The report describes the project goals and strategies, provides a general description of each grantee, and gives a synopsis of project performance.
This study examines the feasibility of assessing causes of variation in SAE by addressing two fundamental sets of questions: Is it possible to measure SAE consistently across states to credibly assess the degree of variation? Are alternative ways to measure SAE needed? If so, what level of effort is needed? Can SAE variation be explained in the absence of a controlled experiment? If yes, what are the alternative approaches? Which are recommended?
This study focuses primarily on the changes as they related to the FSP. The study documents the changes made to FSP application and case maintenance procedures, and it assesses the potential impact of these changes on access to the FSP. The study is designed to help FNS as well as states that are considering modernization to learn from Florida’s experiences.
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.
This report summarizes the results from the state census conducted by FNS. Data for the census were collected during fiscal year 2001. The study examines how states are currently using or planning to use computer matching strategies for error reduction in the Food Stamp Program.
This report is the final product of a study designed to learn about state Food Stamp Program policy choices and local implementation of these policies after the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The report presents examples of policies and practices that may have affected client service in the FSP in terms of program accessibility, quality of service and availability of employment and training services, particularly for food stamp recipients that do not receive cash assistance (non-TANF food stamp households).