Cherokee Nation
Good News! SUN Bucks is Available in Your Location
- Website: Summer EBT Program
- Hotline: 539-234-3265 or 800-256-0671 ext. 5275
- Email: wicsebtc@cherokee.org
An official website of the United States government
Here's how you know
The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
You are now leaving the USDA Food and Nutrition Service website and entering a non-government or non-military external link or a third-party site.
FNS provides links to other websites with additional information that may be useful or interesting and is consistent with the intended purpose of the content you are viewing on our website. FNS is providing these links for your reference. FNS is not responsible for the content, copyright, and licensing restrictions of the new site.
This rule proposes to implement the Electronic Benefit Transfer provisions found in Section 825 of this law which affect the Food Stamp Program.
To explore the suitability of off-line electronic benefits transfer (EBT) as an alternative to paper issuance and on-line EBT issuance systems, USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service has supported the Ohio Department of Human Services in expanding off-line EBT issuance to all Food Stamp Program recipients in the state. A pilot project in Dayton, Ohio and a demonstration of a combined WIC-EBT off-line system in Wyoming have clearly established the technical feasibility of off-line EBT for FSP benefit issuance.
The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) proposes to revise Food Stamp Program (FSP) regulations about approval of Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) systems and how States arrange for those systems to be audited.
This report analyzes the findings from North Carolina’s Vehicle Exclusion Limit Demonstration, which excluded one vehicle per household, regardless of value, from the Food Stamp Program’s countable asset limit. Under current law, for most families, only the first $4,650 of the first vehicle’s value is excluded. Some have argued that because a reliable vehicle is often required to find and hold a job, the entire value of the first vehicle should be excluded.
This report explores the feasibility and potential cost of enabling EBT systems to differentiate between program-eligible and ineligible items. It considers the cost of upgrading systems in stores that now have scanners and the cost of installing new systems in stores without scanners. The report also examines the potential for the purchase of ineligible items even with the introduction of new technological controls.
This report inventories technological approaches to portable on-line authorization and reports on their technical and cost feasibility, advantages/disadvantages and potential impacts.
From October 1, 1993 to September 30, 1996, the Food and Nutrition Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture sponsored demonstration projects in Georgia, Hawaii, Missouri, South Dakota, and Texas to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of operating the Food Stamp Employment and Training (E&T) program under the same legislative and regulatory terms as the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) recipients. Common objectives of the demonstrations were to increase compliance with E&T participation requirements among mandatory work registrants, target services to individuals most at risk of long-term dependency and those most likely to benefit from E&T services, improve participant outcomes, and improve the cost efficiency of welfare to work services.
This study evaluates the Retailer Compliance Management Demonstrations in EBT-ready States. In these demonstrations, the State food stamp agencies in New Mexico (NM) and South Carolina (SC) assumed responsibility for managing the participation of food retailers in the FSP, a task previously managed exclusively by the federal government.
The report is based on a telephone survey of all states with SLEB agreements and case studies of 6 states with noteworthy levels of SLEB agreement-generated activity.
This study was the first in a series of studies that estimated the extent of retailer-level SNAP benefit trafficking. The major findings included large stores having only half the store violation rate that smaller stores had. Additionally, the overall benefit trafficking rate was 13.0% as compared to 1.3% in the latest trafficking rate study.