The proposed rule would revise SNAP regulations to standardize the methodology for calculating standard utility allowances.
In October 2019, FNS published a proposed rule entitled “Standardization of State Heating and Cooling Standard Utility Allowances.” This action modernizes the standard utility allowances used in calculating Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits in order to enhance program integrity and ensure equity among program participants.
SNAP retailer reminder on the reauthorization process.
The Federal Government fully funds SNAP benefits, but FNS and state agencies share administrative expenses, with each paying about 50 percent. State administrative costs per case varies widely by state. This study explores a number of factors, including state economic conditions, SNAP caseload characteristics, state SNAP policies, to try to explain the variation by state.
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.
The characteristics report is published annually, dating back to 1976, and provides information about the demographic and economic circumstances of SNAP households. Using a sample of SNAP Quality Control data that is representative at both the state and national level, this report summarizes the characteristics of households and individuals who participated in SNAP in fiscal year 2017.
To explore other options for assessing impacts, FNS awarded a contract to provide FNS with new information on: experiences and satisfaction of participants in FNS programs, and impacts of program participation on food security, diet quality, and other indicators of household well-being.
A summary of past research on program operations and outcomes related to the Food Stamp Program.
Most discussion of payment accuracy in the Food Stamp Program focuses on the overall level and cost of payment errors. Rarely does the discussion focus on the impact of payment errors on individual households affected. This analysis – based on 2003 food stamp quality control data – leads to two broad conclusions. First, virtually all households receiving food stamps are eligible. Thus, the problem of erroneous payments is not so much one of determining eligibility, but rather one of attempting to finely target benefits to the complicated and changing circumstances of low-income households. Second, most overpayments to eligible households are small relative to household income and official poverty standards. As a result, most food stamp households are poor, and they remain poor even when overpaid.