Instead, the proper procedure under the regulatory scheme is for appellee to reapply for benefits at the time that she regains eligibility through the exercise of care and control of her child. At this point, if the BCAO prospectively determines that appellee's projected income for the month at issue falls below the threshold levels for assistance, then appellee will, once again, be entitled to benefits. Given the relevant definitions in the Code as set forth above, we must conclude that the Commonwealth Court erred by determining that the DPW should have temporarily suspended, rather than discontinued, appellee's AFDC benefits. Accordingly, we reverse and reinstate the Order of the DPW discontinuing appellee' s AFDC benefits. Appellee may reapply for benefits if and when she becomes eligible in the future.
Jurisdiction is relinquished.
1 AFDC is a federally funded, state administered cash welfare program created to enable children to be cared for in their own homes. 601 et seq. 151.42 provide that an adult is eligible for AFDC benefits if he or she is maintaining a home where the child either lives, or will be living within thirty days. 3 One of the eligibility criteria for AFDC was that the child must be living with a specified relative capable of and responsible for the care and control of the child. 5 Eligibility for assistance is determined prospectively by using the best estimate of income and circumstances of the recipient family during the calendar month in which the assistance payment is made .