The aim of this IPERA compliance reporting feasibility study is to develop a reliable method of assessment of erroneous meal claims in CACFP-Family Day Care Homes, test the method on a sample of FDCHs for the purpose of estimating the rate of improper payments and provide annual estimates of erroneous payments. Specifically, the study focuses on accurately estimating meals that are claimed but not served.
The Administrative Review is the process state agencies use to assess compliance with federal requirements of SFAs participating in the National School Lunch Program and the School Breakfast Program. This study assesses the AR process by examining the results from a purposive sample of ARs. The study also describes in-depth how nine selected state agencies conduct their ARs, and ways the process could be further improved.
FNA provides state administrative expense (SAE) funds to state agencies to support administration and oversight of federal child nutrition programs in their state. This study examines the formula used for allocations of SAE funds, identifies factors that influence state agency spending, and presents a series of options for consideration to potentially improve SAE allocations and procedures.
As required by federal law, state SNAP agencies verify financial and non-financial information by matching SNAP applicant and participant information to various national and state data sources to ensure they meet the program’s eligibility criteria. Data matching is an important tool for ensuring program integrity and benefit accuracy. However, information on states’ data matching practices and protocols is limited. This study was undertaken to address this knowledge gap.
FNA 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.
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 describes the feasibility of a modeling approach to forecast tiering error rates based on prior data, in lieu of annual assessments of misclassified FDCHs. It presents estimates for forecasted rates and associated improper payments for FDCHs for each fiscal year (FY) from 2016 to 2020. Due to data limitations, the report concludes that building a reliable model is not possible with the currently available data and estimates produced by the models cannot be used for IPERIA reporting.
The Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 requires all federal agencies to calculate the amount of erroneous payments in federal programs and to periodically conduct detailed assessments of vulnerable program components. This program assessment of the Family Day Care Home component of USDA's Child and Adult Care Food Program provides a national estimate of the share of CACFP family day care homes that are in the wrong reimbursement tier.
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,
FNA 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.