Colorado’s food-assistance program, among the worst in the nation in getting food to the poor, could receive an overhaul through legislation advancing at the state Capitol. The proposal from the Joint Budget Committee is aimed at healing the system’s black eye, in part by transferring some of the consequences for low participation and high error rates to counties.
Counties would share in federal sanctions — and bonuses — depending on their ability to deliver aid within federally mandated timelines to people who qualify for food stamps. In return, the state would conduct a study to determine whether counties have enough staffing and funding to run the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
In Colorado, the state supervises the federally funded program — and pays any federal fines — but it is administered at the county level.
Although some counties support the legislation, their association, Colorado Counties Inc., took a stand against it last week. “Commissioners feel like counties are underfunded in food administration and have been for years, and they question the rationale of fiscally punishing counties when they are already in an underfunded position,” said the group’s legislative director, Gini Pingenot.
With two months left in the fiscal year, counties already have spent all of the funds the state gave them for food assistance. And 25 of 64 counties are overspent, meaning they must borrow from other parts of their budgets to cover the costs of signing people up for food stamps.
Just more than half of Coloradans who are eligible for food stamps are receiving them, putting the state 45th in the nation.
“What’s really critical to remember is this is about people,” said Kathy Underhill, director of Hunger Free Colorado, which supports the bill. “This is about moms who don’t know what they are going to feed their kids tonight. This is about a 70-year-old widow having to choose between food and medicine.”
Senate Bill 190 is designed to focus the accountability at the county level for failure to meet application processing deadlines and errors that contributed to under- and over-payments. Under the measure, if the federal government imposes future sanctions on Colorado, the low-performing counties will shoulder the cost. Likewise, if the state received federal bonus payments for compliance, the money will go to the high-performing counties.
“Right now, because we are a state-supervised, county-administered system, all those bonuses or sanctions are absorbed at state level and proportionately passed along to all counties,” said Sen. Pat Steadman, a Denver Democrat and the bill’s sponsor. “So the individual counties that are more responsible for us meeting or not meeting our goals aren’t experiencing the punishment or reward. It gets masked at the state level.”
The legislation also allocates $550,000 to the Department of Human Services for a new study that will look for ways to improve the county programs, as well as design a quality improvement plan.
The bill won approval in the Senate and awaits action in the House.
State budget writers who proposed the legislation were irritated last year when Colorado received a roughly $1 million fine for making changes to the program without federal approval. Department of Human Services director Reggie Bicha kept quiet about the sanction letter, first revealed by The Denver Post.
Asked whether it passes the buck to the counties, only to take pressure off the state leaders administering the program, lawmakers suggested it is just the start of efforts to address the broader problem.
Sen. Kevin Grantham, a Cañon City Republican and budget writer, said more changes are needed at the state level. “We continue to work on reforms there,” he said. “The entire legislature, both parties, both houses, recognize the need. It’s a matter of getting the executive branch to recognize it as well.”
As for the limited scope of this bill, he said: “It would be nice to wave the magic wand and fix everything in one fell swoop, but that’s not going to happen.”
Staffing in the program is an issue. In similar-sized Minnesota, for example, the state employs 14 people in its food-assistance program, compared with seven in Colorado. Colorado approved funding for three new state-level employees at the Colorado Department of Human Services, including a “performance manager” who is scheduled to start July 1.
Counties are responsible for conducting interviews and processing paperwork to determine eligibility when someone applies for food assistance. Their success varies widely: In mountainous Pitkin County, just 10 percent of those eligible are enrolled, while Pueblo and Costilla counties surpass 80 percent.
A report from Hunger Free Colorado found major differences across counties in the costs reported for enrollment in food assistance. In Boulder County, it costs the county $286 per enrollee, while in Pueblo County, the per-person cost is $80.
Advocates and policymakers are hopeful the study included in the bill will determine the cause of the wide cost variance and identify solutions, possibly including new job descriptions or system design.
The national average is 75 percent of eligible people receiving food stamps, compared with Colorado’s 57 percent.
In Pitkin County, human services deputy director Mitzi Ledingham is worried about possible sanctions for ranking last among Colorado counties but said she understands the need for the legislation. “We have to have some effort,” she said. “We have to examine what we are doing and see what we can do differently.”
Pitkin has joined forces with neighboring Eagle and Garfield counties to investigate why more eligible people aren’t getting help in buying groceries. Traveling mountain roads to fill out an application at human services offices is an issue for some. Ledingham also thinks some people don’t bother enrolling when they realize they are eligible for just $10 or $16 per month, or perhaps, in resort communities where restaurants are big employers, people are getting their meals at work.
“We don’t want to be last,” she said, noting that food stamp enrollment has nearly tripled in five years, from 400 people to about 1,500 now.
Jefferson and Denver counties have improved their timeliness and eligibility scores by attempting same-day service, meaning people can receive approval within hours instead of weeks.
The state paid consultants to provide “business process re-engineering” for counties interested in learning how they could restructure building layout and staffing to process applications faster. In Jefferson County, food assistance technicians now sit at the front desk in place of receptionists who used to make appointments for technicians, said human services deputy director Lynnae Flora.
Denver County accomplished its goal of processing 95 percent of applications within federal timeline requirements, up from 64 percent in 2010, by having staffers work overtime. Denver County is among those that have spent their state allotment for the year.
State human services officials did not take a position on the legislation but requested further evaluation of existing processes before a workload study begins, spokesman Lee Rasizer said.
Jennifer Brown: 303-954-1593, jenbrown@denverpost.com or @jbrowndpost
WHAT IT IS
Senate Bill 190 is designed to focus the accountability at the county level for failure to meet application processing deadlines and errors that contributed to underpayments and overpayments. The bill won approval in the Senate and awaits action in the House.
HOW IT WORKS
Under the measure, if the federal government imposes future sanctions on Colorado, the low-performing counties will shoulder the cost. Likewise, if the state receives federal bonus payments for compliance, the money will go to high-performing counties.
