OHRTF USDA forum 2005 testimony

What is your view of the Program’s strengths and accomplishments?  

• Timely response to hurricane Katrina survivors
• Proven impact on alleviating hunger; first and best response
• Has become part of American experience; over 50% will use in lifetime
• Meets goal of expanding food budgets, increased options for nutrition needs
• Helps keep families healthy; children fed and ready to learn in school

What program features contribute to success and should be preserved?

• Entitlement program based on monthly income
• Categorical eligibility so that working families do not have to worry about value of homes, cars, and savings and can still get FS help when life gets tough
• EBT cards; reduced stigma and fraud, more dignity in purchasing
• Broad spectrum of foods available, allowing for cultural and family preferences
• Outreach and nutrition education funding, make program known and meaningful

Where can we achieve further improvements?  What specific policy options should be considered to bring about these improvements?

Allotments

• Raise the $10 minimum benefit to $25, and allow households with more than 2 members to qualify for full minimum benefits. (Households with more than 2 members currently receive less than the minimum)
• Base monthly benefits on an updated measure of what families need to buy healthy foods. (Current studies establish the need for increased benefits to support actual costs of healthy diets; see http://dcc2.bumc.bu.edu/csnappublic/HealthyDiet_Aug2005.pdf)
• Raise dependent child care deductions to $700 a month per child under age 2 and $500 per month per child age 2 and above. (Would better reflect actual costs)
• Allow medical deductions for non-senior and disabled persons, and/or create a standard medical deduction. (Similar to standard utility allowance; allow persons with costs exceeding standard to use actual costs)

Access

• Provide funding for states to assist with implementation of EBT technology at Farmers' Markets and roadside stands. (Supports local agriculture, dollars stay in local economies)
• Allow state Farmers' Market associations to apply for food stamp authorization on behalf of member markets. (Would allow states to simplify and standardize processes)
• Rename the Food Stamp Program. (No longer using stamps; could impact stigma)
• Include option to "cash out" FS benefits with SSI payments. (Outreach to seniors; high percentage currently receiving SSI and not FS even though are categorically eligible)

Eligibility

• Raise income eligibility thresholds to 185% FPL to align with Child Nutrition Programs. (Higher threshold to simplify and expand outreach to working poor families)
• Fully restore immigrant eligibility. (Allow legal adult immigrants eligibility based on income; eliminate confusing restrictions including 5 year work history)
• Fully restore single adult eligibility. (Eliminate time limits for single adults; make work requirements the same as for other households)
• Exclude from household income reporting all income earned by members age 18 and under if in school at least halftime. (Income from children under 18 should not count against household eligibility; would align with TANF requirements)
• Align Americorps*VISTA eligibility with other Americorps legislation to exclude living allowances, whether the individual applies for food stamps before or after becoming a VISTA member. (Current legislation counts the living expense allowance against eligibility if a VISTA applies after becoming a member)
• Allow participants under age 22 who have children and who are living with their parents, to apply separately from their parents. (Current requirement of applying together results in undue hardship for grandparents and young military families)
• Eliminate work requirements for fulltime college students. (Use direct certification for FS certification FS when student is eligible for financial aid)

Administration

• Adjust the error rate to allow for recognition of state increased participation, set a "reasonable" fixed rate for states to aim toward, and exclude from error sampling households issued less than $25.00 in the sample month. (States currently must compete nationally to establish error rates, and it is easier to achieve low error rates when fewer people are participating; not cost effect to search for errors in households receiving few benefits)
• Eliminate client repayments for worker errors.

What are your priorities for improvement?  

• Expand categorical eligibility nationwide; raise income eligibility thresholds to 185% FPL, disregard value of home, car, savings
• Raise the $10 minimum benefit to $25
• Raise dependent child care deductions to $700 a month per child under age 2 and $500 per month per child age 2 and above.

Are there opportunities for greater integration of eligibility rules and procedures across programs?

• Raise income eligibility thresholds to 185% FPL to align with Child Nutrition and WIC.
• Align Americorps*VISTA eligibility with other Americorps legislation to exclude living allowances.
• Better align FS and TANF income reporting by excluding income earned by members age 18 and under.

How would you balance targeting benefits to match individual circumstances and standardizing benefits to simplify program administration? 

One approach currently used in Oregon to reach more people while simplifying the process is using a semi-annual reporting process, where participants have 1 face-to-face office interview per year and only need report when they exceed the income threshold or their change address. This reduces participant paperwork and office visits, simplifies complex office tracking requirements, and is expected to drastically reduce income reporting errors from small monthly fluctuations in client earnings.

How would you balance the value of nationally uniform rules and benefits and the value of enhanced State flexibility?

Since the FSP is currently at the lowest national error rate in the history of the program, take the best from all state practices and apply them to national rules. For example, Oregon has seen FS caseloads increase by over 70%, thanks in part to categorical eligibility, and at the same time has seen our error rate drop dramatically. The USDA should expand categorical eligibility nationwide, while continuing to fund new pilot strategies at the state level.

Are there ways to encourage more effective use of technology to improve customer service, reduce payment errors and lower administrative costs?

Oregon has been using the same computer technology system since 1973, which is error prone, cumbersome and not worker-friendly. Oregon also has an online FS application program ready to implement, but we lack the technology to support it.

Given the reality of budget constraints, how would you offset the cost of any proposal to expand eligibility, increase benefits, or provide additional funding or incentives to state?

No cost changes include:

· Allow state Farmers' Market associations to apply for food stamp authorization on behalf of member markets.

· Rename the Food Stamp Program