MONTANA

re
i
t

[
i
MISCELLANEOUS The following is an example of the State Wage online screen used by
workers to access wage data. Actions taken as a result of viewing
information through this and other interfaces is not tracked.
i State Wage Onilne Interface
j
ti
09/02/93 BENEFIT PAYMENT HISTORY
H SSN: es 0 NAME: (SEE BYE: 01/09/93
i WBA: 66.00 REMAINING BALANCE. 525.00
NO. OF PAYMENTS: 19 EXTENSION BALANCE: +00
1 PGM PO PO BWE PO BATCH CHECK CHECK PAY AMOUNT UNR DISQ TOTAL
1 CDE NO DoL DOR NUMBER DOI NUMBER TYPE PAID FLG REAS CHECKS
ol 061892 062792 070192 02588392 000000 14 +00 0 oo 200
' o1 061892 062092 070192 02588392 0000000 14 +000 00 =00
ol 060892 061392 061892 01488222 061892 0963895 02 18.00 0 00 18.00
1 o1 060892 060692 061892 01488222 061892 0963895 02 41.00 0 00 41.00
t ol 052792 053092 060892 02688392 060892 0955851 02 9.00 0 00 9.00
! ol 052792 052392 060892 02688392 0000000 14 ~00 0 00 +00
i ol 050692 051692 052792 02088600 052792 0948277 02 26.00 0 00 26.00
o1 050692 050992 052792 02088600 052792 0948277 02 30.00 0 00 30.00
al 042192 050292 050692 01488665 050692 0935407 02 18.00 0 oo 18.00
1 ol 042192 042592 050692 01488665 co00000 14 +00 0 oo +00
o1 040792 041892 042192 05888677 042192 0921179 02 24.00 0 00 24.00
5 ol 040792 041192 042192 05888677 042192 0921179 02 22.00 0 oo 22.00
y FOR MORE THAN 12 PAYMENTS DEPRESS PF2 TRANSACTION OPTION:
i
1
\
ts
i]
]
{
i
iy
Ll
}
if



‘COLORADO

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: Included |
in Report

# of records submitted for matching Yes

# of records which matched with external data Yes

# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes

# of alerts worked by eligibility workers | Yes

# of alerts resuiting in a change to eligibility status/benefit No

Amount of savings determined from JEVS alerts No

# or alerts worked in 45 days i No

# or alerts past due {not worked in 45 days) | Yes

Staff time to complete follow up No

Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped i No

Some of the reports are only available on an adhoc basis.

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Colorado considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, "States should be given more time because some payor
institutions do not provide verification timely."

Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.

For calendar year 1993, staff estimate that somewhat less than 80 percent
of IEVS match results were followed up on (68 percent follow up) in 45
days. This State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45

day follow up timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot
waive this requirement except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken. It is up to loca! offices to ensure
follow up is done timely. Counties are not required to report results to
the State office.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

Some prioritization takes place manually at the focal office level.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Colorado presently

uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit, BEER, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1991. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, and submission of death records. Colorado
implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System in 1991.

During 1992, 309,936 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

iRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

co-4



IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Daily Yes Quarterly | Hardcopy oe

Ul Yes Daily Yes Monthly Hardcopy *
IRS Yes Monthly Yes Annually Hardcopy

SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy *
SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy a
BEER Yes Monthly Yes | Monthly Hardcopy

* Applicant match results are transmitted electronically to the field

office and then printed for the workers.

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online | Online Online | Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online.
Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client, historical SSA benefit
information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application, but not at redetermination/review.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's

computer.

Do Workers Have
Online Access?

How Many Offices?

State Historical | Historical Historical

Wage | UI SSA | SSI | BEER
Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
All All All All



MISCELLANEOUS

State's Justification of Certain Targeting Criteria

Pursuing interest income less than $48 would not be cost effective because
a resource that would produce that minima! amount of interest income,

such as a smal! bank account, would not cause a recipient to exceed the
maximum resource limit. The administrative cost to follow up on IRS income
matches of less than $48 would far outweigh any savings gained.

Additionally, pursuing IRS matches of less than $500 for income and
out-of-state unemployment benefits would not be cost effective because
the information is more than a year-old by the time it is received

as a hit by the worker, and the income is so minimal for an entire year's
income source that the administrative costs of pursuing the match
would far outweigh any savings gained.

AK-8



MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

(Food Stamp program)

1EVS Matches i Records ! Records Records | Records | Records (Estimated

: Submitted | Matched Referred ; Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review Affect | ments

| Matching | (Alerts) | Benefit | Detected
State Wage 27.157,939; 351,331) 351,331 | 351,331 NA NA
ul ; 690,667: 48,914; 48,914 48,914 NA NA
IRS* ; 31,815} 72,123! 72,123 | 72,128 | NA NA
SSA Benefits 177,489! 28,477! 28,477 | 28.477 | NA NA
SSI Benefits | 1,517,589 18,280! 18,280 18,280; NA | NA
BEER j NA: NA; NA NA NA | NA

* September 1992 was not available; other reports may indicate zero in error.

Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)

BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) . (Accretions)
{ MAY JUNE JULY | AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 93,065 82,962 54.823 | 138,548 | 74,820 99,194
M(DMONTH 0 0 w Oo: a 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR | 73,902 0 77,801 55,639 137,836 | 66,289
miomontH = OY ! 0 a: L) t)
! 1
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
| may JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR: 141,044 111,263 80,550 214,695 | 113,843 141,010
MIDMONTH 1,028 iad w 698 [ual w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 127,607 6,963 133,181 | 54,903 226,054 133,928
MIDMONTH - 198,164 iva] 23,183 ; = 12,145 34,838 38,921
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
[may JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR | ‘87,590 42,742 juny 72,641 | §2,140 54,393
' ! :
MIDMONTH | ac0 | 7,490 w HY ta7e 3,223
| NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR | 52,760 6,963 587.334 54,903 83,000 60,655
MIDMONTH | 30,186 ual 9,801 12,145 | 15,235 17,240
i !

KY-5

moons



MISCELLANEOUS

Kansas produces hardcopy reports indicating match results for all IEVS
matches, except the IRS and SDX matches; these appear online for local
office staff to view through the eligibility information system. Hardcopy
feports are distributed to all local offices. (An example of a hardcopy
response for the IRS online interface inquiry is shown below.)

Over the last four years, Kansas staff report the number of workers has
not changed from 509. The typical caseload is approximately 344, and
the average number of alerts a typical worker receives is 510.

During the 1992 annual assessment period, the State's greatest source

of AFDC payment error, based on quality control review, was for earned
income.

(RS INTERFACE INQUIRY RESPONSE

080693
JODY K

INTERFACE INQUIRY 1a:14

SOURCE: IRS

ININ

NAME: DOE, JOHN A
ADDRESS: 100 E. WALNUT ST.
KANSAS CITY

CLIENT: 0900021111

SSN? 345678901
DOB: 00000000 SEX: H

DATE ISSUED: 030993

PAYER NAME & :
ADDRESS

THE BANK
100 E. STREET
SMALL TOWN, KANSAS
91010102010001

TYPE OF INCOME

ACCOUNT NUMBER: TAX YEAR 2 91

INCOME AMOUNT

TOTAL PENSION DISTRIB 197.00

NEXT-->

1£OLT-2 Aa 24/075

KS-8





MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 9,901 13,571 13,394 14,805 15,219 23,597
1992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
22,849 273,486 14,425 13,599 19,501
4992 JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
9,818 15,821 154,725 0 12,708 a
993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
1 w 24,167 15,510 16,119 14,183 25,070
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 15,466 12,548 15,924 a 13,168
SANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
16,081 10,733 12,876 14,652 14,433 0
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
14,184 11,511 w 14,651 0 12,060
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY SUNE
14,705 9,651 11,694 13,311 13,353 0
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 e a )
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a a 8 a 0 0
RESPONSES JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
a 0 a 0 0 a
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

0



CONNECTICUT

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

lEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Change in Yes Wage data GE$150 for same
employer 1.D. quarter as that being reported
number or in by match.
income
information
Discrepancy
ul No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received and if
the amount of the UI does not
match the amount reported in
the eligibility file.
IRS Disregard certain Yes Disregard in-State duplicate
information information previously received
Change in through UI match.
account number
SSA Benefits No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
(Bendex) worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.
SSI Benefits No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
{SDX) worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.
BEER State does not
follow-up on
match data

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC

program.

CT-3

L

}


IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage No targeting No
ul No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;

worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.

ins No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.

SSA Benefits No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
{Bendex) worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the

information is received.

SS! Benefits No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
{SDX) . worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the

information is received.

BEER No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.

When workers receive match information, they are only required to follow up on information
that doesn’t duplicate {is unique) information previously received. Targeting criteria for the
Food Stamp programs differ from that of the AFDC program. For the UI, IRS, Bendex, SDX,
and BEER matches, the client need not be active. The targeting criteria for the Medicaid
program does not differ from that of the AFDC program.

KY-3



DELAWARE

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

i i i ing: |, Included

i Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: lin Report
# of records submitted for matching No ‘

! # of records which matched with external data No

| # of records resulting in alerts for workers ' No ;

_# of alerts worked by eligibility workers ' No |

i # of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit i__No i

| Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts i No i

‘_# or alerts worked in 45 days No '

i_# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) s No

{ Staff time to complete follow up No

! Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Delaware considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be reasonable given
adequate staff for follow up. Staff stated, "IEVS has a lot of overlap and
duplication." They suggest a national meeting be held with Federal agencies
and State Fraud Units to discuss IEVS issues.

Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are not at the expense of more important activities of workers
such as overpayment claims development and collection activity.

For a recent period (4th quarter of 1993), staff report more than 80 percent
of 1£VS match results were followed up on in 45 days. This State presently
has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow up timeframe for the
Food Stamp program.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally: for follow up.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Delaware presently

uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit, BEER, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1993. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, and submission of death records. Delaware has

not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, no records were submitted to SSA for verification using the
Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.



ALABAMA

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports Include The -Following: Included
in Report!
# of records submitted for matching No
|_# of records which matched with external data Yes
# of records resulting in alerts for workers i Yes
# of alerts worked by eligi ty workers |} Yes
# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit Yes
Amount of savings determined from lEVS alerts i Yes }
# or alerts worked in 45 days i No i
| # or alerts past due {not worked in 45 days) Yes
Staff time to complete follow up Yes
Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

Tracking reports are program specific.

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Alabama considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be too restrictive.

Staff stated, "Federal regulations are so restrictive as to not provide States
the needed flexibility to choose what's in their interest to match. Targeting’
regulations failed to provided needed relief, mainly due to its position on
quality control issues related to targeted cases.”

Alabama did not provide estimates of follow up completion even though the
State says that it routinely generates reports showing completion rates.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

IEVS matches (results) are reportedly prioritized’ for follow up at the local
office level.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Alabama presently

uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit, BEER, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1993. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, and submission of death records. Alabama has

not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 968,755 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

AL-4





MICHIGAN %

MISCELLANEOUS

Cost Effectiveness Studies

1) During summer and early autumn of 1992, Michigan participated

in a cost effectiveness study conducted by Mathematica Policy Research,
Inc., {under contract to the Food and Nutrition Service of the Department

of Agriculture). The study was initiated to address concerns expressed

by State agencies that JEVS regulations were inflexible and burdensome.
Prior to the demonstration, Michigan followed up on all match information
received. To address the State's concerns that the State Wage and IRS
matches were not cost effective, the demonstration introduced new targeting
strategies for the IRS match and continued to conduct the State Wage
applicant match with no targeting. Cost effectiveness was measured as the
tatio of program savings from IEVS to the cost of matching, targeting, and
following up under IEVS. Also measured was the cost effectiveness of IEVS
trom the perspective of the State and Federal agencies administering the

FS and AFDC programs. Although not yet released, preliminary findings
shared with the HHS/OIG suggest that all studied IEVS matches were cost
effective. However, no inference can be made that IEVS matches

are always cost effective or that cost effectiveness would necessarily

exist in all States.

2) Michigan conducted its own cost effectiveness study of the State
Wage match, implemented in January 1987._-The report, issued March
1990 (following an interim report in March 1989), indicated that wage
reporting creates substantial savings through actions such as case
closures and grant reduction and that savings are further enhanced
when screen levels are targeted to specific programs. Also, the study
indicated that cost savings reported are directly related to the Jength of
time a case has been open or closed. It was also found that the increase
in estimated costs, associated with targeting screen levels to specific
programs, were not significant when compared to the substantial
savings gained through targeting.

One major implication for these studies for other State IEVS activities.
being cost effective may be the targeting strategies utilized for each
match.



State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

AND BENEFITS

State Wage YES
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS YES
SSA Benefits YES|
SSI Benefits YES
BEER YES)

Conclusions are based on experience (except for the State

Wage match which is based on results of a State study).
State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 1/90 to 12/90) NET:

COSTS

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs

- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other

BENEFITS

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $180,443
BENEFITS 54,128,896
NET: $948,453

$1,809,910

$19,286

$7,208
$884,720
$3,788

$915,002
NA
$2,724,912
$o

$2,724,912

1L-7



INDIANA.

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

IEVS Match Records | Records Records | Records | Records | Estimated
Cond ted es Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
onductes for for Review Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage NA NA NA NA NA NA
ul NA NA NA NA NA | NA
IRS NA NA NA NA NA | NA
SSA Benefits NA NA NA NA NA | NA
SS! Benefits NA NA NA NA NA NA
BEER NA NA NA | _NA NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993). (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 38,365 17159 58,400 34,046 38,504 33,692
MIDMONTH a o [va] 0 0 a
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 34,055 37,848 421,146 34,083 34,481 40,855
MIDMONTH [na | 0 0 a Q
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) .
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 71,090 8,209 101,184 61,308 86,007 70,523
MIDMONTH 792 [yA] pual 667 w w
NOVEMBER ; DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 81,697 84,500 456,892 100,172 106,519 117,078
MIDMONTH 59,607 na] 44,233 46,702 49,599 72,458
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 47,088 3.329 Ww 38,223 | 51,917 46,505
MIDMONTH 537 18,288 [wal ial 25,557 10,486
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 52,138 59,753 331,281 72,947 | 75,037 75,449
MIDMONTH 85,741 w 34,582 37.791 40,812 43,767

1N-5



MASSACHUSETTS

MISCELLANEOUS

Massachusetts staff report that over the last four years the number of
eligibility workers has decreased slightly to 2,000. The typical
caseload of a worker who deals with ongoing cases is approximately
150, and the typical worker received an average of 300 IEVS alerts
during 1992. When alerts are received, through hardcopy reports,
workers are required to communicate the results of their review by
using established codes. These codes correspond to action taken

or resulting from the worker's review and are written on the hardcopy
alert. (An example is provided below.)

The State's greatest source of AFDC Payment error, based on quality

control review, during the 1992 annual assessment period was
unreported earnings.

Ul MATCH RESPONSE ACTION CODES

. MATCH UPDATE SYSTEM

° RUN 2 08/07/67

_ CAN: 710

actiow-cope-Lw} BSI CODE:

CODE ACTION

c CLOSED DUE 7O CIP INFORMATION
D DECREASED DUE TO CIP INFORMATION
u

o

FE

RK

s

T

NEW INFORMATION ~ REVIEWED — ND CHANGES
OLD :NFORMATION ~ REVIEWED - NO CHANGES
PENDING THIRD FARTY VERIFICATION

REDUCED DUE TO OTHER INFORMATION
SFENDDOWN INCURRED/REINCURRED DUE TO

CI® INFORMATION (CAT S-8 ONLY)

TERMINATED DUE TO OTHER INFORMATION
BUREAU OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS REFERRAL

ENTER "%" TO RETURN TO U.I. CIF MENU:
ENTER 'T' FOR END:

MA-8



MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

IEVS Matches Records | Records Records | Records | Records |Estimated
Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review! Affect ments
Matching {Alerts} Benefit | Detected
State Wage NA NA 16,694 | 16,694 NA | NA
Ul NA NA 14,676 | 14,676 NA NA
IRS NA NA 1,286 1,286 NA NA
SSA Benefits NA NA 14,927 14,927 NA NA
SSI Benefits NA NA 94,732 | 94,732 NA NA
BEER NA | NA; 16,886 | 16,886 | NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies {SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993).- (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 17,336 17,253 23,234 10,990 16,469 20,446
MIDMONTH i) 0 Ww a a
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 15,511 a 15,740 13,391; 8 15,241
MIDMONTH w w C) t) 0 a
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) .
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 32,816 6671 36,264 22.669 30,306 34,437
MIDMONTH 827 Pia] 853 al w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR | 43,952 15,943 34,319 33,212! 13,940 39,013
MIDMONTH | 163,960 pul 1415 8028; 10,586 12,628
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 13,331 1,962 w 7,470 10,987 13.505
MIDMONTH 2a7 12,190 fual 6,387 1,037
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY .| MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 11,216 2,156 13,583 13,510 5,849 16.799
MIDMONTH | 33.596 w 4,130 5116 | S988 7.106

MD-5

tL.


i
i

AWODLNO AW SNOTL21dHOD

en re
sith gz 687th ze9 69°OL bye Sava + 46
s9°9 ast 6zy oz stv 16 SAVO 06-18
tee ze oc" eur 08°z ¢9 SAVO 09-06
ze v9 ee'z zsi oz'€ ee SAVG SV-LE
ogy 801 usb osz tee pbb SAVG 06-0
SNOT1L21dNOO
vo"68 sia") a6 °kL 206'c BL tL 6s9'b Sava + 16
00°0 ° 00°0 ° 90070 ° SAVO 06-19
000 ° 00°0 ° 00°0 ° SAVO 09-8
00'0 ° 00°70 ° 00°0 ° SAV SP-1E
000 ° 000 ° 00°0 ° SAVG _O£-0
SNOTL31dHOONT
‘S3HOLVH “ON S3HOLVH on ‘S3HOLVH “ON
e 40 ANaDUad a0 IN30Uad a0 AN3DUad
s ere" bo0'z SIWNOIATGNY Q3HO1VW 1101
& ese's bez'e S3HO1vW W101
& 00° 001 ovb't 00001 28 SNOTLAIdHOD TWL0L
= 60'S te 66 bork av oo
o ar Bey sue ei'en ze No
ze S's nb syz 8c"8 zs wo
gs 85"6p 098 sya az'zs sze #0
Sea Lt et az soc 4 10
== z6'h eh 62 e'E tz 30
Ps 80°F ve aL zs'8 es NH
a Eb0 4 z 00°0 ° 43
= 5s°0 v v 81-0 ‘ 3
es za0 8 8 a1°0 ‘ aa
=o Onnk 8 9% werk a HO
u— £0 1 9 00°0 ° ao
tu" z avo t 29" ¥ 89
uw SNO1137dHOD “ON ‘SNOIL37dWOD on ‘SNO1L31dH09 on za02 NOSVau
z #0 ANIDU3d . 40 1N3DU3d 40 IN3OU3d AONVA3UISIO
= a1voraan Sdwv1s good vd
<
a

OF 391240 LoTYLSIO
€661/¥0 31VG HOLvH
+S) ONTOd adAL HOLVH

£661 /06/80 HONOUHL

waluynd JO GNd ¥alJV Sava BPO

Luoagy ATUIIUVAD SAaT

WALSAS IN3HDOVNVW ALTTTSI9193
SONVNSINIVH JHOINT JO INBWLUVdE 1NO1LO3NNOD

e6/e1/e0 :3iva NN
HL OppBNO-voDesyEHa

MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

cT-9


AND BENEFITS

BENDEX MATCH
cosTs

BENEFITS
NET:

State Wage Yes
Unemployment Yes
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS No
SSA Benefits Yes
SSI Benefits Yes
BEER No

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

Perceptions are based on program experience, not study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/90 to 6191) NET: ($83,571) Loss
COSTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $10,110
personnel costs
- Computer costs $35,925
- Costs associated with verification $44,779
- Other $6,556
$97,370
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $670
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $12,810
- Other $379
$13,859

Arizona did not use IRS information routinely in FY 1992 and FY 1993,
During a portion of FY 1993, Arizona engaged in 2 demonstration project
under the direction of Mathematica Policy Research of Washingtion, D. C.
As a condition of the contract, Arizona reports that Mathematica collected
all cost data. Arizona only used IRS data for the sample selected by the
contractor. Thus, they report not being able to release IRS cost statistics
for 1993 until Mathematica's report has been released by FNS.

(SSA Benefits and BEER)
$23,573

$43,559
$19,986

AZ-7


MONTANA

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage State not
matching
ul No targeting Yes All information is forwarded;
worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.
IRS (1) State not
matching
SSA Benefits Change in benefit Yes
{Bendex) (2) information
SSI Benefits Change in benefit Yes
(SDX) (2) information
BEER (1) State not
matching

{1} The State does not perform these matches due to “contractor confidentiality" issue.
{2) The system automatically updates Bendex and SDX match information on budget
screens. Workers get electronic alert when changes occur.

While the State does not target out duplicate information automatically during any of the
other matches (beyond SDX and Bendex}, when workers receive match information, they are
only required to follow up on information that doesn’t duplicate {is unique) information
previously received. Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same
as that of the AFDC program.



GEORGIA

MATCH
STATISTICS IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)
JULY | AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 F341 0 20,372 22,482 21.266 43.430
tog2 |2avuany_| Feenuary | wanch APRIL MAY JUNE
8 w 18,864 22,158 20,235 20,851 35,716
tagg |u| Aucust |sepremaen | ocrosen | WoveMaen | DECEMBER
0 19,145 19,313 19,227 21,188 40,026
qgqg | oamuany | resruany | arch APRIL MAY JUNE
w 31.677 18,980 20,739 0 35,809

ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)

INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION a a w 0 0 | a
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY = [JUNE
@ 0 0 0 0 | 0
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER’} GCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
8 ti) Q o 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 0 a 0 a

WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)

REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 a 0 a » 0
= JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 0 a a o
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 0 o
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a o 0 fi) o 0

GA-6


IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports Include The-Following: Included
in Report
# of records submitted for matching { Yes
# of records which matched with external data Yes
# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers i Yes
# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit Yes
Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts Yes
# or alerts worked in 45 days Yes |
i # or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days} Yes
Staff time to complete follow up No
Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped Yes |}

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Arkansas considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, “States should be given flexibility in determining IEVS
processing timeframes."

For calendar year 1993, somewhat less than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were followed up on in 45 days. However, workers are required
to clear alert reports by specifying the results of review by entering action
codes in the computer.

The FNS has approved a waiver for the State's Food Stamp program to
operate a quarterly reporting system. Under the quarterly review, IEVS
reports will be generated for food stamps once a quarter. The latest IEVS
data from each IEVS source will then be processed using a form specific
to the quarterly review.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

IEVS matches (results) are prioritized for review based on the source
of the match. Prioritization is done manually at the local office level.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Arkansas presently
uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1993. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Arkansas has
not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 278,919 were submitted to SSA for verification using the
Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with !RS on a routine basis.

AR-4

ARKANSAS



LOUISIANA

MISCELLANEOUS

The following justification was provided by Louisiana for its
most recent targeting strategy provided to a Federal agency.

Ta

ting Justification

Information received from al] SIEVS interfaces will be
available for use at redetermination, application, or when
there is an interim change.

If information is received on a client that has been denied
or terminated, the information will not be pursued. If,
however, the client reapplies, the information will be
pursued at that time.

Information from the Internal Revenue Service has not been
found to be cost effective. Based on statistics relating to
the nine month period July, 1992 through March, 1993, the
clearance of IRS data has resulted in negative cost
effectiveness. During this period, 19,932 IRS discrepancies
were cleared. The total cost of follow up was $157,831.89.
Only 717 (3.60%) of these IRS discrepancies resulted in a
reduction or termination of benefits. The benefit derived
was $109,643.00. On an average, the costs exceeded the
benefit by $2.42 per individual IRS clearance. Refer to the
attached IRS Interface Cost/Benefit Analysis.

Information from the Bendex Wage (BEER) interface has not
been found to be cost effective. Based on the attached
Bendex Wage Cost/Benefit Analysis, the cost of following up
on Bendex Wage data exceeded the benefit by $10.42 per
individual Bendex Wage clearance. Follow up has been
discontinued.

Wage data from Louisiana Department of Labor has been found
to have a greater impact on past benefits than on current
benefits. During the period August, 1992 through May, 1993,
follow up was completed on 62,055 LDOL wage discrepancies.
Only 2.81% of these resulted in a reduction or termination of
current benefits. The LDOL wage targeting strategy will not
have a detrimental effect. This information will be
available for use at the next redetermination. A separate
waiver request is being submitted to allow clearance of LDOL
wage information at the next redetermination if the
redetermination is scheduled within the next three months.

The targeting strategy for SSI and SSA benefits is to
identify when an individual begins receiving these benefits
and when there is a subsequent change in the benefit amount
which exceeds the amount of benefits budgeted in the
Louisiana Food Stamp Management Information System.

LA-8

ey

ee ee ey

piccoce



MISCELLANEOUS
(Continued)

SAMPLE IEVS REPORTS

TEVS WAGE CASE DETAIL REPORT: EKIWE1-R1
FOOD STAMPS SCREEN: ECIGIE
DATE: 08/10/93
CASE NAME: JOHN TIME: 09:29:31
CASE NUMBER: TECHNICIAN: 607 COUNTY/OFFICE: 64

RECIPLENT: QO, JOHN SSN: SUMMON «STATE 1D:

QTR/YEAR: 1/93
*e%* CLIENT REPORTED ****

JAN 1,352.00
FEB 999,999.99
MAR 0.00 QTR TOTAL: 4,352.00

#e44% DOLE REPORTED *****

ROCKIES MANAGEMENT CORPORATION DUE DATE: 08/24/93
ROCKIES DELI & BAKERY

1630 WELTON STREET ACTION: __
DENVER CO 80202 AMOUNT: 1,030.62

REMARKS:

COLORADO NITRO LIMITED LIABILITY CO DUE DATE: 08/24/93
NITRO CLUB

6300 SOUTH SYRACUSE ACTION: __
ENGLEWOOD CO 80111 AMOUNT: 1,724.00

REMARKS:

DOLE TOTAL: 2,754.62
DIFFERENCE: 1,402.62

levs IRS CASE DETAIL REPORT: EKIIRI-R1
OOD STAMPS SCREEN: ECIGIC
DATE: 08/10/93
CASE NAME: be Sued TIME: 09:14:56
CASE NUMBE! TECHNICIAN: 603 COUNTY/OFFICE: 64
ACCT, NO: Cae
1) }, CHERI FIRST INVESTORS HIGH YIELD FUND DIVIDENDS
—— 10 WOODBRIDGE CENTER DRIVE 1,408.00
WOODBRIDGE NJ 07095 YEAR: 91
ACTION: __ DUE DATE: 07/28/93
REMARKS:
ACCT. NO:
( 2) Sam, CHERI FIRST INVESTORS HIGH YIELD FUND DIVIDENDS
be eeeaeed 10 WOODBRIDGE CENTER DRIVE 135.00
WOODBRIDGE NJ 07095 YEAR: 91
ACTION: __ DUE DATE: 07/28/93
REMARKS:
ACCT. NO: CRT
(3) HERT FIRST INVESTORS HIGH YIELD FUND STOCK BONO
10 WOODBRIDGE CENTER DRIVE 4,300.00
WOODBRIDGE NJ 07095 YEAR: 91
ACTION: __ DUE DATE: 07/28/93
REMARKS:

C0-S



—

MINNESOTA

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1981 F782 1.888 2,581 2,406 0 2,698
ygg2 | vaMuanY | FeBRuaRy | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
mw 387,870 a 18,037 6,705 6,739
4992 JULY AuGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
9,372 9,355 3,110 o 419,356 10,393
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
1993 10,226 10,482 10,702 | 9,771 9,848
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 0 0 0 358,369 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
8 fl 85,462 33,539 i 0
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER] OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 t) Ww 0 334,828 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 69,414 19,480 0 0
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS SULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 a o 0 0 D
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY SONE
0 i 0 a 6 0
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 a 0 a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a o 0 0 a 0



KANSAS.

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

AND BENEFITS

State Wage YES
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS YES
SSA Benefits YES
SSI Benefits YES|
BEER YES!

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH

Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93). NET: $21,475

cOosTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $18,703
personnel costs
- Computer costs NA
- Costs associated with verification NA
- Other $1,455
$20,158
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $0
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $o
- Other $41,633
$41,633

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $1,575

BENEFITS $30,261
NET: $28,686

(covers period from 1/93 to 12/93)

KS-7

et



MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

IEVS Targeting Methods (Continued)

(1) Client currently active or active within prior two months and client age
is greater than or equal to 16 years.

(2) lf State or interstate claim exists for the parameter month, then check
FAA computer system for UI income;
a) if none, generate alert to worker or
b) if income indicated, then check UI system, if none listed, generate

alert to worker.

(3) Client actually participated at least six months of annual time period
to which match pertains.

(4) Client currently active.

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs differ from that
of the AFDC program.

Information is not available on the differences in targeting ciriteria between
the programs.

AZ-10



r - RE ET TE Ta

CONNECTICUT

IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
| Conducted Done? When Done? When Results ta Workers
| State Wage Yes _: Daily | Yes. Quarterly | Electranic {S & V}
Ul Yes : Daily i Yes = Monthly ! Electronic (S & V}
IRS | Yes - Monthly : Yes § Annually Electronic (S & V)
LSSA Benefits; Yes :Semi-Monthly: Yes : Semi-monthly Automatic Update
' SSI Benefits | Yes j Daily i Yes : Monthly Automatic Update
BEER [_Yes*} Monthly i_Yes*’ Annually i** No Follow up ** |
| S& V= Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.
* BEER accretions are done, but match results received
from SSA do not result in alerts to workers.

During all the matches, the system targets out duplicate information. For the
State Wage and UI matches, clients under 16 years of age are automatically
excluded from follow up. Aliso, BENDEX and SDX (benefit) information
received from SSA is automatically updated throughout the year (not

just with COLAs), without the worker having to resolve information.

Method(s) of Matching

State |

Wage ul IRS | SSA ssi BEER
: 7

Batch | Batch {Batch | Batch Batch | Batch

Online | Online Online :

ONLINE ACCESS State Wage, Ul, and SSI information are available to the worker online
TO IEVS DATA at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are not required by policy to access available online information
at application or redeterminations. Access is at the worker's discretion.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
receipt of a computer file from the Labor agency which is loaded on
Welfare's computer and made accessible to the workers.

State Historical | Historical | | Historical
Wage | Ul | IRS | SSA | ssi | BEER
fof 4 T
pe orkers Hove Yes | Yes | Yes ! Yes | Yes ; Yes
How Many Offices?| All | all all | all AM All

CT-2


DEMOGRAPHICS
AND PROGRAM

Population: 9,295,297 (Rank - 8th)
Number of counties: 83

1992 Welfare Population

. . Count
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $17,444 (Rank - 19th) in thousands ne me
Unemployment (6/93): 7.4 % AFDC Cases 222 5.5%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: Average Monthiy)
Rank Food Stamp 1,082 14.4%
AFDC 5.55 34th Participants
(Average Moathly)
Food Stamps 8.89 29th Medicaid 1113 WIA
Medicaid fevment 3.90 47th Eligibles '
Federal Share: AFDC 50.5% Medicaid 55.4%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 124 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 3,500

State Capitol: Lansing

Welfare Agency: Michigan Department of Social Services
Family Services Administration

Phil Michel

Systems and Technical Services
Grand Tower Building, Suite 1312
P.O. Box 30037 (235 S. Grand Ave.)
Lansing, MI 48909

IEVS Policy Contact:

Ph#: 517/373-0909

oy

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Local Office Automation (LOA).

MENT AND This system integrates AFDC, Medicaid, and food stamps.
ELIGIBILITY
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: Same as Above
System is not FAMIS certified.
PLANNED Michigan estimated $84 million to complete development of
a FAMIS to support AFDC, food stamps, Medicaid eligibility,
WELFARE JOBS, and child care.
SYSTEMS
CHANGES

MI-1


%~ MICHIGAN

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

AND BENEFITS

Cost Effective for
Recipient Matches Only
State Wage YES
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS YES
SSA Benefits YES
SS! Benefits YES
BEER DK

Conclusions are based on study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: $4,539,000
COSTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $1,350,000
personnel costs

- Computer costs $3,000
- Costs associated with verification $18,000
- Other $20,000
$1,391,000

BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts NA
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $5,930,000
- Other NA
$5,930,000

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
costs NA

BENEFITS NA
NET: NA



State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness il
MATCH COSTS

AND BENEFITS 4

State Wage Yes 4
Unemployment No |
ad
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS No
SSA Benefits No ch
SS! Benefits Yes |
BEER No .

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data :
“4
IRS MATCH |
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers perind from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: ($243,587) voss
cosTs :
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $15,658
personnel costs 1
- Computer costs $3,000 }
- Costs associated with verification $121,380 .
- Other $106,452 -
$246,490 j
BENEFITS :
- Recovered overpayments and debts $0 G
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $2,765 fi
- Other $137
$2,903

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

cosTs $1,509
BENEFITS NA
NET: NA

GA-7




‘ILLINOIS

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

1EVS Matches Records | Records Records | Records | Records |Estimated
Cond d Submitted | Matched Referred | Reviewed | Found To } Overpay-
onducte for for Review! Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage 6,366,581| 663,280 | 209,865} 119,435 14,435 [$20,291,095
Ul 18,971,400] 278,097 | 131,150| 52,164 9,000 | $1,808,956
IRS 708,549] (708,148 6,965 6,600 512 $34,965
«SSA Benefits 17,123,234 | 3,310,184| 135,139 | 133,419 |126,154 | $374,248
SSI Benefits
BEER 726,744] 31,955 978 913 106! $30,679
* SSI (SDX) and SSA (BENDEX) data are processed jointly; all figures
reflected include both.
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993).- (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 76,355 69,606 60,856 438,891 ‘417,794 a
MIDMONTR a 0 Ww o 0 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER} JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 826,937 381,889 410,755 412.360 772.535 175,124
MIDMONTH w ual f] 0 8 0
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ;
MAY JUNE SULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 118,845 42,150 93,096 488,065 478,235 24,511
MIDMONTH 3,498 pa] w _ 4,323 w [ual
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 533,685 443,628 481,834 471,535 | 534,226 597,102
MIOMONTH | 458,687 w 45,255 52,951 62,155 72,458
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
| MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST [ SEPTEMBER | GCTOBER
REGULAR | 43,270 8,680 w 376,057 339,409 2,695
MIDMONTH : 987 31,583 [ua] Ww 244,770 3,724
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER) JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 367,703 331,045 358.535 363,936 366,149 357,278
MIOMONTH | 117.374 na] 221,822 27,221 32,261 37,302

omen)


MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

FS-29246 DIVISION OF ECONOMIC AND MEDICAL SERVICES
WR75784

IVES RELATED FOOD STAMP CLAIM COLLECTIONS
FOR PERIOD ENDING 12/792

NR. CLAIMS 1ST QUARTER CUMULATIVE
ESTABLISHED:

DISC CODE NR. $ AMOUNT NR. © AMOUNT
01 = ESD WAGE 60 18,146.00 60 18,166.00
02 - Esp UL 31 3,179.00 31 3,179.00
03 - BENDEX WAGE 6 662.00 6 662.00
04 - BENDEX CHANGE/ERROR 6 1,773.00 6 1,773.00
05 - SSI NEW CASE/MISMATCH 4 1,481.00 4 1,481.00
06 - STATE RESOURCE 6 6,393.00 6 6,393.00

TOTALS: 213° 31,634.00 113 -315634.00
NR.CLAIMS 1ST QUARTER CUMULATIVE
WITH COLLECTIONS?

_-ISC CODE NR. $ AMOUNT NR. $ AMOUNT
01 - ESD WAGE 282 7,851.50 282 7,851.50
02 - ESD UI 44 960.00 44 960.00
O3 - BENDEX WAGE 33 592.00 33 592.00
04 - BENDEX CHANGE/ERROR 26 508.00 26 508.00
05 - SSI NEW CASE/MISMATCH 34 522.00 34 522.00
06 - STATE RESOURCE 34 1,371.00 34 1,371.00

TOTALS: 453 11,804.50 ~ 453 11,804.50

Claims Monitoring Report

AR-10



‘DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

| Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: in Report
:_# of records submitted for matching wa!
:_# of records which matched with external data NA
# of records resulting in alerts for workers NA i
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers NA !
i # of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit NA i
|_ Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts i _NA i
i_# or alerts worked in 45 days | NA i
|_# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) 1 NA
{ Staff time to complete follow up NA
H Amount of JEVS identified savings actually recouped NA

FLEXIBILITY AND

D.C. considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "The number of days should take into account the
number of days it takes a customer (client) to respond to requests
for data.” :
Interviewed staff could not provide statistics reporting whether efforts to
meet the 45 day follow up timeframe requirement are being met. D.C. was
still implementing its new computer system.
Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.
FOLLOW UP All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.
PRIORITIZATION
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, D.C. does not presently
EXCHANGING use SSA's File Transfer Management System {FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA data. Tape exchanges continue.
FEDERAL During 1992, 23,300 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
AGENCIES the Enumeration Verification System.

{RS: Computer tapes have not been exchanged with IRS on a routine basis
over the last several years.

DC-4



DATA AVAILABLE IN THE PROFILES 4

DEMOGRAPHICS This section provides an overview of State specific information to allow the reader to H
AND PROGRAM compare States by such features.as population, recent error rates, etc. “t
STATISTICS 4
i
WELFARE Provides information describing the organization of the welfare program and the agency Al
ADMINISTRATION responsible for economic services. Also provided is the name of the person given to
us as a contact concerning IEVS policy. ‘y
df
CASE MANAGE- Lists the name of the State's eligibility system, the degree of integration with the major ay
MENT AND welfare programs, whether the system is FAMIS certified, and the contact person given 4
ELIGIBILITY us for systems questions related to IEVS. af
SYSTEM
ty
PLANNED Listed are changes planned or presently being conducted as of 1993 through 1999. States i
WELFARE provided this information to the Government Accounting Office for use in its survey of
SYSTEMS Automated Welfare Systems (GAO/AIMD-94-52FS) released February 1994. Information *y
CHANGES may also have been provided directly to us during our surveys. i
1EVS MATCHING This table describes States' uses of IEVS databases for applicants and recipients, how 4
(AFDC Program) often conducted, and how the resulting information from a match is distributed to '
workers. af
ONLINE ACCESS Most States provide IEVS information via terminal access. Online access is defined “1
TO 1EVS DATA as either access to the actual external database or access to resulting match information i
maintained in a database for worker access. oa
This table provides a complete list of the methods used by States to select (target) follow y
8
METHODS up efforts to the most useful IEVS matches. The table is specific to the AFDC program :
recipients; however, an indication is made whether the targeting differs for FS or Medicaid a

populations. This table is current as of August of 1994 and reflects what States report they
are actually doing with regards to targeting, which may not necessarily coincide with the
State's approved targeting plan.

Targeting strategies used are generalized in the column called targeting strategies:
Possibilities are generally termed exclusion, discrepancy, and tolerance targeting.

The column termed specifications describes specifically what the tolerance, discrepancy,

or exclusion is. Because some States use more than one targeting strategy (e.g., a tolerance
and exclusion), an indicator in the specifications section (F=tolerance, D=discrepancy,

and E=exclusion) shows which specification applies.

DISCREPANCY (D)
A discrepancy amount is the variance allowed between information in the client record and 1
that provided by the external match source. If the variance exceeds the specified discrepancy}
amount, the information is subject to follow up. Clients with a variance less than the
discrepancy amount are not subject to follow up.



Department of Health and Human Services

OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL

STATE INCOME AND ELIGIBILITY
VERIFICATION SYSTEMS (IEVS)

State Profiles

PART I (Alabama through Montana)

wee
£ JUNE GIBBS BROWN
Bd C Inspector General

OCTOBER 1994
OEI-06-92-00081



DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 3,685,296 (Rank - 23rd) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 120
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $13,743 (Rank - 39th} intherrnas eychege
Unemployment (6/93): 6.8 % AFDC Cases 83 417%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: tavarage Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 528 17.8%
AFDC 2.23 3rd Participants
Food Stamps 4.36. Ind (average Monthly)
‘caid Pevment Medicaid 525 NIA
Medicaid fovmen', 1.39 20th Eligibles
tannoel)
Federal Share: AFDC 65% Medicaid 72.6%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 124 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA

State Capitol: Frankfort

Welfare Agency: Kentucky Cabinet of Human Resources
Department of Social Services

Janice Kline
Supervisor
Division of Management and Development
275 E. Main St.

Frankfort, KY 40621-0001

IEVS Policy Contact:

Phi: 502/564-7536

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Public Assistance - 62 {(PA-62)}.

MENT AND The AFDC and Medicaid programs are integrated.
ELIGIBILITY IEVS System Contact: David Oliver
SYSTEM Section Supervisor
Pht: 502/564-7536

System is not yet FAMIS certified.
PLANNED Kentucky is in the process of replacing its existing AFDC/Medicaid

eligibility and food stamp systems with a FAMIS system. Estimated
WELFARE costs for this project are $17.7 million. The State also has interfaced
SYSTEMS its existing JOBS system with the FAMIS. A statewide, online system
CHANGES is being developed for the State's family-focused social services programs.

KY-1

ae



AND BENEFITS

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness

MATCH COSTS

State Wage

No

Unemployment

DK

Is Match Cost Effective? IRS

No

SSA _ Benefits

Yes

SS! Benefits

Yes

BEER

No

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $37,026

BENEFITS $52,647
NET: $15,621

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93} NET:

COSTS

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs

- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other

BENEFITS

Conclusions are based on informal study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

$70,008

$1,693
$554
$264,349

$336,604
$150
$4,104
o

$4,254

($332,350) Loss

AR-7



m7 " OTT --

LOUISIANA

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

| Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: lin Report
__# of records submitted for matching Yes
__# of records which matched with external data Yes
|_# of records resulting in alerts for workers 1 Yes }
|_# of alerts worked by eligibility workers ves i
i_# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit | Yes |
Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts i Yes j
# or alerts worked in 45 days i Yes !}
# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) ! Yes
Staff time to complete follow up Yes
__ Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped f No

FLEXIBILITY -AND
FOLLOW UP

Louisiana considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be reasonable.
Even so, staff report efforts to complete IEVS follow up was somewhat
less than 80 percent for 1993 (approximately 69 percent). The State
has, however, met the follow up requirement for every month in 1994.
Louisiana was granted a waiver from the FNS to extend the 45 day
follow up timeframe for households with fluctuating earnings; however,
this waiver is only applicable to State Wage discrepancies on food
stamp cases having a redetermination date within 3 months of the
receipt of the information. The AFDC cannot waive this requirement
except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up
by using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Louisiana presently
uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit, BEER, SSI data, and death data. Use of FTMS began
in 1990. Tape exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent and
enumeration verification exchange. Louisiana has not yet implemented
use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 1,258,501 records were submitted to SSA for verification
using the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

LA-4


MISCELLANEOUS

IEVS Resolution Codes

BW - BENDEX Wage hit previously handled
CB - Application denied - Due to non-cooperation
CD - Case discontinued - Due to non-cooperation
CH - Contributing Hit - Award adjusted
CM - Initial award reduced - Due to non-cooperation
CR - Award reduced - Clients uncooperative
DM - Application denied between match request date and actual
EB - Application denied due to excess income/assets
ED - Case discontinued due to excess income/assets
EM - Initial award reduced - Due to applied income
HN - Hit with no discrepancy
OA - Matched individual not an applicant, recipient, etc.
E - Income/Asset is exempt
Ol - tncome/Asset not owned by applicant/recipient
OK - Income/Assets within limits
OM - Matched individual discontinued for a reason (not IEVS)
ON - Income Asset no longer exists - No overpayments
OO - Income/Asset no longer exists - Overpayment resulted
OS - Income/Asset within limits - System determination
PI - Process aleady initiated
SC - Incorrect SSN on the System - Hit is inaccurate
SM - Incorrect SSN at match source - Hit is inaccurate
TB - Application denied due to transfer of assets
TD - Case discontinued due to transfer of assets
TM - Initial award reduced due to transfer of assets
TR - Award reduced due to transfer of assets

CT-8



AND BENEFITS

Is Match Cost Effective? IRS

State Wage Yes
Unemployment Yes

No
SSA Benefits No
SSI Benefits Yes
BEER No

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

COSTS $2,873
BENEFITS $3,617
NET: $744

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET:

COSTS

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs

- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other

BENEFITS

Conclusions are based on experience rather than study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

NA
NA
NA

NA
NA
NA

(For matches conducted in 1990)

State Respondent Perceptions of !EVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

DE-7



Department of Health and Human Services

OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL

STATE INCOME AND ELIGIBILITY
VERIFICATION SYSTEMS (IEVS) _

State Profiles

PART I (Alabama through Montana)

s ;
e JUNE GIBBS BROWN
Bd C Inspector General

OCTOBER 1994
OEI-06-92-00081



IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

lEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage No targeting
ul No targeting
IRS Exclusion Client active for tax period to
which match pertains.
SSA Benefits No targeting
(Bendex)
SSI Benefits No targeting
(SDX)
BEER Exclusion Yes Client active for part of time
Disregard certain period to which match pertains.
information Disregard all except agriculture,

Federal earnings and pensions,
military income, and self
employment.

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC

program.

HI-3


DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 6,016,425 (Rank - 13th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 14
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $22,174 (Rank - 3rd) in an ree
Unemployment (6/93): 6.4 % AFDC Cases. ‘118 26.8%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (Average Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 430 35.7%
AFDC 3.37 13th Participants
Food Stamps 13.06 49th (average Math)
— Medicaid 651 NIA
Medicaid favmen’ = 1.68 27th Eligibles
tanaval)
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid so%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION | \umber of iocal welfare offices: 48 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA
State Capitol: Boston
Welfare Agency: Department of Public Welfare

IEVS Policy Contact: James Half
Director of Eligibility Services
600 Washington St.
Boston, MA 02111 = Phit: 617/348-5395

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Financial Management Control System (FMCS).

MENT AND This system does not integrate with food stamps or Medicaid.
ELIGIBILITY IEVS System Contact: Ronald Sabulis
SYSTEM Program Analyst
Phi: 617/348-5270

System is not FAMIS certified.
PLANNED Massachusetts is replacing its Present system with a FAMIS system.

Expected costs near $35 million.
WELFARE
SYSTEMS
CHANGES

MA-1


INDIANA

IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results to Workers ,.
State Wage | Yes Weekly | Yes Quarterly | Electronic {S & V)
ul Yes Weekly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
IRS Yes Monthly Yes Annuaily Electronic (S & V)
SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
BEER Yes Monthly | Yes { Annually Electronic (S & V)
S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.

| * Non-ICES counties receive hardcopy reports.

According to Indiana officials, IEVS reports were not worked between
April 1991and February 1993. The decision to not follow up on IEVS
reports was because the State was in the midst of converting to a new
computer system named ICES. The lEVS subsystem to monitor 1EVS
matches was not fully operational! unti! 1994.

Method(s) of Matching

State
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssl BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
State Wage, U!, and SSI information are available to the worker online
OULINE ACCESS at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,

historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage Ul IRS SSA SSI | BEER
Do Workers H
Online Access? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
How Many Offices? All All All All All All

IN-2


comet =

ta cial

LOUIS

IEVS MATCHING

HEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
: Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
| State Wage | Yes | Quarterly i Yes | Quarterly _! Electronic (S & V)
‘ul : Yes Monthly =: Yes ! Monthly Electronic (S & V)
LIRS i Yes Monthly Yes | Annually ‘Electronic (S & V)
| SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes i Monthly ‘Electronic (S & V)
SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly} Yes | Monthly {Electronic (S & V)
{LBEER i Yes Monthly | Ves | Monthly :** No Follow up **

S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.

Louisiana implemented an online IEVS system effective April 1992.
Prior to this, only discrepancy reports for IRS data were sent to
workers for clearance. Other source data was available for use

at redetermination or at intake.

It was in 1991 that Louisiana stopped requiring parishes to clear
monthly discrepancy reports/alerts. This was reportedly done because
of results from an internal 1991 cost-benefit analysis of the BEER
match which showed (according to the [EVS coordinator) Louisiana was
“spending a lot of money trying to clear up discrepancies from BEER,
but weren't getting much in return.” The parishes resumed clearing
discrepancy reports (excepting BEER) in 4/92 with the implementation
of the State's online system.

Method(s) of Matching

State | '

Wage ul IRS | SSA ssi BEER
Batch | Batch / Batch Batch | Batch | Batch
Online | Online { i

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, U!, and SSI information are available to the worker online
at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and U! database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's
computer.

State i i Historical | Historical | Historical
Wage | Ul | IRS | SSA | SSI | BEER
Do Workers Have H °
Online Access? Yes j Yes ; Yes i Yes | Yes | Yes
How Many Offices?| All | All | All Alt Alli All

LA-2





IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted | Done? When _| Done? _—_—When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes {Twice Weekly| Yes Quarterly | Hardcopy
vi Yes (Twice Weekly| Yes Monthly Hardcopy
IRS Yes [Monthly Yes Annually Hardcopy
SSA Benefits | Yes [Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy
SSI Benefits | No | Yes Weekly Hardcopy
BEER No [Yes | Monthly Hardcopy

Hardcopy = Printed centrally and sent by mail or delivery to local
offices and distributed to workers.

As a participant in a demonstration of IEVS targeting strategies
sponsored by the FNS and conducted by Mathematica, Michigan
is presently not required to conduct the applicant State wage
match.

Method(s) of Matching

State
Wage Ut IRS SSA ssl BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

No IEVS information is available online to workers.

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi

Do Workers Have
Online Access? No No No No No No

How Many Offices?

Mi-2



—

MISSISSIPPI

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 o 0 a 0 o 0
4992 | 2AmuaRY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
[ual 0 0 0 0 0
t992 | AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
664,990 0 100,178 24,205 0 38,670
93 | 2AMUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
13 | wy 20,310 13,240 12,308 10,640 16,880
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION, — 10,944 24,287 [va] 25,873 15,133 12,384
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
13,117 14,425 14,143 13,567 13,487 13,763
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER] OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
9,258 20,656 w 22,238 12,906 10,628
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
71,362 12,468 12,266 11,737 11,619 12,010
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 t) 0 0 o 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 0 0 0 0
RESPONSES | _ JuLy AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 1) 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE



IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

| Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: | Included
|_# of records submitted for matching _ No
{_# of records which matched with external data | Yes
Hl # of records resulting in alerts for workers | Yes
| # of alerts worked by eligibility workers | No
i_# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit i No
| Amount of savings determined from 1EVS alerts : No
i_# or alerts worked in 45 days i No
| # or alerts Past due (not worked in 45 days) i No
Staff time to complete follow up - No
;_ Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND

Hawaii considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "Regulations should be more flexible when match data is
incomplete or inconsistent."
For 1993, staff report more than 80 percent of IEVS match results were
followed up on in 45 days.
Workers may specify the results of IEVS follow up in unit reports.
FOLLOW UP All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.
PRIORITIZATION .
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Hawaii presently uses
EXCHANGING SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or send
DATA WITH SSA Benefit, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1992. Tape exchange
FEDERAL continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration verification
exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Hawaii has not yet
AGENCIES implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

IRS: Computer tapes are not exchanged routinely each month with IRS.



MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

IEVS Matches Records | Records | Records |-Records | Records |Estimated
Conducted Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
anducte: for for Review! Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage S0,000/atr | 50,000/0tr| 400/month} —400/month NA NA
Ul NA WA| 800/month NA NA NA
IRS 22,000/manth |15,000/month | >300/month NA NA NA
SSA Benefits | 35,000/manth NA! 3,000/month NA NA NA
SSI Benefits NA NA| 1,500/month NA NA NA
BEER 35,000/month [10,000/month| —700/month| <100/month NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 58 a1 0 353,621 0 fl
MIOMONTH | i) a w 0 15,194 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER) JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 28,656 29,928 43,944 0 0 106,023
MIDMONTH ja | 0 a 0 0
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ;
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 6,469 4,307 2,337 357,460 10,838 6,323
MIDMONTH 416 w w _ 918 jual w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY [ MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 45,068 41,638 ete 13,141 13,587 89,378
MIDMONTH | 96,864 w 8,149 9,143 8,924 12,485
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 939 581 [val 294,527 1,034 733
MIDMONTH 138 700 [ua ua] 1,268 998
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 30,739 33,486 48,376 aosa | 9.187 74,155
MIDMONTH | 78,211 w 7143 8,331 9,506 11,809

AZ-5


—

MISSISSIPPI

MISCELLANEOUS

The following is an example of an IEVS alert screen. The purpose of this
screen on the workers terminal is to display all of the system generated
IEVS alerts which have been created for a case whether they are
overdue, due today, or due in the future. The screen can display up

to a maximum of 160 IEVS alerts. IEVS alerts are deleted from the
screen as each alert listed is completed.

IEVS ALERT SCREEN

vas JeVS ALERT SELECTION 090187 14:59
Lrap C
CASE NAHE: FLEURY DUUGLAS J CASE RUNULR: 000016527
SELECT DUE DAIE CLIENT NAME IEVS ALERT
FLEURY PUULILAS J AEVS SDX HATCH DATA
FLEURY DOUELAS J TEVS SSN ENUI/ VAL MAIL Dain
FLEURY NURA LEVS SIAIE RESOURCE bAIA
en2987  FLEUIY PoUubLAaS J TEVS UNCAFLOPHENT BENEFITS DATA
ovzge? FLEURY NORA IEVS WAGE MAICH DATA
11ACOs NRA DOUGLAS TEVS EARNINGS RITCRERCE FILE MATC

y2aiu7 oy LUTIty puUG J IEVS UCNDEX nat

bain

FOKE



- 7 - a —

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _

MATCH
STATISTICS IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)
JULY | AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTORER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 0 6 0 0 " 0 0
qogg | 2anuany_| Feenuany {~wanci [~APam MAY JUNE
ual 0 ti) 0 0 a
July | AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1992 a o 0 a c a
jogs | 2muany | FepnuaRy | wancH APRIL MAY JUNE
w t) 0 a a 0

ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)

INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION a 0 wy a 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
f) 0 i 0 fl 0
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
¢ ¢ 0 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 a a 0 0 o

WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER . | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER

0 0 ¢ 0 0 “0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
o 0 a 0 a 0
RESPONSES | JULY AuGusT [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
a 0 t) 0 t) 6
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a 0 0 0 8 to

DC-6


MINNESOTA

1EVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes ‘Semi onthly| Yes Quarterly | Electronic (S & V)

UF Yes Semi-Monthly Yes Electronic (S & V)

TRS Yes’ | Monthly
SSA Benefits | Yes [Monthly _
SSI Benefits | Yes {Monthly
BEER Ves |Monthly |! Yes Monthly _ Electronic (5 & V)

S & V = Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.

Annually Electronic (S & V)

Monthiy
Monthly

| “Monthly
!
Jo

Method{s) of Matching

——

hae

bene

—

State
Wage ul IRS SSA ssl BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
lf the applicant was a prior client or present client, all IEVS historical
On ns ones information is available to the worker at application or review.

Workers are not required by policy to access available online information
at application or redeterminations.

Histories! | pistoric " reror "
State Historical) Historical | Historical | Historical| Historical

Wage Ul IRS SSA SSI BEER
Do Workers Have

Online Access? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

How Many Offices? All Alt All All All All

in


DEMOGRAPHICS
AND PROGRAM

Population: 606,900
Number of counties: NA

1992 Welfare Population

. c
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $23,491 a mnt Grange
Unemployment (6/93): 9.0 % AFDC Cases 23 26.5%
1990 Program/BapmRatérror Rates: tAvarage Monthly!
Rank Food Stamp 86 48.6%
AFDC 4.13 21st Participants
Food Stamps AFDC). 16 30th herrage Manis)
Food Medicaid 100 NA
Medicaid jrstamps?3 8th Eligibles
tAanval!
Federal Share: AFDC _50% Medicaid _50%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of loca! welfare offices: 11 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 800-860

State Capitol: NA

Welfare Agency: D.C. Department of Human Services
Commission on Social Services

IEVS Policy Contact: Ffric Simpson
Acting Division Chief
Income Maintenance Administration
Bureau of Management Systems
Verification Systems Division
First and | Street S.W., Randall Bldg. Room 222
Washington, D.C. 20024
Ph#: 202/727-5041

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Automated Client Eligibility Determination System (ACEDS).

MENT AND Transferred from South Carolina, the system integrates AFDC,
ELIGIBILITY Medicaid, and food stamps.
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: Same as Above

Precently completing FAMIS certification process.
PLANNED Completion of a FAMIS system was estimated at a cost of $9 million.
WELFARE This system replaced the previous system for AFDC, Medicaid, and

food stamps. Additional computer systems development is occurring
SYSTEMS for the CSE system with estimated costs to complete development
CHANGES at $5.2 million.

pc-1



ALABAMA

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 4,040,587 (Rank - 22nd) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 67
. C
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $13,667 (Rank - 43rd) in thant: tor ane
Unemployment (6/93): 8.2% AFDC Cases 51 14.4
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: tAverage Monthly!
Rank Food Stamp 555 27.6
AFDC 6.26 40th Participants
Food Stamps 5.75 Sth (average Mealy)
nigh Pavment Medicaid 403
Medicaid fevment 1.30 15th Eligibles
tannwall
Federal Share: AFDC _ 65% Medicaid 72.9%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 184 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 885 (335 AFDC, 400 FS, 100 Medicaid)
State Capitol: Montgomery
Welfare Agency: Department of Human Resources

Public Assistance Division

IEVS Policy Contact: Alice Wilsen
Program Development Specialist
50 Ripley St.

Montgomery, AL 36130-4000° Phi: 205/242-1950

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Public Assistance Reporting System (PARS).

MENT AND AFDC, food stamps, and Medicaid are integrated.
ELIGIBILITY The PARS system was transferred from Utah.
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: James Young
Program Section Supervisor for IEVS
Phi: 205/242-3239
System was FAMIS certified on January 1, 1985.
PLANNED Alabama plans to replace separate systems, which serve AFDC, food
stamps, Medicaid etigibility, and child welfare, with a single integrated
WELFARE client database system that will be the central repository for all welfare
SYSTEMS client information. Estimated development costs for this system and
CHANGES subsequent systems to service the individual welfare programs are

projected at $21.7 million.

Alabama reports no plans at present to move away from generating
hard copy alerts (called prompters) to paperless electronic notices
to workers.

AL-1


a
a
aa
Z
a
=

ived

Report recei

1S
# DHS. This page is a summary

f a quarterly Cost Benefit Analys

a
®
o

Z
S

&

os

az
a=
o$§
ae]
2a

“5

oe

o>

a

2
o
<

=]

5
£

The follow

ivision o

ts-are also available. Staff

ic repor

from the report. County specifi
reported that other evaluation reports are under development.

ion

sect

Summary Report

ot; : : 11809 ONISsa90NI 982449
T5BhFke «sully Sisao ONIssa20ud ait (sul) ~ fh
2bose GHW) HLL ontssaz0ud TvA0L $0G60x (HIND LAHTL ONISS390Na IWLOL
90:9 Guy xx x asourave avieL goctscz guy x a x x ssOurAVE LOL 90-0
00°0 00" tf,
00" 0-00
00° Silay 00°
ooo *
0
D
o
os2t
4
3
02
beet
os-oosez — guiuy suany
00°88 SrduV
So-orss2  Sutiv
00° b9IE
00-0

05" b69T
on'sut

00°S00%2
00°6259T
00°0
ite
00° 8089 Sr lWy VCE)ZW9TIINT O0°2b8ST SCERIPCIGELINS
00°0 $ e1so3 199uId = OO"ST * £4809 199UTG 00°O
o #19 904SvauoHT 2b itauad U 1 C19)03SVaaONT Atala
22 969e
U o
o @
ol ott
092 boee 103SS3908d S3HOLVH W1OL
AV VE9ONd
£66T/0E790_ HONOYHA C64I71O740 GOLYad INL YO

Auouay SISATWHV Lf4anad 4s0d SAIL

HOISTATG StNaWAVd JoNVISTSsy
S39TAN3S HVUAI 40 LiaHLuvdad

yee9

sun
SuiHy

gry
sony
SuIWV

+1809 ONISS300¥d

«si

CHIH) 1BHIL ONTSSZ90Ns W101
geny

MWK HSONLAVS WVLOL

1C49)SONTAVS BunAnd—sad
1(d9)8asvo waltiad
1 OHI83SV9 035629
raassa00ud S3iI9LW Tid

sWiol avis

MISCELLANEOUS

——



(CALIFORNIA

MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

SUMMARY ABSTRACT

** CONFIDENTIAL

‘STATE OF CALIFORNIA - DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES.
INCOME AND ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION SYSTEM ABSTRACT

COUNTY.ID bist
MEDI-CAL: — @&-30.00012254-0-00

NAME: PETERSON NORM

APOP IND:

WORKER NAME/# DATE OF REVIEW.

IF NO DISCREPANCIES, CHECK THIS BOX [|

FILE IN CASE

1 Date abstract printed in the county 4 Resuts of EDD, FTB, SSA, SSN verification matches

5 Information as known to MEDS/CDB

2. Case information supplied by the county
a. SSN verification coda

8 Seney number . Eligibility status code
© District number €. Medi-Cal/Food Stamp discominuance dates
pa aciennainena 6. Medi-Cal pending change
© Gilaibinty worker number e. Food Stamp pending
© Case name 1. Future eligibility status code
© Case serial number 9: Indicates existance of an overpayment/overissuance
f._Aid Payment Demonstration Project
3 Applicant information supplied by the county 6 Worker must complete after abstract is reviewed and all
discrepancies lif any] aco resolved.
© Applicant name(s
© Sex
© Date of birth
© Social security number

© Person number

FOOD STAMP: @8-30-00012254-0-00 700 FiS TERM DATE: 0131/84
(WIC PENDING CHANGE:;@) FIS PENDING CHANGE:@) FUTURE ESC:) RECOVERY: 3)
‘APOP IND:

BIRTHDATE: 03/27/947 SEX:M  SSAN-VER: W

COUNTY-IO DIST EW ESC
MEDI-CAL: — @-30-00012254-0-00 O10 999 M/C TERM DATE: 0131/84
FOOD STAMP: @#-30-00012254-0-00 100 9 _ FS TERM DATE: 0131/88
MIC PENDING CHANGE: FIS PENDING CHANGE: FUTURE ESC: RECOVERY:

1

neon, nsjevnnonc0 vor)

COUNTY: $9 DISTRICT: 999 APP-DATE: 10/25/92 ‘Ew: 0903,
‘CASE NAME: PETERSON VERA ‘SERIAL NUMBER: 0123456 FRU: 1
———
P 3
NAME s eile Fs sv
—  DATEOF R}OTS NE}
LAST FIRST x BIRTH ‘SSN S|OBA R i
@ '®
| PETERSON VERA 1 F | 07-04-50 | mw2-33-4444 | 50 || | X1 XIJI i
i} it 1 t yee fhe
| PETERSON: NORM 1 M| 03-27-47 | mB3-44-555S | 601;xX1 1 FY!
1 1 roti oil
| PETERSON VERA 1 F | 07-0450 | me2z3e-3eae 1 Sol; F 1x1! ft
I it 1 |
es
aeeeees + MEDSICDR FILE *#eerseeeee —
2
Gane: rerson vena ——RTIDAT:OF4950 SEX F SEAMEN ¥

ESC
010 998-7 MIC TERM DATE: 0131/84. <5

CA-9



MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

SULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 fy 0 r) 0 0 0
1992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a 13,763 D) ; 14,407 24,267
1992 JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
13,526 13,451 0 135,782 13,294 26,970
93 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
19 NA 28,381 13,384 16190 | 13.389 12,089
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 0 0 w 0 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY SUNE
0 0 0 0 f) 0
~ VERIFIED JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
a 0 [ua] f) 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 0 t) | a fy
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER [NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 ry 0 y 8
| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY | SUNE
0 0 t) 0 a 0
RESPONSES [ JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 O) 0 ° 0 0
[ JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

ME-6



q
i
1
MATCH State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992 :
STATISTICS IEVS Matches | Records | Records Records | Records | Records jEstimated {
Conducted Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed |Found To | Overpay- j
‘onducte: for for Review Affect | ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected '
State Wage 112,192,400; 5,134,615 NA NA $59,517 : |
Ul 10,418,671| 5,546,620| 734,188 NA NA $13,371 ‘
IRS 5,083,740| 2,102,039} 177,777 NA NA $6,816 a
SSA Benefits 9,879,189] 2,472,328! 2,472,328 NA NA $66,540
SSI Benefits NA 848,735| 686,983 NA NA $99,982 i
BEER NA 273,178 71,614 NA NA $71,614 1
Estimated overpayments reflect the number of cases for which overpayment
was detected. Florida does not have information on which to base the dollars
for overpaid cases. 1
i

Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
Federal Database ¥ 6 Heene i

Matches BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993). (Accretions)
MAY JUNE ‘JULY AUGUSE GWVEMBER | OCTOBER ]

REGULAR a 0 a yo | 0 a

a
MIDMONTH a ma: \4
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER@ JANDARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL

wa get | tft | ot

BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) .
MAY JUNE SULy AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER

"y

\

REGULAR 43,956 24,943 24,626 23,566 35,605 577,035 if
MIDMONTH 2.515 fval w _ 2,Ad2 w

NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL y

REGULAR 60,963 30,092 51,355 49,836 51,118 66,243 ad
MIDMONTK | 562,783 w 19,381 22430 | 26.871 31,922

BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)

| MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER i
REGULAR 3,103 2,323 w 2,504 1,187 1.268 ‘
‘MIDMONTH 783 2,100 jul 0 4,747
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 3,697 5811 8,209 10,259 12,650 14,905
MIDMONTH | 9,168 w 8,620 10,682 {| = 13,237 15,518

FL-5


“MASSACHUSETTS

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

! Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: ‘in Report
|_# of records submitted for matching i Yes :
_ # of records which matched with external data ioYes :
| # of records resulting in alerts for workers | Yes |
1_# of alerts worked by eligibility workers i Yes
i_# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit Yes |
} Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts Yes |}
# or alerts worked in 45 days i Yes
_# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) _ Yes
Staff time to complete follow up No
__Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND

Massachusetts staff reported the 80 percent follow up rule is unreasonable.
Staff stated, "Timeframes should be expanded."

FOLLOW UP
For calendar year 1992, staff report more than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were followed up (85 percent follow up in 45 days). However,
IRS and BEER alerts were followed up much less often within the 45 day
period (BEER - 25% follow up in 45 days; IRS - 50% follow up in 45 days).
Workers are required to specify the results of review by placing action
codes on the hardcopy alert.
FOLLOW UP AIL IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.
PRIORITIZATION
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Massachusetts presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA Benefit, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1990. Tape
FEDERAL exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Massachusetts
AGENCIES

implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System in 1994.

During 1992, 743,233 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a less than routine basis.

MA-4



MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

a)

[iy

1EVS Matches Records | Records Records | Records | Records |Estimated
Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Datected
State Wage NA} NA | NA NA NA NA
ul NA NA [NA NA NA NA
IRS NA | _NA _NA_ [NA NA | NA
SSA Benefits NA NA NA NA NA NA
SSI Benefits NA | ONA NA NA NA NA
BEER NA NA | NA | NA; NA, NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 74,857 64,752 0 67,307 | a 0
MIDMONTH a t) 0 0 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR t) 72,204 145,628 67,553 t) 72,951
MIDMONTH | w U o. 4 68,816
: i
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ;
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR i 82,681 4,783 1121 74,254 | 3,823 2,494
MIDMONTH 228 val w 198 mw [wal
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 5,070 80,727 116,726 78,217 16,788 85,403
MIDMONTH 58,292 7.425 agit 9,327 79,712
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
[may JUNE JULY AuGusT {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 79,626 3,173 [wa] 63,089 354 192
MIDMONTH 183 66,309 fo w 0 267
[ NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 667 70,266 100,929 70,061 8,989 76,639
MIDMONTH = 17,543 w 7.201 8,635 9,094 73,881

ME-5


CONNECTICUT

SAMPLE IEVS TRACKING REPORT
(IRS)

zs Az
00°0 °
00°09 °
aie &L
80'6s zse
00'0 °
000 °
00°O °
00°0 °
S3HOLVW a)
40 1N3DUad
voz
965
207001 vez
ee-ee as
es" 6
z's ot
ran) &
1870 z
beens ap
SNOTL31dHO9 “ON
40 IN3QUad
GivoraaH

pp ez va by'ze un
yv-o ' bore ‘
boo ' 00°0 °
000 ° 00'0 °
wee s zon 8
yyreo vst o8's9 ze
00°0 ° 000. °
00'0 ° 00°0 0
00-0 ° 00'0 °
00-0 ° 00°0 °
SaHDLVW “ON S3HOLVH oN
4Q AN30U3d 40 INa0U3d
1s} 9
szz ey
va 00°00! a
bb abe 2
° 00'0 °
cy za'85 oF
‘ 00'0 °
e 00°0 °
oF 00°0 °
SNOILATaHOD “ON SNOTL31dWOD “ON
40 IN3DWad AQ INIOU3d
SdWviS a00d va

BHOOLNO AB SNOIL31dHOO

t§ 30%4s0 Loruisia
6661/50 34vd HOLVR
SUI 3dAL HOLVH

£66) /0€/a0 HONOHL
waLUVNO 4O GNA YaLaV Sava BbO
AuOdsy ATWALWYAD SAaT
WALSAS INSHAOVNYW ALTIIBIDI73
SONVNBINIVH 3WOONI JO INaWLYvd¥d LNTLO3NNOD

Sava + 16
SAVO 06-19
SAV 08-9y

SAVO S¥-bE
SAVQ 06-0
‘SNOILATGHOONT

STVNOIAIONI G3HOLVH qW10L
SSHOLVH W101
SNOTLA7dN0D ‘WLOL

3009 NOSVa¥
AONVd38DS10

€6/8)/80 :31va Nou
HIOBbEHO-VooByaHa

MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

10

cT-


MISSOURI

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

Records | Records Records ; Records | Records |Estimated
IEVS Matches Submitted ; Matched Referred | Reviewed ! Found To | Overpay-
Conducted :
for for Review: Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) § Benefit | Detected
State Wage UNA NA NA | ONAL i __NA
Ul NA NA NA NA | NA
IRS NAL NA} NA [ NA | NA
SSA Benefits NA NA wa! wa | NA
SSI Benefits “NA NA NA NA NA
‘BEER __NA _NA NA | NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 44,446 0 46,756 0! 0 0
MIDMONTH 0 37,984 ua] 45,761 43,446 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY I MARCH APRIL
REGULAR : 46,658 45,887 40,529 49,355 a 44,367
MIDMONTH | w w 0 45,800 a 0
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) .
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 67,660 14,236 61,359 9,020 13,780 10,986
MIDMONTH | 1,676 [val w 221 w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 77,134 75,343 78,127 85,436 30,860 88,509
MIDMONTH . 250,747 val 16,757 71.270 23,990 27,991
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
[__May JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 2 3 w 10 7 10
MIDMONTH 0 fy w w 0 ”
l NOVEMBER | DECEMBER} JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 22 32 43 50 68 93
MIDMONTH 726 a4 50 1K 99



DEMOGRAPHICS
AND PROGRAM

Population: 2,350,725 (Rank - 33rd)
Number of counties: 75

1992 Welfare Population

STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $12,901 (Rank - 48th) in Fount rene
Unemployment (6/93): 6.2 % AFDC Cases 27 10.4%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: faverage Monthly)
‘ank Food Stamp 279 26.5%
AFDC 3.83 18th Participants
Food Stamps 5.99 7th Y ne ean
Medicaid 285 NA
Medicaid ferment 0.45 2nd Eligibles
(Anauell
Federal Share: AFDC 65% Medicaid 75.7%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION

Number of local welfare offices: 80 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 669

State Capitol: Little Rock

Welfare Agency: Arkansas Department of Human Services
Division of Economic and Medical Services

IEVS Policy Contact: Steve Sorrows (FS) and Donna Johnson (AFDC/Medicaid)

User Support Analyst

Mail Slot 1240 or 1227

P.O. Box 1437

Little Rock, AR 72203-1437 — Phi: 501/682-8189 or 8183

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Arkansas Client Eligil

lity System (ACES).

MENT AND The systems used integrate the Medicaid program and AFDC.
However, food stamps is not integrated with AFDC. Food
ELIGIBILIT
SYSTEM stamps uses the Food Stamp Automated Client Tracking
System (FACTS) for case management and eligibility. The
systems used were not transferred from any other State.
JEVS System Contact: Steve Sorrows (FS) and Donna Johnson (AFOC/Medicaid)
User Support Analysts
Ph#: 501/682-8189 or 8183
System was FAMIS certified on October 1, 1984.
PLANNED Arkansas expects to replace its two primary eligibility systems with a single
system costing about $6 million. Also, it plans severa! enhancements in other
WELFARE systems supporting JOBS and CSE.
SYSTEMS
CHANGES Amove to a paperless IEVS alert system is dependent on revenue to support

the purchase of terminals/personal computers for eligibility workers.

AR-1



MISCELLANEOUS

Maryland distributes IEVS alerts to local staff using a priority system.
Alerts are prioritized for action based on whether the information

received has a high probability of impacting an individual's eligibility.

If so, it is a priority alert requiring immediate action by the worker;
otherwise, it is held for when the worker is performing the reconsideration
review. Both reviews require the worker to return the alert upon
completion of the review to the data-entry clerk. The clerk will enter into
the online IEVS response system the defined action codes for the
resultant action of the review.

ACTION CODES

CODE USE
00 ~ AWAITING ACTION System generated, all
alerts begin in this
status.
01 - DELAYED THIRD PARTY Used when awaiting

third party verification.
It will extend due date
additional 30 days from
@ate 01 is data-entered.

02 - INVALID Used when alert is
generated by incorrect
SSN data on AMF or on
file of third party
Providing the data.

03 - CLOSED Used only when data
supplied by alert results
in closing of the case.

04 - REDUCED Used only when data
supplied by alert results
in reduction of benefits.

05 - NO ACTION Used when data on alert
was produced due to
incorrect information on.

06 - REFERRED TO DSI/OP Used when data on alert
verifies a prior over-
payment and/or
overissuance.

Maryland staff indicate that over the tast four years, the number of
workers has increased slightly. For the 1480 eligibility workers, the
typical caseload is 210 ongoing cases. Workers routinely averaged
108 alerts each received during 1992. This figure does not include
IEVS data reviewed and acted on at redetermination for which no alert
is produced. Examples include changes in benefit amounts for SSI,
SSA, and UI.

During the 1992 annual assessment period, Maryland's greatest source
of AFDC payment error based on quality control review was for unreported
income.



MISSOURI

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness

MATCH COSTS
AND BENEFITS

State Wage YES
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS YES
SSA Benefits YES!
SS! Benefits YES
BEER NA

Conclusions are based on study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federa! Data

IRS MATCH

Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6193). NET: $86,027

COSTS

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $14,094
personnel costs

- Computer costs $15,343
- Costs associated with verification $0
- Other : $1,783
BENEFITS $31,220
- Recovered overpayments and debts $93,199
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $24,048
- Other $0
$117,247

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $759,423

BENEFITS $5,316,422
NET: $4,556,999



CALIFORNIA

IEVS TARGETING

METHODS IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
(AFDC Program)
State Wage Exclusion a No 1 Client active for part of time

Unique period to which match pertains
information and client must match on SSN
Discrepancy to and last name.
Other to) GE$301.

ul No targeting Yes All information is forwarded for

follow up if the client is active
at the time the information is

received.
IRS Exclusion Yes Client active for part of time
Tolerance in period to which match pertains
Other and client must match on SSN
and last name.
mLe$100.

Match results are compared to
State Franchise Tax Board
records; duplicate IRS results
are disregarded.

SSA Benefits Change in benefit Yes Data must be new or changed;
(Bendex) information if unchanged from previous
report, no follow up.

SSI Benefits Exclusion No Client must be receiving AFDC
{SDX) Unique or Food Stamps and SSI
information benefits for 3 consecutive
Other months and client must match
on SSN, name, date of birth,
and sex. .
BEER Exclusion No «Client active for part of time
Disregard certain period to which match pertains.
information mLeE$4800.
Unique Disregard duplicate information
information provided by State wage match.

Tolerance im

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs differ from that of the AFDC
program. The following reflect the differences:
Food Stamp Program State Wage - «0 GE$701

IRS - 11 GE$250
BEER - mLE$11,200
Medicaid Program State Wage - mLe$5000
IRS - 10 GES 100
BEER - imLE$12,000

CA-3



IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports include The Following: Included
(Done for IRS and BEER matches only) in Report

# of records submitted for matching Yes

# of records which matched with external data Yes

# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes

# of alerts worked by eligibility workers Yes

# of alerts resulting in a change to eli lity status/benefit Yes

Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts Yes

# or alerts worked in 45 days No

# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) No

Staff time to complete follow up No

Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped Yes

FLEXIBILITY AND

idaho considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "States should be given 60 days routinely, plus 15 days more
for BEER and IRS alerts.”
For calendar year 1993, staff report less than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were followed up on (60 percent follow up} in 45 days. This
State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow up
timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot waive this
requirement except for demonstration purposes.
Workers record the results of their review differently depending of
the local office's practice.
FOLLOW UP IRS and BEER alerts are prioritized for review based upon the type and/or
PRIORITIZATION amount of the information.
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Idaho presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA Benefit and SS! data. Use of FTMS began in 1991. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
FEDERAL fication exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Idaho has
AGENCIES not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 129,221 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

1D-4



MISCELLANEOUS

lEVS Applicant Process

Each night, the Department of Social Services (DHS) processes applicant
data submitted by the counties and cross matches it with the IEVS applicant
file. Records will be sent to Employment Development Department (EDD) for
wage and unemployment (UI/Di) information; to the Franchise Tax Board
{FTB) for unearned income matching; to the SSA for SSN validation, Title |!
(RSDI) and Title XV! (SSI/SSP) benefit information; and to Immigration and
Naturalization Service.

When the information has been returned from all the agencies, an IEVS
“abstract” report will be printed in the county showing the income and
assets for each case. All abstracts should be received within five to ten
calendar days from the county input date. The timeframe varies, depending
on the length of time it takes the county data to arrive in Sacramento, when
the agency matches are made, and how long it takes the county to print and
distribute the abstracts.

Some or all match results should be available online within one to three
working days after DHS receives the county input. As each agency
returns their informaiton, DHS updates the IEVS files. This information
can be viewed using IEVS/MEDS (MEDS = Medicaid Eligibility Data System)
online inquiries when the abstracts have not been received and the worker
is ready to approve aid or has an applicant interview scheduled. A screen
print can be made of any information needed by the worker.

The information on an abstract is confidential and adequate precautions are
made to ensure that the information remains confidential.

The county is not to wait to grant eligibility pending the receipt of the IEVS
information to establish eligibility. IEVS information is to be used as an
additional information and verification source, if available, prior to granting
eligibility. However, if the IEVS information is received after eligibility has
been established, it must be reviewed and action taken if warranted.

IEVS UI, DI, and SSA information is to be considered by the worker
as verified upon receipt.

The outcome of all IEVS matches, except those cases denied prior to receipt
of IEVS information, must be noted in the case file. If the 1EVS information
is correct, or is not significantly different from that reported by the client
and no action is required, the worker must sign, date, and check the "No
discrepancy" box on the IEVS summary page and file it in the case record.

If the IEVS information was unreported, or was reported but significantly
different from what the client reported, and action is required, the worker
must fully document on the abstract or in the case narrative the steps
taken to resolve the discrepancy. The abstracts must be filed in the case.

Each case record must contain an IEVS summary page and, if applicable, any
corresponding match abstracts. See the following pages for examples.

CA-8



MINNESOTA

AND BENEFITS

State Wage YES,
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS NO
SSA Benefits YES
SS! Benefits YES
BEER NO

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH

Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7194 to 6193). NET: (857,575) y55

CcOosTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $607,000
personnel costs
- Computer costs $46,500
- Costs associated with verification $1,000
- Other $33,000
“$687,500
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $628,080
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved 1,845
- Other NA
“$629,925

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
COSTS $141,007

BENEFITS NA
NET: NA



DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 2,776,755 (Rank - 30th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 99
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $13,685 (Rank - 41st) in thowsets Chang
Unemployment (6/93): 15,487 (Rank - 32nd) AFDC Cases 37 8.6%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (average Monthiy)
Rank Food Stamp 182 16.6%
AFDC 5.87 37th Participants
(Average Monthly}
Food Stamps 11.82 48th Medicaid 281 NIA
Medicaid farment 1.69 28th Eligibles !
tannasl)
Federal Share: AFDC 611% Medicaid 65.0%
WELFARE STATE ADMINIST D
ADMINISTRATION | jumber of local welfare offices: 104 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 630
State Capitol: Des Moines
Welfare Agency: lowa Department of Human Services

John Fairweather

Chief

Office of Public Policy
Hoover State Office Bldg.
Des Moines, 1A 50319-0174

{EVS Policy Contact:

Ph#:515/281-4848

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: lowa Automated Benefit Calculations (IABC}.

MENT AND The IABC system was transferred from Massachusetts.
ELIGIBILITY It integrates AFDC with food stamps and Medicaid.
SYSTEM 1EVS System Contact: Jean Gruver
Senior Systems Analyst
Ph#: 515/281-8290
System was FAMIS certified on August 14, 1989.
PLANNED 1OWA is upgrading its FAMIS system at an estimated cost of $3.4 million. In
addition, the CSE system will receive approximately $7.2 million in upgrades
WELFARE to satisfy CSE Federal requirements. After a new child welfare system is
SYSTEMS developed, it will eliminate the need for the FAMIS system to support child
CHANGES welfare, as is now the case.

TA-1



IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

i
i Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: lin Hepoct
| # of records submitted for matching i Yes
# of records which matched with external data Yes

Hl {
{_# of records resulting in alerts for workers | Yes
i_# of alerts worked by lity workers [No
| # of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit ! Yes
: Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts | Yes
:_ # or alerts worked in 45 days i No
:_# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) i No
i Staff time to complete follow up > No
i Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped i Yes

FLEXIBILITY AND

California considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, "Targeting should be more flexibile to coincide with changes

FOLLOW UP in workloads.”
Workers are required to clear alert reports by specifying the results of
their review. The method of communicating results (codes in computer,
narrative on alert, etc.) depends on how the county office is set up. The
results of follow up on IEVS recipient data is reported to the State Fraud
Bureau for statistical reporting purposes.
FOLLOW UP IEVS matches (results) are prioritized for review by workers. Priority is
PRIORITIZATION determined at the local office level with alerts prioritized based on the
source of the match and amount of discrepancy/tolerance. In some
cases the prioritization is done automatically by the computer.
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, California presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA Benefit, death records, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in
FEDERAL 1989. Tape exchange continues for matches with the Aiphadent,
enumeration verification exchange and BEER. California implemented
AGENCIES use of the State Verification and Exchange System (formerly called

WTPY) in 1989 and was one of the first two States to trial its use.

During 1992, 769,860 were submitted to SSA for verification using the
Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS once per year. This is
because CA routinely matches with the CA Franchise Tax Board to
obtain unearned income information.

CA-4



fans

MISSOURI

TEVS MATCHING

JEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage Yes Daily Yes | Quarterly | Electronic (S) and Print
Ul Yes Daily Yes Daily | Electronic {S} and Print
1RS Yes Monthly | Yes | Monthly Electronic (S & V)

SSA Benefits | Yes Biweekly | Yes Biweekly Hardcopy

SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy

BEER No [No

L

S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.
Hardcopy = Printed centrally and sent by mail or delivery to local
offices and distributed to workers.

Method{s) of Matching

State

Wage Ur IRS SSA SSI BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online | Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage and UI information are available to the worker online at the
time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.
While not available online, SS| data is available through SSA's file
transfer management system.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's

computer.

Do Workers Have
Online Access?

How Many Offices?

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage | UI SSA | ssi | BEER
Yes Yes Yes No No No

All All All



ened

oe)

\
J

MISSISSIPPI

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

i i ; Incl
Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: in Heport
# of records submitted for matching No |
# of records which matched with external data No |
# of records resulting in alerts for workers No
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers Yes
# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit No
Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts No
# or alerts worked in 45 days { Yes
# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) | Yes
Staff time to complete follow up No

| Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND

Mississippi provided no statistics supporting the State's ability to meet

FOLLOW UP the 45 day follow up timeframe for IEVS matches.
Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.
To reduce the number of alerts sent to workers, a system change was
made in 1993 to automatically clear duplicate wage match alerts
monthly through a batch process. Since alerts are generated monthly
and employers report quarterly, a worker used to get as many as 3 alerts
based on the same identical wage information. The system change keeps
this to only one.
FOLLOW UP IEVS match results are prioritized at the local office level (manual process)
PRIORITIZATION based on the program and the circumstances.
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, as of 1/94 Mississippi
EXCHANGING was not using SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive
DATA WITH and/or send SSA data. Mississippi has not yet implemented use of the
FEDERAL State Verification and Exchange System.
AGENCIES During 1992, 167,521 records were submitted to SSA for verification

using the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS (tapes have not been
exchanged routinely in the past).



MISSOURI

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

1EVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Exclusion ie Yes te Client active for part of time
Tolerance period to which match pertains
Other and client must match on
name.
im LE$250.
Ul No targeting
IRS Exclusion ie Yes ‘© Client active for all of the
Disregard certain time period to which match
information pertains.
Tolerance im Disregards vary by type (1).

im varies by type (2).

SSA Benefits Change in benefit Yes
{Bendex) information
SSI Benefits Change in benefit Yes
{SDX) information
BEER State not
matching ir

(1) Disregard all the following - patronage dividends, non-patronage dividends, per unit
retain allocation, in-State Ul, prior year refund, non-cash liquidation distributions, +
dividends qualifying for exclusions, bartering, gross income, debt satisfied, and fair
market value. Also disregard all income information types which have no reports. x

{2) a. For amounts Ge$5000. follow up prizes and awards.
b. For amounts GE$1000, follow up rollover SEP contributions, IRA or SEP '

‘contributions between years, debt outstanding, gross winnings, and capita! gains.

For amounts GeE$500, follow up most recent year SEP contributions.

d. For amounts Ge$250, follow up royalties, original discount issue, ordinary income,
unrealized appreciation, and other income.

e. For amounts GE$ 200, follow up interest forfeiture.

For amounts GE$50, follow up interest.

g. Nomlevels, but requiring follow up, are distributive shares, dividends, agricultural |,
subsidies, non-taxable distributions, cash liquidation distributions, dividends not
qualifying for-exclusions, savings bonds, substitute payments, stocks and bonds, .
aggregate profit and loss, profit and loss last half year, rents, and IRA distributions.

9

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC
program.





DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

Records | Records Records | Records | Records | Estimated
IEVS Matches Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducte for for Review} Affect | ments
Matching {Alerts} Benefit | Detected
State Wage NA NA NA NA NA NA
Ul NA NA | NA NA NA NA
IRS NA NA | NA NA NA NA
SSA Benefits NA NA NA NA | NA NA
SSI Benefits NA NA NA NA | NA NA
BEER NA NA NA NA | NA | NA
The District of Columbia recently completed the implementation of
ACEDS in September of 1993. The implementation occurred during
1992 and 1993 with much of the data split between two systems (old
and new). Thus, D.C. could not produce the information requested above.
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS}
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993). (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 108,880 116,339 413,187 225,282 108,903 0
MIOMONTH 0 0 w 0 0 131,966
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER; JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 620,937 623,658 522,939 146,484 0 0
MIDMONTH w w 0 0 140,741 0
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ;
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 101,030 77,382 102,444 107,449 99,083 4,001
momonts | 8] BY oa | w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 550,041 549,220 176,237 129,458 21,051 24,530
MIDMONTH 90,302 17,977 18,539 127,294 19,907
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 12,778 11,618 w 16,023 11.650 83
MIDMONTH 58 4,767 w Ww 2,494 23,371
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR | 98,464 95,154 8,209 18,091 8,420 8,554
miomontH | 9,168 pia] 8,166 8,345 15,358 8,650

DC-5


ARKANSAS

° a o t) 0 o 0 0 0 0 98
o T ot) v oO o 0 0 ) oO ot
@ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° o a 6
0 0 0 ° f) 0 o 0 o 0 es
a o 0 0 0 o a o oe o oe im
2 0 0s o os t) 0 0 ° 0 0 us
A > os 0 os t 6 1 62t 6 6u1 rid
oe 8 6t 0 6t 2 o bet 56601 0b $660T 9%
Ke} a 2 9 0 ) a 0 o osger oe osoet sz
S
ae 5 2 9 6 9 £ a 8 ass t) euss 2z
go 2 ° 0 0 o 0 0 or 96D 1 965 1z
eo ae os vost T poet 9 0 292 bUIst2 = £8T DUTETS 0z =
® Ss
2 se g 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 ° 0 we o
3 2 £ ws oF 6 0 6 $9 0 cy sbiz £ SoZ et oc
& oe 2 t 8 0 8 < 0 o og o or rae s
oO
- ee £ t) T ° T 0 o ° $2 0 sz ou z
‘D 56 Oo 1 2 0 z a ) 0 0 0 0 bt
2 So Reis 1 ot ° 6t o 0 0 0 o o st
8 s 8 gees Sz ozz 0 ole 002 ° 0z 6S Led v 6Sé55 as
os 5 33 § 5 ° 0 ° 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 wt
fSoo0
ZS aes 288 0 Bet Q weet e22t o ood Lessee 468s. cussee so
-F £&fET OG HOLYH AIwans = HOLYH 1IWENS — HOAVH LIngAS = HOLWH AIWGNS = HOLWW AINGNS AUOd3LYD
5 osofcc <=TTL xagnag -- 9 -- 30M xagNag = ----—- SUI =---= sa= 3OWM G3 --- =~ In-asd ----
3 eeesaos X SiNaTdI93y x
fo} 2 oores 26/1E7ZT ONIGNA WALYYND HOA 1YOd3X HOLVW IWOTISTIVIS SWI¥ 9L6T-WI LYOgay
QD sa2ovaa W32LSAS ALTIVIOT IVA inaria3 SVSNVRAY ysoseun
w CSae
& SOEES 5 E
F of SS 22
& 200 £EeE
ren
q <fm00uwn
ic]
>
i—]
uw
=z
<
ol
—_ll
uw
o
2
=

AR-8


|
|
|

2
O
é
=
i

wage match. included on the report are wages for the past six quarters,
the employer name and address, case earnings reported, and the difference

The following is an example of a report for workers resulting from the

between the case earnings budgeted and the earnings reported to the wage

agency.

Modey bem ojdweg

zereseres ooros zones ie2s

£6 AVM *E6 way *¢6 UVH 68 Uv “96 038 *E6 VE
30Nau344TO

suze wy a7raHo1n30

433018 Mg “ns 202
00°05 o0-os oovos o0-as ooros zercsizs 1430 MowayeY DWE S340LS LuvH—avn
‘000¥s#¥0090
I-30 26 BH-BSVE 26 MEANY 26 BS-AVRIE 24 30-GN-20 £6 WH-3I-WE SSauooy GY 3K¥H USS Ny 3nvIE
soeanSse=' "" SIUNOW 139000 NY Q3AT393¥ SONTMHYS $SO¥D ---==~=--==—-~ OT yBKOId3 — u3NUV3 JOH S301
£6780, SONIWUY S301 2
31va NOIID3738 wT 3003
. seio9
2 66-60
200) VIU3tty> ——_*93W_32H¥HD BAYORLWI —OT1HD aa ar asa ssaucgy ony
woud a1eveoud = *roud TWIIN310d O10 uA BL 411033 BMY 3S¥2 “OL

6/21/20 31¥0 WONOwHL 25 Yeo AST) viuaLTw> oarvusaint
969 3ovd Lat cagt “isfony Jo worsae ego
16 abve {6/92/20 £31¥0 ory p900nd 40 W3MRYVa30 stoNIMHE 20-0s001@1u # Bor

MISCELLANEOUS

IL-8


-HAWAIL

MISCELLANEOUS

Over the past five years, Hawaii staff report the number of workers has
increased only slightly from 400 positions to approximately 407 (excluding
supervisory personnel). The typical caseload is approximately 200 and the
average number of alerts a typical worker receives is over one thousand.

During 1992 annual assessment period, the State's greatest source of AFDC
Payment error, based on quality control review, was for real property.

Staff report data reliability problems with labor (wage and Ul) data
because the Labor agency is not required by IEVS to maintain a SSN
verification process or make corrections to labor files once an error

has been detected. As a consequence, staff report many IEVS hits are
for the wrong person's record because the Labor's file has the wrong
SSN recorded. IEVS matches with these files are based primarily on the
SSN and secondarily on name.

HE-8


DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 11,430,602 (Rank - 6th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 102
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $18,824 (Rank - 11th) an a % Change
Unemployment (6/93): 8.4 % AFDG Gases 228 14.9%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (average Monthiy)
Rank Food Stamp 1,158 18.9%
AFDC 5.4 33rd Participants
Food Stamps 10.9 41st erage Mati)
Medicaid 1,144 NIA
Medicaid fevment’ 2.40 38th Eligibles .
taonual}
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid so%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 136 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA
State Capitol: Springfield
Welfare Agency: Illinois Department of Public Aid

Ken Durst
Chief
Bureau of Research and Analysis
100 S. Grand Ave., East
Springfield, L 62762

IEVS Policy Contact:

Phi: 217/782-1128

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Automated Intake System (AIS);

MENT AND Automated Case Management (ACM).
ELIGIBILITY None of the three major welfare programs are integrated.
SYSTEM
IEVS System Contact: Odell Roberts
Chief
Bureau of Information Systems
Phi: 217/782-1351
System was FAMIS certified on July 1, 1987.
PLANNED Mlinois plans significant enhancements to its FAMIS, MMIS, and JOBS systems.
WELFARE Estimated costs are $1 million, $5.9 million, and $800,000, respectively.
SYSTEMS
CHANGES



MISSISSIPPI

MATCH State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992
STATISTICS 1EVS Matches Records Records Records Records Records Estimated
Submitted Matched Referred : Reviewed .Found To Overpay-
Conducted for, for Review Affect ments
_ Matching (Alerts) | Benefit Detected
State Wage "2.795.880 647,030 342,912 339.972 43,980 NA
Ur "8,092,181 155,660 101,307 100,307 15,841 NA

IRS __ : NAL NA A NA NA
SSA Benefits _ NA NA 122,476 120,998 23,889 NA
SSI Benefits | NA NA 81,863. 81,193 | 15,272° NA
BEER NA NA NA NA NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
Federal Database ¥ 8 |
Matches BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
T MAY JUNE July] AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR =—«9,080 3,008 10,702 95,146 36,668 23533
MIDMONTH a 0 w 19,022 19,534 + 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY FEBRUARY . MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 78,275 88,640 11,214 26,405 0 i 47,877
MIDMONTH w nA | 90,302 21,268 0 21,269

BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)

i may [| aune | suty | auousT BER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 20,684 14,606 16,303 114,178 51,693
MIDMONTH 846 fia | [a | 66,759 tw

| NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY FEBRUARY . MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 141,236 | 117,548 i 132,368 53,924 H1,931 = 116,958
MiDMONTH 202,860 inal | 150,335 81,046 26,481 ! 86,947

BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)

]__may _ JUNE Jury | AucusT |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 11,735 4,974 | jual 97,337 39,267 25,831
MIDMONTH 610 ! 1,914 | w 24,198 3553

“NOVEMBER | DECEMBER FEBRUARY © MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 49,993 39,896 i ‘35,876 I 49,705 27,860 | 80,014
MIDMONTH 56,591 ' inal | 112,857 | 49,231 28,364 =| 55,721



MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1891 ami 49,563 57.568 58,007 55,917 53.715
gg | oaMuany | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
1 Ww 114,138 53,006 53,583 0 107,115
t9g2 | ute AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
54,278 58,108 65,565 ) 130,382 61,176
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
1993 Ww 123,122 66,934 58,778 63,571 61,735
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST (SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION a 117,431 fay 57,082 0 67,835
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
96,480 86,662 59.569 0 73,587 168,643
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER] OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 89,389 [ual 35,914 a 45,342
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
76,418 $3,298 38,650 0 65,151 126,809
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS duty AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
o o a 0 a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 0 0 a 0
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 ) 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 a 0 a f)



MONTANA

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 799,065 (Rank - 44th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 56
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $14,078 (Rank - 38th) in etn % Change
Unemployment (6/93): 5.9 % AFDC Cases 11 22.2%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: fAverage Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 67 24.2
AFDC 3.92 19th Participants
(A Month;
Food Stamps 6.30 9th (average Haniniy)
Medicald 64 NIA
Medicaid f2vme" 1.96 34th Eligibles
tAnnval)
Federal Share: AFDC 65% Medicaid 71.7%
WELFARE STATE INISTE OME AREAS; COUNTY ADMINISTERED FOR OTHERS
ADMINISTRATION Number of loca! welfare offices: 56 offices 12 offices are State administered

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA 44 offices are County administered

State Capitol: Helena
Welfare Agency: Montana Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services
Family Assistance Division

IEVS Policy Contact: William B. Anderson
FAD/Management Analyst
P.O. Box 4210
111Sanders
Helena, MT 59601 Ph#: 406/444-4097

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: The Economic Assistance Management System (TEAMS).

MENT AND This system, transferred from Hawaii, integrates the
ELIGIBILITY AFDC, Medicaid and FS programs.
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: Marilyn Carlin

TEAMS Project Director

Ph#: 406/444-0012

System was FAMIS certified on November 1, 1991.

PLANNED Information is not available.
WELFARE
SYSTEMS

CHANGES



KENTUCKY

IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted | Done? When __|Done? _—* When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Daily Yes Daily * Electronic (S & V)
Ul Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
1RS Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V}
SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
BEER Yes Monthly Yes Monthty Electronic (S & V)
S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.
*Applications and recertifications are matched against the file on a daily basis.
The data is loaded monthly and matched against all active recipients. |

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER

Batch Batch | Batch Batch Batch Batch

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
OnLine ACCESS at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
IEVS DATA historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
matching files between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's

computer.
State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage ul IRS SSA SS! | BEER
Do Workers Have Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
How Many Offices? All All All All All All

KY-2


pore

KENTUCKY

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

1991 SULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 a 0 0 a 0
4992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
wo 240,853 0 i 324,800 373,423
4992 JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
[a] ri] ra [i] [ra]
4993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
NA ft A] Ww [vay W NA
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 0 a [ual @ 9 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a a 0 (246,956 0 a
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER-] OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 w 0 i 0 [)
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 a e 224,111 0 e
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 0 > 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
G a Q 0 0 0
RESPONSES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

KY-6



The mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452,
as amended, is to protect the integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services’
(HHS) programs as well as the health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs.
This statutory mission is carried out through a nationwide network of audits, investigations,
and inspections conducted by three OIG operating components: the Office of Audit Services,
the Office of Investigations, and the Office of Evaluation and Inspections. The OIG also
informs the Secretary of HHS of program and management problems and recommends
courses to correct them.

OFFICE OF AUDIT SERVICES

The OIG’s Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides all auditing services for HHS, either by
conducting audits with its own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others.
Audits examine the performance of HHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in
carrying out their respective responsibilities and are intended to provide independent
assessments of HHS programs and operations in order to reduce waste, abuse, and
mismanagement and to promote economy and efficiency throughout the Department.

OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS

The OIG’s Office of Investigations (OJ) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative
investigations of allegations of wrongdoing in HHS programs or to HHS beneficiaries and of
unjust enrichment by providers. The investigative efforts of OI lead to criminal convictions,
administrative sanctions, or civil money penalties. The OJ also oversees State Medicaid
fraud control units which investigate and prosecute fraud and patient abuse in the Medicaid
program.

OFFICE OF EVALUATION AND INSPECTIONS

The OIG’s Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts short-term management and
program evaluations (called inspections) that focus on issues of concern to the Department,
the Congress, and the public. The findings and recommendations contained in these
inspection reports generate rapid, accurate, and up-to-date information on the efficiency,
vulnerability, and effectiveness of departmental programs. This report was prepared in the
Dallas regional office under the direction of Ralph Tunnell, Regional Inspector General, and
Chester Slaughter, Deputy Regional Inspector General. Project staff include (names listed
alphabetically and by region):

DALLAS REGION HEADQUARTERS
Leah K. Bostick Alan Levine
Kevin Golladay

Sarah Taylor

For further information contact: Kevin Golladay at 214/767-3310 or 1/800/848-8960.


TEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results ta Workers
State Wage | Yes Monthly | Yes Monthly | Electronic (S$ & V)

Ul Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S$ & V)

IRS Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)

SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy

SSI Benefits | Yes Weekly Yes Weekly Electronic (S & V)

BEER Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic {S & V}

5S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on

worker's screen.

Method(s) of Matching

Online Online

State
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssl BEER
Batch Batch | Batch Batch Batch Batch

ONLINE ACCESS
TO 1EVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online or
on hardcopy at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was
a prior client, historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be

available.

Workers are not required by policy to access available oniine information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's

computer.

Do Workers Have
Online Access?

How Many Offices?

State Historical | Histerieal | Historical | Histarical
Wage | UI IRS | SSA | Sst | BEER
Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Ail All All All All All

KS-2



DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 1,108,229 (Rank - 41st) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 4
, t
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $18,472 (Rank - 13th) in thousands hyeNe
Unemployment (6/93): 5.1 % AFDC Gases 17.3 24.5%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: taverage Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 96 20.1%
AFDC 2.72 8th Participants
d St 4.06 Ist tAverage Monthly)
Food a mem Medicaid a1 NIA
Medicaid fevres, 0.57 3rd Eligibles
Federat Share: AFDC 52.6% Medicaid 52.6%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 44 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 407

State Capitol: Honolulu

Welfare Agency: Department of Human Services
Family and Adult Services Division

Pat Murakami

Income Maintenance Program Dev. Administrator
810 Richards St., Suite 500

Honolulu, Hl 96813 = Ph#: 808/586-5733

IEVS Policy Contact:

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Hawaii Automated Welfare Information System (HAWI).

MENT AND The AFDC and FS portions of the system were transferred from
ELIGIBILITY Arizona. AFDC, Medicaid, and food stamps are integrated.
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: James Lum
Staff Manager :
Systems Development Staff | (SDSI)
Ph# 808/586-5152
System was FAMIS certified effective September 1, 1988.
PLANNED Hawaii is in the process of developing four different automated systems.
First, a JOBS system is under development with an estimated cost
WELFARE of $1.5 million to complete. Hawaii plans to have this system interface
SYSTEMS with both a child care system with projected costs of $300,000, and
CHANGES a combined food stamps/JOBS demonstration project system expected

to cost $200,000 to develop. The CSE system first phase development
will cost approximately $20 million. Contingent on certification of the first
phase, a second phase, costing approximately $5 million, has been
reviewed and approved, but not yet funded.



DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 3,287,116 (Rank - 27th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 8
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $24,683 (Rank - 1st) in thovents Chaney
Unemployment (6/93): 6.8 % AFDC Cases 56 48.5%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: tAverage Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 207 79.7%
AFDC 3.11 10th Participants
Food Stamps 10.07 35th M "ea nly
‘caid Pavment ledicald 272 NA
Medicaid (rr ace 2.48 42nd Eligibtes
Annual}
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid 50%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION | umber of local welfare offices: 14 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 695

State Capitol: Hartford

Welfare Agency: Connecticut Department of Social Services
Aduit Services

IEVS Policy Contact: Aevin Loveland
Director, Adult Services
25 Sigourney Street
Hartford, CT 06106  Ph#: 203/424-5370

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Eligibility Managment System (EMS).

MENT AND The AFDC, Medicaid, and the FS programs are integrated.
ELIGIBILITY IEVS System Contact: Tom Woods
SYSTEM Data Processing Senior Systems Analyst
Phi: 203/424-5463

System was FAMIS certified on May 1, 1990.
PLANNED Connecticut plans to implement an online interface between its

FAMIS system and its MMIS. An initial planning cost of about $1
WELFARE million was anticipated, but no estimates were provided for
SYSTEMS development costs.
CHANGES

CT-1



‘CALIFORNIA

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS ‘

AND BENEFITS State Wage Yes r
Unemployment *
i
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS Yes
SSA Benefits *
SSI Benefits Yes
BEER No

1
Conclusions are based on informal cost effectiveness studies. i

%* The UIB and Bendex matches are upfront matches which
prevent erroneous payments from occurring; thus, no 1
information is available on their cost effectiveness.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal! Data {

IRS MATCH :
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6193) NET: NA :
'
CcOsTS t
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other NA
personnel costs 1
- Computer costs NA if
- Costs associated with verification NA ra]
- Other NA
NA !
BENEFITS ul
- Recovered overpayments and debts NA
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved NA
- Other NA a
NA yy

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs NA

BENEFITS NA
NET: NA

CA-7


MISCELLANEOUS

Maine staff indicate that over the last four years the number of eligibility
workers has decreased slightly to the current 314. Typically, each worker
has a caseload of 325. {t is not known how many alerts each worker
averaged in 1992. However, as indicated previously, alerts are sent to
workers in hardcopy format. Upon receipt, workers review the received
information determining the necessary action and recording it directly

on the alert which is then filed in the client's casefolder. Below is an
example of an alert based on a State Wage match with the resultant
actions of the worker recorded directly on the alert.

FOLLOW UP RESPONSE TO
STATE WAGE ALERT

#28 CASE ACTION ALERT ese one CASE ACTION ALERT 200
LAST UOPALED SY TERMINALO/ ACTIORCUR  ON21APR93

HAVE ASSETS BEEN TOTALED @s) oO

YOUN CHILD 1s OVER 6 SOF
CLIENT
EHP I {028400 SUPREME SLIPPER MFG CO INC Lewiston ME 04240 -

CASE

OCT92-DEC92_ $2997.66 JUL92-SEP92 $1272.95 APR92~-JUNS2 $0.00 JAN92-MARO2 $0.00
CLIENT ra)
EMPLOY) ‘008026400 SUPREME SLIPPER KFG CO INC LEWISTON ME 04240
OcTe2-DECS2 $2210.87 JULS2-SEP92 $0.00 APR92-JUN92 $0.00 JANS2-MARS2 $0.00
CLIENT

CHECK THIS CLIENT FOR SCHOOL ATTENDANCE ‘ in a] ster
i SCNOOl - Lies Sere

Tar tsp! $B

Ginn Bre see :

Ar 1S TM wh3

During the 1992 annual assessment period, the State's greatest source
of AFDC payment error, based on quality control review, was earned income.

ME-8



GEORGIA

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: ined
| # of records submitted for matching Yes |
|_# of records which matched with external data Yes
| # of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes

# of alerts worked by eligibility workers No
‘_# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit : No
| Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts | No

# or alerts worked in 45 days : No

# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) No
| Staff time to complete follow up ' No

Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped

No

FLEXIBILITY AND

Georgia considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be reasonable; however,

FOLLOW UP state staff stated, "Follow up should be done at the next review instead of
45 days.”
Georgia uses an online Clearinghouse system to provide current information
to workers for UI, wages, and SSI information. This system is used at
review and at interim change to verify benefits and income. This system
substitutes for the required quarterly IEVS State Wage match.
Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
writing a narrative description of the action taken on the alert.
FOLLOW UP All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.
PRIORITIZATION
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Georgia presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit, and SS! data. Use of FTMS began in 1992. Tape
DATA WITH exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration
FEDERAL verification exchange, BEER, and submission of death records.
AGENCIES Georgia has not yet implemented use of the State Verification and

Exchange System.

During 1992, no records were submitted to SSA for verification using the
Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

GA-4



rome

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 3,665,228 (Rank - 24th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 15
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $15,802 (Rank - 29th) in tonnes echange
Unemployment (6/93): 6.5 % AFDC Cases 67 80%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: faverage Monthly]
Rank Food Stamp 476 75%
AFDC 7.81 47th Participants
Food Stamps 10.93 42nd Averane Moni)
nid Pavment Medicald NA NA
Medicaid poyren, 2.63 45th Eligibles
tAnauall
Federal Share: AFDC _ 65% Medicaid 72.6%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION

Number of local welfare offices: 84 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 1,349

State Capitol: Phoenix

Welfare Agency: Department of Economic Security
Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility

IEVS Policy Contact: Ben Dillion
Policy Specialist
FAA 960A
P.O. Box 6123
Phoenix, AZ 85005 Phi: 602/542-0354

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Arizona Technical Eligibility Computer System (AZTECS).

MENT AND The AZTECS system integrates the Food Stamp and AFDC
ELIGIBILITY programs. Medicaid is not integrated with AZTECS. This
SYSTEM system was transferred in part from Alaska.
IEVS System Contact: Cindy Walker
Jaterfaces Coordinator
Phi: 602/274-9818 ext, 2524
System was FAMIS certified on July 1, 1988.
PLANNED Although the FAMIS system (AZTECS) has been operational for a number of
years, Arizona expects to spend over $5 million for additional systems
WELFARE enhancements. The State also plans enhancements and upgrades to
SYSTEMS improve its current child support enforcement system. By 1995, Arizona
CHANGES plans to develop a new system, expected to cost about $8 million, to

support medical assistance eligibility determinations.

Staff report managment does not currently support development of a
paperless IEVS alert process.

AZ-1

Ld

\
i
.?



MONTANA

State Respondent Perceptions of 1EVS Cost Effectiveness

MATCH COSTS
AND BENEFITS

State Wage NO
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS NO
SSA Benefits YES
SSI Benefits YES
BEER NO

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH

Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: ($1,360,413) oss

cOsTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $39,000
personnel costs
- Computer costs $32,000
- Costs associated with verification $2,600,000
- Other $82,590
$2,753,590
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $896,281
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $496,896
- Other $0
$1,393,177

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $364,850

BENEFITS NA
NET: NA



MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database

Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

IEVS Matches Reviewed

Affect

State Wage

SSA Benefits

BEBE

SSI Benefits

BERBER

BE

No reports are generated tracking the above information
.

Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)

BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)

SEPTEMBER

4,615
5,832

MARCH

BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)

SEPTEMBER

9,469

MARCH

1,781
1,295

BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)

SEPTEMBER

5,333
3,786

MARCH

1,245
1,275

Records
Found To

Benefit

2 2
> >



sateen ——-

MISCELLANEOUS

Georgia presently uses an alternate source for the State wage quarterly
matches prescribed by IEVS regulations. Specifically, Georgia uses its
Clearinghouse. The Clearinghouse is an On-line Inquiry function of the
PARIS system (via the Main PARIS menu) for use by eligibility workers
and supervisors. The Clearinghouse is designed to facilitate efficiency
and accuracy in eligibility determination by increasing the amount of
information available at the point of the client interview.

The Clearinghouse may be accessed through the PC or existing PARIS
terminals. Available in the Clearinghouse is the following information:

The Clearinghouse

State Data Exchange
(SDX)

Current benefit and demographic
information on SSI recipients

Department of Labor
Wage files
(DOL)

Most recent five quarters employer name,
employer number, and amount of wages
earned.

Department of Labor
Employer Address
Files

Address of each employer.

Department of Labor
Unemployment
Compensation Benefits
File

Amount and dates of UCB payments
made for the most recent 13 months
and for the last 10 weeks.

Department of Labor
UCB Claimant Address
File

Address of each UCB recipient.

SSA Beneficiary and
Earnings Exchange
(BENDEX)

Current benefit and demographic
information on RSDI recipients who are,
or have been recipients of public
assistance.

SDX, Bendex, DOL Wage
Files, DOL UIB File

Current benefit and demographic
information on RSDI and SSI recipients.
Most recent 5 quarter wages earned.
Amount and dates UIB payments. Alf
displayed automatically during initial
application through online PARIS. (An
interactive initial interview system which
includes all applicants for assistance.)

GA-8



LOUISIANA

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for July 1992 to June 1993 AFDC and FS programs)
IEVS Matches Records | Records | Records { Records. | Records |Estimated
Conducted Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-

‘onducte for for Review Affect | ments

Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected

State Wage 420,949| 105,787| 100,617} 67,153 1,181 | $567,138
Ui NA| _177,576| 45,918] 43,583 386 | $359,933
IRS 1,188,434 * 31,748} * 28,194|* 25,089 |[* 522 [$132,780
SSA Benefits NA 9,110 3,179] 2,785 56 | $36,960
SSI Benefits NA| 152,990 27,319] 24,694 207 | $338,473
BEER NA NA Nal NA NA NA
“IRS numbers reflect only 30 percent of the records submitted

to IRS. The remaining 70 percent of results are not yet available.

Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)

BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993). (Accretions)

MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER

REGULAR 53,262 50,028 50.176 54,832 54,226 47,855
MIDMONTH | r) 0 0 0 a
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL

REGULAR 56,007 55,589 48,883 46.581 | = 58.437 41.562

MIDMONTH w Ww t) 0 | 0 0

BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) j

MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER

REGULAR 86,537 83,199 771,183 86,398 92,814 84,004
MIDMONTH 1,419 ual w 1,407 wo w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL,

REGULAR 199,489 109,850 111,438 113,634 132,846 136,329

MIDMONTH | 282,657 w 37,009 44,383 52,650 60,039

BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)

MAY SJUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER

REGULAR 51,592 45,570 val 49,805 49,291 45,381

MIDMONTH 1,060 4,786 Ww jy 4] 26,796 7,472
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL

REGULAR 59,767 68,217 69,633 74428 | 91,141 88,763

MIDMONTH | 83.563 w 31.255 37,738 44,399 51,568

LA-5

—y

a



MISCELLANEOUS

The following justification was provided by Louisiana for its
most recent targeting strategy provided to a Federal agency.

ting Justification

hoa. Information received from all SIEVS interfaces will be
! available for use at redetermination, application, or when
there is an interim change.

2. If information is received on a client that has been denied
or terminated, the information will not be pursued. If,
however, the client reapplies, the information will be
pursued at that time.

| 3. Information from the Internal Revenue Service has not been
found to be cost effective. Based on statistics relating to
. the nine month period July, 1992 through March, 1993, the
clearance of IRS data has resulted in negative cost
effectiveness. During this period, 19,932 IRS discrepancies
: were cleared. The total cost of follow up was $157,831.89.
Only 717 (3.60%) of these IRS discrepancies resulted in a :
1 reduction or termination of benefits. The benefit derived |
|

was $109,643.00. On an average, the costs exceeded the
benefit by $2.42 per individual IRS clearance. Refer to the
attached IRS Interface Cost/Benefit Analysis.

ae Information from the Bendex Wage (BEER) interface has not
been found to be cost effective. Based on the attached
i Bendex Wage Cost/Benefit Analysis, the cost of following up |
on Bendex Wage data exceeded the benefit by $10.42 per :
individual Bendex Wage clearance. Follow up has been
discontinued.

5. Wage data from Louisiana Department of Labor has been found
to have a greater impact on past benefits than on current
benefits. During the period August, 1992 through May, 1993,
follow up was completed on 62,055 LDOL wage discrepancies.
Only 2.81% of these resulted in a reduction or termination of :
current benefits. The LDOL wage targeting strategy will not ‘
have a detrimental effect. This information will be
available for use at the next redetermination. A separate
waiver request is being submitted to allow clearance of LDOL
wage information at the next redetermination if the
redetermination is scheduled within the next three months.

6. The targeting strategy for SSI and SSA benefits is to
identify when an individual begins receiving these benefits
and when there is a subsequent change in the benefit amount
which exceeds the amount of benefits budgeted in the
Louisiana Food Stamp Management Information System.

LA-8



IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

: # or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days)

Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following:

Included |
in Report!

_# of records submitted for matching

# of records which matched with external data
# of records resulting in alerts for workers
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers

# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit

Amount of savings determined from 1EVS alerts
# or alerts worked in 45 days

| Staff time to complete follow up
, Amount of IEVS identified sav

Ss actually recouped

FLEXIBILITY AND

State staff reported that regulations should allow States more flexi

bility

FOLLOW UP concerning IVES follow up timeframes.
Workers are not required to report the results of their review of 1EVS
information.
FOLLOW UP As they are the most productive, State Wage and UIB match discrepancies
PRIORITIZATION are given priority for follow up by workers.
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Maine presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA Benefit and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1992. Tape
ED exchange continues for matches with the Aiphadent, enumeration veri-
FEDERAL fication exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Maine has
AGENCIES not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 18,643 records were submitted to SSA for verification using

the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

ME-4


<
Z,
O
N
pd
<

Samples of IEVS reports for the State Wage and tRS matches.

AWOdaY LUFTV SAgI HOLVAW Sul

oo"ovo0G0 tumy Sur Twi0L

00"o00000 +

90" o09000 +

9000-00-000 «NsS 3svo

zerersso

'ssangay
'amyn
F3GA1 aounosaH

'ssauaay
Fane
tagAL apunosay

YO ,0NOIOOHOE 1OH80NGOHIOHIGHIO, CNN, BSD

AAI9~ XV HOS LHOUZH aMODNI O3NEVINN SUI

saanzv
AUtNngas 21M0NOI3 JO IWAmUVaIO YNOZIUY

AdOD LON 00 = WOLIVMYOAHT TwHLMAGTAWOD - ONINEVA

aveew

ooaoo000
00000000

Youd ey. onto

: smaisas

x
2
5
o

goooc00n tune as¥D

600 tavolisy?
000 13003 11S

ocsua sam ants
LYOd3Y LUFTV SAR) HOLWA 39VM aLVLs
ooc00s —tuy eben oven ‘SSN WS sons ww smisas
00'e00000 + #481 : 5 § sao gasonsne
uo 4 4 rae: ‘oooac00n00
"lata seg aaron anton aninn AO mUTRRR RR Skane

0000-00-000 :Hss asva

zesci7so

36 9900900000000 "900000000000000000  FANYH 9S¥

HAnD2~ = Non. vod

sauizy
Asiuna3s D1M0NO33 20 INamiuvasa YHOZIUY

eoooe000 tuMN Is¥

90.9 tavorssy
000 4009 TIS
orm Fon

MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

AZ-9


MARYLAND ~

IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers

State Wage | Yes Daily Yes {| Quarterly | Hardcopy

Ul Yes Daily Yes Monthly Hardcopy

Rs Yes Monthly Yes Annually Online

SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy

SSI Benefits | Yes Weekly Yes Weekly Hardcopy

BEER Yes Monthly | Yes Monthly Online
| Hardcopy = Printed centrally and sent by mail or delivery to local
| offices and distributed to workers.

Some electronic transmission of results are sent to counties.

Method(s) of Matching

State ‘

Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online | Online | Online Online

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
ONLINE ACCESS at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
TO IEVS DATA historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's

computer.
State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi
De Workers Have Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
How Many Offices? All All All All All All

MD-2


IEVS MATCHING

JEVS Matches | With Applicants Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Weekly Yes Varies Electronic (S) and print
Ul Yes Weekly Yes Varies Electronic (S) and print
TRS Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy
SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Varies Electronic {S) and print
SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Varies Electronic (S) and print
BEER Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy
S & Print = Sent to workers/local office electronically and then printed to give
to worker.
Method{s) of Matching
State
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

Only Ul information is available to the worker online at the time

of application.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Do Workers Have
Online Access?

How Many Offices?

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage | UI IRS | SSA | SSI | BEER
No Yes No No No No
Most

1D-2



MICHIGAN

MATCH State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

STATISTICS IEVS Matches | Records ‘Records » Records | Records | Records iEstimated
| Submitted ‘Matched Referred | Reviewed ‘Found To Overpay-

Conducted : for for Review Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit Detected

State Wage _ NA NA NANA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA

IRS NA NA NA NA NANA

SSA Benefits NA _ NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA

NA NA NA NA NA NA

Federal Database Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)

Matches BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)

, "MAY JUNE JULY | AUGUST Serer | OCTOBER
REGULAR «134,426 0 228,778 148,027 “4 80,790
MIDMONTH 0 0 { w 0 0 124,588

[NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL ‘
REGULAR 0 A 101,485 157,147 311,524 o | 0
MIDMONTH w | 0 0 95,566 | 130,386
l H
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
may | dune [aly] AususT |sepTempen | ocToBE
REGULAR 170,332 | 15,385 192,018 172,225 19,632 |
MIDMONTH 2,389 | Hv a | w 1,997 [ta | |
| NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY  FEBR MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 46,539 i 146,426 210,673 311,006 70,596 84,531
MIDMONTH 495,304 i na | 43,872 55,160 187,395 202,969
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) .
[may | JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER ||:
REGULAR 139,044 4,669 [ha | 105,603 4.396 73,030 Ry
MIDMONTH 1863 | 4,338 fun] iual a | 419,829
“NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL il’
REGULAR 17,312 117,152 174,106 238,966 54,000 62,443 s
MIDMONTH 299,252 | 38,266 48,787 141,303 166,092
i

MYOS


MONTANA

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

i Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: jin Hepoct
# of records submitted for matching i No

i_# of records which matched with external data | No}
# of records resulting in alerts for workers "No {
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers . No

:_# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit | No

{Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts 1 No

!_# or alerts worked in 45 days : No

i # or alerts past due {not worked in 45 days} i No :

| Staff time to complete follow up "No |

__ Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Montana staff consider the 80 percent follow up rulte to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, "States should have the option of targeting and following
up based on a number of factors such as error rates, staffing levels, etc.”

Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement would be at the expense of more important activities of
workers, if the State complied with regulations and completed 80
percent of follow up in 45 days.

For calendar year 1993, staff report less than 80 percent of lEVS match
results were followed up on (55 percent follow up) in 45 days. This
State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow up
timeframe for the Food Stamp Program. The AFDC cannot waive this
requirement except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are not required to specify how they resolve information
received from an IEVS match {e.g., have to enter in the computer
the results of follow up by using codes based on the action taken).

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Montana presently uses
SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or send SSA
Benefit, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1994. Tape exchange
continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration verification
exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Montana has not yet
implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 44,975 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.



State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness 1
MATCH COSTS

AND BENEFITS

IRS MATCH

cosTs

BENEFITS

cOsTS

BENEFITS
NET:

State Wage YES
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS NO
SSA Benefits YES
SSI Benefits YES
BEER NO

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: ($325,818) Loss

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $7,624
personnel costs

- Computer costs $4,571
- Costs associated with verification $748,237
- Other $535,654
$1,296,086

- Recovered overpayments and debts $66,268
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $904,000
- Other $0
$970,268

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

$914,742

$4,065,180

$3,150,438

IN-7

|
4



MARYLAND

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

' Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following:

_.# of records submitted for matching

... # of records which matched ternal data _
# of records resulting in alerts for workers

: # of alerts worked by eligibility workers

‘Tincluded
In Report]

i

; # of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit i Yes |
Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts ; Yes }

“¢ or alerts worked in 45 days Yes 3:

_# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) . 2. Yes!
Staff time to complete follow up No

| Amount of 1EVS identified savings actually | No

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Maryland considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, "Regulations should allow us to select matches which are
successful." .

Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are not at the expense of more important activities of workers.

Over the last two years, staff estimate that less than 80 percent of [EVS
match results were followed up on (only 20 percent follow up) in 45 days.
This State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day

foliow up timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot
waive this requirement except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

IEVS matches are prioritized for follow up based on the source
and program area.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Maryland presently
uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1993. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration
verification exchange, BEER and submission of death records. Maryland

has not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 231,040 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

MD-4



IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Exclusion (1 Yes a Client must have participated
Discrepancy i in any one of the 3 months of
and Tolerance im the quarter being matched.
same cowin $750.

Ul Exclusion te Yes ‘© Client must have participated
Discrepancy in the month the UCB was
and Tolerance m received.
same con $35.

IRS Discrepancy and Yes $500 for interest income only;

Tolerance same

calculation used to determine
the amount in the interest
bearing account - the resultant
calculation is that used against
the discrepancy/tolerance level.

(SDX)

SSA Benefits Discrepancy and Yes $1.
({Bendex) Tolerance same
SSI Benefits Discrepancy and Yes $1.

Tolerance same

BEER

State does not
match for AFDC

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs differ from that of the AFDC
program, The following reflect the differences:
Food Stamp Program IRS -

Medicaid Program

Bendex -

SDX -

BEER -

BEER -

«wn $2000 for interest income only

«agriculture subsidies, discharge of indebtedness,
debt outstanding, and debt satisfied .

«a Client must have participated in month the income
was received

(0 difference must be greater than the current SMIB
premium

e Client must have participated in the month the
income was received

to) difference must be greater than the current SMIB
premium

«a Client must be active; employer must not be
reporting to State

«difference must be greater than $4800 annually
Same as Food Stamp program and reported to Third
Party Resource Unit for action

0-3

uy
|


AND BENEFITS

State Respondent Perceptions of !EVS Cost Effectiveness

MATCH COSTS

IRS MATCH

cosTs

BENEFITS

COSTS

BENEFITS
NET:

State Wage Yes
Unemployment Yes
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS DK
SSA _ Benefits DK
SSI Benefits OK
BEER DK

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

Pssst ratinseen Ax magelred For satan With Feel Dat

Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: $74,096

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $50,597
personnel costs

- Computer costs $1,030
- Costs associated with verification $6,616
- Other $957
$74,096

- Recovered overpayments and debts $63,473
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $73,131
- Other $311
$136,915

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

$27,649
(For matches done during calendar year 1990)

NA

HI-7

J

a


DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 666,168 (Rank - 46th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 3
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $18,483 (Rank - 12th) not 2 chang
Unemployment (6/93): 4.5 % AFDC Gases 11 50.7%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: taverage Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 54 84.6%
AFDC 6.22 39th Participants
ive ith
Food Stamps 8.28 25th Medieaid
icaid Payment edical 51 NIA
Medicaid yrrren, 0.64 4th Eligibles
“Anaual}
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid 50%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION

Number of local welfare offices: 13 (25 Pool Units in 13 locations)

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA

State Capitol: Dover

Welfare Agency: Department of Health and Social Services
Division of Social Services

IEVS Policy Contact: William Garfinkel

Director

Audit and Recovery Management Services

P.O. Box 986 (1901 North Dupont Highway)

CT Building DHHS Campus

New Castle, DE 19720 Phit: 302/577-4564

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Delaware Client Information Systems (DCIS).

MENT AND The system integrates the AFDC and FS program systems.
ELIGIBILITY
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: Marvin Thomas
Management Analyst
Phi: 302/577-4956
System was FAMIS certified on April 17, 1989.
PLANNED Recently completed a requirements analysis to determine if FAMIS enhance-
ments are needed. In addition, enhancements are being made to the CSE
WELFARE system to meet Federal guidelines. This project was estimated to cost
SYSTEMS $1.7 mili °
-7 million,
CHANGES

DE-1

acne!


IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

1EVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Exclusion i Yes «Client actually participated at
Discrepancy 1 least one month of quarter time
Tolerance m period to which match pertains,
Other and case issued benefits at
least one month of quarter time
Period to which match pertains,
and (1) and io) earnings > 20%
per client, and m total earnings
per SSN per client GE$3600.
Ul Change of benefit Yes Client active in paramenter
information month,
Exclusion No dollar comparison.(2)
Other
IRS Exclusion © Yes «8 Case issued benefits at least
Tolerance m one month of annual time
Other period to which match pertains,
and (1} and (3), and im ali
reported amounts total
$10,000 for winnings or $50
for all other income types.
SSA Benefits Exclusion to Yes te See (4) and i income
(Bendex) Change of benefit compared to FAA computer
information income is discrepant.
Discrepancy « New client's demographic data
Other in FAA computer system does
hot match that of SSA.
SSI! Benefits Exclusion ia Yes 1 See (4) and (0) SSI income
{SDX) Change of benefit compared to FAA computer
information system is discrepant.
Discrepancy (0)
Other
BEER Exclusion Yes Case issued benefits at least
Disregard certain one month of annual time
information period to which match pertains,
Unique and (1) and (3), and employer
information listed is not listed in the State
Other Ul system.

Additional information concerning Arizona's targeting methods is located in the
Section labeled “Miscellaneous.”

AZ-3

}
i
,


FLORIDA

ia
q
IEVS TARGETING IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS a
METHODS STRATEGY ACTIVE .
(AFDC Program)
State Wage Discrepancy Yes GE$75 per quarter. i
UL No targeting Yes All information is forwarded; +
worker will follow up if the >
client is active at the time the 4
information is received.
n
IRS Tolerance Yes Tolerances vary by type of : |
unearned income (1). .
SSA Benefits No targeting Yes All information is forwarded; *
(Bendex) worker will follow up if the 1
client is active at the time the
information is received. .
SS! Benefits No targeting Yes All information is forwarded; ‘
(SDX) worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the Ty
information is received. |
BEER Tolerance Yes 1£$100.

(1) a. For amounts GE$1000, follow up gross winnings, additional winnings, prizes and id
awards, per unit retain allocations, cash liquidation distribution, non-case liquidation 7
distribution, stocks and bonds, and fair market value.

b. For amounts GE$60, follow up interest and savings bonds.

c. For amounts GeE$50, foliow up distribution shares, dividends, capital gains, non- aj
taxable distributions, interest forfeiture, rents, royalties, substitute payments, IRA
or SEP distributions, other pensions, and other taxable income. 1y
Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC il
program. .

FL-3


, DATA AVAILABLE IN THE PROFILES (Continued)

TEVS TARGETING TOLERANCE (7)
METHODS A tolerance amount is the amount in the external database above which will trigger a
(continued) follow up of the information. Amounts below the specified tolerance are not submitted
Sor follow up.

EXCLUSION (£)

An exclusion refers to disregarding certain types of information from follow up. Exclusions
can be certain types of information from the external data source (e.g., some types of
unearned income) or certain clients information based on such characteristics as age,
assistance category, etc.

{EVS MONITORING Describes what routine reporting at the State level exists concerning IEVS.
AND TRACKING

FLEXIBILITY AND States were asked in our survey whether or not they believed present IEVS
FOLLOW UP regulations are reasonable regarding the required 80 percent follow up
in 45 days. Also, States were asked to provide statistics or opinions (if no data
available) about whether the State was meeting 80 percent follow up.

FOLLOW UP States were asked if IEVS matches are prioritized for follow up. For example,
PRIORITIZATION one match (e.g., IRS) might be given a higher priority than another (e.g., BEER).

_ METHOD OF This section describes how States exchange information with SSA and IRS. Of
EXCHANGING particular interest is the degree to which States are using SSA's new File Transfer
DATA WITH Management System for electronic data exchange versus the older tape exchange.
FEDERAL
AGENCIES
MATCH Listed are any available statistics States were able to compile pertaining to IEVS
STATISTICS matching during 1992. Also, provided are statistics compiled by the Federal agencies

responsible for supplying IRS, SSA benefit and wage information, and SSN verification.

MATCH COSTS This section includes State perceptions of IEVS cost effectiveness. Responses are based
AND BENEFITS on interviews with State staff responsible for IEVS matching. Also included are cost and
benefit estimations States provided SSA and IRS as required by the Computer Matching
and Privacy Protection Act of 1988. Estimates pertain to the IRS and the BENDEX matches.

MISCELLANEOUS This section provides a place for further clarification of previously provided
information, may include any codes used by States to resolve IEVS alerts,
samples of actual IEVS reports or alerts used, etc.





MISCELLANEOUS

Delaware staff reported that the number of eligibility workers has
remained constant over the last four years. The typical caseload
of a worker who deals with ongoing cases is 294.

For the 1992 annual assessment period, the State's greatest source
of AFDC payment error, based on Quality Control (QC) review, was
due to earned income errors (either the client didn’t report or the
agency did not act on reported changes).

Over the past 12 months, staff report that the State Wage match
and the BENDEX (SSA benefit) match both experience data reliability
and accuracy problems. For the wage match, the wages per quarter,
sometimes, do not match the current quarter report. For the BENDEX
match, wrong dollar amounts are sometimes present.

When applicants apply, all records are submitted for matching with
the match sources regardless of whether the Social Security Number
of the person submitted has been verified. However, for ongoing
matching, only recipients with valid SSNs are submitted.

DE-8





TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION ........ 0... ce eee 1

STATE PROFILES ...........0 0.00.00. 02 ceceeeee 5
Alabama... 2.2.1... eee eee AL-1
Alaska 22... ee eee AK-1
Arizona 2.0... ee eee AZ-1
Arkansas .. 1.1... 2. ee AR-1
California... 2... ee CA-1
Colorado... 22... eee CO-1
Connecticut... 2.2... eee CT-1
Delaware .... 0.2.2. 2 eee DE-1
District of Columbia... 2... ee ee DC-1
Florida 2... 2 ee eee eee FL-1
Georgia... 1. ee eee eee GA-1
Hawaii... 2... eee HI-1
Idaho... 1... eee ID-1
MMinois 2... ee eee IL-1
Indiana ©... eee IN-1
Towa 2.2... eee TA-1
Kansas... eee KS-1
Kentucky ..... 2.20... 0.000000 20 2c eee KY-1
Louisiana ... 2.2.2.2 ee LA-1
Maine .... 2... ee ME-1
Maryland .... 2... 2... eee MD-1
Massachusetts .. 2... ee eee MA-1
Michigan .....20 0.2020... eee MI-1
Minnesota... 2... 2... ee MN-1
Mississippi... . 2... eee MS-1
Missouri... 2.2... 2. ee Dee eee MO-1

Montana... 1... ne MT-1


MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 31,278 0 0 91,531 a 25,950
4992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
fu] a t) 24,493 a 25,199
4992 JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 o 0 101,442 0 30,310
1993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
Ww i f] 28,883 a 29,888
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AuGusT [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION! = 9.397 4,992 w 5,698 8,782 6,090
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
7,552 5.473 6.575 42,370 6.838 5.784
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER] OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
6,740 4,094 w 4,588 6.461 4,843
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
5,423 3.940 4,688 5,124 4,923 4,291
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 a a fy fl fl
RESPONSES | JULY AuGUsT |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 a 0 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

i)

0



TRA ROS

DELAWARE —

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)
1991 {  JULy AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
! 0 10,388 a 4214 | 7,550 0
4992 | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH | APRIL ! MAY JUNE
! 23,025 6839 | 8: (7,687 17,763
4992 i JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
; 0 9,001 7,718 i 7,380 i 0 12,731
4993 j JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
! 10,138 1759 | 0005 0 13,012
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR | JULY AuGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION; — 7,049 7,358 [ua] 7a | 7,737 7,450
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL | = MAY JUNE
1 7708 7,958 7885 | 8397 | 7,806 7,635
VERIFIED | JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OcToBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
: 6,643 6,972 [way : 7474 | (7,348 7,085
i JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH Aprit. | MAY SUNE
i 7ase | 782 7252 | 7858) 7,186 7,246
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS | JULY AUGUST. [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
! 0 0 0 . 0 , 0
[ sanuany | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL | MAY JUNE
i 0 0 o o | 6 0
RESPONSES | JULY Ausust [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
H 0 0 0 : a : 0 0
i JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a a a ! ti) H Q 0

DE-6



MATCH COSTS
AND BENEFITS

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness

State Wage YES)
Unemployment YES
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS YES
SSA Benefits YES
SSI Benefits YES
BEER YES

Conclusions are based on study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET:

COSTS

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs

- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other

BENEFITS

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $45,000

BENEFITS $900,000
NET: $855,000

$763,500

$350,000

$60,000
$90,000
$80,000

$580,000
NA
$1,303,500
$40,000

$1,343,500

MA-7


IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Daily Yes Quarterly | Ontine/Hardcopy
ul Yes Daily Yes Monthly Online/Hardcopy
IRS Yes Monthly Yes Annually Hardcopy
SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
SS! Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
BEER Yes Monthly Yes Annually Hardcopy
S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.
Method(s) of Matching

State Tg,

Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER

Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch

Online Online Online Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's

computer.

Do Workers Have

Online Access?

How Many Offices? All

State Historical | Historicel Historical
Wage Ul SSA SSi | BEER
Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
All Alt All

HI-2



DEMOGRAPHICS
AND PROGRAM

Population: 12,937,926 (Rank - 4th)
Number of counties: 67

1992 Welfare Population

STATISTICS Per Capita income: $17,647 (Rank - 16th) a te #6 Change
Unemployment (6/93): 7.6 % AFDC Cases 234 © 92.6%
4990 Program/Payment Error Rates: faverage Monthly]
Rank Food Stamp 1,431 109.4%
AFDC 9.72 Sist Participants
rage Monthly}
Food Stamps 9.66 32nd me
‘cad Payment Medicaid 1,408 102.4%
Medicaid permet 2.56 43rd Eligibies
(Annwall
Federal Share: AFDC _ 50% Medicaid 54.7%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 148 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 3,934

State Capitol: Tallahassee

Welfare Agency: Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
Economic Services Program Office

1EVS Policy Contact: Patricia Bailey
Sr. Human Services Program Specialist
1317 Winewood Blvd.
Building 6, Room 447
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0700 Phit: 904/487-4387

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Florida On-line Integrated Data Access System (FLORIDA).
The AFDC, FS, and Medicaid programs are

MENT AND integrated into this system.
ELIGIBILITY 1EVS System Contact: Marie Harder
SYSTEM Management Review Specialist
1317 Winewood Blvd.
Building B, Room 432
Tallahassee, Fl 32399-0700 Phi: 904/488-2572
System underwent FAMIS certification in 1994.
FAMIS is operational, but development activities continue through fiscal
PLANNED
year 1995, at an estimated remaining cost of $13.5 million, and the
WELFARE system's mainframe will be upgraded within the next 2-3 years ata
SYSTEMS projected cost of $5.6 million. In addition, Florida has been conducting
CHANGES a feasibility study to assess potential alternative architectures to

support FAMIS growth. Although no estimates were provided,
additional FAMIS development costs could be significant in the 1995
and 1996 period.



AND BENEFITS

Is Match Cost Effective?

State Wage “YES
Unemployment YES
IRS DK
SSA Benefits NO
SSI Benefits YES
BEER NO

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: ($145,866)
COSTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $167,492
personnel costs

- Computer costs $3,499
- Costs associated with verification NA
- Other $40,859
$211,850

BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $o
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $65,984
- Other $0
$65,984

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

cosTs NA
BENEFITS NA
NET: NA

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

Loss

MD-7

wz

m



E

TS

IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches
Conducted

With Applicants

With Recipients

Method of Sending

Done? ‘When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage Yes Weekly Yes Quarterly [Hardcopy
Ul Yes Weekly Yes Monthly | Hardcopy
RS No | [_Yes Annually Hardcopy
SSA Benefits | No | Yes Biweekly | Hardcopy
SS! Benefits | No Yes Biweekly Hardcopy
BEER No Yes Annually _| Hardcopy

Hardcopy = Printed centrally and sent by mail or delivery to local
offices and distributed to workers.

Method(s} of Matching

State
Wage

Ul

IRS

SSA

ssl BEER

Batch

Batch | Batch

Batch

Batch Batch

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

UI, SSA benefit, and SSI information are available to the worker online
at the time of application or review. Workers are required by policy to
access available online information when doing case reviews.

Online access to the UI database is achieved through an electronic
link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's computer.

Do Workers Have
Online Access?

How. Many Offices? |__.__.

State Historical Historical
Wage Ur IRS SSA ssi BEER
No Yes No Yes Yes No

_|..-All

All _ All}

MA-2



COLORADO

i
MATCH State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992 :
STATISTICS IEVS Matches Records | Records | Records |- Records | Records |Estimated|| °
t Submitted ; Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay- a
onducted for for Review Affect ments
Matching {Alerts} Benefit | Detected "
State Wage 2,429,022 | 2,360,595] ) \ \ \ il
ul 2,429,022 | 2,360,595] J
IRS 1,113,374 | 1,005,215] { 1
SSA Benefits 746,759 | 1,250,962 f\ \
SSi Benefits 2,429,022 | 2,360,595 J \ \ iY \ ‘
BEER NA naj J \ \ \ Ty nm
Ww v a wv ‘y
130,996 99,479 254 = $119,717]] , j
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS}
Federal Database i
Matches BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
'
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR a 0 88,405 fy 0 0
MIDMONTH | 31,446 28,076 37,898 49,371 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 65,941 43,197 55,110 60,180 0 31,733
MIDMONTH Ww 0 46.561 f) 0 4
a
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) .
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER ]
REGULAR _ 1074 4,405 111,014 4,687 6,489 41s al
MIDMONTH 60,887 ual w 69,689 w w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL !
REGULAR 73,681 67,980 99,509 rosss1 | 13,788 78,630 3
MIDMONTH 84,000 Ww 8.288 85,503 ! 11,233 12,809 .
i 1
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 1,218 953 w 1.024 761 596 ‘
mipmonth | — 36,620 845 w ua] 5,204 798
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 46,061 55,085 65,540 73,381 | 9.432 42,182
MIDMONTH | 73,771 w 6,828 59.488 | (9,658 11,089

co-5


COLORADO

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 3,294,394 (Rank - 26th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 63
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $17,553 (Rank - 18th) in Fount no 708
Unemployment (6/93): 6.0 % AFDG Cases 42 25.9%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (Average Monthiy)
Rank Food Stamp 264 27.8%
AFDC 2.68 7th Participants
Food Stamps 6.28 8th versgt Moni
Medicaid 223 NWA
Medicaid fevmer’ 2.47 39th Eligibles
Ganwall
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid 54.8%
WELFARE COUNTY ADMINISTERED AND ST, SUPERVISED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local wetfare offices: 63 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 688 (FTEs) 50m counties have more than

fends one office per county. There are
State Capitol: Denver . 80 FS offices but only 63 counties.
Welfare Agency: Colorado Department of Social Services

Office of Self Sufficiency

IEVS Policy Contact: Don Bishop
Assistant Manager
Office of Self Sufficiency
1575 Sherman St.
Denver, Colorado 80203-1714 Phi#t: 303/866-3182

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Client Oriented Information Network (COIN).

MENT AND This system integrates AFDC and Medicaid; however, the
ELIGIBILITY Food Stamp program relies on its own system called the
Colorado Automated Food Stamp System (CAFSS}.
SYSTEM CAFSS was transferred from New Mexico.
IEVS System Contact: Same as Above
System was FAMIS certified on December 1, 1986.
PLANNED Colorado hopes to replace its FAMIS system with a new system that would
WELFARE support AFDC, Medicaid eligibility, and food stamps. The new system's
projected cost is $22 million. Minor enhancements to the State's current
SYSTEMS system were projected to cost $100,000.
CHANGES

co-1


AND BENEFITS

tate Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness .
MATCH COSTS

State Wage Yes
Unemployment Yes
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS No
SSA Benefits Yes
SSI Benefits Yes
BEER No

Conclusions are based on experience, not formal study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH (uly 1, 1990 to June 30, 1991)

Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: ($207,161) voss
cOsTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $265,880
personnel costs
- Computer costs $10,871
- Costs associated with verification $3,709
- Other $1,160
$379,620
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $103,707
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $62,723
- Other $6,029
$172,459

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

COSTS $366,739 (January 1991 to December 1991)
Does not include Computer costs of
BENEFITS $106,538 $397,871 which are also attributable
———_ to the SDX exchange.
NET: ($260,201)

‘}
!

a
id

see


IEVS MATCHING

jIEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results ta Workers
State Wage | Yes [Twice Weekly) Yes | Quarterly {Hardcopy *

ful | Yes !Twice Weekly] Yes | Monthly [Hardcopy *

! IRS {No | E Yes ! Annually Hardcopy *

{SSA Benefits | Yes !Twice Weekly: Yes | Monthly Hardcopy *

i SSI Benefits | Yes iTwice Weely | Yes | Twice Weekly Electronic (S&V)
BEER ‘No | i Yes Monthly iHardcopy

1 S& V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.

* Applicant match information is transmitted electronically to the county office
where it is printed for the worker.

The IEVS targets out duplicate information during the matches, only

considering information unique from the match source.

for further discussion of matching).

Method(s) of Matching

(See Miscellaneous

T
|
!
| Batch
|
i
1

State ! }
Wage Ul i IRS SSA SsI i BEER
Batch | Batch | Batch Batch = Batch

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

Workers are not required by State policy to access available online
information at application or redetermination unless hard copy
reports are not received within 3-5 days of application/redetermination.

Workers automatically receive match information printouts. However,
all IEVS applicant data is available on-line for 60 days.

Do Workers Have
Online Access?

How Many Offices?

State Historical | : Historical
Wage Ul IRS | SSA | SSI | BEER
No No No ! Yes Yes No
All All

CA-2



CALIFORNIA

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

1991 JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
a 0 0 0 i 0 0
1992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
[vay 0 0 f] 0 2,881,002
1992 JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 9 8
4993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
Hl NA Q a 0 3,334,021 o
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION; 763.860 0 w 0 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 0 0 875,297 9
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
io 0 _o 0 f)
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 a 0 | 653,181 0
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS | JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
483,677 67,221 602,318 435,747 451,165 NA
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
483,219 456,589 564,139 NA 486,795 495,488
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
483,677 130,415 607,756 500.271 455,139 NA
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
487,486 460,803 569,538 Wa | 481,287 | s00,0%2

CA-6



DELAWARE

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

IEVS Matches Records | Records | Records | Records | Records | Estimated
Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed |Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review Affect ments
Matching {Alerts} Benefit | Detected
State Wage NA NA NA NA NA NA
ul NA NA NA NA NA NA
IRS NA NA NA NA NA NA
SSA Benefits NA NA NA NA NA NA
SSI Benefits NA NA NA NA NA NA
BEER NA NA NA] NA | NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 73,318 0 71,789 73,427 73,840 75,534
MIDMONTH 6.444 0 jual a | 0 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 76,546 76,993 76,750 77,826 79,581 f)
MIDMONTH w w 0 0 8 79,792
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) .
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 69,520 880 69,391 70,383 71,159 72,135
MIDMONTH 8,031 val 108 w ual
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER} JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 73,829 73,849 74,392 75,071 76,642 7,343
MIDMONTH 21,253 w 5,396 5,058 6,080 16,757
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 75,097 234 w 88,549 14,113 72,922
MIDMONTH 8,264 222 wm [ua] 38,718 4,745
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
RecuiaR =| 74,300 75,199 75,484 76.756 | 78,525 7,093
MIDMONTH | 14,698 w 6.088 | 6.502 6,884 79,451

DE-5



MATCH COSTS
AND BENEFITS

State Respo t Perceptions of JEVS Cost Effec

State Wage

Yes

Unemployment

Yes

Is Match Cost Effective? IRS

Yes

SSA Benefits

Yes

SSI Benefits

Yes

BEER

Yes

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

COSTS NA
BENEFITS NA
NET: NA

Conclusions are based on experience rather than study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches h Federal Data

$47,693

$12,000
$0
$4,147

$63,840

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 t 6/93) NET: $1,647,945
cosTs
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs
- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other
BENEFITS

$220,414
$1,485,371
$0

$1,705,785

1A-7



INDIANA

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

‘JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 504,577 0 53,624 o 48,868, 34,958
1992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
w 36.646 o 42,183 i} 58,857
1992 JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
[Ya] v4] wy | [8]
1993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
Lv na] [a] uA
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 156,448 0 ual 165,413 7,107 6,379
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
252,581 a 13,658 0 76,523 131,051
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER:| OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
99,967 0 [ea] 107.789 6.613 5,970
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH ‘APRIL MAY JUNE
195,341 0 12,882 0 71,888 123,055
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
Qa a a 0 | e 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL | __MAY JUNE
0 t) 0 0 0 a
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 0 t)
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE



NONINVIN

JEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending

Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Daily Yes Monthly Electronic (S) and print
ul Yes Daily Yes Weekly Electronic (S) and print
IRS Yes Monthly Yes Annually Electronic (S) and print
SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S) and print
SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S) and
BEER Yes Monthly Yes [| Annualiy* [Electronic (S) and print
S=Sent to worker electronically.

i * Received as new information is added during the year.

L

The IEVS does not target out duplicate information with successive matches.
Unlike many other States, COLAs for BENDEX and SDX are not automatically

updated in the clients’ records (using computer), but require follow up by
workers to confirm recieved information is accurate.

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage UL IRS

SSA ssl BEER

Batch Batch | Batch Batch Batch Batch

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

SSI information is available to the worker online at the time of application.
State Wage and Ui are available to the worker the next day since files are
matched overnight with the labor agency.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information at
application. For redeterminations/reviews workers receive matched
information automatically via hard copy reports called prompters.

Online access to the State Wage and U! database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's
computer.

Availabie
{Next Day Only)
State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssl BEER
Do Workers Have
Online Access? Yes Yes No No Yes No
How Many Offices? All All All

AL-2



MISCELLANEOUS

Over the last four years, Indiana staff report that the number of eligibility
workers has increased slightly to the current 2,500. Each eligibility
worker deals with approximately 350 ongoing cases. As the State

was not working iEVS through February 1993, and the new computer
system was not expected to be fully functional until 1994, there are

no IEVS statistics available. Further, examples of the new system's
screens and the codes used to resolve alerts are not available.

During the 1992 annual assessment period, Indiana's greatest source
of AFDC payment error based on quality control review was wages
and salaries.

IEVS Targeting Methods (Continued)

(1) Client active for part of time period to which match pertains.
(2) a. Multiple Social Security benefits received by a household member.
b. Duplicate assistance in another State.
c. An overpayment of Social Security benefits which results in current
benefits being reduced.
(3) a. Discrepancy in date of death or earned income.
b. Any additional source/amount of unearned income resulting in a
discrepancy of $5.
c. An underpayment of SSI benefits which results in current benefits
being increased.
d. An overpayment of SSI benefits which results in current benefits
being reduced.
e. Termination of SSI benefits while client still disabled.
ft. Client eligible for SSI, was once eligible for AFDC.

The system will not generate alerts for discrepant information if the
matched data is tess than or equal to the tolerance threshold. Workers
can dispose of previous alerts not worked for the same match when
new, contradicting information is received. (New alerts from the same
match source will only be generated if the previous alerts have been
worked/cleared. If a different discrepancy has been identified for the
same match source, a new alert will be generated; otherwise, duplicate
alerts are not sent or cleared.)

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as
that of the AFDC program.



‘CALIFORNIA

MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

STATE WAGE ABSTRACT

CONFIDENTIAL *****

REPORT: —RS-IEV410-ROO1
PROGRAM: IEV410

STATE OF CAUFORNIA - DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVI

DISTRICT: 999

COUNTY: 39 Z
‘SSN: 3-44-5555 g ‘SEGMENT 02

COUNTY.ID: 99-88-0123456-1-60

+ APPLICANT FILE ***

SEXM 008 03-27-9467

NORM PETERSON
CASE NAME VERA PETERSON APPLICATION DATE 10/07/92.

‘°* WAGE AND EMPLOYER INFO REPORTED BY EDD AS OF 10/08/92 **

WAGES BY QUARTER: TAL NY }E EMPLOYERS:
4,

FIRST PRIOR(OCT-DEC 97) $

[THIRD PRIORIAPR-JUNS1)__$

(a)

10/16/92
PAGE 3

NCES

INCOME AND ELIGIBILITY VERIFICATION SYSTEM ABSTRACT

Ew: 0909

7.790 SECOND PRIORWJUL-SEP 91) $ 7.625 {F
7.248 FOURTH PRIORWJAN-MAR 91) $6,980.

EARNINGS:
s

NEN FULLER @WRIEN PAINTS.
P.O BOX s087
SACRAMENTO , CA 958147

EMPLOYER BRANCH:
ACCOUNT NUMBER;00886092

EMPLOYEE NAME: N PETERSON
EMPLOYER NAME: GARY SLACK
ACCOUNT NUMBER: 87087

SUNSET PAINTING
1000 FAIR OAKS BLVD.
CARMICHAEL CA 95608

EMPLOYEE NAME: N PETERSON =A 1 PAINTING
EMPLOYER NAME: SLY FOXX PO 23456
ACCOUNT NUMBER: #807688 CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA 95610

EMPLOYEE NAME: N PETERSON
EMPLOYER NAME: T ROSS
ACCOUNT NUMBER: @565432

TOUCHE ROSS & COMPANY
2335 AMERICAN RIVER DRIVE
SACRAMENTO CA 95825

EMPLOYEE NAME: N PETERSON
EMPLOYER NAME: P LYBRAND
ACCOUNT NUMBER: 855478

COOPERS AND LYBRAND, CPA
PO BOX 55546
CARMICHAEL, CA 95608

Date abstract printed in the county. 8

2 SSN submitted by the county. EDD matched on this number.

3 Applicant information submitted by the county; includes name, sex. date of

birth, and application date.

4 Number of employers who submitted wage information to EDD in the current

‘quarter for the SSN provided by the county...

5 Wages reported for the current (process) quarter (Jan - Mar 1992) for that SSN.

6 Wages for four quarters prior to the process quarter.

Amount of current quarter earnings by SSN for each employer, listed with the
‘emplayee name. Up to five employers afe listed for the current quarter.

Employer(s} name and address.

CA-10





pooner

MARYLAND

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 4,781,468 (Rank - 19th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 24
STATISTICS Per Capita income: $21,013 (Rank - 6th) in mnt eee
Unemployment (6/93): 6.8 % AFDC Gases 81 27.8%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: ‘Average Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 356 44.1%
AFDC 7.34 45th Participants
Food Stamps 10.64 38th (arate ently)
a Medicaid 363 NA
Medicaid ferment, = 1.53 23rd Eligibles
tanaval!
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid 50%
WELFARE COUNTY ADMINISTERED AND STATE SUPERVISED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 51

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA

State Capitol: Annapolis

Welfare Agency: Maryland Department of Human Services
Income Maintenance Administration

IEVS Policy Contact: Beth Boyd
Director
Office of Policy Administration
311 W. Saratoga St.
Baltimore, MD 21201 —PH#: 410/333-0809

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Automated Income Maintenance System and Master Fil:

MENT AND (AMS and AMF). .
System integrates AFDC and food stamps, but not Medicaid.
ELIGIBILITY
SYSTEM lEVS System Contact: Joe Ulrich
Director
Data Processing
Office Information Management
Ph#: 410/333-0508
System is not FAMIS certified.
PLANNED AFAMIS, currently in the implementation phase, will support AFDC, food
WELFARE stamps, and Medicaid eligibility as well as JOBS. This project was estimated
to cost $39.5 million to complete and will replace an existing automated
SYSTEMS income maintenance and eligibility verification system.
CHANGES

MD-1



MINNESOTA

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 4,375,099 (Rank - 20th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 87
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $17,657 (Rank - 15th) ne % Change
Unemployment (6/93): 5.5 % AFDC Cases 65 20.3%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (Average Monthiy)
Rank Food Stamp 317 28.8%
AFDC 2.67 6th Participants
Food Stamps 9.67 33rd mane Bonny
‘cad Povment Medicaid 422 NIA
Medicaid poymem 1.15 14th Eligibles
fAnnval)
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid 54.4%
WELFARE COUNTY ADMINISTERED AND STATE SUPERVISED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 87 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 1,955
State Capitol: St. Paul
Welfare Agency: Minnesota Department of Human Services

{EVS Policy Contact: Mike Hofmeister
JEVS Coordinator
Quality Initiative Division
444 Lafayette Rd.
St. Paul, MN 55155-3845 Phi: 612/282-5439

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: MAXIS.

MENT AND This system was transferred from South Dakota and
ELIGIBILITY integrates AFDC, Medicaid, and food stamps.
SYSTEM lEVS System Contact: Jack Thueson
Systems Analyst
612/287-5413
System was FAMIS certified on November 16, 1992.
PLANNED Minnesota has been replacing its batch processing MMIS with a
system that has improved online capabilities.
WELFARE
SYSTEMS

CHANGES



MISSOURI

MISCELLANEOUS Missouri staff indicate that over the last four years the number of
eligibility workers has increased slightly to 1900. Typically, each
{] worker has a caseload of approximately 400 ongoing cases. It is not
i | known how many IEVS alerts workers averaged receiving in 1992.

During the 1992 annual assessment period, the State's greatest

! | source of AFDC payment error, based on quality control review,
LG was wages and salaries.

Statistics

Missouri staff report that IEVS statistics are present with implementation
‘ of the newly transferred FAMIS system. In the past, the automated
system could not generate statistics as it was not designed to do so.

r

es

tae

rane


LOUISIANA —

MATCH

STATISTICS IRS INPUT. (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY | AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 1,089,367 12,867 26,941 20,652 19,441 103,988

tage | 2amuany_| Fesnuany ["wanch ‘APRIL MAY JUNE
a 45,968 29,940 24,715 24,572 48,074
qog2 |suLY__| August _[sePremsen | ocTosen | NovemBen { DECEMBER
967,358 33.937 a 27,621 26.871 48,055

qogg | 2aMUARY_| FeBnuany [MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
w 24,586 21,399 20,942 22,556 882,450

ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)

INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | GCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 0 461.136 w 75,462 a 256,536
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
69,308 a 34,592 38,826 fT 59,472
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER-| OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 169,688 [ra] 32,977 0 128,897
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
34,197 a 30,225 31,670 o 50,388

WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS | JULY | AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER

a n . 0 0 - oO
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a 0 a 0 0 o
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 ti) .) a o o
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH ‘APRIL MAY JUNE
0 fy a oh 0 0

LA-6


CONNECTICUT r
1

AND BENEFITS q
id

State Wage Yes

Unemployment Yes |
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS Yes |

SSA Benefits Yes

SSI Benefits Yes |

BEER No

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State Estimates As Req d For Matches With Federal Da y
a

IRS MATCH |
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: $606,350 .
y
COSTS }
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $591,749 .
personnel costs :
- Computer costs $21,252 \
- Costs associated with verification $o 7
- Other $11,794
$624,795
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $8,777 y
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $1,222,368 :
- Other $0 ai
$1,231,145 ny

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

COsTS NA
BENEFITS NA
NET: NA

CT-7


ARIZONA

IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | No Yes i Monthly Hardcopy

ul Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)

IRS No Yes Annually Hardcopy

SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)

SSi Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)

BEER No Yes Annually Hardcopy

S & V = Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.

Arizona recently participated in a targeting study sponsored by the Food
and Nutrition Service. Prior to participation in FNS‘s targeting study,
Arizona had discontinued its State wage quarterly tape match and was only
conducting online matches with the wage database. Additionally, although
the State was conducting matches with the BEER and IRS databases, no
match follow up was conducted by workers. Arizona perceived these
matches were not cost effective. However, since the FNS study results
were released to them, all recipient matches are being conducted and
followed up on. Staff report the system targets out duplicate information
during the match, only considering information unique from the match
source. Also, COLAs for the BENDEX and SDX are resolved automatically
without requiring worker follow up.

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER

Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online | Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's
computer.

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssl BEER
Do Workers Hi
Online Access? Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
How Many Offices? All All All All

AZ-2



CONNECTICUT

SE TEER PTI

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

| Records | Records | Records | Records { Records . Estimated
1EVS tche: m cords . c :
EVS Matches | Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review | Affect | ments
| Matching | (Alerts) | | Benetit | Detected
State Wage ! NA: NA! 251,040! 110,081 | 4,455 NA
UL H NA NA! 108,803! 88,720 i 3,118 i NA
IRS 528,476; 307,661' 142,723} 56,900 : 698 | NA
SSA Benefits | 607.844: 328,982; 149,690! NA i NA NA
SSi Benefits NA: NAj 137,017! NA: NA NA
BEER NA; NA! NA: NA NA NA
In addition to the above statistics, there are a number of alerts that resulted
in historical overpayments by either benefit reduction or ineligibility. These
alerts number 4,465, 503, and 481 for the State Wage, UI, and IRS matches,
respectively.

Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)

BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
Tr MAY JUNE Jury] AuGusT [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR ; 31,888 0 16,232 17,003 31,194 40,456
MIDMONTH 0 19,134 wm. 18,794 21,352 20,681
[| NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY [ FEBRUARY | MARCH ‘APRIL
REGULAR 61,734 421,073 33,833 109,139 | 113,965 101,707
momonth | BY 9 a, 0 22,545
i i
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
| may JUNE juty | august |sePTEmBER | OCTOBER
recuar | 25,921 4,405 aio | 25,375 | 41,514 29,567
MIDMONTH | 60,867 [wa] wm | i fia] w
{NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY . MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 79,070 | 355,619 65,698 88,127 94,693 89,758
MIDMONTH } 127,637 ' [ual 22,109 23,249 24,521 48,381
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 13,993 2.025 fa] 10,526 | 11,433 12,877
MIDMONTH 258 7,880 fwal ual 7,514 14,837
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCK APRIL
REGULAR 24,889 211,788 35,741 58,979 | 63,390 59,855
miomowta | 33.587 | OXY 14,376 15,240 16,281 17,265

CT-5


GANG'S

:
MATCH State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992 a
STATISTICS IEVS Matches Records | Records Records | Records | Records | Estimated 7
Conducted Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay- i

onducte: for for Review! Affect ments

Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected

State Wage 2,085,066 8,832 8,832 8,832 NA NA |
Ul 2,085,066| 54,211 64,211 | 54,211 NA NA .
IRS 140,836} 23,040 23,040 23,040 NA NA y

SSA Benefits 140,836| 36,471 36,471 | 36,477 NA NA
SSI Benefits NAl 99,492 | 99,492 | 99,492 NA NA ‘
BEER NA NA NA NA NA NA "

Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)

Federal Database .
Matches BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993)- (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER j
REGULAR 26,359 a 49,533 50,630 20,665 17,872 =
MIDMONTH 11,900 0 w tt) Q 0 .
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 1 18,462 21,403 27,412 17,531 20,053 19,019 .
MIDMONTH w wi 0 0 t) a 4
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) , .
MAY JUNE JULY ‘AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER 4
REGULAR 33,932 3,075 67,372 56.865 35,212 30,649 i
MIOMONTH 23,020 na . 761 ww
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL ‘1
REGULAR | 33,935 33,436 48,897 31,188 35,964 35,133 4
MIDMONTH | 54,602 wm 6,037 7,581 7,998 9,157 4
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-Apri! 1993) :
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER ;
REGULAR 3.188 409 w 47,221 19,143 16,376 .
MIDMONTH 2,238 396 Ww 10,485 1,237 ;
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL a
REGULAR 18,234 23,292 27,797 19,823 | 23,158 23,191
MIDMONTH 26.092 inal 4400 4946 | 5.798 6,704 4

KS-5


MISCELLANEOUS IEVS ACTION CODES

The following IEVS Action Codes are used to take action on State Wage,
UIB, IRS, SSA Benefit (BENDEX), SSI (SDX), and SSA Earnings (BEER):

01 = No Action Required - information reported by client
02 = No Action Required - Eligibility/Benefits not affected
03 = No Action Required - Action previously taken

04 = No Action Required - Case closed/transferred

05 = No Action Required - Invalid match

O06 = Benefits Reduced

07 = Benefits Discontinued/Closure

O08 = Benefits Increased

The following IEVS Action Codes are used to take action on SSN
Verification (Numident):

21 = Action Taken - Client contacted
22 = Action Taken - Problem resolved
23 = Action Taken - Client deleted from grant/disqualified

c0-8


DEMOGRAPHICS
AND PROGRAM

Population: 550,043 (Rank - 49th)
Number of counties: 25

1992 Welfare Population

STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $21,656 (Rank - 4th) in tonsnds Change
Unemployment (6/93): 7.7% AFDC Cases “TH («53.4%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: tAverage Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 41 63.6%
AFDC 3.60 15th Participants,
Food Stamps 7.38 17th Medicaid 51 NIA
Medicaid ferment 1.96 I Ith Eligibles
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid 50%
WELFARE
ADMINISTRATION

Number of local welfare offices: 15 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 209

State Capitol: Juneau

Welfare Agency: Department of Health and Social Services
Division of Public Assistance

lEVS Policy Contact: Myrtle Ellerbee
Public Assistance Payment Manager
P.O. Box 110640 (240 Main St.)
Juneau, AK 99811-0649 = Phit: 907/465-3347

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Eligibility Information System (EIS).

MENT AND The AFDC, Medicaid, and Food Stamp (FS) programs’
ELIGIBILITY are integrated.
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: Valerie Horner
Public Assistance Analyst
Ph#: 907/465-3347
System was FAMIS certified on July 1, 1984.
PLANNED Alaska is presently studying the feasibility of replacing its current FAMIS
system, which is about 10 years old, with a system that would also service
WELFARE multiple welfare programs. State representatives estimated that anew
SYSTEMS system could cost between $28 and $32 million. Additionally, Alaska
CHANGES received HHS approval to upgrade its current child support enforcement

system to comply with requirements imposed by the Family Support Act
of 1988. State representatives estimated that planned enhancements
could cost $500,000.

AK-1

“\
|



“ARKANSAS

IEVS MATCHING

lEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending

Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results to Workers

State Wage | Yes Weekly Yes | Twice Quarterly! Hardcopy

Ul Yes Weekly Yes Monthly Hardcopy

IRS Yes Monthly Yes Yearly Hardcopy

SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Hardcopy

SSI Benefits | Yes Weekly Yes Weekly Hardcopy

BEER Yes Monthly Yes | Monthly Hardcopy
Hardcopy = Printed centrally and sent by mail or delivery to local
offices and distributed to workers.

BENDEX COLAs are automatically updated with client records by computer
and do not typically require foflow up by workers. The $SI information
received from SDX is automatically updated in client records throughout
the year in addition to COLA runs.

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage ul IRS SSA ssi BEER
Batch Batch | Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online | Online Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
at the time of application. SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information are
not available to workers online.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application but not at redeterminations/reviews.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic tink between welfare’s computer and the Labor agency's
computer.

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage Ul IRS SSA SSI | BEER
Do Workers Hi
Online Access? Yes Yes No No Yes No
How Many Offices? Alt All All

AR-2



le

M
O
>
i=
gaa

These reports are for food stamps only as Kentucky does not

generate reports for AFDC and Medical Assistance since this data is

The following are samples of reports routinely generated based on IEVS
currently not automated.

matches.

Summary Reperts

s00z aie ir oo8 asi ws wu zec
00-tsonr1 oo'azha—oot00c)co"LeLB eo'esisi ovate “co-euoe—ooenens
cove on vot an sou te sth tax
Oo'etees} —oo"zzo1}—o"eLge} © oaEeceG © 00 EeuL ©» 00"BOSY owe a wzevs
oxot oy och aoe ust sci on ov
eovapccr —ovoars —oa-saLz =n eeoL © o0"OreR © 00"eREI © ower nwa
hae ‘ a co ca o a a
us o z ww o ° ‘ ,
aan e3nevann
io va 0 vorns x0s xaons0

cy
24/10 GNI ANON wOd
AMWMNNS (SART) WELSAS NOTLVOTITUGA ALTTIGIOI1a GN aMOONT FOIMBLVIS

zen Sa Samva

3ONWHO 10M GIO
$1143N30 HOHR ¥O1
SQTOH3SNOH JO waEKN

Sataanga_aasyzuont
NO aNWWA BvTI00

OaSv3YONT S1143N30 MOH
OJ SOTOHASNOH 30 yaaMAN

S1143N30_ aaSv3¥D30
NO aNWWA yYTI00

qasvauog0 $1143Naa moun
Od SQTOHASNOH 40 HIGHT

‘Sasv> G3iyNtWASL
NO aNWA yvv100

oaiyNieu3i
SOTOHISNGH 40 W3ENNN

aaiNnaa
SinvoITday 40 ¥3aKNN

ies

mw mw we sacecez
z8/10 28/90/10 26/90/10 eeecs
28/60/10 28/80/10 eevecie
z6/10 E/so/10 zeseoss0

ve8r hoses bevorset vavozses
vere: 00 °
° ee/Lost0 tE/s0/10 ors.
guzz 0 26/10/10 oocs:
oawuniay S3HOLvH ooiwad 3W1L G3NWNL3Y HOLYN = OBLYILIN] HOLWW al.tmens
40 waaHNN Holm ava sais 40 waaKW
26/10 GNA _HiNDM wos
4 :39ve AMVWANE (SAIT) NBLSAS NOTLVOISINGA ALTVIGIONTZ ONY JNOONT JOIAILVIS
te/1E 10 Sa-S3Mv

iswiot

va
WOLWW wainanoD
aanavann - xa0Na0

aaNuva - x30N36

zocoums4

MISCELLANEOUS

KY-8


COLORADO

IEVS MATCHING

iIEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients | {Method of Sending
jConducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
{State Wage. Yes | Monthly | Yes Monthly Electronic (S & ViPrint)
ul : Yes Monthly i Yes | Monthly {Electronic ($ & ViPrint)
IRS : Yes Monthly ; Yes . Monthly (Electronic (S & V/Print)
SSA Benefits; Yes : Monthly : Yes j Monthly iElectronic (S & V{Print)
SSI Benefits | Yes | Monthly: Yes | | Manthly | Electronic (S & V/Print)
! BEER i No: _ No | :

S & W/P = Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen or Printed hardcopy.
i i

COLAs from SDX and BENDEX are automatically updated via the computer
without the worker having to view and resolve discrepancies/changes.

Method(s) of Matching

State l
Wage ul IRS | SSA ssi BEER
Batch | Batch , Batch : Batch Batch Batch

Online | Online : H

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit, and IRS information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
each agency's sharing of a common computer facility. This allows
welfare easy access to the appropriate labor files.

State Historical | Historical | Aietorical
Wage | UI IRS | SSA | SSI j BEER
Do Workers Have ! 1 1

Online Access? Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes ; Yes | No

How Many Offices?| All | All ‘ an ! al” alt
L

co-2



INNS IN

MATCH
STATISTICS IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)
T JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 j 57,254 55,742 0 i 55,021 { 55.409 57,201
1992 | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL MAY JUNE
H 116,731 59,930 H oo: 62,627 63,924
1992 {July AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
: 64,584 0 o o | 64,489 130,883
4993 | 2amuany | Feemuary | MARCH | apa | MAY JUNE
: Ww 133,132 69,054 , 71577 0 72,368
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR |_ JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 0 a [na | i 0 i a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL | MAY JUNE
ey : a 0 @ | 0 ; 0 0
: VERIFIED : JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
: J 8 inal i 0 Po a
| JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL | MAY JUNE
i a 0 ) i a t) a
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 a i a 0 a)
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL MAY JUNE
a 0 C) i a : 0 Q
RESPONSES | JULY AusustT [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
i a 0 0 : 0 0 cy
[ JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL | MAY JUNE
: o 0 0 0 a I 0

AK-6


DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 2,477,574 (Rank - 32nd) “1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 105 i
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $16,498 (Rank - 21st) fz in tiosvane te 789
Unemployment (6/93): 5.6 % d AFDC Cases ag 18.8%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: tAvarege Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 179 37.0%
AFDC 5.87 38th Participants
o (average Monthly)
Food Stamps 7.91 20th Medicaid
Medicaid fmm, 0.70 7th Eligibles
Federal Share: AFDC _54.7% Medicaid 59.2%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 106 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 509

State Capitol: Topeka

Welfare Agency: Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services
Division of Income Maintenance

IEVS Policy Contact: Chery! Woods
Automation Specialist
Division of Income Maintenance
915 5.W. Harrison
Room 624 South Docking State Office Bldg.
Topeka, KS 66612-1588 Phi: 913/296-6706

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Kansas Automated Eligibility Child Support and

MENT AND Enforcement System (KAECSES).
Transferred from Arizona, this system integrates AFDC, food
ELIGIBILITY stamps, and Medicaid. The integrated system aids workers
SYSTEM in determining eligibility for AFDC, Medicaid and food stamps.
It was piloted in July 1988 with statewide implementation completed
in July 1989.
IEVS System Contact: Larry Hager
Programmer Analyst
Phi: 913/296-4732
System was FAMIS certified in December 1989.
PLANNED Systems improvements inciude implementation of various FAMIS
WELFARE enhancements such as those to the Child Support Enforcement
SYSTEMS component to comply with the 1988 requirements.
CHANGES

KS-1


DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
|

State Wage Yes t

Unemployment Yes i
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS Yes

SSA Benefits Yes {

SS! Benefits Yes i

BEER No :

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

"y
State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data J

IRS MATCH ;
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: WA
'
i
COSTS .
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other NA
personnel costs y
- Computer costs NA j
- Costs associated with verification NA .
- Other NA ry
NA ‘5
BENEFITS .
- Recovered overpayments and debts NA H
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved NA aa
- Other NA
:
NA i

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs NA

BENEFITS NA
NET: NA

De-7


MATCH COSTS
AND BENEFITS

State Wage

YES|

Unemployment

YES

Is Match Cost Effective? IRS

YES

SSA Benefits

YES

SSI Benefits

YES|

BEER

DK

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $15,000

BENEFITS $140,000
NET: $125,000

Conclusions are based on experience and
informal studies by the State.

| ciate Essimaves As Required For Matches With Federal Dote

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

$584,500

$9,000
NA
$94,500

$688,000

(RS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6/93) NET: $412,000
COSTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs
- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other
BENEFITS

$957,000
$143,000
$0

$1,100,000

re

ME-7


n
<<
p)
Zz
<
ws
jad
<

Additional Sample IEVS Reports

1WOdau 3NGYIAG

o o ry 0 Q 0 0 o dad 1-50
r) 0 0 0 o 0 0 o ONT 1-90
“br t a 9 0 0 Thy z gad 1-0
0 0 6 T 0 0 0 0 ONT 1-£0
Q 0 ry 9 o a o 0 93a 1-20
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ONT 1-20
eryas t 0 a 052 £ ost 1 gad 2-10
a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 ONT 2-T0
0 Q Q 0 0 9 o 0 23g I-10
0 a s z 8 0 0 0 ONT T-To
SONIAVS OW SONIAVS | ON SONIAYS ON SONTAVS ON AaNno
TH. xaqnad ‘30vM X30NIG A asa ‘3OVM Osa
£690 Od 996T-S4
SANAIdI9au YOd SONTAVS SdWviS dood osossrH
3009 NOILNTOS3Y AG dNMOTI0d HOLVW

0 o 0 a ap saz
as eee saz 909 (XS) HOLWHSIN TSS

L tt » ost (WS? ISS MAN

0 t) 0 a (Ma) JovM xaqNaa

g a at out (ag) aaa xaqn3d

s rag a s9T (og) OD Xx3qNaE
S> yw @ voorz (Rd) 3OVM d9aU

0 0 0 ° (HY) JOVM Tdd¥

6 att os eset (NW) 1M 938
t) 0 0 C) (nv) In Idav
BAVUNSOVNT asvayoae aSVaYONT ‘SHONVHO ON gOuNOS HOLVH

@ 3009 3 3d09 @ ado ¥ ado
AGINALVIS 6-66 ALNNOD
$6790 Od

$3009 3ONVUVIID SAIT 40 NHOONVTUG
WAISAS dH¥1s G003

StT0-s4
OzgysrM

MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

AR-9


"DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

IEVS MATCHING

JEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results ta Workers
State Wage | Yes Daily Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
Ul Yes Daily Yes Weekly Electronic (S & V)
1RS Yes Monthly | Yes Monthly Electranic (S & V)
SSA Benefits | Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
SSI Benefits | Yes * Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
BEER Yes Monthly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
S& V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.
**At application, the worker enters the information into the Medicaid system which then
does an automatic lookup for SSL

Although officials report the IRS match is done, only recently did the
District of Columbia enter into the requisite matching agreement with
IRS (effective August 7, 1993). Prior to this agreement, IRS data could
not be released to the State (during FY 1992 and FY 1993).

Method{s) of Matching

State
Wage UL IRS SSA ssl BEER
Batch Batch | Batch Batch Batch Batch

Online | Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SS! information are available to the worker online
at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved by
welfare receiving a copy of the Labor agency's data and loading
it on the welfare agency's computer.

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage ul IRS SSA SSI | BEER
Do Workers Ha’
Online Access? ve Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
How Many Offices? All All Alt All All All

DC-2



MARYLAND ~

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS iEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
(AFDC Program) i
State Wage Unique Yes See (1) for other.
information 1
Other t
ul Unique Yes (1)
information +
Other
i
iRS Unique Yes Interest income te$500 and
information Earnings income LE$10,000. 1
Tolerance (1) |
Other
SSA Benefits | Change in benefit Yes a) uy
(Bendex) information id
Unique
information .
Other
SSI Benefits Change in benefit Yes M1)
(sDx) information 1
Unique
information .
Other
am
BEER Unique Yes L€$10,000. - |
information an .
Tolerance 7
Other t
ai
(1) Other targeting strategies utilized by the system if:
a. No tolerance level exists “3
If the match source indicates income or benefits which are absent from the case |
file (unique to the match source), an alert will be issued. If the match source a
indicates income or benefits known to the case file yet reflecting changes, the
discrepancy will be reviewed at the next redetermination. ‘T
b. Tolerance level exists
tf the match source indicates a change in income information or benefits GE the ‘
indicated tolerance levels, an alert will be issued. If the match source indicates a +
change in income information or benefits < the tolerance level, the discrepancy will | ©
be reviewed at the next redetermination. aa
Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC 1
program. :
at

MOo-3


MISSISSIPPI

AND BENEFITS

State Wage YES
Unemployment YES!
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS NO
SSA Benefits YES)
SSI Benefits YES
BEER NO

Conclusions are based only on perceptions.

State Estimates As quired For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7191 to 6183) NET: $251,272
COSTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $45,281
personnel costs

- Computer costs $78,639
- Costs associated with verification $0
- Other $18,954
$142,874

BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $205,020
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $189,126
- Other $0
$394,146

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $316,222

BENEFITS $203,994,316
NET: $203,678,094

neat


MINNESOTA

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

1 1 Estimated
1EVS Matches Records 1| Records 1} Records/: Records | Records
s Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To Gverpay-
Conducted fi i Aff ments
or for Review: ect | petected
Matching i {Alerts} 2! Benefit » 2
State Wage 1,902,091 206,307 31,986 54,940 3,164 $4,562,060
UI 4,420,651 51,951 7,721, 13,112 812)
IRS 773,499 426,068 19,552 ; 2,368
SSA Benefits 720,326 703,533 7,301 i 12,096
SSI Benefits "389.327 214,736 5,672 «5.840 * 972° «$100,548
BEER 720,326' 48,587 2,097 6,772 184 $248,408
! Data extrapolated using monthly data provided
2 Data estimated from 3rd quarter statistics
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
| MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER
REGULAR 16,206 0 25,849 13,856 368,771 24,507
MIDMONTH 0 12,249 Ww 0 t) 0
| NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY I MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 12,603 19,894 18,082 12,128 0 0
mipmonTH YY inal a 0 0 0
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
[may JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 31,603 4,584 33,258 22.283 460,508 35,767
MIDMONTH g2t [ual w 107 [val
[ NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 29,873 32,131 32,957 26,860 14,247 18,475
MIDMONTH | 126,206 mw 8,289 9,701 10,812 12,348
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
l MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 886 338 w 1,410 16,212 1,296
MIDMONTH 120 372 [aa] w 10,773 249
[ NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY |_MaRch APRIL
REGULAR 1155 1,512 1.739 1,864 1743 2,035
MIDMONTH 46,838 4,110 1,419 1,782 2.404



State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

AND BENEFITS

COLORADO

State Wage Yes
Unemployment Yes
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS Yes
SSA Benefits Yes
SS! Benefits Yes
BEER Ves

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

COSTS $29,437
BENEFITS $851,892
NET: $822,455

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6193) NET:

cosTs

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs

- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other

BENEFITS

Conclusions are based on experience, not study.

State mates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

($138,647) voss

$775,403

$65,992
$196

$108,469

$950,060

$599,601
$211,812
$0

$811,413

co-7

Ld


DISTRICT.

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

lEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Change in income Yes New earnings where none
information listed prior or multipte
Discrepancy wo employers in the same quarter
Tolerance m or single employer and wages.
0) 10% between reported and
listed dollars and m LE$500 per
quarter.
Ul Change in benefit Yes New claim or received a final
information payment or difference in the
Discrepancy weekly amount received from
that recorded as received for
the prior week.
IRS Tolerance Yes Interest, dividends, or rent

must be LE$150.

SSA Benefits

Discrepancy

Yes The Bendex amount must not

information
Unique
information
Tolerance

(Bendex) be equal to the listed amount.
SSI Benefits Exclusion Yes The client must be SSI and
(SDX) AFDC active
or the client must be SSI
terminated.
BEER Disregard certain Yes Disregard income from VA,

MD, and DC and all earnings
except for pension, agriculture,
and self earnings.

Wages must be LE$5000.

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs differ from that of the AFDC
program. The following reflect the differences:
Food Stamp Program State Wage -

SDX -

Medicaid Program State Wage -

SDX -

to 20%

Client FS active and dollar amounts do not
match exactly

10 10%

Client SSI active and Medicaid inactive and
dollar amounts do not match

DC-3



MISCELLANEOUS

The following are the results of a BEER cost-benefit analysis conducted
by Idaho and submitted with its Food Stamps program targeting plan.

BEER Target Study Cost-Benefit Analysis

This Analysis is based on the August 1990 annual BEER report.
There were 7717 cases (8829 clients) in the sample universe. The
selection criteria was as follows:

° All cases identified as "no match" were excluded
(22.5% clients).

° Or the remaining cases, every 18th case was
selected. The selection of every 18th case produced
a sample of 424 cases representing 211 seven regions
within the State.

° Of the 424 cases, 257 were eliminated due to no
program involvement within the 1989 tax year
resulting in 167 cases.

° of the 167 cases all but two had Focd Stenp
involvement resulting in 165 target cases. (132
cases had only Food Stamp involvement and 33 cases
hac involvement in Focd Stamps ané at least cne
other benefit program.)

The selection criteria was applied after the match but before any
follow-up action comparing the results of the match to casefile
information.

Of the 165 reviewed cases, two cases (1%) had Social Security
numbers misreported by employers, two cases (1%) had income w
was not verified as both cases had been closed 12 months or more
before view of the data, three cases (2%) had unreported income
resulting in overpayments/ineligibility of $221, $224 and $1349
respectively. (All overpayments were discovered on cases wi
were open the entire tax year.) Eighty-six cases (52%)
reported all wages, and 72 cases (44%) had no program involverent
wnen the income was earned.

None of the 165 cases involved pension or self-employment incone.
We have found follow-up on those kinds of cases outside the report
are generally productive.

10-8



MICHIGAN

+.
®

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 108,462 | 107,513 f) 104,506 205,868 208,667
4992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
fa] 100,388 106,101 103,413 107,515 98,316
1992 JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
100,122 | 102,08t 92,808 91,808 96,480 99,255
1993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
Ww 190,123 95,802 94,619 | 100,397 203,428
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST /SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 103,601 8 102,493 0 o
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
90,880 0 0 0 0 i
VERIFIED dULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER:| OCTOBER NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
75,717 a w 76,307 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
66,024 i 0 i 0 0
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 D 0 0 0 0)
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
fy fy 8 0 0 0
RESPONSES JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 D 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

a

o



IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

l€VS MATCH

TARGETING
STRATEGY

CLIENT
ACTIVE

SPECIFICATIONS

State Wage

Exclusion (e
Discrepancy w

Yes

«@ pregnant women and children
under the MANG-P program*
and children with exempt
income and client must be
active for all of the time period
to which match pertains.

to) GE$ 150.

Ul

Exclusion i
Tolerance mn

t@ pregnant women and children
under the MANG-P program
only and client must be active
for all of the time period to
which match pertains.

met 5%.

IRS

Exclusion te,
Discrepancy 0)

t@ pregnant women (MANG)
and disabled clients presumed
to be SSI eligible and on interim
assistance.

(0) GE$1 above the asset limit or
GE$50 annually above that
budgeted for retirement
income.

SSA Benefits
(Bendex)

No targeting

All information is forwarded;
worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.

SSI Benefits
{SDX)

No targeting

All information is forwarded;
worker will follow up if the
client is active at the time the
information is received.

BEER

Exclusion
Disregard certain
information
Discrepancy m
Other

1 pregnant women (MANG)
and both disabled or blind
clients presumed to be SSI
eligible and on interim
assistance.

Disregard duplicate information
provided by State wage match.
«) GE$50 between that
budgeted and reported income
for December of income year.

* MANG-P: Medical Assistance No Grant for Pregnant Women

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC

Program.

1-3

‘y
{


|
j

ARIZONA

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 |e a 0 184,720 0 0
4992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
[ual 0 93,609 98,603 26,717 57.134
1992 JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 375,527 368,609 35.862 35,862 18,355
4993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
[ua] 15,483 0 21,388 | 34,160 36,519
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION| 38,817 38,817 34,265 32,064 28,236
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a 29,085 a 0 210,595 39,891
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
32,574 32,621 [yal 28,365 26,109 22,873
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
6 23,809 0 0 175,764 32,113
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
7,289 2,585, 6,156 6,951 8,679 WA
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH ‘APRIL MAY JUNE
23,538 7,427 11,238 WA 9,889 9,373
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
7,283 6,085 6,308 7.113 8,971 NA
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
24,190 7,603 11,492 NA 10,130 9,559

AZ-6



mee ae te omen wees meee ene - eee —_ ¥

KENTUCKY [
State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

AND BENEFITS '
State Wage NO i
Unemployment NO ;
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS - NO ‘|
SSA Benefits NO 1
SSI Benefits NO
BEER NO 1

Conclusions are based on review of cases discontinued, or
where benefits decrease less those increased muitiplied by the|
time it takes to process the case. |

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH ;
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers periad from 7/91 to 6193). NET: ($299,987) 10ss
——— f
CcOosTs i
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $579,575
personnel costs
- Computer costs $7,953
- Costs associated with verification $2,750 .
- Other $5,958 :
$596,236
BENEFITS
~ Recovered overpayments and debts $7,817
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $288,512 vl
- Other $0
$296,329 : |
i

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $133,869 i

BENEFITS $397,512
NET: $263,643 ii

KY-7


MARYLAND

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 3,366 10,080 15,014 13,659 11,703 11,580
qag2 _2awuaRY | Feeauany [“MancH APRIL MAY JUNE
w 21,514 10,835 13,071 11,265 11,374
4992 |_20 AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
14,122 6.877 10,563 12,559 9,989 9,801
19 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
93 WA 8,620 13,152 sa21 | 10,819 22,082
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION| — 31,220 17,634 w 12,748 a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL [ MAY JUNE
90,074 i 30,889 0 I a 56,034
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER’| OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
26,161 6 Ww 10,796 a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
| 53,094 0 24,448 0 0 37,772
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 a 0 0 a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
e 0 e 8 0 0
RESPONSES | JULY AuGuST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
a 0 a 0 0 a
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH ‘APRIL MAY JUNE
0 fy 0 0 0 0

MD-6



INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE

This report provides a reference source of State Income Eligibility Verification Systems
(IEVS) procedures and experiences.

BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY

The Income and Eligibility Verification System was established by Congress under the
1984 Deficit Reduction Act to reduce errors in determining eligibility and benefit levels in
the Food Stamp, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and Medicaid programs. The
implementing regulations require State agencies to compare income reported by program
applicants and recipients with income from several data sources: 1) Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) data on interest, dividends, and other types of unearned income; 2) Social
Security Administration data for Retirement, Survivors, and Disability Insurance benefits,
Supplemental Security Insurance benefits, and annual earnings; and 3) State quarterly
wage reports and unemployment insurance benefits. States are required to complete
follow up within 45 days on at least 80 percent of all IEVS information received on
applicants and information targeted (selected) for review on recipients.

During the course of conducting our most recent IEVS review (Reforms are Needed in
State Income and Eligibility Verification Systems (IEVS) (OEI-06-92-00080)), we
gathered a significant amount of State specific information we believe could be beneficial
as a reference tool for Federal and State agencies responsible for IEVS oversight. While
most of the information was gathered through interviews with State officials
knowledgeable about the State’s IEVS process (a person was often designated by the State
as their IEVS coordinator), most match statistics were obtained from the Federal agency
conducting the match with the States. Upon completion of each State profile, States were
asked to review and make any changes or additions necessary to ensure facts and
statements presented were accurate. Review of the profiles by States was completed
during August of 1994.

During our discussions with States, we found most State IEVS coordinators (a generic
term we use to describe the person designated in the State as overseeing or integrally
involved in State IEVS processes) interested in any information we were able to gather
about other States’ IEVS processes. The primary purpose expressed for knowing this
information is to reassess their own IEVS procedures in light of what other States are
doing.

We hope this report provides State and Federal agencies with basic information that can
be used to stimulate discussions among State and Federal agencies concerning eligibility
verification issues. State IEVS coordinator contacts are provided to facilitate these
discussions for an exchange of views and experiences.


MISSISSIPPI

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 2,573,216 (Rank - 31st) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 82
i : Count %
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $11,724 (Rank - 50th) in thoosonds # charge
. 9 — yz ~ anon
Unemployment (6/93): 8.0 % AFDC Cases 61 2.2%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: SAverage Menttiy}
Rank Food Stamp 540 9.9%
AFDC 7.84 48th Participants
h tAverage Monthly)
Food Stamps 10.07 34¢ Medicaid 470 NIA
Medicaid former’, = 1.32 ‘17th Bligibles
Federal Share: AFDC 65% Medicaid go0%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 83 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 835

State Capitol: Jackson

Welfare Agency: Mississippi Department of Human Services
Economic Assistance

IEVS Policy Contact: Janis Stinson McDowell
Director, Policy Unit
Economie Assistance
P.O. Box 352 (750 North State Street)
Jackson, MS 39205-0352 Ph#: 601/359-4500

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: MAVERICS.

MENT AND This system integrates eligibility for the FS, AFDC, and
ELIGIBILITY Medicaid programs.
SYSTEM IEVS System Contact: Jerry Weir
Acting Director, Division of MIS
Ph#: 601/359-4500
System was FAMIS certified on July 1, 1986.
Mississippi planned to upgrade its FAMIS system at an approximate
PLANNED cost of $10 million.
WELFARE
SYSTEMS

CHANGES



IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? ‘When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes |Monthly Yes | Monthly Hardcopy
ul Yes {Twice Monthly| Yes | Twice Monthly Hardcopy
IRS. Yes [Monthly Yes | Monthly Hardcopy
SSA Benefits | Yes [Twice Monthiy| Yes | Twice Monthly [Hardcopy
SSI Benefits | Yes |Weekly Yes { Weekly Hardcopy
BEER Yes |Twice Monthly] Yes | Twice Monthly Hardcopy
Hardcopy = Printed centrally and sent by mail or delivery to local
offices and distributed to workers.

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER

Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online | Online Online | Ontine

ONLINE ACCESS State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
TO IEVS DATA at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
s historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's
computer.

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage | Ul IRS | SSA | SSI | BEER

Do Workers Have
Online Access? No No No Yes Yes No

How Many Offices? All All



KANSAS

MATCH ~
STATISTICS IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)
tog 2 AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1 t 20,354 12,806 9,541 9,063 240,056 24,714
1992 [-sanuany | Feeruary | MARCH | APRIL MAY JUNE
i 26,230 11741 ; o i 17,435 21,565
4992 |v AucusT [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 12,333 9,416 i 9,574 t 270,420 29,798
| January | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL MAY JUNE
1993 ; i
! 25,025 ia7e_ |

a 13,570 21,829

ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)

pe eh oa

INPUT FOR | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION: = 27,138 26,797 CY 27,313 | 31,883 27,564
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL | MAY JUNE

: 0 11,220 11,945 15588 | (13,837 16,268

VERIFIED | JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER.| OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER

H 13,676 12,638 jual i 12,655 15,447 10,621
{ JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

Hy o 9,852 9,577 12,063 : 9,605 11,179

WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)

REQUESTS | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
i 9 0 6 a 0 , 0
[JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH | APRIL MAY JUNE
fy fy o } a i fy 0

RESPONSES | Juty aAucusT [sePTEMBER | OcTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
: o 0 ® ; 0 j 0 0
JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
: fy a o | 4 a a

KS-6


KENTUCKY »

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

| Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: jn need
: # of records submitted for matching ! Yes
__# of records which matched with external data i Yes
;_# of records resulting in alerts for workers Ves
:_# of alerts worked by eligibility workers ! Yes :
|_# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit | Yes ?
: Amount of savings determined from 1EVS alerts Yes i
'_# or alerts worked in 45 days i Yes |
__# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) lL Yes |
| Staff time to complete follow up : No
{_Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No !

FLEXIBILITY AND

Kentucky considers the 80 percent foliow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "States should be permitted to resolve matches at the
time of recertification."
Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day foliow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.
For calendar year 1993, staff estimate more than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were followed up on in 45 days. This State presently has no waiver
from FNS extending the 45 day follow up timeframe for the Food Stamp
program.
Workers are required to specify the actions taken, based on the alert, by
writing a narrative description on the alert or in the case file.
FOLLOW UP All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.
PRIORITIZATION
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Kentucky presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA Benefit, BEER, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1993. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
FEDERAL fication exchange, and submission of death records. Kentucky has
AGENCIES not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 203,846 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are not exchanged with IRS on a routine monthly basis,

KY-4


CALIFORNIA.

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 29,760,021 (Rank - 1st} 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 58 ry
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $19,929 (Rank - 8th) in mount #4 Grange il
Unemployment (6/93): 9.4 % AFDC Cases 824 36.3%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: faverage Monthly) ,
Rank Food Stamp = 2,859 49.3 i
AFDC 6.74 41st Participants
7
Food Stamps 11.64 47th Media :
jedicald 4,019 NIA }
Medicaid fevment = 1.32 19th Eligibles ‘ i

(Anawal) ‘
Federal Share: AFDC 50% Medicaid 50%

WELFARE COUNTY ADMINISTERED AND STATE SUPERVISED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 58 offices t

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 16,908 (4F0C-9,606, FS-2,569, Medi-Cal-4,733)

State Capitol: Sacramento

Welfare Agency: California Health and Welfare Agency +
Department of Social Services \

IEVS Policy Contact: Charr Lee Metsker
Chief, Fraud Bureau
Welfare Programs Division
744 P Street, Mail Stop 19-26
Sacramento, CA 95814 PH#: 916/445-0031

CASE MANAGE- System Name: No Statewide Automated Eligibility System exists at present.

MENT AND ‘

ELIGIBILITY IEVS System Contact: Mike Collins or Marty Bornstein -t
SYSTEM Data Processing

Phi: 916/445-5027 or 0798 ,

PLANNED California intends to replace the 58 county-based eligibility systems with
a FAMIS system (Statewide Automated Welfare System - SAWS). SAWS
WELFARE is expected to be implemented over the next several years. The costis
SYSTEMS expected to be at least $322 million. However, no estimate was provided i
CHANGES for future FAMIS development costs related to Los Angeles County.

CA-1


MISSISSIPPI

IEVS TARGETING

METHODS IEVS MATCH | TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
{AFDC Program)
State Wage Change in income Yes An additional alert is generated
information when 3 or more employers are
Other indicated for the same match
. period.
Ul Change in benefit Yes
information
IRS Exclusion Yes Client active for part of time
Disregard period to which match pertains.
Change in income Disregard $0 income.
information
Other
SSA Benefits Exclusion Yes Client active the month
(Bendex) Change in benefit following the time period to
information which the match pertains.
SSI Benefits Exclusion. Yes Client active the month
(SDX) Change in benefit following the time period to
information which the match pertains.
BEER Exclusion No Client active for part of time
Change in income period to which match pertains.
information

Targeting criteria for Food Stamp program differs from that of the AFDC and Medicaid
programs primarily for when the State Wage match occurs. Food Stamp recipients are
matched just prior to recertification; all AFDC and Medicaid recipients are matched during the
months of March, June, September, and December.

While the State does not target out duplicate information automatically during any of the
matches, following the matches, duplicate wage match alerts are removed to ensure that the
duplicate information is eliminated before an alert is issued to the workers, Further, when
workers receive match information, they are only required to follow up on information that
doesn't duplicate (is unique) information previously received.



MONTANA

MATCH State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992 (8 months of data annualized)
STATISTICS IEVS Matches Records . Records Records ; Records Records !Estimated
Submitted Matched Referred | Reviewed ‘Found To Overpay-
Conducted . for for Review Affect ments
Matching {Alerts} Benefit Detected
: 112,204 ; 44,718 44,718 NA NA NA
8,522 4,944 4,944 NA NA NA
74,595 NA NA NA NA NA
187,103 41,679 41,679 NA NA NA
187,103 102,167 102.167 NA NA NA
NA NA NA NA NA NA
Programming errors make this data suspect.
1
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies {SSA and IRS) ,
Federal Database y 9 {
Matches BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions) ‘
i MAY JUNE JULY | AUGUST | SEPTEMBER OCTOBER jj;
REGULAR 99,448 "92.075 | (198,763 60,244 102,573 | 109,163 { {7
MIDMONTH . 0 [nay 0 o| 0
ER | JANUARY - FEBRUARY = MARCH APRIL H
REGULAR 71,663 73,303 73,600 0 77,544 i
MIDMONTH ju] bna| a a 0 a
Ir
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) i
may | [_Avoust |sepTemBen | ocToBeR |]
REGULAR 104,726 66,192 to.ts1 | 115,012 |
MIDMONTH 326 | 224 mw w
[NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY © FEBRUARY — MARCH APRIL},
REGULAR 79,578 77,472 80,744 80,031 10,347 85.051 H
MIDMONTH 36,099 Nay 8,200 8,671 8,843 3,401
q
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ,
] MAY SUNE JULY AUGUST: ; SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER ||
REGULAR 65,628 $3,445 ital 19,332 60,474 67,774 |,
MIDMONTH 64 4,010 inal w 38,200 5,641
EMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 37.286 | 36,877 38,701 39,703 7,233 42,922 |}
MIDMONTH 23,781 H tw 6,771 7,132 7,380 i 7,810





MATCH State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992 (Food Stamp program)
STATISTICS IEVS Matches Records | Records Records |. Records { Records | Estimated
Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage 3,340,526 425,090| 68,026 45,793 297 $72,821
ul 3,340,526 | 128,639| 23,895 26,545 554 | $16,082
IRS NA| 293,108| 16,364 17,378 463 | $26,871
SSA Benefits 232,974 | 163,968| 6,307 6,207 2,576 | $10,652
SSI Benefits 7,100,843 | 110,648| 24,388 21,802 | 8,777 $2,625
BEER NA{ NA NA NA | NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
Federal Database
Matches BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 50,865 47,278 o . 0 129,430 48,418
MIDMONTH 0 0 0 0 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 51.038 0 6 0 62,191 106,623
MIDMONTH Ww w 0 a 0 a
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY SUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 73,790 51,148 5,163 5.977 104,964 56,649
MIDMONTH 929 w 964 I wi
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 69,024 15,934 22,245 20,080 83,952 28,044
MIDMONTH 130,725 fual 14,461 16,885 20.181 22,336
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
L MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 7,319 6,863 w 574 14,175 4,744
MIDMONTH 164 1,155 fi a] W 8.337 658
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 8,531 1,960 2.598 3.134 23,639 4,951
MIDMONTH | 30.350 fy A] 271 3.258 | 4,435 5,088

AR-5


AND BENEFITS

State Resp ent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness
MATCH COSTS

State Wage Yes
Unemployment Yes
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS Yes
SSA Benefits Yes
SS! Benefits Yes
BEER No

Conclusions are based on experience rather than study.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

IRS MATCH

Cost Benefit Estimation {covers period trom 7/91 to 6/93) .NET: $13,138

COSTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $111,696
personnel costs
- Computer costs $12,909
- Costs associated with verification $1,203
- Other $1,297
$127,105
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $78,551
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved $61,692
- Other $0
$140,243

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)

cOosTS $83,166 The information for the BENDEX statistics
were not readily available. The data shown

BENEFITS $557,789 are based upon estimates gathered through

NET: $474,623 a sampling of cases conducted via contact

with the field office staff, as well as review
of caseload, payment, and administrative
cost statistics. Not included is the monetary
value for the nonquantifiable benefits such
as deterrent effects, increased staff morale,
and greater public confidence. Such effects
are impossible to value.



MISSOURI

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 5,117,073 (Rank - 15th} 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 115
. . Count % Change
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $16,292 (Rank - 25th) in thousands fom 789
Unemployment (6/93): 7.0 % AFDC Cases 86 27.6%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: fAverage Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 559 39.6%
AFDC 4.43 23rd Participants
Food Stamps 8.32 26th neni
Medicaid 503 NIA
Medicaid fovmest 1.47 22nd Eligibles
anual)
Federal Share: AFDC _ 56.5% Medicaid 60.8%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 115 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA

State Capitol: Jefferson City

Welfare Agency: Missouri Department of Social Services
Division of Family Services

IEVS Policy Contact: Jane Cox
Program Development Specialist
Division of Family Services
P. 0. Box 88
1014 Madison
Jefferson City, MO 65102 Ph#: 314/681-0133

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Income Maintenance Update (IMU5).

MENT AND This system is not integrated with Medicaid and food stamps.
ELIGIBILITY
SYSTEM 1EVS System Contact: Gary Oesterly
Project Leader
314/751-2109
System is not FAMIS certified.
PLANNED Missouri is working on a new FAMIS system that will support
AFDC, food stamps, Medicaid eligibility, JOBS, and child care.
WELFARE The system under development has a cost of $78 million.
SYSTEMS

CHANGES



MISCELLANEOUS

RESOLUTION CODES
Reason Codes

121 - Computer generated reason code on all investigations that
are computer generated. It means outside information has been
received on a recipient and an investigation is required.

151 - Worker initiated investigation on a case which does not
report monthly.
152 - Worker initiated investigation on a monthly reporting case.
161 - Worker initiated fraud investigation on a closed case which
did not report monthly.

162 - Worker initiated fraud investigation on a closed monthly
reporting case.

Result Codes

501 - Increase due to IEVS information. No claim.

502 - Increase due to IEVS information with a claim.

511 - Increase partly due to IEVS information. No claim.

519 - Increase partly due to IEVS information resulting in a claim.
521 - Increase not due to {EVS information. No claim.

529 - Increase not due to [EVS information but a claim resulted.
531 - Decrease due to IEVS information. No claim.

539 - Decrease due to IEVS information with a claim.

5471 - Decrease partly due to IEVS information. No claim.

549 - Decrease partly due to IEVS resulting in a claim.

551 - Decrease not due to IEVS information. No claim

559 - Decrease not due to IEVS resulting in a claim.

561 - Termination due to !EVS information. No claim.

569 - Termination due to IEVS information resulting in a claim.
571 - Termination partly due to [EVS. No claim.

579 - Termination partly due to IEVS resulting in a claim.

581 - Termination not due to IEVS information. No claim. .
589 - Termination not due to IEVS informaiton resulting in a claim.
601 - Case unaffected by IEVS information.

609 - Payment unaffected by JEVS information but claim resulted.

611 - Payment was terminated prior to the completion of the investigation

for reasons other than IEVS information. No claim. Savings amount
inappropriate.

619 - Payment was terminated prior to the completion of the IEVS
investigation resulting in a claim.



IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

tEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage No targeting
UL No targeting
IRS. Tolerance No (1) Le$25 for unearned income per

individual.

SSA Benefits
(Bendex) (2)

No targeting

SSI Benefits No targeting
(SDX}
BEER No targeting

{1} Client names are purged from the system 90 days after closure.
(2) Bendex match does not require third party verification for Bendex or SDX.

Targeting criteria for the Food Stamp and Medicaid programs differ from that of the AFDC
Program. /nformation is not available on the differences in targeting criteria between the

programs.

AL-3

ese


PREFACE

The purpose of this report is to provide a reference resource
regarding States’ Income and Eligibility Verification Systems
(IEVS).

The Income and Eligibility Verification System was established
by Congress under the 1984 Deficit Reduction Act to reduce
errors in determining eligibility and benefit levels in the Food
Stamp, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and Medicaid
programs. The implementing regulations require State agencies
to compare income reported by program applicants and recipients
with income from several data sources: 1) Internal Revenue
Service data on interest, dividends, and other types of unearned
income; 2) Social Security Administration data for Retirement,
Survivors, and Disability Insurance benefits, Supplemental
Security Insurance benefits, and annual earnings; and 3) State
quarterly wage reports and unemployment insurance benefits.
States are required to complete follow up within 45 days on at
least 80 percent of all IEVS information received on applicants

and information targeted (selected) for review on recipients.

In our previous studies of IEVS systems, we found that State
TEVS practices and levels of matching success and efficiency
varied considerably. Nevertheless, the most promising approach
to improving the cost effectiveness of matching systems seems to
be through the initiative and experimentation conducted by
individual States. For this reason, we decided to compile what
information we had gathered from our review of State IEVS
practices into an easy to read reference document and share it
among the States and Federal agencies. By doing this, we hope
to stimulate discussions within and between State and Federal
agencies as they exchange views and attempt to improve
computerized eligibility verification.

This is one of two reference resources on IEVS. The companion
report, Summary of Literature, provides a detailed description of
findings from published reports about IEVS.



INDIANA

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

lEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Exclusion Yes ta) See (1).
Change in income cm Wages LE$150 quarterly.
information Any discrepancy between case
Tolerance m file and match data requires
Other follow up.
ul Exclusion Yes See (1).
Other Any unemployment insurance
information needs verified.
Any discrepancy between case
file and match information
requires follow up.
IRS Exclusion te Yes ro See (1).
Tolerance in mLE$100 for each income type.
Other Any discrepancy between case
file and match data requires
follow -up.
SSA Benefits | Exclusion Yes See (1).
(Bendex) Change in benefit Any discrepancy in automatic
information update between case file and
Other match unearned income
information requires follow up.
Other specific targeting
strategies (2).
SS! Benefits Exclusion Yes See (1).
(SDX) Change in benefit Any discrepancy in automatic
information update between case file and
Other match unearned income .
information requires follow up.
Other specific targeting
strategies (3).
BEER Exclusion Yes ta See (1).
Disregard certain Disregard duplicate information
information provided by State wage match.
Tolerance m m Out of State Wage/Self
Other employment Le$500 and

Pensions Le$150.

Any discrepancy between case
file and match unearned income
or wage information requires
follow up.

Additional information concerning Indiana‘s targeting methods is located in the
section labeled “Miscellaneous.”

IN-3

4

4
ee)

Coma


MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

IEVS Matches | Records | Records | Records | Recards | Records | Estimated
Conducted ! Submitted | Matched Referred | Reviewed |Found To | Overpay-
‘onducte: ! for for Review, Affect ments
| Matching | i (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage P 92,824! 71,243 | 52,762 | 52.762 | 3 | $78,732
UL } 8.777! 34,752 33,626 | 33,526 | 11 «| $8,255
IRS : 177,084; 21,250 : 21,250 | 21,250 | 50 $9,459
SSA Benefits | 313,121! 70,587 | 17,373 NA | ONA NA
SS Benefits | 164.892: 17.567 | 5.425 ; NA NA NA
BEER NA NA NA: NA NA NA
Data Provided by Federal! Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
| MAY ‘SUNE JULY | AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR | 19,408 17,058 20,324 | 16,006 22,792 20,170
MIDMONTH | 0 a w a, 0 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR =| 24,253 | 22,518 25,993 22,792 0 0
miomonTH . = BEY w 0 a: 0 a
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
| _ MAY SUNE duty | aucusT |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR | = 25,002 20,067 25,026 22,475 28,910 25,274
i
MIDMONTH | 218 [wal m 197 uA] w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 32,533 29,308 34et1 | 30.418 | 5,132 25,495
MIDMONTH ; 36,593 w 3202 | 93,766 | 4,031 4,386
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
[may JUNE JULY AuGusT |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 23,438 18,833 [nia | 19,677 25,198 22,795
MIDMONTH : 125 2,112 [val fay 14,975 587
| NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY : MARCH ‘APRIL
REGULAR =| 27,603 26,533 30,527 27,954 | 2,930 3,238
miomontH | 36.46¢ | BBY 2,156 2787 | 3,026 3.336

L3


CONNECTICUT

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports tnctude The “Following: Included

in Report
# of records submitted for matching No
# of records which matched with external data Yes
# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers Yes
# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit Yes
Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts Yes
|_# or alerts worked in 45 days Yes
# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) Yes
Staff time to complete follow up Yes
Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Connecticut considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, "Regulations should allow tor follow up to be prioritized
based on potential impact of the match, rather than the match date. Our
staff presently receive an extremely high number of IEVS alerts making it
extremely difficult to follow up in 45 days."

Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.

For August 1993, staff report significantly less than 80 percent of IEVS
match results were followed up on (30 percent follow up) in 45 days.
This State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow
up timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot waive this
requirement except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Connecticut presently
uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1992. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Connecticut
has not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange
System. During 1992, 386,309 no records were submitted to SSA for
verification using the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

CT-4



MISSISSIPPI

TEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Bimonthly | Yes Quarterly | Electronic (S & V)
Ur Yes Bimonthly | Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
TRS Yes Monthly Yes Annually [Hardcopy
SSA Benefits | Yes Bimonthly | Yes Monthly + |Electronic (S & V)
SSI Benefits | Yes Weehly Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
BEER Yes Bimonthly | Yes Annually Hardcopy
S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.
* For recipients who quit receiving all benefits
Method(s) of Matching
State
Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online

at the time of application.

client, historical SSA benefit information may be available.

Additionally, if the applicant was a prior

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's

computer.

Do Workers Have
Online Access?

How Many Offices? All

State Historical | Historical Historical

Wage ul IRS SSA SS! | BEER

Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
All All All



MATCH COSTS
AND BENEFITS

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness

State Wage Yes
Unemployment No
Is Match Cost Effective? IRS No
SSA Benefits Yes
SSI Benefits Yes
BEER NA

Perceptions are based not on study, but on experience.

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/91 to 6193) NET: ($391,609) Loss
COSTS
- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other $585,000
personnel costs
- Computer costs $4,800
- Costs associated with verification oO
- Other Costs for forms. postage. etc. $15,600
$605,400
BENEFITS
- Recovered overpayments and debts $5,791
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved 0
- Other Savings from preventing $208,000
issuance of benefits ————_
$213,791
BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER) and SDX
costs $466,306 (January 1991 - December 1991)

BENEFITS $1,016,452
NET: $550,146

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

AK-7


MISCELLANEOUS

To accomplish exchange of data for IEVS, data from the lowa Automated
Benefit Calculation (IABC) system are used to create and update records
in an IEVS Client Record System. This client record system contains the
following [ABC individual data necessary for the matches: client name;
SSN; date of birth; Social Security claim number; program status; and
case numbers associated with the State 1D number.

Each successful exchange of information with lEVS data sources becomes
part of a system file for the particular match. The system uses these files
to create reports or update screens to communicate data to Department
staff. IEVS client record data are used to determine whether a particular
match should be attempted for a particular person's record, and for which
cases the results should be printed or displayed.

The following is a diagram prepared by 1QWA describing its IEVS matching
Process:

Employment Services IRS
Wage U.c. IRs
Match Match Match

IEVS Client Records

© SSN verification record

© Alternate SSNs

o Replacement prints for IEVS

© Information needed for all matches --
programs, names, county, worker, etc,

Alternate SSN & IABC Case and
SS Claim Numbers Master Files

SSN Bendex
Validation f Match
i SSA Income
Bendex Buy-In History

Enumeration
(Buy-In Information) SSA Earnings &
Pensions Match,

Social Security Administration

1A-8



AFDC
BEER
BENDEX
CSE
COLA
D

DK
FAMIS
FNS
FS
FTMS
FY

GE
HHS
1EVS
IRS

LE

NA
OIG
SDX
SSA
SVES
SWICA
T

Ul
WTPY

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN PROFILES

Aid to Families with Dependent Children

SSA's Beneficiary Earnings Exchange Record
SSA's Beneficiary Data Exchange

Child Support Enforcement

Cost of Living Allowance (annual adjustment)
Discrepancy (targeting)

Don't Know

Financial Assistance Management Information System
Food and Nutrition Service (Department of Agriculture)
Food Stamp Program

SSA's File Transfer Management System

Fiscal Year

Greater Than or Equal To (targeting)

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Income Eligibility Verification System

Internal Revenue Service

Less Than or Equal To (targeting)

Not Applicable or Not Available

Office of Inspector General (HHS)

SSA's State Data Exchange

Social Security Administration

SSA's State Verification and Exchange System
State Wage Information Collection Agency
Tolerance (targeting)

Unemployment Insurance

SSA's Wire Third Party Query System



IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

| Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: jin Report
|_# of records submitted for matching i No :
L_# of records which matched with external data No |
# of records resulting in alerts for workers ' No :
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers No :
| # of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit 7 No
: Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts i No
# or alerts worked in 45 days i No
__# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) No
| Staff time to complete follow up No
| Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

lowa considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, "If review/recertification is near to the 45 days, let workers
hold alert till then. However, applicants should be done in 45 days.”

Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.

For calendar year 1993, State staff are not sure if 80 percent of IEVS match
results were foilowed up on in 45 days).

This State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow up
timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot waive this
requirement except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are required to specify the results of their review by adding a
narrative description of the action taken on the hardcopy alert.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

!EVS matches (results) are prioritized at the local office for review.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, jowa presently uses
SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or send
BEER and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1994. Tape exchange continues
for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration verification exchange, SSA
benefit, and submission of death records. lowa has not yet implemented
use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 1,461,722 records were submitted to SSA for verification
using the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a fairly routine basis.

1A-4


MASSACHUSETTS

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

information

IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Exclusion te Yes vei certain clients - /nformation
Change in income not available.
information tm LE$300 per quarter.
Tolerance m
ul Exclusion ie Yes ts ongoing clients who have had
Change in income ‘no change in their Ul amount or
information who have picked up their U!
check within 60 days of
issuance.
IRS Disregard certain Yes Disregard - information not
information available
Change in income LE$ 199 per quarter.
information
Tolerance
SSA Benefits Change in benefit Yes LE$24 per month.
(Bendex} information,
Tolerance
SSI Benefits Change in benefit Yes
(SDX) information
BEER Disregard certain Yes Disregard duplicate information

provided by State Wage match.
All other information is
forwarded; worker will follow
up if the client is active at the
time the information is
received

ja for the Medicaid and Food Stamp programs: /nformation not available.

al

MA-3


IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports Include The -Following: Included
in Report

# of records submitted for matching No

# of records which matched with external data Yes

# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes

# of alerts worked by eligibility workers No

# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit i No

Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts No

# or alerts worked in 45 days Yes

# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) Yes

Staff time to complete follow up No

Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped | No

Reports are general (not program specific)

FLEXIBILITY AND

Staff report IEVS is considered too rigid a process and should be made

FOLLOW UP more dynamic. Much of the rigidity stems from Federal regulations.
Staff stated that 1EVS should provide for more "State involvement in its
design and aliow more tailoring to State-specific population demographics.”
Staff report communication with Federal agencies should be improved.
One suggestion offered is for the Federal agencies to provide direct
access between States and IEVS experts.
According to State policy, workers are not required to clear alerts by
specifying the results of review.
FOLLOW UP All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.
PRIORITIZATION
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Arizona presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA Benefit, BEER, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1991. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent and submission of
FEDERAL death records. Arizona implemented use of the State Verification and
AGENCIES Exchange System (formerly WTPY) in 1991.

During 1992, 353,596 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

AZ-4



DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 1,227,928 (Rank - 38th) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 16
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $16,248 (Rank - 26th) ant % Change
Unemployment (6/93): 8.1 % AFDC Cases 24 31.7%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: faverage Monthiy]
Rank Food Stamp 134 59.0%
AFDC 3.83 I7th Participants
Food Stamps 8.35 27th M salen . a ‘”
icaid Payment ecical 151 NIA
Medicaid jovi. 1.93 33rd Eligibles
tanaval)
Federal Share: AFDC 58.2% Medicaid 62.4%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
Number of local welfare offices: 15 offices

ADMINISTRATION

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA

State Capitol: Augusta

Welfare Agency: Maine Department of Human Services
Bureau of Income Maintenance

Peter McCarron

Food Stamp Program Manager TM

Station 11, Whitten Road

Augusta, Maine 04333 Phi: 207/287-3097

IEVS Policy Contact:

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Human Services Online System (WELFRE}.

MENT AND This system integrates the AFDC, Medicaid, and FS programs.
ELIGIBILITY JEVS System Contact: Jim Beach
SYSTEM Systems Team Leader
Phi: 207/287-3864

System is not yet FAMIS certified.
PLANNED Maine is developing a FAMIS system to replace the existing, which is over 20

years old. The new system will support AFDC, food stamps, Medicaid eligibility,
WELFARE JOBS, and some child care functions, and was expected to cost $22 million.
SYSTEMS
CHANGES

ME-1



MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for July 1993 Only.

1EVS Matches Records | Records | Records | Records | Records | Estimated
Conducted Submitted | Matched | Referred } Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
onducte for for Review Affect ments
Matching {Alerts} Benefit | Detected
State Wage 150,000 10,000 2,000 2,000 220 NA
Ul 450,000 | 30,000 2,200 2,200 100 NA
IRS NA NA NA NA NA NA
SSA Benefits 25,000 NA NA NA NA NA
SSI Benefits 125,000 NA NA NA NA NA
BEER NA NA NA NA NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993). (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 51,802 27,882 20,006 23,157 36,805 4
MIDMONTH 0 t) t) 19,205 24,835
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 1 70,458 108,678 206,529 24,117 52,871
MIDMONTH w jus 0 t) 0 22,166
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ;
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOSER
REGULAR 82,734 13.074 36,841 35.063 64,685 7,582
MIDMONTH 678 tf Ww 668 tw w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER} JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 18,672 100,546 150,760 241,150 72,579 120,567
MIDMONTH | 242,433 fal 16,766 27,897 30,269 59,984
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 37,755 3,428 wi 17,933 28,733 789
MIDMONTH 519 19,607 pual [+ 18.701
NOVEMBER ; DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 3.348 41.776 71544 127,933 39.489 62,443
MIDMONTH | 27.836 w 12,454 20,686 22,537 40,817

MA-5


MATCH COSTS
AND BENEFITS

State Respondent Perceptions of IEVS Cost Effectiveness

Is Match Cost Effective? IRS

State Wage Yes
Unemployment Yes

No
SSA _ Benefits Yes
SSI Benefits Yes
BEER No

- Recovered overpayments and debts
- Amounts of monthly benefits saved
- Other

BENDEX MATCH (SSA Benefits and BEER)
cosTs $713,490
BENEFITS $1,239,149
NET: 525,659

IRS MATCH
Cost Benefit Estimation (covers period from 7/90 to 6/91) NET:

CcOsTS

- Salaries, fringe benefits, and other
personnel costs

- Computer costs
- Costs associated with verification
- Other

BENEFITS

These conclusions are based not on study, but on experience.

State Estimates As Required For Matches With Federal Data

($168,513) oss

$41,288

$568,061
$0
$14,763

$624,112

$o
$455,095
$3,504

$458,599



IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

lEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Exciusion No SSI Medicaid eligibles, foster
Unique care, and subsidized adoption
information clients and anyone 13 years of
age or younger.

UL Exclusion No SSt Medicaid, ongoing nursing
Unique home (except at application),
information foster care, and subsidized

adoption clients and
anyone 16 years of age or
younger.

IRS Exclusion No SSI Medicaid, foster care, and
Unique subsidized adoption clients.
information Tolerance varies by type (1).
Tolerance

SSA Benefits Exclusion Yes Client has history of AFDC or
(Bendex) Unique Food Stamp issuance or has an
information active Medicaid code in the
quarter or year.
SSI Benefits Exclusion Yes Client has history of AFDC or

(SDX) Unique Food Stamp issuance or has an
information active Medicaid code in the

quarter or year.

BEER Exclusion Yes SSI Medicaid, foster care, and
Disregard certain subsidized adoption clients and
information anyone 13 years of age or
Unique younger.
information Client has history of AFDC or

Food Stamp issuance or has an
active Medicaid code in the
quarter or year.

Disregard duplicate information
provided by State wage match.

(1) a. For amounts GE$50 follow up winnings, interest, patronage dividends, savings
bonds, stocks and bonds, prizes and awards, total pension distribution, other
pension distribution, and other income.

b. For amounts GE$500 follow up prior year refunds, agricultural subsidies, and
aggregate profit/oss.

c. Nom levels, but requiring follow up, are dividends, unemployment, cash liquidation
distributions, rents, royaities, original issue discount, other taxable income, and real

estate sales.

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC

program.

1A-3



MISCELLANEOUS

As indicated previously, the District of Columbia has a fully automated
client eligibility determination system which is accessed by workers
directly. Workers are informed of match alerts electronically; their
resolution of these requires that they specify, using codes, the result
and subsequent actions of their review. Using a menu driven program,
the worker is able to specify which match interface record is to be
reviewed. Each match type has its own disposition screen in the system.
However, the disposition codes are the same for all:

°

individual does not participate in the program, or eligibility
has been denied

individual is currently eligible, no change in grant or benefits
individual is currently eligible, grant/benefits reduced
individual is currently eligible, grant/benefits reduced, case
referred to claims/fraud

individual is currently eligible, grant/benefits increased

- case closed due to IEVS match

case closed due to IEVS match, referred to claims/fraud

- case previously closed, no action required

- case previously closed, referred to claims/fraud

ens

avouan

The following are examples of two interface screens for Bendex. Similar
screens are available for all IEVS matches.

Bendex Information Bendex Disposition
Screen Screen
& . ’
ptf tlt .
If 8 a 2s
= Foy a?
ame = w
field Zs
g.s823 2 395 >
zg, chpeks foptee #,
E8pi5E £8 = 3-%
| gaeiid zeckey = RZ
Bz g gREeEe 558 B g°k
22 84 Hy £ gE:
& = 5 few
fli! ie
5° H ,:
a qd aft tt Pease | st igs
FH g ¢ g3 Be:
3 5 § B, 28:
Hy e325... 23°
suche 2 8 ghee
pi eee fab |b:
a = giad &
| paezee i8e?
Sf gs554 SESE
By Roa?e sca) 5
ZE S0ly ¢
a4 Boks: ade Bo Eecseseccusceeuee

DC-8



MISSOURI

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

1991 JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER [ NOVEMBER DECEMBER
603,988 0 1,822 33,550 f) 58,079
q992 | 2AMuaRY FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
iva] 68,646 0 0 | 58,768 55,508
1992 JULY AuGuST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 715,767 57,503 Oo. 44,105 86,030
4993 _2ANUARY FEBRUARY | MARCR apr | MAY JUNE
, 78,934 38,819 37.567 | 31,085 26,108
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 107,985 0 w 62,398 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
180,710] . 0 0 66,601 t) 0
JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER |:
102,06 0 w 56453 | 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
56,423 0 f) 50,098 o | f)
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 t) 0 i) 0 i. 0
[ sanuary | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY =| JUNE
0 0 0 0 0 0
RESPONSES | _ JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 a 0 ! 0 J 0
[ January | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY | JUNE
0 D o 0 0 ! t)



a
i
4s

MICHIGAN

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

. ; ina: Include
Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: in ogee
# of records submitted for matching i Yes

| _# of records which matched with external data Yes

| # of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes Hl

|_# of alerts worked by eligibility workers ml Yes |
# of alerts resulting in a change to eli ity status/benefit > Yes |
Amount of savings determined from JEVS alerts No

1 # or alerts worked in 45 days — bl ves

' # or alerts past due {not worked in 45 days} > Yes
Staff time to complete follow up No

__ Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

These reports are only available for the State wage match.

FLEXIBILITY AND

Michigan staff consider the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "States should be free to set their own schedules
according to the particular’match.”
Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.
For calendar year 1993, staff estimate less than 80 percent of the
State Wage match results were followed up on (50 percent follow up) in
45 days. This State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the
45 day follow up timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC
cannot waive this requirement except for demonstration purposes.
Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.
FOLLOW UP All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.
PRIORITIZATION
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Michigan uses SSA's
EXCHANGING . File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or send SSA Data.
DATA WITH However, Michigan has not yet implemented use of the State Verification
and Exchange System.
FEDERAL
AGENCIES During 1992, 366,543 records were submitted to SSA for verification using

the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

nay



FOLLOWING ARE THE INDIVIDUAL
PROFILES FOR EACH STATE
FROM ALABAMA TO MONTANA

(OTHER STATES ARE IN PART II)


FLORIDA

MATCH
STATISTICS IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)
JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 282,423 o 206,528 293,611 0 0
1992 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
inal 534,315 265,985 24,564 987,858 11.615
1992 JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
12,531 0 1,397,836 780,368 0 520,445
1993 JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
ja] 736,568 0 916,787 518,977 211,335

ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)

INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 0 0 [a] 0 C) 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a a a 0 0 a
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER'| OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 a a a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 o a 0 ti) o

WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS SULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER

537,218 132,249 $12,443 444,611 208,357 * NA
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
161,025 149,775 202,747 WA 187,727 197,211
RESPONSES JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
537,218 281,060 618,284 448,844 210,385 NA
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH ‘APRIL MAY JUNE

162,784 151,437 204,346 NA 189,794 199,247
t



MASSACHUSETTS

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

1991 | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
i a 9 fT fy ' a 0
qog2 (JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL {MAY JUNE
ual 591,046 o A 0 : 0 a
qgg2 2 AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
: a 0 623,821 | 0 a
1 JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL | MAY JUNE
1993 ;
, 0 a : G 0 a
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION! 59,526 64,811 57,331 67,340 58,285
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL | MAY JUNE
; 86,905 64,795 60,024 © «59,313 «| «67,764 53,210
VERIFIED | July AUGUST |SEPTEMBER.| OCTOBER j NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
i 28,071 33,325 + 26,294 Hl 35,995 27,282
(SanUARY_| FEBRUARY ot aPait | _-MAY JUNE
35650 | 34871 2693 | 29.095 (38,188 24,643
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS {| JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
H 0 t) 0 : fT t 0 a)
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL | MAY JUNE
a a 0 : o , o t)
RESPONSES | July August |sepTempBeR | ocToBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
i 0 o 0 . a if 0 0
i ganuarY | FEBRUARY | MARCH pai [MAY JUNE
! ty) 0 ) 9 : 0 0

MA-6



GEORGIA

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

IEVS Matches Records | Records | Records | Records | Records |Estimated
c d Submitted | Matched | Referred { Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
onducte for for Review] Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage 5,039,617 |4,361,959 | 643,179] NA NA NA
ul NA NA NA} NA NA NA
IRS 385,347 | 320,461| 127,734[ NA NA NA
SSA Benefits 268,752 | 278,520 25,861; NA NA NA
SSI Benefits NA NA NA] NA NA NA
BEER 40,348 41,688 7,016{ NA NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993). (Accretions)
MAY ‘JOE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER ] OCTOBER
REGULAR 20,821 46,731 33.567 32,945 32,339 13,263
MIDMONTH a 0 w 0 0 r)
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 35,721 21,482 62,417 19,100 18,451 38,448
MIDMONTH w 0 8 t) Q
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ,
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 39,088 16,643 45,287 44,327 49,812 577.035
MIDMONTH 1,061 ual ful _ 1,073 w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER) JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 64,500 39,336 1.213 39,001 40,503 72,337
MIDMONTH | 295,285 [val 11,775 13,776 16,046 18,679
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
[May JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 25,523 5,881 mw 21,743 21,868 1,052
MIDMONTH 629 19,019 ow w 11,972 1,406
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 25,307 28,582 27,448 30,687 33,036 34,885
MIDMONTH | 97,913 val 9,039 11,525 | 14,012 16,328

GA-5



MONTANA

u IEVS MATCHING

1} JEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
us Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | No No |
{} Ur Yes | Weekly © Yes © Monthly Hardcopy |
: H IRS Wo 0 Ng
SSA Bonefits| Yes | Monthly ° Yes | Monthly | Electronic (S&V)
t} SSI Benefits | Yes Monthly, 7 Monthly [Electronic (S&V) |
lt BEER Wo! !fo : ~ a

S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.

i Follow up for several matches was discontinued. For example,

the State Wage match was discontinued in 1992 because of a

ay “reported information overload to the county offices.” BEER

i was discontinued in 1990 because the information was considered
i to be “too old and unreliabie.” Additionally, IRS information is not
utilized. This resulted because Familiy Assistance Management
Information System (FAMIS) uses a contractor. Since IRS does
not allow contractors access to IRS tapes, Montana stopped
processing IRS matches.

Montana's approved targeting plan specifically precludes follow up
of BEER results.

Method(s) of Matching

State
I Wage ul IRS SSA ssi BEER
| Online Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
| Online
}
State Wage and Ul information are available to the worker online.
i ONLINE ACEESS Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client, historical SSA
benefit information may be available.
}
} Workers are not required by policy to access available online information
at application or redeterminations.
: Online access to the State Wage and UI database is possible because
} both agencies use a common computer system.
| State Historical | Historical Historical
i Wage ul IRS SSA SSI | BEER
Do Workers Have
Online Access? Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
| How Many Offices? All All All All



i
i
Le

ne peed

MINNESOTA

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

| Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: hin Hoport
# of records submitted for matching Yes
,_# of records which matched with external data ‘Yes
# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers i Yes
| _# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit Yes
* Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts 1 Yes
i # or alerts worked in 45 days i Yes j
|_ # or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) i_Yes 7
: Staff time to complete follow up 1 Yes |
|_ Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped Y No !

FLEXIBILITY AND

Minnesota considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "Regulations should allow individual States to indicate
resolution timeframes to be met and why they are adequate.”
interviewed staff suspect efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.
For 1993, staff estimate that more than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were foliowed up on in 45 days. However, staff lack data
to accurately support this conclusion. Counties are monitored
though food stamp and compliance reports which focus on’many
issues other than IEVS compliance.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow
up by using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP All IEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.

PRIORITIZATION

METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Minnesota does not

EXCHANGING presently use SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive

DATA WITH and/or send SSA information, nor has it implemented use of the
State Verification and Exchange System.

FEDERAL fe Menmeation a gewy

AGENCIES During 1992, 1,345,909 records were submitted to SSA for verification

using the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.



MICHIGAN

IEVS TARGETING

lEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
METHODS STRATEGY ACTIVE P|
(AFDC Program) i
State Wage Exclusion te Yes te Client active for part of time
Discrepancy ‘o period to which match pertains. -

«oi information not available.

ul Exclusion Yes Client active for part of time
period to which match pertains. “y
IRS Exclusion ‘ei Yes «Client active for part of time il
Disregard certain period to which match pertains.
information Disregard - Information not '
Tolerance im available. j
«ninformation not available. .
SSA Benefits | No targeting Yes All information is forwarded for 4
({Bendex) follow up if the client is active |
at the time the information is
received. “y
i
SSI Benefits No targeting (1) Yes i
{SDX}
1
BEER Exclusion 1 Yes te: Client active for part of time i
Disregard certain period to which match pertains. .
information tm nformation not available.
Unique :
information :

Tolerance m

(1) State automatically updates SDX file information received on active clients.

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs : Information not available



MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

lEVS Matches Records | Records Records | Records | Records |Estimated
d d Submitted | Matched Referred | Reviewed | Found Tc | Overpay-
Conducte: for for Review! Affect ments
Matching {Alerts} Benefit | Detected
State Wage 1,683,724| 247,768] 247,768! NA NA NA
Ul 8,821,740, 837.240| 837,240] NA NA NA
IRS 148,103 42,132 2,364, NA NA NA
SSA Benefits 21,465| 21,465, NA NA NA
SSI Benefits 192,083 | 1,692,900] 4,692,900| NA NA NA
BEER | 184,204 1,122] NA NA NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993). (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 14,421 13,812 13,498 15,559 15,218 16,595
MIDMONTH 0 a w 0 0 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
RecuiaR =! 17,010 17,306 18,646 16,431 16,495 17,282
MIDMONTH ww w a o 0 0
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) :
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 19,039 16,916 15,849 19,8889 18,408 21,186
MIDMONTH 398 w val 208 w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER| JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 23,332 21,683 25.727 22,408 22,768 25,495
MIDMONTH 41,009 a] 3,624 4,233 4,808 5,496
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 12,298 11,577 w 11211 11,624 12,630
MIDMONTH 85 808 w ua] 7,170 670
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER; JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 13,007 15,175 16,762 15,482 16,178 16,731
MIDMONTH | 46,155 vA] 2,447 2,848 3,365 3,881



MISCELLANEOUS

(Continued)

SAMPLE IEVS REPORTS

TEVS

CASE NAME: QMS , BARBARA
CASE NUMBER: Coane

ie ——— ERIC

DUE DATE: 08/24/93
REMARKS:

‘SOX CASE DETAIL
FOOD STAMPS

REPORT: EKIXAS-R1

SCREEN: ECIGIM
DATE: 08/10/93
TIME: 09:21:07

TECHNICIAN: 603 COUNTY /OFFICE: 64

INCOME MONTH: 06/93 FS-3B: 4
CLIENT REPORTED: 296.00
SDX REPORTED: 391.00
DIFFERENCE: 95.00
ACTION

REPORT: EKIRE1-R1

1EVS ER CASE DETAIL
‘000 STAMPS SCREEN: ECIGIS
DATE: 08/10/93
CASE NAME VICKS TIME: 09:20:12
CASE NUMBI TECHNICIAN: 604 COUNTY/OFFICE: 64
} ROBERT ACTIVE ARMY MILITARY
DFAS-I-YAA 11,463.02
EMPLOYER CODE 359990000 DFAS I YAR YEAR: 91
INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46249 NEW
ACTION: __ DUE DATE: 08/24/93
REMARKS:
TEVS UIB CASE DETAIL REPORT: EXIUE1-R1
00D STAMPS SCREEN: ECIGIA
DATE: 08/10/93
CASE NAME: ROSA TIME: 09:29:02
CASE NUMBER: TECHNICIAN: 604 COUNTY/OFFICE: 64
css DOLE
INCOME MONTH: 06/93
qq) ROSA ROSA A
Ng DOLE PAID: 624.00
CLIENT REPORTED: -00 DIFFERENCE: 624.00
AFOC CASE Qi
DUE DATE: 08/24/93 ACTION: __
REHARKS:
levs REPORT: EKIBEA-R1

CASE NAME: | RUPERTA
CASE NUMBER: 8
ea

DUE DATE: 08/24/93

REMARKS:

BENDEX CASE DETAIL
FOOD STAMPS

08244241

TIME:
TECHNICIAN: 604 COUNTY/OFFICE: 64

INCOME MONTH: 07/93 ~FS-38: 10
CLIENT REPORTED: 00
BENDEX REPORTED: 374.00
DIFFERENCE: 374.00

ACTION: __

C0-18



r - pe

MATCH

STATISTICS IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY [ AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 0 51,328 9 29,360 45,035 281,711

ggg | vamuany | Feenuany | “wanci | APRIL MAY JUNE
1 w 37.456 i) 28,018 a 48,740
tag2 | luv __| auoust |sePTewnen | octosen | wovewsen | neceMBEa

a 56,739 0 39,156 39,888 0

Januany [FEBRUARY | MARCH | APRIL MAY JUNE
1998 w 307,994 o 59,805 0 38,817

ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)

INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION| 24,889 26,102 26,862 24,895 52,512
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
23,097 26,614 55,948 f 53,096 26,163
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
5.874 7.148 ia] 7523 4,890 13,111
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
: 3,838 6.372 15,330 0 12,585 | 6,265

WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)

REQUESTS JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
[) a 0 0 | t) 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
8 a 0 0 0 a
RESPONSES JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
i Cy) a 9 o i | a
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY [ JUNE
0 0 0 0 0 | 0

CT-6


MINNESOTA

IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Exclusion ie Yes te: Client must be recipi
Discrepancy tm applicant for part of time period
to which match pertains
«or GES 1000 per quarter or $333
per month.
Ur Exciusion ie Yes 1 Client must be recipient or
Discrepancy io applicant for part of time period
to which match pertains.
40 GE$ 200 per month.
IRS Exclusion is Yes te Client must be recipient or
Tolerance m applicant for part of time period
to which match pertains.
im Unearned income - LES900
per year or $25 per month.
SSA Benefits Exclusion 16 Yes 1 Client must be recipient or
(Bendex) Discrepancy «01 applicant for part of time period
to which match pertains.
101 GE$10 per month.
SSI Benefits Exclusion er Yes te Client must be recipient or
{SDX) Discrepancy i applicant for part of time period
to which match pertains,
1 GE$10 per month.

BEER Exclusion te Yes it must be recipient or
Disregard certain applicant for part of time period
information to which match pertains.
Tolerance m Disregard duplicate information

provided by State wage match.
rmLe$1500 per year.

Targeting criteria for the Food Stamp program is the same as that of the AFDC program.
However, the Medicaid program targets out clients with SSI income {other criteria are the

same).



ALABAMA

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

Statistics For Medicaid Program Only
hi Records | Records Records | Records | Records | Estimated
IEVS Matches Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage 70,000 65 65 27 oO $0
Ul 70,000 26 26 0 o! $0
IRS 229,701 4,000 687 687 0 | $0
SSA Benefits 24,600 1,096 1,096 1,096 16 | $2,891
SSI Benefits 2,241,744 | 2,064,264' 161,424 | 137,208 NA NA
BEER NA NA NA NA NA | NA
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 21,844 23,633 22,139 21,913 26,028 25,347
MIDMONTH 0 167 w 731 0 0
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 23,195 28,697 21,882 22,471 | 1,868 29.768
MIDMONTH Ww w a o | r) 8
|
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ;
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST {SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 40,337 35,536 31.470 32,187 41,723 36,532
MIDMONTH 4,041 [ua] w _ 2219 w
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 48,240 48,491 48,015 44,361; 28,749 55,380
MIDMONTH | 255,016 fia] 15,098 17,626 | 20,126 23,460
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
| MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR | 25,926 22,683 24,250 28,533 27,155
MIDMONTH | 256 4,850 w ia 16,765 2,285
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 28,100 35,509 31,318 34,409 | 11,836 34.450
MIDMONTH 44,646 Ww 8,947 10,965, = 12,070 13,894

AL-5


LOUIS

IEVS TARGETING

lEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
METHODS STRATEGY ACTIVE r
i
(AFDC Program) 5 i
State Wage Exclusion te Yes te Client active Food Stamp
Discrepancy 10 recipient for all reported rc
Other quarter. i

to) GE$500 per quarter more

than that budgeted on the FS
case; discrepancy may be -
postponed until month prior to 4
FS redetermination if that i
month is within 3 months; if

not within 3 months, the if

discrepancy is not postponed. 1
ul Discrepancy Yes Reported UI {after converting to

a monthly amount) must be at !

least $1 greater than that {

budgeted for the FS case.

IRS Disregard certain Yes Disregard Ut and Federal tax
information . refunds. i
Tolerance LE$500 per year.
SSA Benefits Change in benefit Yes Reported must be at least $1 !
(Bendex) information greater than that budgeted on 2
Discrepancy the FS case.
'
SSI Benefits Change in benefit Yes Reported must be at least $1 i
(SDx) information greater than that budgeted on ‘
Discrepancy the FS case. ‘
BEER State does not j
follow-up on ;
match data 1

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the AFDC
program.

LA-3


a rete ee

FLORIDA

MISCELLANEOUS

During CY 1992, Florida was completing its conversions to a statewide
computer system called the Florida On-line Recipient Integrated Data
Access (FLORIDA) System. Numerous system problems (including
excessive “down time" and limited access) resulted in worker efforts
being concentrated on essential case actions to ensure the issuance

of benefits. As a result, IEVS reviews and the completion of savings
calculations were often placed at a lower priority. Preliminary figures
for 1993 show marked improvement in the completion of IEVS reviews.

Florida is currently redesigning its IEVS process on the FLORIDA
System. Efforts to reduce the number of unnecessary matches
requested, perform automated reviews, display responses in a more
usable manner, and simplify the process of reviewing responses are
anticipated to be completed in early 1995.

FL-8



IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? + When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Daily Yes | Monthly Electronic (S & V)
U Yes Weekly Yes Weekly |Electronic (S & V)
IRS No Yes Monthly * [Electronic (S & V)
SSA Benefits | No Yes Biweekly Electronic (S & V)
SSI Benefits | Yes Weekly Yes Weekly Electronic (S & V)
BEER Yes Monthly Yes Monthly [Electronic (S & V)
S & V= Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.

i *au recipients are submitted each month. i

For SSi benefit match, hardcopy reports are also generated. Alaska
reports it does not maintain an historical database resulting from
tEVS matches.

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage ul IRS SSA ssl BEER
Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online {| Online | Online Ontine | Online | Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO IEVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
at the time of application. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

Online access to the State Wage and UI database is achieved through
an electronic link between welfare's computer and the Labor agency's
computer.

State Historica! | Historical Historic!
Wage | UI IRS | ssA | ssi | BEER
Do Workers Hi
Online Access? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
How Many Offices? All All All All All All

AK-2



CALIFORNIA

MATCH
STATISTICS

Federal Database
Matches

State Supplied Statistics for Calendar Year 1992

(AFDC and FS programs)

IEVS Matches Records | Records Records |- Records | Records | Estimated
Submitted | Matched | Referred | Reviewed | Found To | Overpay-
Conducted for for Review, Affect ments
Matching (Alerts) Benefit | Detected
State Wage 12,082,000; 1,215,000] 599,000 NA 5,882 $8,098,000
ul 41,454,000| 1,510,000 | 1,159,000 NA 1,149 | $477,000
{RS 3,334,000| 130,127 11,644 NA 176 | $467,452
SSA Benefits |38,144,000| 364,000| 188,000 NA NA NA
SSI Benefits 12,082,000| 13,359 13,359 NA NA *
BEER nal NA NA] NA NA NA
* Overpayments included with State Wage Overpayments
Data Provided by Federal Source Agencies (SSA and IRS)
BENDEX INPUT (May 1992-April 1993) (Accretions)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 260,432 245,650 208,872 249,051 256,180 224,155
MIDMONTH ! 0 245,650 w a | a 224,155
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 243,481 223,916 241,833 223,809 |. 266,655 258,849
MIDMONTH Ww a 0 a a
BENDEX OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993) ;
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 505,504 457.832 422,519 472,701 512,267 447,815
MIDMONTH 3,496 mw _ 3.233 wi
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 572,910 468,071 535,613 516,608 601,191 602,005
MIDMONTH i 1,093,478 [nay 83,323 100,307 | 118,538 136,365
BEER OUTPUT (May 1992-April 1993)
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER
REGULAR 277,006 240,335 w 237,551 249,503 220,023
MIDMONTH 2,596 23,323 ju ag 152.235 221,921
NOVEMBER | DECEMBER | JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL
REGULAR 257,039 245,109 272,868 280,339 319,782 328,299
MIDMONTH 254,540 PAY 50,370 60.964 | 72,965 82,870

CA-5


IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: jincluded
| # of records submitted for matching 1 Yes |
(_# of records which matched with external data L Yes
|_# of records resulting in alerts for workers i Yes |
| # of alerts worked by eligibility workers Yes =
i_# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit i NA;
i Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts | Yes j
|_# or alerts worked in 45 days "Yes
;_# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) Yes

Staff time to complete follow up i No
;_ Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped Yes

FLEXIBILITY AND
FOLLOW UP

Florida considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
Staff stated, “The standard should reflect the amount of work processed
rather than the percentage of work processed. States should not be
punished for choosing to be more thorough (targeting less and doing
more}. Also, States with higher match rates’ due to demographics
should not be punished as a result.”

Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.

During 1992, staff report somewhat less than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were followed up on (65 percent follow up in 45 days). This
State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow up
timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot waive this
requirement except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP
PRIORITIZATION

All lEVS matches (results) are prioritized equally for follow up.

METHOD OF
EXCHANGING
DATA WITH
FEDERAL
AGENCIES

BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Florida presently

uses SSA's File Transfer Management System {FTMS) to receive and/or
send SSA Benefit, BEER, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1991. Tape
exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, and submission of death records. Florida

implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System in 1991.

During 1992, 690,445 were submitted to SSA for verification using the
Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.



MISCELLANEOUS

Sample of 1EVS data collection form used by Arizona workers to
record results of IEVS reviews in conjunction with the FNS Targeting
study Arizona was participating in.

Document #

—___
DATA COLLECTION Site Code
{ 1 IRs { ] BEER ( ] BASE WAGE OATE OF REPORT WU
AZTECS # Client ID
elieat @i Citeat WF Citeat ep
ET Name OP EI Date Completed
TASK: CASE HANDLED: 1°! time/2-¢ time|3:¢ time/4t® time/St® time

Review Case

Client Contact: Correspondence,
telephone, in person

Correspondence sent to
collateral contact or 3r4
party query

Recompute eligibility and
benefits

Referral to OPU (FA-526)

Completion of FA-529

Other (explain)

ENTER TOTAL TIME SPENT
(Round up to nearest 5 min.)

THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN CURRENT BENEFITS AS A RESULT OP THIS REPORT
INSERT LETTER OF APPROPRIATE REASON IN SPACES TO THE LEFT

(] Fs [A] inactive case {H] employer reported wrong amt.
{] aArpc [B] recipient not active (1] wrong ssn .
(] MA {cj already reported (3) excluded income
(D] already budgeted (K) prior period, no effect on
(£] case transferred to a current benefits
non-target office {L] already denied

{F] case transferred to target offc. (4] other (explain)
{¢] employer will not verify income

AS A RESULT OF THIS REPORT, CURRENT BENEFITS WERE:

ONGOING: RECERT/REVIEW:

(] reduced to: FS $ AFDC S$. Indicate benefit prior to month of
benefit amt. prior to reduction Recert/Review FS S$. AFDC S.
FS $ AFDC $____ () denied/closed

() closed (enter closure reason code) (enter denial/closure reason code)
FS AFDC MA Fs AFDC MA
benefit amt. prior to closure {] continued at lesser amount:
Fs $ AFDC §. FS $. AFDC S$.

() other (explain) {] other (explain)

OVERPAYMENT:

OP amount [] FS §. (1 aFoc s. Agency caused ___ Client caused ___|

AZ-8





INDIANA |

IEVS MONITORING

AND TRACKING Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: Included
in Report
# of records submitted for matching Yes
# of records which matched with external data Yes
# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers No
# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit Yes
Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts No
# or alerts worked in 45 days Yes
# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) Yes
Staff time to complete follow up i Yes
Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped [No
FLEXIBILITY AND Indiana considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.
FOLLOW UP Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
7 requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of
workers.

For calendar year 1993, staff report less than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were followed up on in 45 days. This State presently has no
waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow up timeframe for the

Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot waive this

requirement except for demonstration purposes.

Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken.

FOLLOW UP lEvS BEER and IRS match results are prioritized for tollow up in ICES
counties. A second alert is sent to the supervisor if the compliance
PRIORITIZATION screen is not completed by the worker within 30 days of the initial alert.
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Indiana presently uses
EXCHANGING SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or send
DATA WITH SSA Benefit and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1992. Tape exchange
continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration verification
FEDERAL exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Indiana has not yet
AGENCIES implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 663,833 records were submitted to SSA for verification
using the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

IN-4


NON INVIN

MATCH
STATISTICS IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)
JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 |r 05 45,732 0 2,613 0 48,052
t992 _oatuaey [ Fepruany [“MaRcu APRIL may JUNE
w 0 43,703 21,125 21,049 41,096
tose | AuGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
o 620,071 (25,042 23,832 22,444 48,115
3 Lvawuany” | Fepauany | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
199 w 0 50,598 fy 19,011 44,276

ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)

INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION a 68,283 [val 64,883 90,924 106,847
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
te 83,710 88,053 63,775 62,820 82,422 82,786
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 26,387 23,301 | 46,482 62,142
JANUARY | FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY | JUNE
39,206 43,248 19,834 19,552 39,137 | 40,093

WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)

REQUESTS SULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 ¢ 0 0 0 “oO
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a QO t) o a 0

RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
io a 0 f) 0 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
| 0 0 0 0 i 0

AL-6


COLORADO

MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1991 38,407 0 106,531 48,536 0 537,611
yggo | January | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
ful 269,838 53,508 40,442 40,886 46,817
tage |v AUGUST | SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
39,608 46,378 37,311 83,434 38,318 351,246
qag3 | 2Awuany | Fearuary | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
| w 0 249,686 248,250 | 46,304 40,323
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR dULY AUGUST |SEPTEMBER | OCTORER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION] — 20.048 30,243 [va] 29,513 28,223 28,621
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY SUNE
28,610 28,342 13,680 30,070 3662 | 27.624
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST/SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
9,995 13,860 w 19,082 18,977 18,255
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
17,924 17,652 9.247 18,573 25,995 17,371
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS SULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
a 0 0 0 0 “Oo
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
0 0 a a i 0
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
a 0 D 0 a 8
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a f) 0 . | 90 0

C0-6



os

MISSOURI

IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

; Routine Tracking Reports Include The Following: lim Repert
b
# of records submitted for matching Yes
# of records which matched with external data Yes
:_# of records resulting in alerts for workers ‘Yes
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers : No
# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit ' No
: Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts No
|_# or alerts worked in 45 days H No
:_# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) H No '
Staff time to complete follow up ‘ No i
t Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

FLEXIBILITY AND

Missouri considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "Regulations should provide more flexibility."
Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the.45 day.follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.
For calendar year 1993, staff suspect somewhat Jess than 80 percent of
!EVS match results were followed up on (75 percent follow up) in 45 days.
This State presently has no waiver from FNS extending the 45 day follow
up timeframe for the Food Stamp program. The AFDC cannot waive this
requirement except for demonstration purposes.
Workers are not required to document the results of their review of IEVS
reports.
FOLLOW UP IEVS match results may be prioritized at the local office level.
PRIORITIZATION
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Missouri presently
EXCHANGING uses SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or
DATA WITH send SSA Benefit, and SSI data. Use of FTMS began in 1993. Tape
FEDERAL exchange continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration veri-
fication exchange, BEER, and submission of death records. Missouri has
AGENCIES not yet implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System.

During 1992, 289,414 records were submitted to SSA for verification using
the Enumeration Verification System.

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.



DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 5,544,159 (Rank - 14th) “1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 92
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $15,779 (Rank - 30th) increase 20g
Unemployment (6/93): 5.7 % AFDG Cases 1 38.2%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (average Monthiyy
Rank Food Stamp 465 68.2%
AFDC 4.82 28th Participants
My
Food Stamps 11.38 46th Medeata
icaid Payment barley 415 NIA
Medicaid payer, 2.11 36th Eligibles
(Annual)
Federal Share: AFDC 59.8% Medicaid 63.9%
WELFARE Ss DMINISTE
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 110 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: NA

State Capitol: Indianapolis

Welfare Agency: Indiana Family and Social Services Administration
Division of Family and Children .

1EVS Policy Contact: Bil! Hastings
Food Stamp Policy Supervisor
Family Independence Bureau
W363 Government Center South
402 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 Phi: 317/232-4946

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Indiana Client Eli

MENT AND AFDC, Medicaid, and food stamps are integrated.
ELIGIBILITY IEVS System Contact: Pat Roberson
SYSTEM ICES Track Manager
Ph#: 317/464-2356
Presently seeking or recently completed FAMIS certification.
PLANNED Indianais completing development a FAMIS system to support AFDC,
food stamps, and Medicaid eligibility.
WELFARE
SYSTEMS
CHANGES

IN-1

a)


DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 1,006,749 (Rank - 42nd) 1992 Welfare Population
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 44
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $13,707 {Rank - 40th) nant % Change
Unemployment (6/93): 6.0 % AFDC Cases 7 24.1%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (average Monthly)
Rank Food Stamp 71 29.13%
AFDC 3.13 Ilth Participants
Food Stamps 8.44 28th (Avetage Ment
Medicaid Parment . Medicald 70 NIA
fedicaid jrrrine 9-39 Ist Eligibles
tdanualy
Federal Share: AFDC 65% Medicaid 73.2%
WELFARE STATE ADMINISTERED
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 29 offices

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 266

State Capitol: Boise

Welfare Agency: Idaho Department of Health and Welfare
Department of Welfare Programs

IEVS Policy Contact: Linda White

Welfare Program Specialist

Department of Welfare Programs

450 W. State, 6th floor

Boise, 1D 83720-5450 Ph#: 208/334-5818

CASE MANAGE-

System Name: Eligibility Programs Integrated Computer System (EPICS).

MENT AND EPICS integrates AFDC, food stamps, and Medicaid. ©
ELIGIBILITY IEVS System Contact: Willie Uhrig
SYSTEM Supervisor, EPICS
Ph#: 208/334-5818
System was FAMIS certified on July 1, 1988.
PLANNED Idaho is planning to improve its FAMIS online capabilities at an estimated
cost of $4.1 million.
WELFARE
SYSTEMS
CHANGES

1D-1

et eee)


IEVS TARGETING
METHODS
(AFDC Program)

IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage | No targeting
UL No targeting
iRS Exclusion ie No See (1).
Disregard certain
information
Tolerance m
SSA Benefits No targeting
{Bendex)
SSI Benefits No targeting
{SDX)
BEER Exclusion ¢) No to For all earnings except
jisregard certain pensions and self-employment,
information client must have been involved
Tolerance m in a benefit program the entire

tax year.
Disregard all earnings except
pension, self employment,
agriculture, and wages
attributed to an out of State
employer.

im Out of State income
te$1000.

(1) a. Interest/dividend income GE$75 and does not require program participation in the

reported tax year
b. Out of State unemployment GeE$1000 and requires 6 months of program ,

participation during the tax year
c. 1099 reserved income GE$1000 and requires 6 months of program participation

during the tax year

Alerts are prioritized manually centrally using various schemes - the source of the match; the
amount of discrepancy or tolerance; the type of data or dollar amount indicated (IRS and
BEER). Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs are the same as that of the

AFDC program.

10-3





FLORIDA

IEVS MATCHING

IEVS Matches | With Applicants With Recipients Method of Sending
Conducted Done? When Done? When Results to Workers
State Wage | Yes Daily Yes Monthly Electronic (S & V)
Ul Yes Daily Yes Weekly Electronic (S & V)
RSs Yes Monthly Yes Annually Electronic (S & V}
SSA Benefits | Yes Daily Yes * Electronic (S & V)
SS! Benefits | Yes Daily Yes * Electronic (S & V)
BEER Yes Daily Yes Daily Electronic (S & V)
S & V=Sent to worker and viewed on worker's screen.
* Once accreted, State automatically notified when change occurs.

The IEVS targets out duplicate information during the matches, only
considering information unique from the match source. COLAs for

SSA benefits and SSI benefits are automatically updated without

requiring follow up by workers to confirm received information is accurate.
Florida is presently making a modification to its system so that any

BENDEX and/or SDX benefit information received throughout the year will

be automatically disposed of by the.computer just as it is done for the COLA.

Method(s) of Matching

State

Wage Ul IRS SSA ssi BEER

Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch Batch
Online | Online Online Online | Online | Online

ONLINE ACCESS
TO 1EVS DATA

State Wage, UI, and SSI information are available to the worker online
following the time of application. Match information received can also

be viewed for recipients. Additionally, if the applicant was a prior client,
historical SSA benefit, IRS, and BEER information may be available.
Workers can view any previously reviewed and disposed match information
{all historical information is retrievable from archives through a restoration
request process).

Workers are required by policy to access available online information
at application and redeterminations.

State Historical | Historical Historical
Wage ul IRS SSA ssi BEER
Do Workers Have
Online Access? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
How Many Offices? All All All All All All



IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

IEVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Change in Yes New employers.
employers
Ul Change in benefit Yes See (1).
information
IRS Disregard certain Yes Disregards vary by type (2).
information The resource limit is the
Tolerance tolerance level for winnings and

prizes and awards.

SSA Benefits Discrepancy Yes >$1 when payment amounts
(Bendex) compared.

SSI Benefits No targeting

{SDX)
BEER Disregard certain Yes Disregard all earnings except
information self employment, agricultural,
and pension.

(1) All UCB initially reported. Subsequent reports for follow up require change in maximum
weekly benefit amount, or the result of dividing the cumulative monthly amount by the
weekly amount is less than 4 or is not a whole number; such result indicates the weekly
amount fluctuates or the UCB is terminating.

(2) Disregard the following: in-State Ul; U.S. Treasury Department interest; prior year
refund, savings bond, ordinary income, debt outstanding/satisfied, fair market value for
real estate; interest if paid by same payor as reported previous tax year; winnings unless
total amount for case exceeds resource limit; and prizes and awards unless total amount
for case exceeds resource limit.

All targeting is done by computer. System targets out duplicate information and prioritizes
follow up based on actions needed. The system will bypass any Bendex Error Messages with
dates greater than one year from run date.

Targeting criteria for Medicaid and Food Stamp programs differ from that of the AFDC
program. The following reflect the differences:

Food Stamp Program State Wage - Tolerance $100; FS member wages for
comparable SWICA wage quarter are compared
and SWICA must have 10% or more wages
than were counted for FS during quarter; client
must have participated for all 3 months of wage

quarter
IRS - No reports as not cost effective
SDX - Discrepancy between SDX SS! amount and FS

SSI amount must be $2

Medicaid Program While basically same as AFDC, exclude several Medicaid client
categories for IRS match (e.g., clients who receive benefits as
a result of spend-down, pregnant women, and SOBRA
newborns).

AR-3


ANA

DEMOGRAPHICS Population: 4,219,973 (Rank - 21st) 1992 Welfare Population }
AND PROGRAM Number of counties: 64 t
STATISTICS Per Capita Income: $12,921 (Rank - 47th) ane # change i
Unemployment (6/93): 7.8 % AFDC Gases 92 0.8%
1990 Program/Payment Error Rates: (Average Monthly) t
Rank Food Stamp 714 7.09% i }
AFDC 5.74 35th Participants A
fAverage Monthly}
Food Stamps 11.18 44th ai
maid Payment Oth Medicaid 641 NIA
Medicaid jryren. 3.21 49ti Eligibles

Ganval!
Federal Share: AFDC 65% Medicaid 75.4%

WELFARE COUNTY ADMINISTERED AND STATE SUPERVISED i
ADMINISTRATION Number of local welfare offices: 69 offices |

Approximate number of eligibility workers: 1,299
State Capitol: Baton Rouge i
Welfare Agency: Louisiana Department of Social Services

Office of Family Support 1 |

IEVS Policy Contact: Sammy Guillory

: Family Security Program Coord. Supervisor
1885 Woodale Bivd., Room &16 i
Baton Rouge, LA 70806 Phi: 504/925-4547 A

System Name: Weifare Information System (WIS);

CASE MANAGE- Food Stamp Management Information System (FSMIS).
MENT AND The two systems are not integrated. The WIS integrates ,
ELIGIBILITY Medicaid and AFDC eligibility; the FSMIS is for food stamp
eligibility. iy
SYSTEM
IEVS System Contact: Randall Dupuy
Director

Automated Systems Section
Phi: 504/922-1632
System was not a FAMIS certified system as of early 1994. ny

PLANNED Louisiana is planning to implement a FAMIS system to integrate its

existing systems 11/94. The Louisiana Automated Management
WELFARE Information System (LAMI) will integrate AFDC and food stamp eligibility |
SYSTEMS while the WIS continues to handle Medicaid. This FAMIS system was a
CHANGES estimated to cost $10.2 million.



IEVS MONITORING
AND TRACKING

i i ina: Included
Routine Tracking Reports include The Following: in Report
# of records submitted for matching Yes
# of records which matched with external data Yes
# of records resulting in alerts for workers Yes
# of alerts worked by eligibility workers Yes
# of alerts resulting in a change to eligibility status/benefit Yes
Amount of savings determined from IEVS alerts No x
# or alerts worked in 45 days Yes
# or alerts past due (not worked in 45 days) Yes
Staff time to complete fotlow up No
Amount of IEVS identified savings actually recouped No

%* Available annually.

FLEXIBILITY AND

Itlinois considers the 80 percent follow up rule to be unreasonable.

FOLLOW UP Staff stated, "States should be given the flexibility to review the information
at the next redetermination or at the next unscheduled case review."
Interviewed staff report efforts to meet the 45 day follow up timeframe
requirement are only at the expense of more important activities of workers.
For calendar year 1993, staff report more than 80 percent of IEVS match
results were followed up on in 45 days.
Workers are required to enter in the computer the results of follow up by
using codes based on the action taken. Also, a narrative description of
the action taken is to be specified on the hardcopy alert.
FOLLOW UP IEVS match results are prioritized for follow up based on the type of
PRIORITIZATION match. This prioritization is done manually by the workers.
METHOD OF BENDEX AND BEER: To exchange data with SSA, Illinois presently uses
SSA's File Transfer Management System (FTMS) to receive and/or send
EXCHANGING SSA Benefit and SS! data. Use of FTMS began in 1993. Tape exchange
DATA WITH continues for matches with the Alphadent, enumeration verification
FEDERAL exchange, and submission of death records. Illinois has not yet
AGENCIES implemented use of the State Verification and Exchange System. BEER

information is exchanged electronically.

During 1992, 681,314 were submitted to SSA for verification using the
Enumeration Verification System. .

IRS: Computer tapes are exchanged with IRS on a routine basis.

IL-4



IEVS TARGETING
METHODS

(AFDC Program)

1EVS MATCH TARGETING CLIENT SPECIFICATIONS
STRATEGY ACTIVE
State Wage Tolerance Yes Le$750 per quarter.
Ul Tolerance Yes LE$100 per month.
IRS Tolerance 1E$50 per year.
SSA Benefits Tolerance Yes 1£$100.
({Bendex)
SS! Benefits State not
(SDX) matching
BEER Tolerance Yes Ue$300 per year.

All targeting for follow up is manual at the local office level. Targeting criteria for Medicaid
and Food Stamp programs differ from that of the AFDC program. The following reflect the
differences:

Food Stamp Program State Wage - Tolerance m $300 per quarter

Ul- No m
Bendex - Nom
BEER - m $300 per year
Medicaid Program For all matches, no m for Aged, Blind, and Disabled

GA-3



MATCH
STATISTICS

IRS INPUT (July 1991-June 1993)

SULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
1981 ) 51.978 721.813 56,527 51,317 47,170
qg92 | 2aNuany | Feenuany | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
w 52,370 0 58,251 t) 0
4992 _ AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
6 422,570 61,533 41,778 49,170 50,201
4993 |_2awuaRy | FeeRuany | Marck APRIL MAY JUNE
Ww 76,589 78,460 1,623 | 1,564 0
ENUMERATION VERIFICATION (July 1992-June 1993)
INPUT FOR JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
VERIFICATION 0 f) w a 148,691 35,058
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
29,127 24,127 14,850 59,033 42,903 15,754
VERIFIED JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 w 0 127,483 30,515
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
24,356 20,824 12,954 $1,161 | 14,183 134,482
WIRE THIRD PARTY QUERY (July 1993-June 1994)
REQUESTS JULY AuGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
0 0 0 0 a 7 oe
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
a f) 0 fy f) 0
RESPONSES | JULY AUGUST [SEPTEMBER | OCTOBER | NOVEMBER | DECEMBER
t) 0 0 0 a 0
JANUARY | FEBRUARY | MARCH Apa [MAY JUNE
fo a 0 o | oo 0

{

AR-6