Page 267

ESA SNAP Policy Manual 251  Providing false or incomplete information at application, recertification or when reporting a change  Failure to report an income change at application or recertification  Failure to report a change in household size at recertification  Providing false verification at application, recertification or when reporting a change For ESA to consider an overpayment a result of fraud, one of the following actions must occur:  A court must convict the household of fraud or theft of public benefits.  A court or an ADH must find that the household committed an IPV.  The customer signed a waiver to an ADH or a disqualification consent agreement for cases of deferred adjudication. Example 1 Ms. Tilly applies for SNAP for her family in May. She states she just started a job and is working 20 hours a week and provides a phone number to call and verify her employment. She is approved for benefits based on the verbal confirmation with someone who states they are her supervisor. At her next recertification, Ms. Tilly states her income has not changed. However, when ESA verifies her employment through The Work Number, it shows income equal to full-time pay in the two months before. This is in direct conflict with the information Ms. Tilly provided when she applied. Process the overpayment as an inadvertent error and refer the case for an IPV determination.

Example 2 Ms. Andrews receives TANF and SNAP for herself and her two children. She applied as a single parent and has maintained she does not know who the father is. She reports her rent has increased. ESA calls her landlord to verify the amount of rent. The landlord verifies the rent and states Mr. and Mrs. Andrews and their children have been long-term tenants. Send a notice requesting information to determine eligibility with Mr. Andrews in the home and refer the case for a fraud investigation.

Example 3 Mr. Sparks receives SNAP. At his recertification, he includes a copy of his current Maryland driver’s license in his packet. ESA contacts Maryland and discovers Mr. Sparks is also receiving benefits there. Deny the recertification. Process an inadvertent household error overpayment for the months of SNAP benefits Mr. Sparks received in the District while he also received benefits in Maryland. Refer the case for an IPV determination.

Return