This change would eliminate the cumbersome process of requiring workers to hold an application for which customer has not provided verification for an additional 30 days.  The current process places an additional burden on the eligibility worker, as well as providing an impediment to the receipt of performance bonus funds from the United States Department of Agriculture.

We have always been about self sufficiency and having people responsible for themselves, we should not have to be pulling teeth in order to obtain required verifications to determine eligibility. Clients can request the worker's assistance with obtaining any verification they may be having difficulty obtaining. I think if someone is truly in need they would be getting their verifications in more promptly thus 30 days is ample opportunity for one to verify what is needed to receive assistance.

I support the State Board of Social Services in denying applications after being held pending for 30 days.  The customer/household if in need of assistance will provide required verifications long before the 30 day period has been reached.  It is time consuming for the eligibility workers to keep track of applications for a 60 day period of time.

Since self-sufficiency is what we try to instill in our customers, it is important that the extend pend timeframe be eliminated.  Thirty days is ample time to process an application especially if an individual is truly in need of our services.  Eliminating the EOO  would also be extremely beneficial to the eligibility worker at this critical time because of increased caseloads in all programs.  This way the worker can concentrate on providing services instead of keeping track of cases that are in EOO.

I am definitely for the elimination of the additional 30 day requirement for client caused delays.  It has proven not to be an very effective as those that do not submit the required verifications normally are  denied. This option will bring about a better tracking system for our Intake workers that are dealing with multiple policies at one time.  Customers could also get a better sense of urgency and work harder to turn in the required information within the 30 days.. 

Eliminate the extend pending--30 days is long enough to hold an application pending.

I would like to see the elimination of extend pend in the Food Stamp Program

Please eliminate 30 day extend pending.

Thank you.

All of the programs should be consistent.  30 days is more than sufficient time to return verifications 

I agree with eliminating extend pend for Food Stamps.

I agree with eliminating extend pend FS cases.

I support the decision to eliminate the 30 day extend pend of Food Stamp applications.  

The processs of extending an application for an additional 30 days in not productive and does not help the majority of customers.  Most cases that are extended for processing the extra 30 days are denied becasue the customer never turned in the verifications that the agency was waiting for in the first 30 days.  This process would help reduce the food stamp error rate by not having to deal with an application for such a long period of time also.

Elimination of the additional 30 days would help reduce state error rates and potential fiscal sanctions from FNS.  It would also help improve the processing timeliness of applications ensuring recipients receive any benefits to which they are entitled expeditiously.  It would also reduce the workload of already overburdened Benefit Programs Specialists/Eligibility Workers, thereby improving morale and retention. 

Our Agency is in support of eliminating Extend Pending for FS applications!

I agree do away with the extended time frame, this will bring down error rates and customer should be able to provide information within 30 days. Any application extended is usually denied, therefore a waste of valuable time for workers.

Extend pend on FS applications ONLY if househould contacts us to say they are having trouble getting info. Under most situations 30 days is enough time.

Rarely does a client return/respond after the 30 days, even thought they are sent a notice.  Also, it isn't consistent with policy for other pregrams.

I support the elimination of the current 30-day extend pend policy.  This would improve timely case processing and also contribute to the reduction of state error rates.  This would also align the processing timeframe with TANF policy.  Most applications that are extended are denied, proving that applicants will get the information if they realize they only have 30 days to do so. 

I believe that the extend pend for Food Stamp Applications should be eliminated.

Please eliminate the extend pend process for the FS program. Thirty days should be sufficient  for a customer to send in required verifications.

I think extend pend should be eliminated.  Thirty days is plenty of time to allow for verifications to be returned..

Please eliminate the extend pend process for food stamps.

I feel that 30 days of processing time is enough and we should do away with extend pending food stamp applications.  If a household needs assistance they will provide the agency with the necessary information in order to process their application within the first 30 days or they probably don't need the assistance.  Agencies rarely take 30 days to process an application if all verifications are provided to them in a timely manner.  There are too many things that can change in an additional 30 day time period that would make the household ineligible for benefits or eligible for additional benefits when you allow 30 days originally and then extend pend for an additional 30 days and taking action based on the households circumstances at the time of application when you finally receive the final verifications you were waiting on originally.  30 days is long enough.

Please eliminate the 30 day extend pending policy for Food Stamp applications.

Please eliminate the "extend pend" process for FS applications.  It is cumbersome to workers and rarely results in applicants completing the process.

I fully support the elimination of extend pend.

Most of the times when an application goes over the 30 days is because client does not want to follow thru with the application.  I think as an EW we should be able to make a decision on wheather or not to extend just like TANF on special circumstances only...

The policy to extend Food Stamps should be eliminated. 

PENDING SHOULD BE ELIMINATED PAST 30 DAYS.  IF THE CLIENT DOES NOT PROVIDE THEIR INFORMATION OR CONTACT THE AGENCY WITHIN 30 DAYS THEN THE APPLICATION SHOULD NOT CONTINUE TO BE HELD PENDING, BUT SHOULD BE DENIED ON THE 30TH DAY.

Please elimate the extend pend policy of the Food Application.

Customer that really want and need Food Stamps return the requested information within the 1st  30 days an application is pending.

I strongly believe 30 days is enough time for an applicant to provide verifications for Food Stamp benefits and extend pending should be eliminated.

I believe that extend pend should be eliminated. Most of the applications I receive that are extend pended end up becoming abandoned.

IF A PERSON NEEDS FS THEY WILL GET VERIFICATONS BACK IN WITHIN THE FIRST 30 DAYS. ALSO TO MANY CHANGES COME ABOUT AFTER 30 DAYS TO DO THE APPLICATION CORRECT.

I agree that this policy needs to be changed. Individuals who are interested in participating generally do respond within the first 30 days. It will  also align processing with the Tanf program and potentially create a less error prone area and one that better serves the applicants at the same time assisting staff in the processing.

I agree that the extend pend should be eliminated from the application processing policy.  By eliminating this process, this would line up the application to follow the TANF guidelines,  help to reduce errors and help to streamline the intake caseload.  

I BELIEVE WE SHOULD ELIMINATE THE EXTEND PENDING OF FOOD STAMP APPLICATION.  IF A CLIENT HAS NOT PROVIDED REQUESTED INFORMATION WITHIN 30 DAYS THEN EITHER THEY ARE NOT AS NEEDY AS THEY CLAIM OR THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING.  RARELY HAVE I SEEN INFORMATION NOT PROVIDED WITHIN 30 DAYS BECAUSE THEY WERE HAVING TROUBLE OBTAINING THE VERIFICATIONS.  THE EXTENTIONS ONLY MAKES MORE WORK ON THE WORKER PROCESSING THE CASE.  IT'S ABOUT TIME THINGS ARE CHANGED TO HELP THE WORKER INSTEAD JUST PATRONIZING THE CLIENT.  THEY ARE RECEIVING HELP FROM THE TAXPAYERS AND THE LEAST THEY SHOULD DO IS BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS IF THEY NEED THE HELP.  I DO THIS JOB TO HELP PEOPLE BUT I AM HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR MY ACTIONS AND IF WE TRULY WANT TO HELP THE CLIENT BECOME SELF-SUFFICIENT WE NEED TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE TO CERTAIN THINGS.  THEY WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO BECOME SELF SUFFICIENT IF THEY ARE NOT.

I support the recommendation for eliminating extend pending for food stamp applications that have been pending for 30 days.

I support the elimination of the extend pend in the Food Stamps Program.  Applicants are originally allowed thirty days from date of request to provide verifications.  Applications are currently extended with no requests from clients to do so, with no further communication from clients indicating they are having problems or concerns with obtaining the requested verifications.  Extend pending the Food Stamps applications are not helping the applicants to be self-efficient. 

We should NOT be required to hold Food Stamp Cases beyond 30 days.  If the customer doesn't bring the infomation in on or before the 30 day, the case should be closed.  If they want benefits, they should reapply.

The 30-day extend pend period for Food Stamps needs to be eliminated.

I support the elimination of the extend pending process.  30 days is ample time to provide verifications if your household is in need and workers offer assistance to customers who have difficulty in obtaining the information within 30 days.  Workers are constantly asked to do more with less and with increasing caseloads, decreased workers due to illness, stress and retirement and no additional staff being provided the relief has to come from the proposed legislation and how we do the work.  Therefore the elimination of extend pending will decrease the number of applications held, decrease the number of actions that a worker has to take on an application, remove the stress of remembering to meet the second 30 day deadline, reduce the timely error rate because everything will be done in 30 days, provide consistency across program lines (except Medicaid), and make customers more responsible.

The extended period needs to be eliminated.  Applicants have 30 days to provide verifications and that is more inline with the TANF Program.  When it  is extended past the 30 days, the worker encounters more problems with processing due to other changes that may occur during this period.  Changes that occur often are not reported by the customer during the pending period.  A new application would capture any changes that had occurred during the pending period.  It would seem that the information would be more current and the case would be processed correctly.  A large percent of the time, if the customer has not provided verifications within the first 30 days, the application is denied on the 60th day.

I think that the extended pending should be eliminated.  The food stamp application should be approved or denied by the 30th day without an extension to the 60th day. 

I would like to see the extend pend eliminated.  Most of the time the clients provide all verifications within the 30days, if it goes over the 30 days it is rare that they provide the verifications.  This policy change would align with TANF which makes it easier for workers to remember and make less errors which will also help with our negative error rate.  At the current time you have to EOO on the 30th day, you are not allow to EOO prior to the 30th day.