Food Stamp Program:

Relatively Few Improper Benefits Provided to Individuals in Long-Term Care Facilities

RCED-99-151: Published: Jun 4, 1999. Publicly Released: Jun 22, 1999.

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Lawrence J. Dyckman
(202) 512-9692
contact@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the extent to which individuals residing in long-term care facilities are improperly included as members of food stamp households, focusing on: (1) how many individuals were included as members of food stamp households while they were residing in long-term care facilities and the estimated value of the overpayments to those households; and (2) whether computer matching is a practical means for identifying such overpayments.

GAO noted that: (1) in the seven states GAO reviewed, GAO identified about 4,500 individuals who were potentially improperly included as members in households receiving food stamps while residing in long-term care facilities; (2) these households could have received an estimated $500,000 in food stamp overpayments during calendar year 1997; (3) these potential overpayments represented a very small percentage of the $8.5 billion in benefits distributed in the seven states during fiscal year 1997; (4) GAO has provided the states with its computer match results for their use in eliminating or recovering the overpayments; (5) in view of the relatively small amount of potential food stamp overpayments made to households that included residents of long-term care facilities compared to the cost of computer matching, routine computer matching may not be practical for all the states included in GAO's review; (6) none of the seven states GAO visited were using computer matching to identify such overpayments; (7) officials in California and Kansas, which had the smallest amount of potentially improper benefits--in one case less than $25,000 and in another about $1,800--said that computer matching for these types of overpayments would not be practical or cost-effective to them; and (8) officials in the remaining five states said they would assess the potential benefits of computer matching, either as a tool for routinely identifying overpayments or as a means for periodically evaluating the effectiveness of procedures used to prevent such overpayments.

Jan 21, 2021

Jan 14, 2021

Jan 4, 2021

Dec 22, 2020

Dec 16, 2020

Dec 14, 2020

Dec 10, 2020

Looking for more? Browse all our products here