QUESTIONS
You asked: (1) how Arizona law views the availability of funds in a “conservatorship
account;” and (2) whether funds placed in a “blocked account” in Arizona are a countable
resource for purposes of determining Julia’s eligibility for Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) payments.[1]
SHORT ANSWER
Under Arizona law, funds in a conservatorship account are generally available for
the support and maintenance of the protected individual. However, funds in Julia’s
blocked account are not a countable resource because of the court-ordered restrictions
placed on the account.
BACKGROUND
Julia is a minor and an SSI recipient residing in Arizona. In 2007, when Julia was
8 years old, she received settlement proceeds of approximately $39,500. In approving
the settlement terms, the state court ordered that the funds belonging to Julia be
placed in a restricted bank account labeled “The Estate of Julia M. .” See Order Appointing Conservator for a Minor and Approving Settlement of Claim, ¶ 5.
The court appointed Julia’s mother, Yvonne, as the conservator. Id. ¶ 1. The court
also ordered that funds in the bank account may not be withdrawn until after Julia
turns 18 years old and that any withdrawals from the account must have prior court
approval. Id. ¶¶ 1, 6. In a subsequent order, the court reaffirmed these restrictions. See Order Affirming Conservatorship Authority and Bank Account Restrictions Until the
Age of Majority.
ANALYSIS
In general, the assets of an individual are counted as a resource to that individual
for purposes of SSI eligibility. See generally Social Security Act § 1611(a), 42 U.S.C. § 1382(a); Program Operations Manual System
(POMS) SI 01110.001. Thus, as a starting point, the funds in the account belong to Julia and would be
counted as a resource to her unless an exception applies.
The bank account at issue qualifies as a “conservatorship account.” A conservatorship
account is “a financial account in which a person or institution has been appointed
by a court to manage and preserve the assets of an individual which are held in the
account.” POMS SI 01140.215(A)(1). The court ordered the settlement proceeds to be deposited in a bank account
and appointed Julia’s mother the conservator. Accordingly, this account is a “conservatorship
account.” See POMS SI 01140.215(A)(1).
To determine whether the funds in a conservatorship account are a resource, the agency
first considers state law. If state law requires funds in a conservatorship account
to be available for an individual’s care and maintenance, the agency presumes that
funds in the account are a resource. The agency then considers any factual evidence
to the contrary. See POMS SI 01140.215(B)(1) (“If State law requires that funds in a conservatorship account be made available
for the care and maintenance of an individual, we assume, absent evidence to the contrary,
that funds in such an account are available for the individual’s support and maintenance
and are, therefore, that individual’s resource.”).
With respect to the first factor, Arizona state law provides that funds in a conservatorship
account are to be used for “the support, education, care or benefit” of the protected
individual. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 14-5425(A)(2) (providing that a conservator “shall expend or distribute
sums reasonably necessary for the support, education, care or benefit of the protected
person and the person’s dependents”). Thus, unless there is “evidence to the contrary,”
the funds in Julia’s account would be counted as a resource. See POMS SI 01140.215(B)(2).
Regarding the second factor, “evidence to the contrary” includes the following types
of evidence:
• restrictive language in the court order establishing the account or a subsequent
order;
• state or local procedural rules for withdrawing funds from the account; and
• local court practices regarding withdrawal of funds.
POMS SI 01140.215(B)(2).
Here, restrictive language in multiple court orders is strong “evidence to the contrary,”
showing that funds in the blocked account are not available for Julia’s support and
maintenance. First, the court order establishing the account precludes the withdrawal
of funds until Julia reaches age 18. See Order Appointing Conservator for a Minor and Approving Settlement of Claim ¶ 1. Second,
the order contains the additional restriction that a withdrawal may occur only by
obtaining a court order authorizing the withdrawal. See id. ¶ 5. Third, a subsequent court order reaffirms these restrictions and explicitly
states that access to the account is “prohibited” and that funds in the account are
not to be used for Julia’s care and maintenance. See Order Affirming Conservatorship Authority and Bank Account Restrictions Until the
Age of Majority. [2]
Accordingly, the court’s language rebuts the presumption that funds in the account
are available for care and maintenance. The restrictions in these court orders constitute
clear “evidence to the contrary,” see POMS SI 01140.215(B)(2), showing that funds in the blocked account are not available for Julia’s support
and maintenance and should not be counted as a resource.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Although Arizona law provides that funds in a conservatorship account are generally
available for the support and maintenance of the protected individual, the court has
severely restricted access to funds in Julia’s blocked account. Consequently, funds
in the account are not a countable resource to Julia pursuant to Social Security Act
§ 1611(a), 42 U.S.C. § 1382(a).