Restoring Food Stamp Eligibility for Legal Immigrants: State Implementation Issues

 

By Jan Kaplan

 

Background

 

Until 1996 most legal immigrants were eligible for food stamps. However, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PWRORA) eliminated food stamp eligibility for approximately 825,000 legal immigrants (Schwartz September 2001). A small number of legal immigrants retained their food stamp eligibility because of their service in the U.S. military or substantial work history; refugees and asylees retained their eligibility for the first five years of residency in the United States. The termination of food stamp benefits to legal immigrants was one of the more controversial and significant changes to public assistance programs enacted in PWRORA. Advocates, food policy experts, and many state and local governments believed this policy change posed a serious threat to the health and well-being of a large number of vulnerable people. States and localities also were concerned about the financial and administrative burdens of continuing to provide this safety net.

 

In response to these concerns, Congress restored benefits to some groups of legal immigrants in the intervening years. In 1997 states were given the option to purchase food stamps from the federal government for distribution to legal immigrants. Seventeen states chose to establish a state-funded food stamp replacement program for various categories of legal immigrants. In 1998 Congress restored benefits to immigrants who were children below age 18 and lawfully living in the United States as of August 22, 1996; seniors born before August 22, 1931; and individuals receiving disability-related benefits. In addition, certain groups of refugees and asylees were made eligible without regard to their date of residence in the United States. Assistance for some refugee groups was limited to seven years; no time limits were applied to other groups. These legislative changes restored benefits to approximately 250,000 legal immigrants¾one third of those who lost eligibility under PRWORA. However, most adult legal immigrants who were not elderly or disabled, as well as nearly all legal immigrants who entered the United States after August 22, 1996, remained ineligible for food stamps.

 

In spring 2002 the president signed into law the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-171). The farm legislation restored food stamp eligibility for most legal immigrants who entered the United States before August 1996 and for a large proportion of those who entered after that time. The law established different implementation dates for the restoration of benefits for three subgroups of immigrants. First, certain immigrants with disabilities became eligible for food stamps on October 1, 2002. Second, an estimated 363,000 immigrants who have been U.S. residents for five years will become eligible for food stamps April 1, 2003. Finally, on October 1, 2003, benefits will be restored for immigrant children below age 18, regardless of their date of entry into the United States.

 

States must make several policy decisions as they implement these eligibility expansions to ensure the delivery of food stamps to large numbers of legal immigrants. In addition, they might want to consider ways to prevent hardship among those who remain ineligible. Severe budget constraints will limit the policy options of many states. This Issue Note explores issues that policymakers and program staff should consider as they implement the new food stamp provisions for legal immigrants. For more information, visit the Welfare Information Network’s web site on Food Stamp Eligibility: Legal Immigrants at

http://www.financeprojectinfo.org/WIN/foodstamps_and_immigrants.asp.

 

Policy Issues

 

What new criteria must states use to determine food stamp eligibility for legal immigrants? Responsibility for determining the status of immigrants rests with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS)--formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). However, when establishing food stamp eligibility, states with electronic access to the INS/BCIS verification database must confirm the qualified status of immigrant applicants. States without electronic access must confirm the qualified status of immigrants only when presented with questionable documents. Most legal immigrants will have qualified status because they are legal permanent residents, including Amerasians; refugees or asylees; persons granted a withholding of deportation; persons paroled into the United States for at least one year; Cuban/Haitian entrants; and, under certain circumstances, victims of domestic violence.

 

After verifying qualified status, states must determine whether the immigrant status of the applicant fits one of many federal conditions for benefits established in the new farm law and in prior law. They must also determine the duration of eligibility based on those laws. According to the federal criteria, eligibility will be granted indefinitely to:

·         legal permanent residents who have 40 qualifying quarters of work;

·         elderly individuals born on or before August 22, 1931, who were lawfully in the United States as of August 22, 1996;

·         children below age 18 (effective October 1, 2003);

·         blind or disabled individuals who are receiving benefits or assistance for their condition, regardless of when they entered the country;

·         individuals who have legally lived in the United States as a qualified alien for five years (effective April 1, 2003); and

·         legal immigrants who are on active duty in the military or who have been honorably discharged.

 

Finally, states will use different criteria when determining eligibility for naturalized citizens, certain Native Americans, and categories of Hmong or Laotian refugees. These groups of legal immigrants are eligible for food stamps regardless of their qualified status. For a complete description of the eligibility criteria and benefit duration rules, see Food and Nutrition Service January 2003.

 

How does the restoration of food stamp benefits for legal immigrants affect state-funded food stamp replacement programs? Since 1996 17 states have established food stamp replacement programs. Fifteen states continue to run state-funded programs, though current budget constraints have forced some to curtail the scope of those benefits. For a description of these state programs, see Schwartz and Haywood 2002. States may want to continue to provide state-funded food stamps until federal food stamp benefits are restored to all legal immigrants. After the prescribed restorations are implemented, some states may choose to continue state-funded benefits for the small number of legal immigrants who remain ineligible for federal assistance.

 

Maintaining state food stamp replacement programs can simplify the implementation of the federal restorations. For example, states may be able to use case data from their programs to estimate future caseloads and to make staffing and other capacity decisions. States with comprehensive benefit replacement programs may be able to transfer their existing staffing patterns and administrative structures to the new program with few additional resources. Although states with less comprehensive programs will probably need additional staff and other resources to meet the needs of their expanded caseload, they will have fewer capacity-building challenges than states without an existing administrative structure.

 

In addition, the continuation of state-funded programs enables legal immigrants to make a seamless transition from a state benefit to a federal benefit, without the loss of assistance. Furthermore, states that continue their replacement programs may have an easier time identifying and enrolling in the federal program other household members who were ineligible for state benefits. Finally, a simplified transition between the state and federal programs may enable resources to be redirected toward conducting outreach to newly eligible legal immigrants and other activities.

 

Conversely, early termination of state-funded programs would eliminate benefits for many legal immigrants and would result in a larger use of staff and financial resources. States would need to develop larger and more aggressive outreach campaigns targeting both former recipients of state-funded benefits and newly eligible immigrants. They would also need to process a greater number of applications. In many states budget constraints may prevent the allocation of funds to meet these additional resource needs.

 

Some states might decide to maintain or establish limited benefit replacement programs after the federal restorations are implemented. For example, states could provide benefits to immigrants who have not yet met their five-year residency requirement. States could reprogram funds previously allocated to their larger benefit replacement program to support the more limited benefits. The costs of replacement programs should be modest given the small number of immigrants who remain ineligible for the federal Food Stamp program.

 

What can states do to ensure legal immigrants know about their food stamp eligibility? The extent and effectiveness of outreach efforts will be key determinants of how many eligible legal immigrants will receive food stamp assistance on a timely basis. Early identification and notification of potentially eligible legal immigrants are critical. Guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) strongly encourages state agencies to use case record reviews to identify affected households and to notify those households of potential eligibility as soon as possible. In addition, the guidance suggests that during recertifications of current recipients, states prescreen households for newly eligible family members (Food and Nutrition Service October 2002).

 

Besides the outreach strategies suggested in the federal guidance, states might want to target their outreach to discrete groups of immigrants with different potential eligibility. Target groups could include immigrants who lost eligibility under welfare reform and have had no contact with the food stamp office. They could also include those who live in households in which other members have continued to receive federal food stamps; those who have participated in a state-funded food assistance program or live in a household where others have received state-funded food stamps; and/or refugees and asylees.

 

Several states have ongoing outreach campaigns to promote the availability of state-funded benefits and/or to educate legal immigrants about their limited eligibility for federal assistance. These strategies can be expanded to reach the larger immigrant community, and they could be combined with case reviews and strategies that build on the recertification process. States should work closely with community-based organizations representing immigrant and refugee populations, including those that work with seasonal and migrant workers, to implement their outreach initiatives. States could contract with these organizations to conduct various outreach activities. For example, community-based organizations could deliver flyers in different languages to the targeted populations via home visits, community centers, or other common gathering places; put ads in local newspapers and on radio and television stations that serve immigrant communities; and distribute notices through local churches and other religious organizations.

 

State food stamp offices can also collaborate with federal, state, and local agencies, such as health clinics, one-stop job centers, heating assistance agencies, emergency food distribution centers, Head Start centers, and housing assistance offices to disseminate information. In addition, states can distribute culturally appropriate information through school systems with large numbers of immigrant children. (For more information, see Wegener December 1999.) Finally, states may want to collaborate with FNS on its education campaigns to communicate the benefits of food stamps. However, they should be sensitive to the fears many immigrants have about interacting with federal agencies.

 

Outreach materials should be culturally appropriate and written in the relevant language. They should also address the fears and other barriers that historically have deterred eligible legal immigrants from seeking public benefits. In particular, immigrants have been reluctant to seek food stamp assistance because of concerns about the effects of benefit receipt on their immigration status. INS/BCIS and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have education campaigns aimed at dispelling these concerns. However, state and local organizations’ outreach materials should address these concerns and clarify food stamp eligibility rules and relevant immigration policies.

 

Ongoing budget constraints may impede state outreach efforts. However, federal funds are available to support all or some  outreach-related activities. The Food Stamp Act of 1977 authorized FNS to provide 50-percent matching funds to states with an approved optional Food Stamp Outreach Plan. To receive their matching funds, states must submit plans to their FNS regional office and provide details on intended outreach activities, the media to be used, targeted populations and geographic areas, and other organizations involved in the outreach activities. States are allowed to increase their portion of the outreach fund through the receipt of private donations and contributions by other state agencies and local governments. To date only a few states have sought the federal matching funds. Other states have not been able to use the funds because of state fiscal concerns and changes to food stamp cost allocation rules enacted in 1998 that reduced matching funds for many states.

 

In addition, FNS competitive grant programs support state and local initiatives aimed at increasing awareness and access to the Food Stamp program. In fiscal 2002 more than $5 million was awarded to 19 state and local organizations to implement outreach efforts that targeted legal immigrants and others. FNS recently completed a solicitation for applications for its fiscal 2003 Food Stamp Program Participation Grants (see http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/outreach/fy03_proposals.htm).

 

How can the food stamp application process be simplified for legal immigrants? Language barriers, poor literacy skills, and long, complex application forms with unfamiliar terminology often impede legal immigrants’ ability to complete the application process. Furthermore, some legal immigrants are fearful of entering a government agency to fill out forms or are reluctant to share financial and immigration-related information with government agency staff. Others find it hard to assemble the required verification documents or to arrange for transportation, child care, and leave from work so they can apply for benefits at the food stamp office.

 

States can address these obstacles while following the timelines for implementing application procedures that are outlined in federal guidance. USDA guidance encourages state agencies to begin taking applications as early as February 1, 2003 from immigrant households with members who will become eligible for food stamps April 1, 2003. States that begin taking such applications receive an automatic waiver from some food stamp administrative rules. The federal guidance also allowed states to start taking applications prior to February 1, 2003 after submitting a waiver request to their FNS regional office. All pending applications must be processed by March 31, 2003 to ensure eligible households receive a full month of benefits beginning April 1. Although the initiation of an early application process may shorten expected long waiting lines when the law goes into effect, states may not have the staff and financial resources to follow the earlier timeline. In addition, the guidance requires states to begin to process eligibility changes in March for households that are recertified during that month. This procedure should eliminate the need for an additional application process for these individuals.

 

Many of the same measures that states have adopted to simplify the application process for the general food stamp population would benefit legal immigrants. For example, extended hours of operation in the evening and on weekends, web-based applications, and mail-in applications can be particularly helpful to working immigrant families that are afraid to enter a government office. Other important simplification measures include using shortened application forms with simpler terminology, employing language translators to assist applicants, and making application forms available in several languages. Community organizations that serve the immigrant community may be able to provide translation services. These translators could accompany immigrants during face-to-face caseworker interviews and help them complete application forms.

 

Prescreening services can also help legal immigrants overcome their fears of the application process and prepare the required information and forms prior to applying. Community organizations can provide prescreening services that include helping legal immigrant households to collect required documentation and assessing their potential eligibility. Information gleaned during prescreening could be incorporated into the collection of required documentation during the application process.

 

In addition, many states have combined elements of the food stamp application with those for other public programs, particularly Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). A coordinated application process would reduce the need for the applicant to provide immigration and financial documentation multiple times to different agencies. Web-based applications and cross-agency automated systems facilitate the sharing of common application information.

 

Food stamp agencies can also collaborate with community-based organizations and other state and local agencies to place eligibility workers in schools, shelters, community centers, health care settings, and other sites that serve immigrant families. Using  outstationed workers to take applications in the evenings and on weekends can be effective in some instances. In addition, the application interview can be changed to address the fears of many legal immigrants and to accommodate their work schedule. First, federal regulations allow household members to request a telephone or home visit interview if they would face a hardship by attending an in-office interview. Second, changing the sequence and types of items addressed could reduce the time needed to complete an interview.

 

Federal funds are available to support some state and local efforts to simplify the application process for legal immigrants. FNS fiscal 2003 Food Stamp Program Participation Grants can be used to develop new or revised systems, management structures, training programs, and technological aids that will improve the application process. Acceptable projects include, for example, the coordination of food stamp applications and eligibility processes with other assistance programs and the establishment of application procedures that use the telephone and Internet. (For more information, visit http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/outreach/fy03_proposals.htm.)

 

How can states simplify the eligibility determination process for legal immigrants? Eligibility determination for legal immigrants is a two-pronged process. First, states need to confirm the immigration status of each applicant as prescribed in federal law and guidance. Second, they need to determine the applicant’s financial eligibility for the benefit. The process for determining and verifying immigration status is specified in federal guidance (see Food and Nutrition Service January 2003). States need to verify that the immigrant has been in a qualified status for five years or is in an exempt status (e.g., certain refugees and asylees). They will also need to determine whether the immigrant has worked or can be credited with 40 qualifying quarters of work. It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide documents from INS/BCIS that verify his or her immigration status and date of entry into the United States. The state agency must then verify the validity of those documents. States that have access to the INS/BCIS Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) electronic database will be able to expedite this verification process. States may also use the Social Security Administration’s automated system to obtain information about an applicant’s work history.

 

There are several ways to simplify Food Stamp program eligibility determinations for immigrants who meet the federal criteria for legal immigrants. States with Food Stamp replacement programs can convert recipients directly into the federal Food Stamp program. These states may also bring newly eligible legal immigrants into the federal program without requiring the submission and processing of an application when those immigrants live in a household in which other members received state-funded food stamps. In addition, if the state counts the income for ineligible household members when determining eligibility and benefit levels for other members, it must collect and maintain case files on the income and resources--but not the immigration status--of the ineligible individuals. Therefore, caseworkers will have needed information on record and will require less resources to conduct automated or manual eligibility verifications.

 

In addition, states should review the eligibility simplification measures included in the new farm law as well as those outlined in existing federal regulations. They should pay particular attention to provisions that permit states to provide categorical eligibility, align income and resource rules with TANF and Medicaid, and establish longer reporting periods for eligibility recertification.

 

Categorical eligibility results in automatic food stamp eligibility for households in which all members benefit from TANF cash assistance. In addition, 44 states have decided to expand categorical eligibility to households receiving TANF services other than cash assistance (Food and Nutrition Service April 2002). The new farm law also allows states to align their food stamp income and resource definitions with those used in TANF or Medicaid and to exclude certain types of income that are not counted under TANF and Medicaid. A single definition of income and resources for all three programs enables states to design shorter applications and simplify eligibility determinations. States already had the flexibility to align other aspects of their application and eligibility policies for several public programs.

 

Finally, the farm law allows states to expand an existing option for semi-annual reporting. This change allows states to provide a fixed amount of food stamp benefits for six months to all households unless household income rises above 130 percent of the federal poverty level¾the Food Stamp program’s gross income limit. According to FNS, 19 states allowed semi-annual reporting for certain households before the enactment of the farm law (Food and Nutrition Service April 2002). For states that choose this option, semi-annual reporting is significantly less burdensome for caseworkers and recipients. However, quality control concerns may delay implementation of semi-annual reporting in some states.

 

States use automated tools to support their eligibility determination procedures. They may need to modify both their internal information management systems and their utilization of external systems to accommodate the increased caseload of legal immigrants. The Income Eligibility Verification System (IEVS), a federally designed system covering multiple public benefit programs, has been available for many years. IEVS enables state agencies to use six major databases to conduct matches to verify household income. It can help caseworkers determine correct benefit levels and prevent administrative errors. FNS also provides access to several data matching computer applications that allow states to confirm information provided to them by applicants. (For more information, visit http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/government/fraud.htm.) In addition, FNS has plans to develop additional automated tools to help human service agencies serve their increased caseload and improve immigrant access to the Food Stamp program. These and other eligibility simplification measures could be funded through FNS fiscal 2003 Food Stamp Program Participation Grants (visit http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/outreach/fy03_proposals.htm).

 

What are the implications of the food stamp restorations for sponsors of immigrants? States need to review federal “sponsor deeming” rules and determine how to address the issue of sponsor liability for the newly eligible categories of legal immigrants. Federal law requires immigrants who enter the United States to submit “affidavits of support” from their relatives who are petitioning to bring them into the country. Those affidavits are statements of commitment to financially support the immigrant in the United States. They are legally binding and enforceable if signed on or after December 19, 1997. Under food stamp deeming rules, the income and resources of a sponsor who has signed an enforceable affidavit of support are counted as part of an adult immigrant’s resources when determining eligibility for food stamp benefits. If a sponsored immigrant with an enforceable affidavit of support receives food stamps, the state must ask the sponsor to repay the benefits. States may sue sponsors to collect the cost of the benefits. However, food stamp law exempts several categories of immigrants from sponsor deeming, and it is likely that most of the new immigrant applicants will not be subject to deeming. Exemptions include immigrants whose sponsor has not signed an enforceable affidavit of support; whose affidavits of support were signed prior to December 19, 1997; who do not have sponsors, such as refugees and asylees; who are indigent, as defined in federal regulations; who have 40 qualifying quarters of work; or who are below age 18.

 

Caseworkers have primary responsibility for implementing the deeming rules and exemptions as defined in federal regulation. They must obtain from the applicant the information and documentation necessary to calculate deemed income and resources at the time of application and recertification. In the event that the sponsor is uncooperative, caseworkers must help the applicant secure the information. The INS/BCIS automated SAVE program can provide the sponsor’s name, address, and social security number. Food stamp agencies should review their policies and procedures on the collection of this information to ensure consistent and fair caseworker practices.

 

States must decide whether to sue sponsors who have signed enforceable affidavits to collect the cost of the benefits. Absent federal guidance on billing, notification, and reporting requirements, few states have established policies for legal action against liable sponsors. When making this policy decision, states should be aware they cannot keep any portion of the liability payment. Furthermore, states that do not legally pursue sponsor liability are not subject to federal quality control measures. Finally, some advocacy organizations are concerned that stringent sponsor liability policies may deter some immigrants from applying for food stamp benefits (see Food and Nutrition Service January 2003 and Fremstad and Parrott February 2003).

 

How will federal quality control standards affect state implementation of the food stamp restorations for legal immigrants? States will need to think about potential quality control issues as they implement the benefit restorations for legal immigrants. Abnormally high error rates are possible as staff and other resources are strained by the likely surge in cases and as new application and verification systems are implemented. Acknowledging these implementation issues, USDA has set a “hold harmless” period of 120 days from the restoration effective dates. During that time states will not incur financial penalties as a result of applicant processing errors. The farm law also changes the method USDA uses to determine state sanctions for quality control errors. The new methodology is designed to ease the threat of penalties and, coupled with the hold harmless policy, to encourage state innovation in application and eligibility simplifications and the development of mechanisms to complete complex eligibility verification processes (see Food and Nutrition Service October 2002 and Hayes January 2003).

 

What type of training and administrative supports will caseworkers need? Caseworker training will be critical to the successful implementation of state systems that restore food stamps to legal immigrants. Training will be needed on the eligibility categories of legal immigrants; methods for verifying immigration status; sponsor deeming and liability requirements; the determination of 40 qualifying quarters of work; and federal immigration laws. In addition, training should address common participation barriers facing legal immigrants. Caseworkers, outreach workers, and other staff who may interact with immigrant applicants should be trained in cultural sensitivity, interpersonal skills, and key terms and phrases in the most common languages spoken by immigrants in their community.

 

Controlling caseload size is another way agencies can assist caseworkers to effectively serve the new food stamp applicants and recipients. Fiscal constraints in many states will prevent the hiring of new workers to serve the increased caseload. Furthermore, some states may be reducing their workforce. However, states can control workloads and administrative burdens in several ways. Initiating an early application period that begins February 1, 2003, can spread out the applications over a longer period and avoid overwhelming caseworkers after April 1, 2003. In addition, caseloads can be reduced or controlled through collaborations with community-based organizations that can provide outreach, prescreening, translation, and documentation preparation services. Longer recertification periods and the implementation of categorical eligibility policies can also reduce workload.

 

Automated information management and eligibility determination systems are critical to effective service delivery. Modifications and expansions of internal systems as well as linkages with external systems such as the INS/BCIS automated SAVE program can help states serve the new caseload of legal immigrants in the Food Stamp program. Internal modifications that enable the use of web- or telephone-based application forms can increase efficiency and reduce staff workload. Other external information systems enable states to conduct computer matches to confirm work history, criminal history, etc. (see Food and Nutrition Service January 2002). FNS fiscal 2003 Food Stamp Program Participation Grants are a source of funds for many of these training and resource development activities at the state and local levels (visit http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/outreach/fy03_proposals.htm)..

Research Findings

 

It is too early for research findings on the implementation decisions that states are making to restore food stamp benefits for legal immigrants. However, researchers have looked at the impact on legal immigrants of restricted access to food stamps and how state-funded food stamps have filled the gap left by the federal prohibition on benefits.

 

An Urban Institute study found that children in immigrant families are more likely than children in native-born families to experience economic hardship but receive no public benefits. Twenty-two percent of immigrant families with children have problems affording food but receive no food stamps, compared with 16 percent of children in native-born families (Reardon-Anderson et al. November 2002). An earlier Urban Institute analysis found the extent of food concerns and difficulties varied by state. States with very limited food stamp replacement programs had the highest share of immigrant families with food concerns (Capps February 2001).

 

An analysis by Borjas (2001) of the impact of food stamp restrictions on legal immigrants also found significantly higher rates of food insecurity in states without food stamp replacement programs. The study found that, after welfare reform, food insecurity increased most among the nonrefugee, noncitizen households living in states without a state-funded food safety net. Furthermore, the study found a direct link between cuts in food stamps and increases in food insecurity. It concluded that a 10-percent cut in the proportion of the population receiving food stamps leads to a 5-percent increase in the proportion that has concerns about food.

 

Innovative Practices

 

States are launching initiatives to improve access to food stamp benefits. These approaches could be relevant to efforts targeting legal immigrants. For more program examples, see Food and Nutrition Service June 2002.

 

California. Since April 2002, the state has been using a simple application form that can be filled out by applicants and returned to the food stamp office. During their interview with a food stamp worker, applicants are asked additional questions to complete the application process. The interactive interview enables the agency to get required information without making applicants complete complex application forms. For more information, contact Autumn Arnold, California Food Policy Advocates, at 415-777-4422, ext. 107, or autumn@cfpa.net.

 

Massachusetts. The Coordinated Food Stamp Outreach Program is a public-private partnership of the Massachusetts Departments of Public Health and Transitional Assistance and Project Bread, a community-based organization. Activities include a comprehensive web site created by Project Bread and a statewide toll-free information line that provides confidential screening services and referrals to other food resources. The web site (www.gettingfoodstamps.org) provides visitors with background information on the Food Stamp program, eligibility guidelines, and a list of documents to bring to the food stamp agency. It also provides access to a printable application form, tips for filling out the form, and a confidential calculator that can help visitors determine their eligibility and estimate their benefits. In addition, the state recently implemented several new initiatives aimed at increasing program participation. It has reduced the length of its application form from 12 to four pages, implemented telephone and mail-in applications, and replaced quarterly income reporting with semiannual requirements. For more information, contact Dick Powers, Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance, at 617-348-8405.

 

New York. The state’s Nutrition Outreach and Education Program is a community-based Food Stamp outreach model. The program is administered through the state health department, which contracts with the Nutrition Consortium of New York State and works in conjunction with the state’s temporary and disability assistance office. The consortium, with 21 community-based subcontractors, runs media campaigns, works with caseworkers to address systemic barriers, and provides information and prescreening services to potentially eligible applicants. The state provides additional funds to the consortium to support other activities, such as providing transportation to human service offices and negotiating for food stamp clients when eligibility problems arise. Contact Edie Mesick, Nutrition Consortium of New York State, at 518-436-8757 or hungerNYS@aol.com.

 

Oregon. The state’s department of human services has been working with the Oregon Hunger Relief Task Force, a legislatively created statewide advocacy organization, on a statewide outreach campaign. Initiatives include shortened applications, extended office hours, a toll-free telephone number for information about food stamps, customer service training for agency staff, the outstationing of agency staff with community organizations, and school-based outreach efforts. Contact Nancy Weed, Oregon Hunger Relief Task Force, at nancyweed@aol.cm, or Jim Neely, Oregon Department of Human Services, at 503-945-6116.

 

Federal Competitive Research Grants to Improve Food Stamp Program Access. The Food and Nutrition Service recently awarded grants totaling more than $5 million to improve access and awareness of the Food Stamp program. FNS gave grants to 19 state and local organizations to support initiatives aimed at increasing program education, enhancing the use of new technology, and improving the application process. Targeted populations include legal immigrants, the working poor, the elderly, and low-income families and individuals. Contact Alisa Harrison at 202-720-4623; or visit http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/outreach/default.htm.

 

Resource Contacts

 

·         American Public Human Services Association, Larry Goolsby, 202-682-0100 or lgoolsby@aphsa.org.

·         Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Shawn Fremstad, 202-408-1080 or fremstad@cbpp.org.

·         Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Bonny O'Neil, 703-305-2026; or visit fsphq-web@fns.usda.gov.

·         Food Research and Action Center, Sonya Schwartz, 202-986-2200 or sschwartz@frac.org.

·         National Conference of State Legislatures, Ann Morse, 202-624-8697.

·         The Urban Institute, Randy Capps, 202-833-7200.

 

Publications and Electronic Resources

 

Borjas, George J. Food Insecurity and Public Assistance. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, May 2001. Available at http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/groups/ccsa/borjas.pdf.

 

Brown, Desmond, and Larry Goolsby. Restoration of Food Stamp Benefits for Legal Immigrants. Washington, D.C.: American Public Human Services Association, 2002. Available at http://www.aphsa.org.

 

Capps, Randolph. Hardship Among Children of Immigrants: Findings from the 1999 National Survey of American Families. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, February 1, 2001. Available at http://www.urban.org.

 

Carmody, Kelly, and Stacy Dean. New Federal Food Stamp Restoration for Legal Immigrants: Implications and Implementation Issues. Washington, D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, July 10, 1998. Available at http://www.cbpp.org/71098fs.htm.

 

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Linking Medicaid and Food Stamps: Four Little-Known Facts about the Food Stamp Program. Washington, D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, November 30, 2002. Available at http://www.cbpp.org/8-30-00fs.pdf.

 

Food and Nutrition Service. 2002 Farm Bill: Section-by-Section Summary of Provisions Affecting Food Stamp Provisions. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, May 2002. Available at http://www.fns.usda.gov/cga/2002_Farm_Bill/food_stamps.html.

 

Food and Nutrition Service. An Assessment of Computer Matching in the Food Stamp Program. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, January 2002. Available at

http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/MENU/Published/FSP{/FILES/Program%20Integrity/computermatching.htm.

 

Food and Nutrition Service. Food Stamp Outreach Program: State Outreach Plan Guidance. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, September 2002. Available at

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/outrach/pdfs/Outreach_Plan_Guidance.pdf.

 

Food and Nutrition Service. State Best Practices.  Improving Food Stamp Program Access. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, June 2002. Available at

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/rules/Memo/state_best_practices/statebestpractice_8_02.htm.

 

Food and Nutrition Service. Food Stamp Program: State Options Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, April 4, 2002. Available at

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/MENU/ADMIN/CERTIFICATION/SUPPORT/StateOptionTable.pdf.

 

Food and Nutrition Service. Guidance for State Agencies in Implementing Immigrant Provisions. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, October 17, 2002. Available at

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/rules/Legislation/2002_farm_bill/guide_immigrant_provisions.htm.

 

Food and Nutrition Service. Non-Citizen Requirements in the Food Stamp Program. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, January 2, 2003. Available at

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/rules/Legislation/2002_farm_bill/memo_non_citizen_elg03.htm.

 

Food Research and Action Center. Good Choices in Hard Times: Fifteen Ideas for States to Reduce Hunger and Stimulate the Economy. Washington, D.C.: Food Research and Action Center, July 2002. Available at http://ww.frac.org/html/publications/stimulus2002.pdf.

 

Food Research and Action Center. A Guide to Food Stamp Program Outreach. Washington, D.C.: Food Research and Action Center, 1999. Available at

http://www.frac.org/html/federal_food_programs/programs/fsoutreachprg.html.

 

Fremstad, Shawn, and Sharon Parrott. Implementing the New Federal Food Stamp Restorations for Legal Immigrants. Washington, D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, February 2003. Available at http://www.centeronbudget.org.

 

Hayes, Louise. Get Ready for Food Stamp Reauthorization Changes in Your State. Washington, D.C.: Food Research and Action Center, January 2003. Available at

http://www.frac.org/pdf/implementaiton081402.PDF.

 

Reardon-Anderson, Jane, et al. The Health and Well-Being of Children in Immigrant Families. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, November 2002. Available at http://www.urban.org.

 

Schwartz, Sonya. Immigrant Access to Food Stamps: Overcoming Barriers to Participation. Washington, D.C.: Food Research and Action Center, 2001. Available at

http://www.frac.org/text%20documents/sonya.pdf.

 

Schwartz, Sonya, and Brad Haywood. Opportunities to Maximize the Effects of Immigrant Restorations in the Food Stamp Reauthorization Act of 2002. Washington, D.C.: Food Research and Action Center, 2002. Available at

http://www.frac.org/html_new/food_stamps/legal_immigrants/opportunities.PDF.

 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. “Food Stamp Program: Noncitizen Eligibility and Certification Provisions of Pub. L. 104-193, as Amended by Public Laws 104-208, 105-33 and 105-185¾Final Rule.” Federal Register 65, no. 225 (21 November 2000). Available at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fedreg/a001121c.html.

 

Wegener, Victoria. Food Stamp Education and Outreach Working to Provide Nutrition Benefits to Eligible Households. Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, December 1999. Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/foodstampout.htm.

 

The Welfare Information Network is supported by grants from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rural Policy Research Institute.