On Oct. 6, 2017, we issued a memo regarding SNAP applicants and households who are sending certification materials to the USDA instead of the appropriate SNAP state agency for processing.
In school year 2013-14, FNS introduced the unified administrative review and a 3-year review cycle. Since then, FNS has received feedback about the difficulties of the shorter review cycle, both for the state agencies conducting the reviews, and for school food authorities preparing for and responding to reviews.
Consistent with USDA's efforts to increase state flexibility within the bounds of the law, FNS is expanding allowable activities for states seeking to use non-merit system personnel in call centers. With FNS approval, states may now use non-merit personnel to provide basic case-specific information that is readily available in the system to a SNAP applicant or participant, such as application or case status, benefit issuance date, and status of submitted verifications.
This memo discusses SNAP applications and other documents being sent by clients to the USDA Office of Civil Rights instead of the appropriate state SNAP office. The memo outlines best practices states can use to make submission instructions clearer for clients.
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide regional offices and state agencies with information that can help them examine and revise client notices of denial and termination to improve SNAP customer service and program access.
Letter of Verification Results and Adverse Action
This memorandum provides clarification of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) comparable disqualification policy.
The purpose of this memorandum is to clarify the meaning of within 10 days for issuing a notice of adverse action.
This is to advise you that we are revising conditions associated with waivers of 7 CFR 273.10(f)(4) which would allow state agencies to shorten the certification periods of food stamp households
This memo is in response to requests for us to clarify what takes place when a confirmation review finds an error in the eligibility determination after a household has been initially notified of its status.