FNS uses a two-tier system to measure errors in eligibility and benefit determination for SNAP. This feasibility study identifies all processes and components that would be required for a one-tier federal SNAP QC system, including the procedural, staffing, and organizational changes and the technological and data-sharing infrastructures.
SNAP Payment Error Rates - Fiscal Year 2018
The Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive grant program provided $100 million to fund and evaluate projects that were intended to increase fruit and vegetable purchases among SNAP participants by providing incentives at the point of purchase.
This study sought to better understand the root causes of SNAP application timeliness concerns. A comprehensive in-depth study of program components and practices adopted by the 50 states and the District of Columbia to process SNAP applications was conducted.
This report is a census of women, infants, and children who were participating in the WIC program in April, 2012. The report includes information on participant income and nutrition risk characteristics, and estimates breastfeeding initiation rates for WIC infants.
Trafficking of SNAP benefits occurs when SNAP recipients sell their benefits for cash to food retailers, often at a discount. Although trafficking does not increase costs to the federal government, it is a diversion of program benefits from their intended purpose of helping low-income families access a nutritious diet. This report, the latest in a series of periodic analyses, provides estimates of the extent of trafficking during the period 2009 through 2011.
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.
FNS uses a set of EBT-based administrative tools and undercover investigations to identify and sanction trafficking retailers, and to estimate the extent of trafficking. The estimates of the amount of trafficking, the trafficking rate, and the store violation rate reported here are based on information from almost 33,000 stores subject to administrative or undercover investigation from late 2002 through 2005.
This paper presents a comparison of the two surveys as a source of data for the PAI calculation and illustrates the potential effects of moving to the ACS.
The report is based on a telephone survey of all states with SLEB agreements and case studies of 6 states with noteworthy levels of SLEB agreement-generated activity.