, and curricula. Service delivery costs typically include labor, fringe, supplies, and travel associated with implementing a specific model. Costs not related to models, such as costs associated with overseeing the grant or supporting other recipient-level infrastructure should not be included. For awardees with service delivery contracts with local implementing agencies (LIAs), include the LIA contractual costs as described below:
- If LIA implements a single model/promising approach, include the total contractual cost in the share for that model implementation.
- If LIA implements more than one model/promising approach, allocate the direct or approximate share of cost to each model. (See 45 CFR 75.405 for additional information on allocation.)
- If the share of the cost can be determined without undue effort or cost, the cost should be allocated based on the proportional benefit to each model/promising approach. If the share of a cost cannot be determined because of the interrelationship of the work involved, then the costs may be allocated on any reasonable documented basis.
Note that the total percentage expended will generally not add up to 100% of the award due to funding non-model expenditures associated with administration of the award and infrastructure activities.
Annual performance reporting
MIECHV Program awardees must report the number of virtual home visits conducted by each model in their Annual Performance Reports (APRs). This new requirement starts in FY24, and the data must be disaggregated by home visiting model. (See the answer to a related FAQ for more information.)
Reducing administrative burden
Reauthorization of the MIECHV Program requires HRSA to reduce administrative burden for awardees by at least 15%. HRSA is implementing this requirement by eliminating duplicate reporting requirements and streamlining data collection and reporting processes. HRSA will report recommendations for reducing burden in the FY24 annual report to Congress.
Virtual home visiting
MIECHV statute defines virtual home visits as home visits conducted only through electronic information and telecommunications technologies. Under reauthorization of the MIECHV Program, virtual home visits are allowable; however, guardrails are established to ensure virtual home visits are only used in limited circumstances and do not replace in-person home visits. Reauthorization also requires each home visiting model to have equivalent training standards for virtual and in-person home visits. More information about how awardees must meet these requirements will be included in the FY24 NOFO.
Targeted, intensive home visiting services
Federal law requires awardees to use MIECHV funds to provide or support targeted, intensive home visiting services. To meet this requirement, your home visiting services should target populations listed in your most recent statewide needs assessment update and the priority populations listed in the law. You must use evidence-based home visiting models approved by the Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) review. The latest list of approved models is on the HomVEE website.
This requirement also applies to non-federal funds for matching funds. To qualify for federal matching funds, awardees must contribute non-federal funds that are used for targeted, intensive home visiting services.
More information about how awardees must meet these requirements will be in the FY24 NOFO.
FAQs
Jump to the following subsections:
New MIECHV Program grant funding
Data collection
Funding expenditure by model
Virtual home visiting
New MIECHV Program grant funding
What is the difference between non-federal funds for the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirement and non-federal funds for matching funds?
The non-federal funds each awardee contributes to receive matching funds must be above and beyond those counted toward meeting the MOE requirement. Awardees must meet the MOE requirement to be eligible for base or matching funds and they must also contribute additional non-federal funds to receive federal matching funds. Additionally, different types of funds may be counted to qualify for matching funds. For more information, see the definition of non-federal funds for matching grants.
What happens if the MOE requirement for a state or jurisdiction is $0?
If there is no qualifying non-federal spending from FY19 or FY21, then there is no non-federal spending requirement to meet the MOE. In this case, the first dollar of non-federal funds spent can be applied to the non-federal matching contribution.
Does an awardee's non-federal contribution for matching funds add to their MOE requirement for future years?
For the current authorization of the MIECHV Program from FY23 – FY27, the MOE requirement is the lesser of qualifying non-federal spending from FY19 or FY21. Non-federal spending from other years will not affect the MOE requirement.
Will HRSA recoup unspent MIECHV grant funds?
Yes, HRSA will recoup any unobligated base and matching funds. HRSA will distribute unobligated matching funds in the fiscal year after they are returned to HRSA.
Do states and territories have to apply for the full matching funds amount?
States and jurisdictions may choose not to apply for matching funds if they wish. States and jurisdictions that wish to receive matching funds may apply for any amount between the minimum amount established in statute and their ceiling amount, determined by the matching funds formula, as long as they contribute the necessary non-federal funds.
How much in non-federal funds will awardees have to contribute to receive the estimated federal match?
To receive the estimated federal match, awardees must contribute 25% in non-federal funds for matching funds. This share increases from about $240,000 in FY24 to $660,000 in FY27. (These figures are estimates.)
Will HRSA provide awardees with matching fund ceiling amounts?
HRSA plans to release matching fund ceiling amounts for each state and jurisdiction around the time the annual NOFO or Non-Competing Continuation (NCC) Update is released. This is similar to the timing and process used to share ceiling amounts for base funds. Until that time, HRSA encourages awardees to estimate their own ceiling amounts. Please refer to the slides from the August 9, 2023, technical assistance webinar for more discussion on how to estimate your state or jurisdiction's ceiling amount. If you have questions about your specific circumstances, please contact your HRSA Project Officer.
Will HRSA issue guidance that identifies what funding sources from the state can be used as a match?
Non-federal funds for MIECHV Program matching funds can come from state appropriations or other state funding sources, local governments, and private entities, including gifts, donations, transfers, and third-party in-kind contributions. For more information, please see the definition of non-federal funds for matching funds. If you have questions about your specific circumstances, please contact your HRSA Project Officer.
Does non-federal, non-state funding, such as investments by localities and philanthropy, “count” towards meeting the state match?
Non-federal funds from localities, philanthropy, and other sources can be used for the 25% non-federal contribution for matching funds, as long as they meet certain statutory requirements.
Can non-federal matching funds come from sources other than the MIECHV lead agency?
Non-federal funds can come from another state agency, local governments, or private organizations, as long as they meet the criteria for non-federal funds.
Can awardees use in-kind contributions from non-federal sources for the state match?
Yes, in-kind contributions can be used to meet the non-federal matching fund requirement. This includes in-kind contributions from state-level entities, local governments, and other local private agencies, such as non-profit and philanthropic organizations. Contact your HRSA Grants Management Specialist or Project Officer to discuss any specific limitations that may apply. Further guidance about documentation will be included in the FY24 MIECHV NOFO.
How will sequestration impact matching funds award amounts?
Sequestration will reduce the total amount of money available for matching funds in the years it applies. For example, Congress appropriated $50 million for matching funds in FY24. After accounting for 13% set aside for reservations and mandatory sequestration, which is expected to be a 5.7% reduction, HRSA estimates that the total amount of money available for matching funds in FY24 may be about $40 million.
How will awardees apply for base and matching funds? What about additional matching funds?
Awardees can apply for a MIECHV Program grant that includes up to three funding sources: base funds, matching funds, and, starting in FY25, additional matching funds. Awardees can apply for any combination of these three funding components in response to the annual MIECHV Program NOFO. More information on applying for matching funds will be included in the FY24 NOFO, and more information on applying for additional matching funds will be included in the FY25 NOFO.
Can awardees opt in at any time for matching funds?
Awardees may apply for matching funds through their annual funding application, submitted in response to the NOFO. Not applying for matching funds in one fiscal year does not prevent an awardee from applying for matching funds in a later fiscal year.
Will awardees receive two separate grants or one combined grant?
HRSA anticipates issuing MIECHV Program grants using one Notice of Award (NOA) that includes base funds, matching funds, and, if available, additional matching funds.
Will MIECHV Program awardees have to report on matching fund spending separately from their base funds (for example, a separate Form 1, 2, and 4)?
HRSA is developing final details about reporting and documentation requirements.
What is the project period for matching funds?
MIECHV Program awards can include up to three funding components in one Notice of Award (NOA): base funds, matching funds, and additional matching grants (if available and requested by the awardee). All funding components in an NOA are subject to the same funding characteristics, including budget period, project period, and reporting requirements.
The project period for MIECHV Program awards will be two years. For FY24, the anticipated project period will be September 30, 2024, to September 29, 2026.
Will MIECHV Program awardees have the same period to spend matching funds as for base funds?
Yes, there is a two-year period to spend all MIECHV Program grant funds, which includes base funds, matching funds, and additional matching funds.
What does it mean for non-federal funds to be obligated for services in compliance with certain MIECHV statutory requirements and related to core components of the MIECHV Program?
To be used as non-federal funds for MIECHV matching grants, non-federal funds must be committed for services that improve outcomes for families and adhere to core components of the MIECHV Program. These services must meet HHS criteria for evidence of effectiveness (or up to 25% may be used for promising approaches that do not yet meet HHS criteria but are being rigorously evaluated), provide targeted, intensive home visiting services, and prioritize serving high-risk populations.
What services can matching funds be used for?
The federal contribution to matching funds may be used to support any services within the scope of the MIECHV award.
Are matching funds subject to the same requirements as base funds?
Yes, matching funds must meet all the statutory and programmatic requirements for the MIECHV Program. For example, the limitation on administrative costs applies to the total MIECHV award, which includes base funds and matching funds.
Are awardees required to report MIECHV performance measures for services funded by non-federal matching funds?
HRSA is still developing final details about the exact reporting and documentation needed for non-federal funds contributed for matching funds.
What home visiting models qualify for non-federal match?
To qualify for the match, funds must be used for targeted, intensive services that meet evidence standards and improve individual and family outcomes. Awardees can use matching funds to implement evidence-based models approved by Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness (HomVEE) review. The most up-to-date list of approved models is on the HomVEE website. Up to 25% of matching funds can be used for promising approaches that are being rigorously evaluated.
Will states receive the federal matching funds before or after documenting they have expended the state match amount?
At the time states and jurisdictions apply for matching funds, non-federal funds must be committed to be used for the non-federal match.
More information about what states and jurisdictions need to provide HRSA to validate the funds they are proposing to meet the match will be in the FY24 MIECHV NOFO.
What happens if a MIECHV Program awardee does not obligate the state match as planned?
Awardees that do not obligate their state match as planned must make sure that their federal match is in line with actual obligations. If an awardee obligates less than the non-federal funds they produced to qualify for the match as planned, they must return excess federal funds distributed to match funds that were not ultimately obligated.
When will states be able to apply for leftover matching dollars that other states did not use?
Starting in FY25, HRSA will distribute additional matching funds to awardees who express interest, if funds are available.
What happens if an awardee decides later that they want to be considered for additional matching funds?
If an awardee does not express interest in receiving additional matching funds, the awardee will not be eligible to apply for additional matching funds for the relevant fiscal year, even if they become available. For example, awardees who do not respond to the request for information by September 6, 2023, will not be eligible for additional matching funds in FY25. Not expressing interest now does not mean an awardee cannot apply for matching funds or additional matching funds in future fiscal years.
What happens if a MIECHV Program awardee does not need matching funds?
Matching funds are optional. If an awardee does not need matching funds, the awardee does not need to apply for them.
What data does HRSA use to calculate the share of children younger than 5 and children younger than 5 in families with incomes below the poverty line?
Reauthorizing statute requires HRSA use the most recently available data before FY25. Specific data source references will be included in the FY24 MIECHV NOFO. However, examples of relevant data may include data from the U.S. Census Bureau based on 2021 American Community survey data showing the population of children younger than 5 in each state and the population of children in poverty by sex and by age in each state.
Data collection
What data will awardees need to submit for HRSA to populate the new dashboard?
Data for the new outcomes dashboard will come from existing performance measures, like Forms 1, 2, and 4. Reporting requirements for these forms are not changing at this time to accommodate data needed for the dashboard. HRSA will work with awardees and other partners to decide which data to show on the dashboard.
Funding expenditure by model
Why are awardees required to report funding expenditures by model?
The reauthorization of the MIECHV Program requires an annual Report to Congress that must include “a description of each service delivery model funded under this section by the eligible entities in each State, and the share (if any) of the grants expended on each model” (42 U.S.C. 711(j)(6)).
What is the deadline for reporting the funding expenditures by model?
This information will be included in your FY21 Final Report directions and will be due via the HRSA Electronic Handbooks (EHBs) no later than January 18, 2024, at 11:59 p.m. ET.
What funding expenditures by model should be included in the FY21 Final Report?
In the FY21 Final Report, you will report on the expenditure of only FY21 MIECHV formula funds.
Should funding expenditures by model be reported based on what was spent or what was budgeted?
In the FY21 Final Report, you will report based on amounts of FY21 MIECHV formula funds that you have actually spent and not the budgeted amounts.
How frequently will awardees have to report these funding expenditures?
Awardees must report funding expenditures by model on an annual basis and submit the information in their formula funding or base funds Final Reports.
Is there a reporting template that awardees can use to track and report the costs?
Yes, HRSA has developed an optional report template which will be included as an attachment when you receive your Final Report instructions via EHBs.
What are some examples of model costs?
Model costs should include costs spent on each evidence-based home visiting model or promising approach implemented by your program. Some examples of model costs include:
- Model fees
- Model training costs
- Model conferences
- Service delivery costs, including LIA contractual costs
- Model tool or curricula costs
- Model data systems
Should awardees include American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act funding in the report?
Do not include ARP funding in the report. Awardees only need to report the dollar amount of FY21 formula funding spent on each model implemented.
What are examples of labor costs that must be reported?
Report labor costs if they are easy to identify and associated with implementing a specific model. Examples of labor costs include, but are not limited to, home visitors, supervisors, and other staff paid in full or in part using MIECHV funding.
Include labor costs if you can allocate those costs to implementing or overseeing a specific model. Do not include labor costs for grant administration or required grant oversight, such as subrecipient monitoring.
Do affiliation and conference fees count towards the total share of the expenditure for each model? How should those be reported?
Count only costs that are easy to identify and allocate to a specific model, such as model-specific fees, training, and curricula. Do not include costs that are not related to a specific model, such as those for overseeing the grant or supporting the infrastructure. For example:
- Do include:
- Model accreditation or membership fees
- Model training costs
- Model conferences
- Do not include:
- Non-model-specific membership fees
- MIECHV Annual Grantee Meeting
- Non-model-specific home visiting conferences
What is included in the costs associated with delivering a home visiting model?
Service delivery costs typically include labor, fringe benefits, supplies, travel, and overhead associated with implementing a specific model. If you have contracts with LIAs to deliver services, include the contractual costs. Also include any other costs that are easy to identify and allocate to a specific model, such as model-specific fees, data systems, training, and curricula.
How do awardees break down awardee-level costs?
Each awardee should assess if costs are primarily used to implement a specific model. Examples of awardee-level costs that should be categorized as model-specific costs include:
- Service delivery costs, including contracted services and LIA contracts
- Model costs associated with certification, tools, curricula, and model-specific trainings
- Any other costs that are easy to identify and allocated to a specific model
Awardees should not include the following awardee-level costs:
- Administrative costs
- Other recipient-level infrastructure costs that are not used for a specific model
Should awardees include awardee-level administrative costs?
The MIECHV Program defines administrative costs as the costs of administering a MIECHV award. These costs are not specific to any one model, so you do not need to include them in your calculation of model costs unless they can be clearly identified and allocated to a specific model.
Administrative costs can include, but are not limited to:
- Reporting costs (MCHB Administrative Forms in HRSA’s EHBs, Home Visiting Information System, Federal Financial Report, and other reports required by HRSA as a condition of the award)
- Project-specific accounting and financial management
- Payment Management System drawdowns and quarterly reporting
- Time spent working with the HRSA Grants Management Specialist and HRSA Project Officer
- Programmatic or fiscal monitoring of subrecipients or local implementation agencies
- Complying with FFATA subrecipient reporting requirements
- Supporting HRSA site visits
- The portion of regional or national meetings dealing with MIECHV grants administration
- Audit expenses
- Supporting HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) or Government Accountability Office (GAO) audits
Should awardees include other awardee-level infrastructure costs?
The MIECHV Program defines recipient-level infrastructure costs as the costs that are necessary to enable the awardee to deliver MIECHV services, but not the costs of delivering services themselves. These activities are generally not specific to any one model, so you do not need to include them in the calculation of model costs unless they can be clearly identified and allocated to a specific model, such as model affiliation and accreditation fees.
In addition to MIECHV administrative costs, other awardee recipient-level infrastructure costs may include awardee-level personnel, contracts, supplies, travel, equipment, rental, printing, and other costs to support the following (excluding costs related to state evaluation):
- Professional development and training for awardee-level staff
- Model affiliation and accreditation fees
- Continuous quality improvement (CQI) and quality assurance activities, including development of CQI and related plans
- Technical assistance provided by the recipient to the LIAs
- Information technology, including data systems
- Coordination with comprehensive statewide early childhood systems
- Indirect costs (also known as “facilities and administrative costs”)
Should awardees include costs for a promising approach evaluation?
If you implement a promising approach and are using MIECHV funds to evaluate the model, the evaluation costs should be included and reported as costs specific to that model.
For awardees participating in coordinated state evaluation (CSE), should awardees include evaluation costs?
If you are participating in CSE, generally, the evaluation will not be specific to a particular model and should be considered as part of awardee-level infrastructure cost and not included as model-specific cost. If you have specific questions regarding your evaluation project, reach out to your HRSA Project Officer.
If an awardee has an LIA that implements multiple models, how should the awardee report model expenditures for each model?
Allocate the cost to each model based on how much it benefits each model or promising approach. (See 45 CFR 75.405 for additional information on allocation.) If you cannot determine the share of a cost because the work is interrelated (for example, shared costs like general office supplies), then you may allocate the costs based on any reasonable and documented basis. If you have questions specific to your program, reach out to your Project Officer.
What do you mean by “reasonable and documented basis”?
For this reporting requirement, “reasonable” is typically meant to describe making a decision that another prudent person, in similar circumstances, would find appropriate. Then, how the cost was allocated and the reasonable rationale for why a cost was allocated in such a way should be documented and saved as supporting information in your internal records. It does not need to be submitted to HRSA as part of the FY21 Final Report.
See 45 CFR 75.405, Allocable Costs section of the Cost Principles subpart for more information.
How should awardees report costs if they do not have any LIAs?
If you do not have any LIAs, report service delivery costs and any other costs that are easy to identify and allocate to a specific model. If you have questions specific to your program, reach out to your Project Officer.
Will the reported model expenditure be shared with the models?
The model expenditure information is being collected to meet the requirement for the annual Report to Congress. Awardee-specific model expenditure information will not be shared directly with models. National data may be made public through the Report.
Virtual home visiting
What data on virtual home visits will MIECHV Program awardees be required to submit to HRSA?
HRSA requires awardees to collect data on virtual home visits. This includes the number of virtual home visits conducted each year, broken down by home visiting model. HRSA will collect this data as part of the Annual Performance Report (APR). Awardees will report these data on Form 1, Table 15 (see Figure 1). Please submit data for all home visits conducted during the reporting period, regardless of how long a family was enrolled. Awardees must start collecting this information October 1, 2023, to be reported to HRSA in the FY24 APR.
Table 15: Virtual Home Visit Data Collection
| Home Visiting Model (Select One per Row – Add Rows for Additional Models) | In-person Home Visits | Virtual Home Visits | Unknown/Did Not Report |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percent (Auto Calculate) |
* When the percent of data that is "Unknown/Did not Report" is >10%, a table note should be provided that addresses the reason for the missing data, and if possible, plans to reduce the amount of missing data in future reporting.
| Notes: |
|---|
How many in-person home visits are required for each family in a given year?
Awardees must ensure that each client family receives at least one in-person home visit within each 12-month period that they are enrolled.
What circumstances justify the use of virtual home visits?
The law requires MIECHV awardees to describe how they will decide when to use virtual home visits. Awardees should consider client consent, preference, location, fidelity to the model, and safety. Awardees should clearly explain their process in their application.
Does statute define a specific method of delivery for virtual home visits?
The MIECHV statute defines a virtual home visit as a visit conducted only using electronic information and telecommunications technologies.