The purpose of this memorandum is to clarify the recent regulatory changes, and to provide interim guidance for taking additional actions in advance of further regulatory amendments.
This memorandum is to clarify the use of pasteurized juice in the child nutrition programs.
This action proposes to revise Food Stamp Program regulations pertaining to the standards for approval of Electronic Benefits Transfer systems, the participation of retail food stores and wholesale food concerns, and the state agency liabilities and federal sanctions.
Previous studies have shown that participation rates are higher among people eligible for a relatively large food stamp benefit than among those eligible for a comparatively small benefit. This analysis seeks to determine whether or not this relationship between participation rates and benefits holds for different demographic groups within the food stamp population. This analysis confirms that the relationship holds for most demographic groups. Surprisingly, the analysis also shows that there are many nonparticipating individuals eligible for relatively large benefits
FNS published “The WIC Vendor Management Study, 1998” in July 2001 which examined, in part, the extent to which retail grocers, defined as WIC “vendors” were violating program rules and regulations. The 1998 study is a follow-up to the “WIC Vendor Issues Study, 1991” published by FNS in May 1993.
After a further review of this matter, and upon advice of our legal counsel, we have reconsidered our position on the use of the Request for Contact (RFC) to facilitate household cooperation with fraud investigations. We have decided that the RFC may only be issued by state eligibility workers and only when the state agency learns of a change in the household’s circumstances that calls into question the household’s continued eligibility for the program or its current level of benefits.
The purpose of this memorandum is to, once again, establish that regional offices may allow state agencies to count a USDA review of an SFSP sponsor as one of their required reviews, provided that the state agency assumes all responsibilities associated with resolution of the review findings relating to the administration of the program by the sponsor, including but not limited to any and all appeals arising from the review.
The FY 2003 U.S. Department of Agriculture appropriations legislation extended the free and reduced price provision for for-profit centers in the CACFP through Sept. 30, 2003. The intent of this provision was to extend the availability of program benefits offered to low-income children by expanding upon the eligibility requirements for proprietary centers.
Over the past few months, we have learned that some local offices suggest that clients withdraw their applications. The suggestion or recommendation that a client withdraw impinges on the voluntary character of a withdrawal.
The purpose of this TEFAP program guidance memorandum is to provide clarification on in-kind contributions, specifically, whether a state’s purchase of additional foods for distribution could be classified as an in-kind contribution.