This memorandum is to reiterate and clarify current policy governing intentional program violations as set forth in the Food Stamp Program regulations.
The following memo represents our position on the question of whether the head of household may be held responsible for an IPV when the household member that committed the IPV cannot be determined.
Cooperación del Programa de Cupones para Alimentos con investigaciones de fraude.
After a further review of this matter, and upon advice of our legal counsel, we have reconsidered our position on the use of the Request for Contact (RFC) to facilitate household cooperation with fraud investigations. We have decided that the RFC may only be issued by state eligibility workers and only when the state agency learns of a change in the household’s circumstances that calls into question the household’s continued eligibility for the program or its current level of benefits.
Accommodating children with special dietary needs in the School Nutrition Programs. Guidance for school food service staff.
This section of Q&As covers the Application form, Filing the Application Form, Interviews, Verification, Request For Contact and Shortening Certification Periods, Drug/Alcohol Treatment Programs, Transitional Benefits, Recertification, Aliens, Self-Employment, Shelter Expenses, and Extending Certification Periods.
Attached is a fourth series of Q&As developed to address questions arising from states’ enactment of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (PL 105-33). The answers do not establish new policy. They are an interpretation of the relevant provisions and their intent, and should serve as a guide until issuance of regulations.
Balanced Budget Act of 1977 (PL 105-33) Questions and Answers - Set 2
This file contains answers to questions to provisions of PRWORA generally concerned with intentional program violation (fraud)-related disqualifications and food stamp recipient claims.