The Rapid Cycle Evaluation project provided interested states the opportunity to test small scale operational changes for improving program operations and delivery. Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Minnesota and Rhode Island participated in developing and rigorously evaluating site-specific interventions.
The 2014 Farm Bill authorized up to $200 million for the development, implementation, and evaluation of up to 10 pilot projects designed to reduce dependency and increase work effort under SNAP. These pilots gave USDA and states the opportunity to build on existing SNAP E&T programs and test new strategies to determine the most effective ways to help SNAP recipients gain and retain employment that leads to self-sufficiency.
The purpose of this study is to help FNA better understand how states are implementing the SNAP E&T case management requirement, including how they assess individuals’ needs for services and supports and provide participant reimbursements and other support services. It was also intended to identify promising practices and lessons learned that can be used to support states as they work to provide case management services aligned with their participants’ needs, available resources, and program priorities.
This study — mandated by Section 4022 of the Agricultural Act of 2014 — reviews research on employment and training program components and practices that: (1) assist members of households participating in SNAP to obtain regular employment; and (2) are best integrated with state workforce development systems.
The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA; PL 111-296) required the USDA Food and Nutrition Administration to conduct a demonstration that adds Medicaid to the list of programs used to directly certify students for free school meals. Although students receiving Medicaid are not categorically eligible for free meals, the DC-M demonstration authorizes selected States and districts to use income information from Medicaid files to directly certify those students found to be eligible for free meals.
The purpose of this study is to describe current methods of direct certification used by state and local agencies and challenges facing states and local education agencies in attaining high matching rates.
Student eligibility for free meals is determined by application or by direct certification. Although direct certification systems vary by State and LEA, all such systems are designed to eliminate the need for paper applications. Effective in SY 2011-12, LEAs must conduct direct certification three times per year: once at or around the start of the school year, and again three and six months after that initial effort. All direct certification systems now match student enrollment lists against SNAP agency records and the records of other assistance agencies whose participants are categorically eligible for free meals. The matching process, whether automated or manual, requires no action by the children’s parents or guardians.
The report draws on data for households participating in the Food Stamp Program under normal rules and thus does not include information about those who received disaster assistance after the Gulf Coast hurricanes in September and October 2005.
This report provides information about the demographic and economic circumstances of food stamp households in fiscal year 2005. The report draws on data for households participating in the Food Stamp Program under normal rules and thus does not include information about those who received disaster assistance after the Gulf Coast hurricanes in October 2004 and September 2005.
This is the first of a series of annual reports which will assess the administrative error associated with school food authorities’ approval of applications for free and reduced-price school meals. More than 95 percent of students who were approved for benefits on the basis of an application were receiving correct benefits, based on the information in the application files. In school year 2004/05, 3.5 percent of all students who submitted an application for free/reduced-price meal benefits had an administrative error in the processing of their applications.