SEBTC demonstration offered a rigorous test of the impact of providing a monthly benefit of $60 per child - using existing electronic benefit transfer (EBT) systems - on food insecurity among children during the summer when school meals are not available.

The Healthy Incentive Pilot (HIP) is being evaluated using a rigorous research design. The overall goal of the evaluation is to assess the impact of HIP on participants’ intake of fruits and vegetables. 

Summer 2011 SFSP Home Delivery and Food Backpacks Demonstration Projects Request for Applications and Questions and Answers

The Early Implementation Report addresses the processes involved in implementing and operating HIP, focusing on the early implementation period, from pilot inception to March 2012.

The aim of this pilot is to study the impact of the availability of universal-free school breakfast on breakfast participation and measures related to students’ nutritional status and academic performance. This pilot is not intended to evaluate the current SBP or the value of consuming breakfast.

This report describes how the Direction Card system works; the process undertaken by ODJFS and its EBT vendor to design, develop, and test the system; the implementation process and experiences; and the cost of system design, development, and implementation. Volume 2 of this report compares the ongoing administrative costs of system operations and system levels of benefit loss and diversion with those of on-line EBT systems and the Dayton pilot.

A fundamental issue in the design of the Food Stamp Program (FSP) is the form benefits should take. Advocates of the current coupon system argue that coupons are a direct and inexpensive way to ensure that food stamp benefits are used to purchase food. Coupon advocates contend that, despite some evidence of fraud and benefit diversion under the current system, food stamps are used largely to purchase food. In addition, they contend that coupons give household food budgets some measure of protection against other demands on limited household resources. Advocates of cashing out the FSP argue that the current system limits the food-purchasing choices of recipients and places a stigma on participation. Moreover, they cite the cumbersome nature and cost of coupon issuance, transaction, and redemption.

A fundamental issue in the design of the Food Stamp Program is the form the benefits take. From the inception of pilot programs in the early 1960s to the contemporary program, the vehicle of choice has been the food stamp coupon, a voucher that can be redeemed for food at authorized retailers. For nearly that same period analyses have considered the relative merits of cash--or, in practice, checks--as an alternative. Advocates of the current coupon system argue that coupons are a direct and inexpensive way to ensure that food stamp benefits are used to purchase food, that the unauthorized use of food stamps is relatively limited despite some evidence of fraud and benefit diversion, and that coupons provide some measure of protection to food budgets from other demands on limited household resources. Advocates of cash benefits argue that the current system limits the purchasing choices of participants; places a stigma on participation; does not prevent the diversion of benefits (as evidenced by the existence of illegal trafficking); and entails excessive costs for coupon production, issuance, transaction, and redemption.