APPENDIX E. 7 CFR 275 Management Evaluation Review Schedule
(a) Objectives. Each State agency shall ensure that project areas operate the Food Stamp Program in accordance with the Act, regulations, and FNS-approved State Plan of Operation. To ensure compliance with program requirements, ME reviews shall be conducted to measure compliance with the provisions of FNS regulations. The objectives of an ME review are to:
(1) Provide a systematic method of monitoring and assessing program operations in the project areas;
(2) Provide a basis for project areas to improve and strengthen program operations by identifying and correcting deficiencies; and
(3) Provide a continuing flow of information between the project areas, the States, and FNS, necessary to develop the solutions to problems in program policy and procedures.
(b) Frequency of review. (1) State agencies shall conduct a review once every year for large project areas, once every two years for medium project areas, and once every three years for small project areas, unless an alternate schedule is approved by FNS. The most current and accurate information on active monthly caseload available at the time the review schedule is developed shall be used to determine project area size.
(2) A request for an alternate review schedule shall be submitted for approval in writing with a proposed schedule and justification. In any alternate schedule, each project area must be reviewed at least once every three years. Approval of an alternate schedule is dependent upon a State agency's justification that the project areas that will be reviewed less frequently than required in paragraph (b)(1) of this section are performing adequately and that previous reviews indicate few problems or that known problems have been corrected. FNS retains the authority for approving any alternate schedule and may approve a schedule in whole or in part. Until FNS approval of an alternate schedule is obtained, the State agency shall conduct reviews in accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
(3) FNS may require the State agency to conduct additional on-site reviews when a serious problem is detected in a project area which could result in a substantial dollar or service loss.
(4) State agencies shall also establish a system for monitoring those project areas' operations which experience a significant influx of migratory workers during such migrations. This requirement may be satisfied by either scheduling ME reviews to coincide with such migrations or by conducting special reviews. As part of the review the State agency shall contact local migrant councils, advocate groups, or other organizations in the project area to ensure that migrants are receiving the required services.
[Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 262, 49 FR 50597, Dec. 31, 1984; Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987]
(a) Establishment of management units. For the purpose of ME reviews, State agencies may, subject to FNS approval, establish “management units” which are different from project areas designated by FNS for participation in the program. For example, State-established welfare districts, regions or other administrative structures within a State may be so designated. Management units can be designated as either large, medium, or small for purposes of frequency of review. However, establishment of management units solely for the purpose of reducing the frequency of review will not be approved by FNS.
(b) FNS approval of management units. State agencies shall submit requests for establishment of management units to FNS, which shall have final authority for approval of such units as well as any changes in those previously approved by FNS.
(1) The following minimum criteria must be met prior to requesting FNS approval:
(i) The proposed management unit must correspond with existing State-established welfare districts, regions, or other administrative structures; and
(ii) The unit must have supervisory control over Food Stamp Program operations within that geographic area and have authority for implementation of corrective action.
(2) In submitting the request for FNS approval, the State agency shall include the following information regarding the proposed management unit:
(i) That the proposed management unit meets the minimum criteria described in paragraphs (b)(1) (i) and (ii) of this section;
(ii) Geographic coverage, including the names of the counties/project areas within the unit and the identification (district or region number) and location (city) of the office which has supervisory control over the management unit;
(iii) Food Stamp Program participation, including the number of persons and number of households;
(iv) The number of certification offices;
(v) The number of issuance units;
(vi) The dollar value of allotments issued as reflected in the most recent available data; and
(vii) Any other relevant information.
[Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980; 45 FR 23637, Apr. 8, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987]
(a) Definition of sub-units. Sub-units are the physical locations of organizational entities within project areas responsible for operating various aspects of the Food Stamp Program, exclusive of Post Offices which may issue coupons. Sub-units shall be classified based upon functional responsibility as one or more of the following.
(1) Certification office. Any sub-unit which has the responsibility for accepting applications, conducting interviews, determining eligibility, maintaining (or having easy access to) casefiles, and transmitting information to the data management unit shall be designated as a certification office.
(2) Issuance office. Any sub-unit which has the responsibility for issuing coupons to participating households and storing coupons shall be designated as an issuance office.
(3) Data management unit (DMU). Any sub-unit which has the responsibility for maintaining the household issuance record (HIR) masterfile shall be designated as a DMU.
(4) Bulk storage point. Any sub-unit which has the responsibility for accepting and storing supplies of coupons prior to shipment to issuance sites shall be designated as a bulk storage point.
(5) Reporting point. Any sub-unit which has the responsibility for preparation and submittal of Form FNS-250 for more than one issuance unit shall be designated as a reporting point, regardless of whether or not the unit actually issues coupons.
(b) Reviewing Issuance Offices and Bulk Storage Points. The issuance office and bulk storage point review required by § 274.1(c)(2) of this chapter may be satisfied through the ME review system.
(c) Combined responsibilities. (1) When a sub-unit has more than one of the areas of functional responsibility specified in paragraph (a) of this section, it shall be included in each applicable classification and if selected for review, all functions performed shall be examined. For example, if a sub-unit has an organizational entity which certifies households and also has an entity which regularly issues coupons, the sub-unit shall be designated as both a certification and an issuance office. Thus, in an HIR issuance system, sub-units designated as issuance offices would usually also be designated as DMU's since the HIR masterfile is usually maintained at the issuance site in this system.
(2) Certain sub-units shall not be designated as having combined responsibilities, even though they may perform certain functions related to more than one of the areas. For example, coupon issuers must maintain a level of coupon inventory to ensure that participants' needs are met on a daily basis but do not supply other issuance sites with bulk supplies of coupons. Such a sub-unit would not be classified as a bulk storage point. Certification offices may issue coupons in emergency situations or to meet the requirements of expedited service but do not routinely issue coupons to households under standard certifications. In these and similar situations, the sub-unit would be classified based upon its primary function exclusively. However, when any sub-unit is selected, all program requirements specified in § 275.8 which the sub-unit has responsibility for, shall be reviewed.
(d) Itinerant issuance and certification points. Units which certify households and/or issue coupons as satellites of a central sub-unit shall not be classified as independent sub-units. Units may be identified as itinerant when they do not operate on a regular basis, retain certification records, store coupons, transmit information directly to the DMU and/or develop FNS-250 reports independently. Examples of such units include mobile units, short term or seasonal operations, and units which may operate on a regular basis but do not meet the criteria for a sub-unit described in paragraph (a) of this section. However, when a sub-unit is selected for review which acts as a parent unit for itinerant service points, at least one itinerant point per sub-unit shall be reviewed if operational at the time of the review.
(e) Selection of Sub-units for Review. State agencies shall select a representative number of sub-units of each category for on-site review in order to determine a project area's compliance with program standards.
[Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980; 45 FR 23638, Apr. 8, 1980; 45 FR 46784, July 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987]
(a) During each review period, State agencies shall review the national target areas of program operation specified by FNS. FNS will notify State agencies of the minimum program areas to be reviewed at least 90 days before the beginning of each annual review period, which is the Federal fiscal year. FNS may add additional areas during the review period if deemed necessary. The FNS headquarters office will add national target areas during the review period only for deficiencies of national scope. State agencies have 60 days in which to establish a plan schedule for such reviews.
(b) State agencies shall be responsible for reviewing each national target area or other program requirement based upon the provisions of the regulations governing the Food Stamp Program and the FNS-approved Plan of Operation. If FNS approves a State agency's request for a waiver from a program requirement, any different policy approved by FNS would also be reviewed. When, in the course of a review, a project area is found to be out of compliance with a given program requirement, the State agency shall identify the specifics of the problem including: the extent of the deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and, as applicable, the specific procedural requirements the project area is misapplying.
[Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987, as amended by Amdt. 356, 59 FR 29713, June 9, 1994]
(a) Review procedures. State agencies shall review the program requirements specified for review in § 275.8 of this part using procedures that are adequate to identify problems and the causes of those problems. As each project area's operational structure will differ, State agencies shall review each program requirement applicable to the project area in a manner which will best measure the project area's compliance with each program requirement.
(b) ME review plan. (1) State agencies shall develop a review plan prior to each ME review. This review plan shall specify whether each project area is large, medium, or small and shall contain:
(i) Identification of the project area to be reviewed, program areas to be reviewed, the dates the review will be conducted, and the period of time that the review will cover;
(ii) Information secured from the project area regarding its caseload and organization;
(iii) Identification of the certification offices, issuance offices, bulk storage points, reporting points, and data management units selected for review and the techniques used to select them;
(iv) Identification of whether the State agency is using the ME review to monitor coupon issuers and bulk storage points as discussed § 274.1(c)(2). At State agency option it may also indicate whether the State agency is using the ME review process to perform non-discrimination reviews; and
(v) A description of the review method(s) the State agency plans to use for each program area being reviewed.
(2) ME review plans shall be maintained in an orderly fashion and be made available to FNS upon request.
(c) Review methods. (1) State agencies shall determine the method of reviewing the program requirements associated with each program area. For some areas of program operation it may be necessary to use more than one method of review to determine if the project area is in compliance with program requirements. The procedures used shall be adequate to identify any problems and the causes of those problems.
(2) State agencies shall ensure that the method used to review a program requirement does not bias the review findings. Bias can be introduced through leading questions, incomplete reviews, incorrect sampling techniques, etc.
(d) Review worksheet. (1) State agencies shall use a review worksheet to record all review findings. For each sub-unit reviewed the State agency shall, on the worksheet, identify:
(i) The sub-unit being reviewed;
(ii) Each program requirement reviewed in the sub-unit;
(iii) The method used to review each program requirement;
(iv) A description of any deficiency detected;
(v) The cause(s) of any deficiency detected, if known;
(vi) The number of casefiles and/or program records selected and examined within the sub-unit, identification of those selected (record case number, household name, etc.), the proportion which were not subject to review, as well as the method used to select the sample;
(vii) Where applicable, the numerical extent of any deficiency detected through examination of program records; and
(viii) Any pertinent comments concerning the sub-unit's operation.
(2) State agencies shall promptly forward review findings to the appropriate State office for analysis, evaluation, and corrective action planning. Review worksheets shall be retained in an orderly fashion and made available to FNS upon request.
[Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980; 45 FR 25375, Apr. 15, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3409, Feb. 4, 1987; Amdt. 356, 59 FR 29713, June 9, 1994.
| File Type | application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document |
| Author | Goldberg, Sarah - FNS |
| File Modified | 0000-00-00 |
| File Created | 2021-01-24 |