cfr_sections
Data license: Public Domain (U.S. Government data) · Data source: Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API
24 rows where part_number = 275 and title_number = 7 sorted by section_id
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: subpart, subpart_name, amendment_citations
| section_id ▼ | title_number | title_name | chapter | subchapter | part_number | part_name | subpart | subpart_name | section_number | section_heading | agency | authority | source_citation | amendment_citations | full_text |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.1.1.1 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | A | Subpart A—Administration | § 275.1 General scope and purpose. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15898, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3407, Feb. 4, 1987; Amdt. 328, 56 FR 60051, Nov. 27, 1991; 75 FR 33436, June 11, 2010] | Under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, each State agency is responsible for the administration of SNAP in accordance with the Act, Regulations, and the State agency's plan of operation. To fulfill the requirements of the Act, each State agency shall have a system for monitoring and improving its administration of the program. The State agency is also responsible for reporting on its administration to FNS. These reports shall identify program deficiencies and the specific administrative action proposed to meet the program requirements established by the Secretary. If it is determined, however, that a State has failed without good cause to meet any of the program requirements established by the Secretary, or has failed to carry out the approved State plan of operation, the Department shall suspend and/or disallow from the State such funds as are determined to be appropriate in accordance with part 276 of this chapter. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.1.1.2 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | A | Subpart A—Administration | § 275.2 State agency responsibilities. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15898, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3407, Feb. 4, 1987; 86 FR 44586, Aug. 13, 2021; 88 FR 23559, Apr. 18, 2023] | (a) Establishment of the performance reporting system. (1) The State agency shall establish a continuing performance reporting system to monitor program administration and program operations. The method for establishing each component of the system is identified and explained in subparts B through F of this part. The components of the State agency's performance reporting system shall be: (i) Data collection through management evaluation (ME) reviews and quality control (QC) reviews; (ii) Analysis and evaluation of data from all sources; (iii) Corrective action planning; (iv) Corrective action implementation and monitoring; and (v) Reporting to FNS on program performance. (2) The State agency must ensure corrective action is effected at the State and project area levels. (b) Staffing standards. The State agency shall employ sufficient State level staff to perform all aspects of the Performance Reporting System as required in this part of the regulations. The staff used to conduct QC reviews shall not have prior knowledge of either the household or the decision under review. Where there is prior knowledge, the reviewer must disqualify her/himself. Prior knowledge is defined as having: (1) Taken any part in the decision that has been made in the case; (2) any discussion of the case with staff who participated in the decision; or (3) any personal knowledge of or acquaintance with persons in the case itself. To ensure no prior knowledge on the part of QC or ME reviewers, local project area staff shall not be used to conduct QC or ME reviews; exceptions to this requirement concerning local level staff may be granted with prior approval from FNS. However, local personnel shall not, under any circumstances, participate in ME reviews of their own project areas. (c) Use of third party contractors. Any State agency procuring services of a contractor for quality control related services, including any project or training that involves the interpretation of SNAP regulations, policies, or handbooks for quality c… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.1.1.3 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | A | Subpart A—Administration | § 275.3 Federal monitoring. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15898, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 237, 47 FR 57669, Dec. 28, 1982; Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6303, Feb. 17, 1984; Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3407, Feb. 4, 1987; 53 FR 1604, Jan. 21, 1988; 54 FR 23951, June 5, 1989; Amdt. 309, 55 FR 1672, Jan. 18, 1990; Amdt. 328, 56 FR 60051, Nov. 27, 1991; Amdt. 366, 62 FR 29658, June 2, 1997; Amdt. 373, 64 FR 38294, July 16, 1999; 68 FR 59523, Oct. 16, 2003; 75 FR 33436, June 11, 2010; 86 FR 44586, Aug. 13, 2021] | The Food and Nutrition Service shall conduct the review described in this section to determine whether a State agency is operating SNAP and the Performance Reporting System in accordance with program requirements. The Federal reviewer may consolidate the scheduling and conduction of these reviews to reduce the frequency of entry into the State agency. FNS regional offices will conduct additional reviews to examine State agency and project area operations, as considered necessary to determine compliance with program requirements. FNS shall notify the State agency of any deficiencies detected in program or system operations. Any deficiencies detected in program or system operations which do not necessitate long range analytical and evaluative measures for corrective action development shall be immediately corrected by the State agency. Within 60 days of receipt of the findings of each review established below, State agencies shall develop corrective action addressing all other deficiencies detected in either program or system operations and shall ensure that the State agency's own corrective action plan is amended and that FNS is provided this information at the time of the next formal semiannual update to the State agency's Corrective Action Plan, as required in § 275.17. (a) Reviews of State Agency's Administration/Operation of SNAP. FNS shall conduct an annual review of certain functions performed at the State agency level in the administration/operation of the program. FNS will designate specific areas required to be reviewed each fiscal year. (b) Reviews of State Agency's Management Evaluation System. FNS will review each State agency's management evaluation system on a biennial basis; however, FNS may review a State agency's management evaluation system on a more frequent basis if a regular review reveals serious deficiencies in the ME system. The ME review will include but not be limited to a determination of whether or not the State agency is complying with FNS regulations, an assessment of the State … | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.1.1.4 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | A | Subpart A—Administration | § 275.4 Record retention. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15898, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6304, Feb. 17, 1984; Amdt. 262, 49 FR 50597, Dec. 31, 1984; 75 FR 33436, June 11, 2010; 86 FR 44586, Aug. 13, 2021] | (a) The State agency shall maintain Performance Reporting System records to permit ready access to, and use of, these records. Performance Reporting System records include information used in data analysis and evaluation, corrective action plans, corrective action monitoring records in addition to ME review records and QC review records as explained in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. To be readily accessible, system records shall be retained and filed in an orderly fashion. Precautions should be taken to ensure that these records are retained without loss or destruction for the 3-year period required by these regulations. Information obtained on individual households for Performance Reporting System purposes shall be safeguarded in accordance with FNS policies on disclosure of information for SNAP. (b) ME review records consist of thorough documentation of review findings, sources from which information was obtained, procedures used to review SNAP requirements including sampling techniques and lists, and ME review plans. The State agency must submit documented evidence of review findings to the FNS Regional Office upon request for purposes of evaluating State corrective action plans. (c) QC review records consist of Forms FNS-380, Worksheet for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, FNS-380-1, Quality Control Review Schedule, FNS-245, Negative Quality Control Review Schedule; other materials supporting the review decision, including all correspondence with the household and all case notes, digital or otherwise, taken or used by the eligibility worker that are applicable to the review period; sample lists; sampling frames; tabulation sheets; and reports of the results of all quality control reviews during each review period. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.2.1.1 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | B | Subpart B—Management Evaluation (ME) Reviews | § 275.5 Scope and purpose. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 262, 49 FR 50597, Dec. 31, 1984; Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987] | (a) Objectives. Each State agency shall ensure that project areas operate SNAP in accordance with the Act, regulations, and FNS-approved State Plan of Operation. To ensure compliance with program requirements, ME reviews shall be conducted to measure compliance with the provisions of FNS regulations. The objectives of an ME review are to: (1) Provide a systematic method of monitoring and assessing program operations in the project areas; (2) Provide a basis for project areas to improve and strengthen program operations by identifying and correcting deficiencies; and (3) Provide a continuing flow of information between the project areas, the States, and FNS, necessary to develop the solutions to problems in program policy and procedures. (b) Frequency of review. (1) State agencies shall conduct a review once every year for large project areas, once every two years for medium project areas, and once every three years for small project areas, unless an alternate schedule is approved by FNS. The most current and accurate information on active monthly caseload available at the time the review schedule is developed shall be used to determine project area size. (2) A request for an alternate review schedule shall be submitted for approval in writing with a proposed schedule and justification. In any alternate schedule, each project area must be reviewed at least once every three years. Approval of an alternate schedule is dependent upon a State agency's justification that the project areas that will be reviewed less frequently than required in paragraph (b)(1) of this section are performing adequately and that previous reviews indicate few problems or that known problems have been corrected. FNS retains the authority for approving any alternate schedule and may approve a schedule in whole or in part. Until FNS approval of an alternate schedule is obtained, the State agency shall conduct reviews in accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section. (3) FNS may require the State agency to conduct additional on-si… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.2.1.2 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | B | Subpart B—Management Evaluation (ME) Reviews | § 275.6 Management units. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980; 45 FR 23637, Apr. 8, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987] | (a) Establishment of management units. For the purpose of ME reviews, State agencies may, subject to FNS approval, establish “management units” which are different from project areas designated by FNS for participation in the program. For example, State-established welfare districts, regions or other administrative structures within a State may be so designated. Management units can be designated as either large, medium, or small for purposes of frequency of review. However, establishment of management units solely for the purpose of reducing the frequency of review will not be approved by FNS. (b) FNS approval of management units. State agencies shall submit requests for establishment of management units to FNS, which shall have final authority for approval of such units as well as any changes in those previously approved by FNS. (1) The following minimum criteria must be met prior to requesting FNS approval: (i) The proposed management unit must correspond with existing State-established welfare districts, regions, or other administrative structures; and (ii) The unit must have supervisory control over SNAP operations within that geographic area and have authority for implementation of corrective action. (2) In submitting the request for FNS approval, the State agency shall include the following information regarding the proposed management unit: (i) That the proposed management unit meets the minimum criteria described in paragraphs (b)(1) (i) and (ii) of this section; (ii) Geographic coverage, including the names of the counties/project areas within the unit and the identification (district or region number) and location (city) of the office which has supervisory control over the management unit; (iii) SNAP participation, including the number of persons and number of households; (iv) The number of certification offices; (v) The number of issuance units; (vi) The dollar value of allotments issued as reflected in the most recent available data; and (vii) Any other relevant information. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.2.1.3 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | B | Subpart B—Management Evaluation (ME) Reviews | § 275.7 Selection of sub-units for review. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980; 45 FR 23638, Apr. 8, 1980; 45 FR 46784, July 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987; 81 FR 2741, Jan. 19, 2016] | (a) Definition of sub-units. Sub-units are the physical locations of organizational entities within project areas responsible for operating various aspects of SNAP and include but are not limited to certification offices, call centers, and employment and training offices. (b) Selection of Sub-units for Review. State agencies shall select a representative number of sub-units of each category for review in order to determine a project area's compliance with program standards. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.2.1.4 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | B | Subpart B—Management Evaluation (ME) Reviews | § 275.8 Review coverage. | FNS | [Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3408, Feb. 4, 1987, as amended by Amdt. 356, 59 FR 29713, June 9, 1994] | (a) During each review period, State agencies shall review the national target areas of program operation specified by FNS. FNS will notify State agencies of the minimum program areas to be reviewed at least 90 days before the beginning of each annual review period, which is the Federal fiscal year. FNS may add additional areas during the review period if deemed necessary. The FNS headquarters office will add national target areas during the review period only for deficiencies of national scope. State agencies have 60 days in which to establish a plan schedule for such reviews. (b) State agencies shall be responsible for reviewing each national target area or other program requirement based upon the provisions of the regulations governing SNAP and the FNS-approved Plan of Operation. If FNS approves a State agency's request for a waiver from a program requirement, any different policy approved by FNS would also be reviewed. When, in the course of a review, a project area is found to be out of compliance with a given program requirement, the State agency shall identify the specifics of the problem including: the extent of the deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and, as applicable, the specific procedural requirements the project area is misapplying. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.2.1.5 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | B | Subpart B—Management Evaluation (ME) Reviews | § 275.9 Review process. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15900, Mar. 11, 1980; 45 FR 25375, Apr. 15, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3409, Feb. 4, 1987; Amdt. 356, 59 FR 29713, June 9, 1994; 81 FR 2741, Jan. 19, 2016] | (a) Review procedures. State agencies shall review the program requirements specified for review in § 275.8 of this part using procedures that are adequate to identify problems and the causes of those problems. As each project area's operational structure will differ, State agencies shall review each program requirement applicable to the project area in a manner which will best measure the project area's compliance with each program requirement. (b) ME review plan. (1) State agencies shall develop a review plan prior to each ME review. This review plan shall specify whether each project area is large, medium, or small and shall contain: (i) Identification of the project area to be reviewed, program areas to be reviewed, the dates the review will be conducted, and the period of time that the review will cover; (ii) Information secured from the project area regarding its caseload and organization; (iii) Identification of the sub-units selected for review and the techniques used to select them; (iv) At State agency option it may also indicate whether the State agency is using the ME review process to perform non-discrimination reviews; and (v) A description of the review method(s) the State agency plans to use for each program area being reviewed. (2) ME review plans shall be maintained in an orderly fashion and be made available to FNS upon request. (c) Review methods. (1) State agenices shall determine the method of reviewing the program requirements associated with each program area. For some areas of program operation it may be necessary to use more than one method of review to determine if the project area is in compliance with program requirements. The procedures used shall be adequate to identify any problems and the causes of those problems. (2) State agencies shall ensure that the method used to review a program requirement does not bias the review findings. Bias can be introduced through leading questions, incomplete reviews, incorrect sampling techniques, etc. (d) Review worksheet. (1) S… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.3.1.1 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | C | Subpart C—Quality Control (QC) Reviews | § 275.10 Scope and purpose. | FNS | [Amdt. 149, 44 FR 45893, Aug. 3, 1979, as amended by Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6304, Feb. 17, 1984; 54 FR 7016, Feb. 15, 1989; Amdt. 328, 56 FR 60051, Nov. 27, 1991; Amdt. 373, 64 FR 38294, July 16, 1999; 75 FR 33436, June 11, 2010] | (a) As part of the Performance Reporting System, each State agency is responsible for conducting quality control reviews. For SNAP quality control reviews, a sample of households shall be selected from two different categories: Households which are participating in SNAP (called active cases) and households for which participation was denied, suspended or terminated (called negative cases). Reviews shall be conducted on active cases to determine if households are eligible and receiving the correct allotment of SNAP benefits. The determination of whether the household received the correct allotment will be made by comparing the eligibility data gathered during the review against the amount authorized on the master issuance file. Reviews of negative cases shall be conducted to determine whether the State agency's decision to deny, suspend or terminate the household, as of the review date, was correct. Quality control reviews measure the validity of SNAP cases at a given time (the review date) by reviewing against SNAP standards established in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 and the Regulations, taking into account any FNS authorized waivers to deviate from specific regulatory provisions. FNS and the State agency shall analyze findings of the reviews to determine the incidence and dollar amounts of errors, which will determine the State agency's liability for payment errors in accordance with the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, and to plan corrective action to reduce excessive levels of errors for any State agency. (b) The objectives of quality control reviews are to provide: (1) A systematic method of measuring the validity of the SNAP caseload; (2) A basis for determining error rates; (3) A timely continuous flow of information on which to base corrective action at all levels of administration; and (4) A basis for establishing State agency liability for errors that exceed the National performance measure. (c) The review process is the activity necessary to complete reviews and document findings… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.3.1.2 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | C | Subpart C—Quality Control (QC) Reviews | § 275.11 Sampling. | FNS | [Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6304, Feb. 17, 1984; 49 FR 14495, Apr. 12, 1984, as amended by Amdt. 262, 49 FR 50598, Dec. 31, 1984; Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3409, Feb. 4, 1987; Amdt. 328, 56 FR 60051, Nov. 27, 1991; Amdt. 366, 62 FR 29658, June 2, 1997; Amdt. 373, 64 FR 38295, July 16, 1999; 68 FR 59523, Oct. 16, 2003; 75 FR 33436, June 11, 2010; 86 FR 44586, Aug. 13, 2021] | (a) Sampling plan. Each State agency shall develop a quality control sampling plan which demonstrates the integrity of its sampling procedures. (1) Content. The sampling plan shall include a complete description of the frame, the method of sample selection, and methods for estimating characteristics of the population and their sampling errors. The description of the sample frames shall include: source, availability, accuracy, completeness, components, location, form, frequency of updates, deletion of cases not subject to review, and structure. The description of the methods of sample selection shall include procedures for: estimating caseload size, overpull, computation of sampling intervals and random starts (if any), stratification or clustering (if any), identifying sample cases, correcting over-or undersampling, and monitoring sample selection and assignment. A time schedule for each step in the sampling procedures shall be included. (2) Criteria. Sampling plans proposing non-proportional or other alternative designs shall document compliance with the approval criteria in paragraph (b)(4) of this section. All sampling plans shall: (i) Conform to principles of probability sampling; (ii) Specify and explain the basis for the sample sizes chosen by the State agency; (iii) If the State agency has chosen an active sample size as specified in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section, include a statement that, whether or not the sample size is increased to reflect an increase in participation as discussed in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the State agency will not use the size of the sample chosen as a basis for challenging the resulting error rates. (iv) If the State agency has chosen a negative sample size as specified in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, include a statement that, whether or not the sample size is increased to reflect an increase in negative actions as discussed in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the State agency will not use the size of the sample chosen as a basis for challengi… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.3.1.3 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | C | Subpart C—Quality Control (QC) Reviews | § 275.12 Review of active cases. | FNS | [Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6306, Feb. 17, 1984; 49 FR 14495, Apr. 12, 1984] | (a) General. A sample of households which were certified prior to, or during, the sample month and issued SNAP benefits for the sample month shall be selected for quality control review. These active cases shall be reviewed to determine if the household is eligible and, if eligible, whether the household is receiving the correct allotment. The determination of a household's eligibility shall be based on an examination and verification of all elements of eligibility (i.e., basic program requirements, resources, income, and deductions). The elements of eligibility are specified in §§ 273.1 and 273.3 through 273.9 of this chapter. The verified circumstances and the resulting benefit level determined by the quality control review shall be compared to the benefits authorized by the State agency as of the review date. When changes in household circumstances occur, the reviewer shall determine whether the changes were reported by the participant and handled by the agency in accordance with the rules set forth in §§ 273.12, 273.13 and 273.21 of this chapter, as appropriate. For active cases, the review date shall always fall within the sample month, either the first day of a calendar or fiscal month or the day of certification, whichever is later. The review of active cases shall include: a household case record review; a field investigation, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section; the identification of any variances; an error analysis; and the reporting of review findings. (b) Household case record review. The reviewer shall examine the household case record to identify the specific facts relating to the household's eligibility and basis of issuance. If the reviewer is unable to locate the household case record, the reviewer shall identify as many of the pertinent facts as possible from the household issuance record. The case record review shall include all information applicable to the case as of the review month, including the application and worksheet in effect as of the review date. Documentation c… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.3.1.4 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | C | Subpart C—Quality Control (QC) Reviews | § 275.13 Review of negative cases. | FNS | [Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6309, Feb. 17, 1984, as amended at 53 FR 39443, Oct. 7, 1988; Amdt. 373, 64 FR 38296, July 16, 1999; 75 FR 33437, June 11, 2010; 86 FR 44587, Aug. 13, 2021] | (a) General. A sample of actions to deny applications, or suspend or terminate a household in the sample month shall be selected for quality control review. These negative actions shall be reviewed to determine whether the State agency's decision to deny, suspend, or terminate the household, as of the review date, was correct. Depending on the characteristics of individual State systems, the review date for negative cases could be the date of the agency's decision to deny, suspend, or terminate program benefits, the date on which the decision is entered into the computer system, or the date of the notice to the client. State agencies must consistently apply the same definition for review date to all sample cases of the same classification. The review of negative cases shall include a household case record review; an error analysis; and the reporting of review findings, including procedural problems with the action regardless of the validity of the decision to deny, suspend or terminate. In certain instances, contact with the household or a collateral contact may be permitted. (b) Household case record review. The reviewer shall examine the household case record and verify through documentation in it whether the reason given for the denial, suspension, or termination is correct. Through the review of the household case record, the reviewer shall complete the household case record sections and document the reasons for denial, suspension or termination on the Negative Quality Control Review Schedule, Form FNS-245. (c) Error analysis. (1) A negative case shall be considered valid if the reviewer is able to verify through documentation in the household case record that a household was correctly denied, suspended, or terminated from the program in accordance with the reason for the action given by the State agency in the notice. Whenever the reviewer is unable to verify the correctness of the State agency's decision to deny, suspend, or terminate a household's participation through such documentation, the QC re… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.3.1.5 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | C | Subpart C—Quality Control (QC) Reviews | § 275.14 Review processing. | FNS | [Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6310, Feb. 17, 1984, as amended by Amdt. 262, 49 FR 50598, Dec. 31, 1984; 75 FR 33438, June 11, 2010] | (a) General. Each State agency shall use FNS handbooks, worksheets, and schedules in the quality control review process. (b) Handbooks. The reviewer shall follow the procedures outlined in the Quality Control Review Handbook, FNS Handbook 310, to conduct quality control reviews. In addition, the sample of active and negative cases shall be selected in accordance with the sampling techniques described in the Quality Control Sampling Handbook, FNS Handbook 311. (c) Worksheets. The Form FNS-380, shall be used by the reviewer to record required information from the case record, plan and conduct the field investigation, and record findings which contribute to the determination of eligibility and basis of issuance in the review of active cases. In some instances, reviewers may need to supplement Form FNS-380 with other forms. The State forms for appointments, interoffice communications, release of information, etc., should be used when appropriate. (d) Schedules. Decisions reached by the reviewer in active case reviews shall be coded and recorded on the Integrated Review Worksheet, Form FNS-380-1. Such active case review findings must be substantiated by information recorded on the Integrated Review Worksheet, Form FNS-380. In negative case reviews, the review findings shall be coded and recorded on the Negative Quality Control Review Schedule, Form FNS-245, and supplemented as necessary with other documentation substantiating the findings. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.4.1.1 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | D | Subpart D—Data Analysis and Evaluation | § 275.15 Data management. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15909, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3409, Feb. 4, 1987; Amdt. 320, 55 FR 6240, Feb. 22, 1990] | (a) Analysis. Analysis is the process of classifying data, such as by areas of program requirements or use of error-prone profiles, to provide a basis for studying the data and determining trends including significant characteristics and their relationships. (b) Evaluation. Evaluation is the process of determining the cause(s) of each deficiency, magnitude of the deficiency, and geographic extent of the deficiency, to provide the basis for planning and developing effective corrective action. (c) Each State agency must analyze and evaluate at the State and project area levels all management information sources available to: (1) Identify all deficiencies in program operations and systems; (2) Identify causal factors and their relationships; (3) Identify magnitude of each deficiency, where appropriate (This is the frequency of each deficiency occurring based on the number of program records reviewed and where applicable, the amount of loss either to the program or participants or potential participants in terms of dollars. The State agency shall include an estimate of the number of participants or potential participants affected by the existence of the deficiency, if applicable); (4) Determine the geographic extent of each deficiency (e.g., Statewide/individual project area or management unit); and, (5) Provide a basis for management decisions on planning, implementing, and evaluating corrective action. (d) In the evaluation of data, situations may arise where the State agency identifies the existence of a deficiency, but after reviewing all available management information sources sufficient information is not available to make a determination of the actual causal factor(s), magnitude, or geographic extent necessary for the development of appropriate corrective action. In these situations, the State agency shall be responsible for gathering additional data necessary to make these determinations. This action may include, but is not limited to, conducting additional full or partial ME reviews in one or mo… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.5.1.1 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | E | Subpart E—Corrective Action | § 275.16 Corrective action planning. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15909, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 169, 46 FR 7263, Jan. 23, 1981; Amdt. 262, 49 FR 50598, Dec. 31, 1984; Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3409, Feb. 4, 1987; Amdt. 328, 56 FR 60052, Nov. 27, 1991; 68 FR 59523, Oct. 16, 2003; 75 FR 33438, June 11, 2010; 81 FR 2741, Jan. 19, 2016] | (a) Corrective action planning is the process by which State agencies shall determine appropriate actions to reduce substantially or eliminate deficiencies in program operations and provide responsive service to eligible households. (b) The State agency and project area(s)/management unit(s), as appropriate, shall implement corrective action on all identified deficiencies. Deficiencies requiring action by the State agency or the combined efforts of the State agency and the project area(s)/management unit(s) in the planning, development, and implementation of corrective action are those which: (1) Result from a payment error rate of 6 percent or greater (actions to correct errors in individual cases, however, shall not be submitted as part of the State agency's corrective action plan); (2) Are the causes of other errors/deficiencies detected through quality control, including error rates of 1 percent or more in negative cases (actions to correct errors in individual cases, however, shall not be submitted as part of the State agency's corrective action plan); (3) Are identified by FNS reviews, GAO audits, contract audits, reports to FNS regarding the implementation of major changes (as discussed in § 272.15) or USDA audits or investigations at the State agency or project area level (except deficiencies in isolated cases as indicated by FNS); and, (4) Result from 5 percent or more of the State agency's QC sample being coded “not complete” as defined in § 275.12(g)(1) of this part. This standard shall apply separately to both active and negative samples. (5) Result in underissuances, improper denials, improper suspensions, improper termination, or improper systemic suspension of benefits to eligible households where such errors are caused by State agency rules, practices, or procedures. (c) The State agency shall ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken on all deficiencies including each case found to be in error by quality control reviews and those deficiencies requiring corrective action only at th… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.5.1.2 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | E | Subpart E—Corrective Action | § 275.17 State corrective action plan. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15909, Mar. 11, 1980, as amended by Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3409, Feb. 4, 1987] | (a) State agencies shall prepare corrective action plans addressing those deficiencies specified in § 275.16(b) requiring action by the State agency or the combined efforts of the State agency and the project area(s)/management unit(s). This corrective action plan is an open-ended plan and shall remain in effect until all deficiencies in program operations have been reduced substantially or eliminated. State agencies shall provide updates to their corrective action plans through regular, semiannual updates. These semiannual updates shall be received by FNS by May 1st and November 1st respectively. Such updates must contain: (1) Any additional deficiencies identified since the previous corrective action plan update; (2) Documentation that a deficiency has been corrected and is therefore being removed from the plan; and (3) Any changes to planned corrective actions for previously reported deficiencies. (b) Content. State corrective action plans shall contain, but not necessarily be limited to, the following, based on the most recent information available: (1) Specific description and identification of each deficiency; (2) Source(s) through which the deficiency was detected; (3) Magnitude of each deficiency, if appropriate, as defined in § 275.15(c)(3) of this part; (4) Geographic extent of the deficiency (e.g., Statewide/project area or management unit—specific project areas in which the deficiency occurs); (5) Identification of causal factor(s) contributing to the occurrence of each deficiency; (6) Identification of any action already completed to eliminate the deficiency; (7) For each deficiency, an outline of actions to be taken, the expected outcome of each action, the target date for each action, and the date by which each deficiency will have been eliminated; and (8) For each deficiency, a description of the manner in which the State agency will monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the corrective action in eliminating the deficiency. (c) FNS will provide technical assistance in developing … | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.5.1.3 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | E | Subpart E—Corrective Action | § 275.18 Project area/management unit corrective action plan. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15909, Mar. 11, 1980] | (a) The State agency shall ensure that corrective action plans are prepared at the project area/management unit level, addressing those deficiencies not required to be included in the State corrective action plan. State agencies may elect to prepare these plans for or in cooperation with the project area. These project area/management unit corrective action plans shall be open-ended and shall remain in effect until all deficiencies in program operations have been reduced substantially or eliminated. Any deficiencies detected through any source not previously reported to the State agency which require incorporation into the Project Area/Management Unit Corrective Action Plan shall be submitted to the State agency within 60 days of identification. As deficiencies are reduced substantially or eliminated, the project area/management unit shall notify the State agency in writing. The project area/management unit shall be responsible for documenting why each deficiency is being removed from the Plan. The removal of any deficiency from the Plan will be subject to State agency and FNS review and validation. (b) Content. Project area/management unit corrective action plans shall contain all the information necessary to enable the State agency to monitor and evaluate the corrective action properly. Also, State agencies shall establish requirements for project area/management units in planning, implementing and reporting corrective action to assist the State agency's efforts to fulfill its responsibilities for determining which deficiencies must be addressed in the State corrective action plan. States should consider requiring project area/management unit plans to include the following, based on the most recent information available: (1) Specific description and identification of each deficiency; (2) Source(s) through which the deficiency was detected; (3) Magnitude of each deficiency, if appropriate, as defined in § 275.15(c)(3) of this part; (4) Geographic extent of the deficiency (throughout the project area/manag… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.5.1.4 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | E | Subpart E—Corrective Action | § 275.19 Monitoring and evaluation. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15909, Mar. 11, 1980] | (a) The State agency shall establish a system for monitoring and evaluating corrective action at the State and project area levels. Monitoring and evaluation shall be an ongoing process to determine that deficiencies are being substantially reduced or eliminated in an efficient manner and that the program provides responsive service to eligible households. (b) The State agency shall ensure that corrective action on all deficiencies identified in the State Corrective Action Plan and Project Area/Management Unit Corrective Action Plan is implemented and achieves the anticipated results within the specified time frames. The State agency shall monitor and evaluate corrective action at the State and project levels through a combination of reports, field reviews, and examination of current data available through program management tools and other sources. (c) In instances where the State agency and/or the project area/management unit determines that the proposed corrective action is not effective in reducing substantially or eliminating deficiencies, the State agency and/or the project area/management unit shall promptly reevaluate the deficiency, causes, and the corrective action taken, and develop and implement new corrective actions. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.6.1.1 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | F | Subpart F—Responsibilities for Reporting on Program Performance | § 275.20 ME review schedules. | FNS | [Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3410, Feb. 4, 1987] | (a) Each State agency shall submit its review schedule to the appropriate FNS regional office at least 60 days prior to the beginning of the next year's review period (the Federal fiscal year). These schedules must ensure that all project areas/management units will be reviewed within the required time limits. Each schedule shall identify the project areas/management units in each classification and list each project area to be reviewed by month or by quarter. A State agency may submit a request to use an alternate review schedule at any time. The alternate schedule shall not be effective until approved by FNS in accordance with § 275.5(b)(2). (b) State agencies shall notify the appropriate FNS regional office of all changes in review schedules. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.6.1.2 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | F | Subpart F—Responsibilities for Reporting on Program Performance | § 275.21 Quality control review reports. | FNS | [Amdt. 260, 49 FR 6310, Feb. 17, 1984, as amended by Amdt. 262, 49 FR 50598, Dec. 31, 1984; Amdt. 266, 52 FR 3410, Feb. 4, 1987; 75 FR 33438, June 11, 2010; 86 FR 44857, Aug. 13, 2021; 86 FR 49229, Sept. 2, 2021] | (a) General. Each State agency shall submit reports on the performance of quality control reviews in accordance with the requirements outlined in this section. These reports are designed to enable FNS to monitor the State agency's compliance with Program requirements relative to the Quality Control Review System. Every case selected for review during the sample month must be accounted for and reflected in the appropriate report(s). (b) Individual cases. The State agency shall report the review findings on each case selected for review during the sample month. For active cases, the State agency shall thoroughly document the Quality Control Review Schedule, Form FNS-380, to ensure any subsequent case reviewers fully understand household circumstances pertaining to the QC review as well as the reasons for the individual case finding and disposition. The State agency shall also code the findings on the Form FNS-380-1. For negative cases, the State agency shall submit a summary report, coded and documented on the Negative Quality Control Review Schedule, Form FNS-245, in enough detail to ensure subsequent case reviewers fully understand the reasons for the individual finding and disposition. The review findings shall be reported as follows: (1) The State agency shall utilize SNAPQCS, FNS' automated, web-based QC System, to report all required QC forms, supporting evidence, and information necessary to understand the disposition and final findings for active and negative sampled cases to FNS. Upon State agency request, FNS will consider approval of any technical changes in the review results after they have been reported to FNS. (2) The State agency shall have at least 115 days from the end of the sample month to dispose of and report the findings of all cases selected in a sample month. FNS may grant additional time as warranted upon request by a State agency for cause shown to complete and dispose of individual cases. (3) The State agency shall supply the FNS Regional Office with individual household case rec… | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.6.1.3 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | F | Subpart F—Responsibilities for Reporting on Program Performance | § 275.22 Administrative procedure. | FNS | [Amdt. 160, 45 FR 15911, Mar. 11, 1980. Redesignated at 52 FR 3410, Feb. 4, 1987] | Reports on program performance are intended to provide the State an opportunity to determine compliance with program requirements, identify and resolve emerging problems, and assess the effectiveness of actions that have been taken to correct existing problems. States' reports enable FNS to assess the nationwide status of eligibility and basis of issuance determinations, to ensure State compliance with Federal requirements, to assist States in improving and strengthening their programs, and to develop Federal policies. Reports must be submitted in duplicate to the appropriate FNS Regional Office according to the time frames established in §§ 275.20, 275.21, and 275.22 of this part. | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.7.1.1 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | G | Subpart G—Program Performance | § 275.23 Determination of State agency program performance. | FNS | [75 FR 33438, June 11, 2010, as amended at 80 FR 53243, Sept. 3, 2015; 86 FR 44587, Aug. 13, 2021] | (a) Determination of efficiency and effectiveness. FNS shall determine the efficiency and effectiveness of a State's administration of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by measuring State compliance with the standards contained in the Food and Nutrition Act, regulations, and the State Plan of Operation and State efforts to improve program operations through corrective action. This determination shall be made based on: (1) Reports submitted to FNS by the State; (2) FNS reviews of State agency operations; (3) State performance reporting systems and corrective action efforts; and (4) Other available information such as Federal audits and investigations, civil rights reviews, administrative cost data, complaints, and any pending litigation. (b) State agency error rates. FNS shall estimate each State agency's active case, payment, and negative case error rate based on the results of quality control review reports submitted in accordance with the requirements outlined in § 275.21. The determination of the correctness of the case shall be based on certification policy as set forth in part 273 of this chapter. (1) Demonstration projects. FNS shall make a determination for each individual project whether the reported results of reviews of active and negative demonstration project cases shall be included or excluded from the estimate of the active case error rate, payment error rate, and negative case error rate. (2) Determination of payment error rates. As specified in § 275.3(c), FNS will validate each State agency's estimated payment error rate by rereviewing the State agency's active case sample and ensuring that its sampling, estimation, and data management procedures are correct. (i) Once the Federal case reviews have been completed and all differences with the State agency have been identified, FNS shall calculate regressed error rates using the following linear regression equations. (A) y 1 ′ = y 1 + b 1 ( X 1 − x 1 ), where y 1 ′ is the average value of allotments overissued to … | |||
| 7:7:4.1.1.3.23.7.1.2 | 7 | Agriculture | II | C | 275 | PART 275—PERFORMANCE REPORTING SYSTEM | G | Subpart G—Program Performance | § 275.24 High performance bonuses. | FNS | [70 FR 6322, Feb. 7, 2005, as amended at 80 FR 53243, Sept. 3, 2015] | (a) General rule. (1) FNS will award bonuses totaling $48 million for each fiscal year to State agencies that show high or improved performance in accordance with the performance measures under paragraph (b) of this section. (2) FNS will award the bonuses no later than September 30th of the fiscal year following the performance measurement year. (3) A State agency is not eligible for a bonus payment in any fiscal year for which it has a liability amount established as a result of an excessive payment error rate in the same year. If a State is disqualified from receiving a bonus payment under this paragraph (a)(3), and the State is not tied for a bonus, the State with the next best performance will be awarded a bonus payment. (4) The determination whether, and in what amount, to award a performance bonus payment is not subject to administrative or judicial review. (5) In determining the amount of the award, FNS will first award a base amount of $100,000 to each State agency that is an identified winner in each category. Subsequently, FNS will divide the remaining money among the States in each category (see paragraph (b) of this section) in proportion to the size of their caseloads (the average number of households per month for the fiscal year for which performance is measured). (6) A State cannot be awarded two bonuses in the same category; the relevant categories are payment accuracy (which is outlined in paragraph (b)(1) of this section), negative error rate (which is outlined in paragraph (b)(2) of this section), or program access index (which is outlined in paragraph (b)(3) of this section). If a State is determined to be among the best and the most improved in a category, it will be awarded a bonus only for being the best. The next State in the best category will be awarded a bonus as being among the best States. (7) Where there is a tie to the fourth decimal point for the categories outlined in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this section, FNS will add the additional State(s) into the category … |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE cfr_sections (
section_id TEXT PRIMARY KEY,
title_number INTEGER,
title_name TEXT,
chapter TEXT,
subchapter TEXT,
part_number TEXT,
part_name TEXT,
subpart TEXT,
subpart_name TEXT,
section_number TEXT,
section_heading TEXT,
agency TEXT,
authority TEXT,
source_citation TEXT,
amendment_citations TEXT,
full_text TEXT
);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_title ON cfr_sections(title_number);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_part ON cfr_sections(part_number);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_agency ON cfr_sections(agency);