1 FoodShare Wisconsin (reports 12-3 and 12-8) Legislative Audit Bureau August 2012

2 Audit Focus  trends in program expenditures and participation;  eligibility determination policies and practices;  indicators of potential fraud and abuse;  efforts undertaken by state and local agencies to identify and address fraud and abuse; and  best practices in identifying and preventing fraud and abuse.

3 Growth in Participation FoodShare Recipients

4 Factors Affecting Program Growth  The national economic recession from December 2007 to June  An increase in poverty, especially among children.  Policy changes that reduced barriers to participation and increased the number eligible for benefits.  Estimates of participation for 2009 by eligible individuals range from 42.1 percent to 76.5 percent.

5 Timeliness and Accuracy  Applications processed within required time limits decreased from 90.3 percent in FFY to 74.9 percent in FFY  USDA has required Wisconsin to develop timeliness improvement plans since FFY  Wisconsin’s negative error rate declined from 12.9 percent in FFY to 4.6 percent in FFY  Wisconsin’s benefit payment error rate declined from 7.4 percent in FFY to 2.0 percent in FFY

FoodShare Benefits Spent Outside of Wisconsin 1 FY

7 Other Findings  In FY , 22 assistance groups were issued ten or more replacement cards, including 21 issued a total of 86 replacement cards at the time their accounts had balances of less than one dollar.  447 state prison inmates received FoodShare benefits while incarcerated, including 293 in single-person assistance groups who received an estimated $413,000 in benefits.  1,192 recipients were ineligible because they are fleeing to avoid prosecution, to avoid incarceration after a conviction, or violating a condition of probation or parole, including 847 in single-person assistance groups who received an estimated $1.4 million in benefits.

8 Coordinating Fraud-related Efforts  County fraud consortia were created to enhance local fraud prevention and investigation efforts.  Most have not functioned as intended because of limited collaboration.  DHS will need to determine:  how best to facilitate coordination efforts among counties; and  the role of its Office of Inspector General in coordinating local efforts and directly providing fraud prevention and investigation services.

9 Audit Follow Up  On August 7 th, DHS reported to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee on its efforts to address the recommendations we made in report 12-3 on FoodShare benefits spent outside of Wisconsin.  By December 3 rd, we recommend that DHS report to the Joint Legislative Audit Committee on its efforts to address recommendations made in report 12-8 on the FoodShare program.

10 FoodShare Wisconsin (reports 12-3 and 12-8) Legislative Audit Bureau August 2012