Government // Open Government
Commentary
11/4/2013
09:33 AM
Pam Walker
Pam Walker
Commentary
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Food Stamp Automation Restrictions Must End

Archaic rules prevent states from adopting modern technology and business approaches that would cut costs, but not services, in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

As House and Senate conferees begin discussions on the latest farm bill, HR 2642, the conversation is centering around how to find greater savings, but in ways that lead to an agreement between two very different perspectives. And the biggest point of contention is between proposals to cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), otherwise known as food stamps.

The Senate is proposing a $4 billion cut and the House is proposing a $39 billion cut. While there is no magic fix to bridge that wide of a difference, there is a proposal on the table that would deliver cost savings that wouldn't cut services, but would help the program operate more efficiently using technology.

Food stamps have been around in this country since the 1930s, and not much has changed in the way the program is delivered to Americans. The system is paper-based, and innovations that automate or facilitate the application process, eligibility determination and benefits management are discouraged. In some cases, innovation is even prohibited.

SNAP is the largest and most complex program providing health and human services outside of Medicaid. SNAP needs more flexibility now to take advantage of the newest technologies and labor-saving techniques to address the increase in SNAP applicants and the intense pressures on state and federal budgets to find efficiencies.

[ Feds need to take the mobile strategy to the next level. See Why We Need Digital Government Strategy 2.0. ]

What is being proposed would remove a restriction that prevents states from using new and more efficient and effective delivery models for the SNAP program. Currently, despite widespread evidence that public/private partnerships have shown worth, the Food and Nutrition Service restricts states from contracting for business process services that would provide improvements in the system -- improvements that would bring efficiencies to the delivery of services and the accuracy of payments, while providing a better experience for constituents and savings for taxpayers.

State and local program agencies should be able to contract for the broad array of services necessary for SNAP administration, beginning with application and intake through to benefit delivery, using a mix of public, private or nonprofit organizations and personnel that best matches their individual administrative structures and participant demographics. Experience shows that these options can deliver timely and accurate service when properly managed as part of a comprehensive, integrated, cross-program approach that is accountable for outcomes rather than procedural requirements.

TechAmerica believes permitting nonprofit organizations and for-profit contractors, or a mix of public and private entities, to assist in the administration of SNAP is supported by extensive evidence that proves states benefit from working with contractors to administer benefits for needy families. Not providing this flexibility would lead to increased costs, reduced benefits, or both, and that's not good for beneficiaries, constituents or taxpayers.

With such grand decisions on the table, one to remove an outdated barrier to better access to the SNAP program, improve payment accuracy and deliver cost savings should be a no brainer.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Rob Berra
50%
50%
Rob Berra,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/7/2013 | 3:06:12 PM
re: Food Stamp Automation Restrictions Must End
For some people, that's a feature, not a bug. Underclasses provide cheap labor, buy Chinese-made trash at Wal-Mart, and don't make waves as long as there's Facebook and Jersey Shore to keep them entertained (along with the perpetual lie that they, too, have a chance to become part of the 1% if they keep voting to keep taxes low and--again--don't make waves).
Rob Berra
50%
50%
Rob Berra,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/7/2013 | 3:02:28 PM
re: Food Stamp Automation Restrictions Must End
Is this another example of that "compassionate conservatism" we keep ... actually, I guess we *don't* hear so much about that these days. Wonder why?
Lorna Garey
50%
50%
Lorna Garey,
User Rank: Author
11/6/2013 | 9:49:15 PM
re: Food Stamp Automation Restrictions Must End
Really? Because that makes so much sense, to let children go hungry and become malnourished, so that they have difficulties in school, thus ensuring that we have an under-performing workforce for many years into the future. Smart policy.
Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Author
11/6/2013 | 1:45:25 AM
re: Food Stamp Automation Restrictions Must End
A contractual prohibition on improvements? Unbelievable. Though I'm reminded of a story I saw earlier today about how South Korea requires Internet Explorer for e-commerce.
WKash
50%
50%
WKash,
User Rank: Author
11/4/2013 | 8:16:47 PM
re: Food Stamp Automation Restrictions Must End
This is one of the many places where archaic statutes and practices designed in the 20th century continue to stymie the ability to solve problems with 21st century solutions.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest September 18, 2014
Enterprise social network success starts and ends with integration. Here's how to finally make collaboration click.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.