July 20, Enclosed is a copy of the decision resulting from the hearing held in the above-referenced matter. Sincerely,

Transcription

1 STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Earl Ray Tomblin BOARD OF REVIEW Karen L. Bowling Governor 1400 Virginia Street Cabinet Secretary Oak Hill, WV July 20, 2016 RE: v. WV DHHR ACTION NO.: 16-BOR-2198 Dear Mr. Enclosed is a copy of the decision resulting from the hearing held in the above-referenced matter. In arriving at a decision, the State Hearing Officer is governed by the Public Welfare Laws of West Virginia and the rules and regulations established by the Department of Health and Human Resources. These same laws and regulations are used in all cases to assure that all persons are treated alike. You will find attached an explanation of possible actions you may take if you disagree with the decision reached in this matter. Sincerely, Kristi Logan State Hearing Officer Member, State Board of Review Encl: Appellant s Recourse to Hearing Decision Form IG-BR-29 cc: Alice James, County DHHR

2 WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES BOARD OF REVIEW, Appellant, v. Action Number: 16-BOR-2198 WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES, Respondent. DECISION OF STATE HEARING OFFICER INTRODUCTION This is the decision of the State Hearing Officer resulting from a fair hearing for. This hearing was held in accordance with the provisions found in Chapter 700 of the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources Common Chapters Manual. This fair hearing was convened on July 19, 2016, on an appeal filed June 21, The matter before the Hearing Officer arises from the June 17, 2016, decision by the Respondent to terminate the Appellant s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. At the hearing, the Respondent appeared by Alice James, Economic Service Worker. The Appellant appeared pro se. All witnesses were sworn and the following documents were admitted into evidence. Department s Exhibits: D-1 Department s Summary D-2 Hearing Request received June 21, 2016 D-3 Hearing Request Notification Form D-4 Scheduling Order D-5 Notice of Decision dated June 17, 2016 D-6 Case Comments Screen Print from May 2016-June 2016 D-7 SNAP Review Form/CSLE received May 25, 2016 D-8 West Virginia Income Maintenance Manual 1.2B After a review of the record, including testimony, exhibits, and stipulations admitted into evidence at the hearing, and after assessing the credibility of all witnesses and weighing the evidence in consideration of the same, the Hearing Officer sets forth the following Findings of Fact. 16-BOR-2198 Page 1

3 FINDINGS OF FACT 1) The Appellant submitted an eligibility review form (D-7) to the district office on May 25, ) A telephone appointment (D-7) was scheduled for the Appellant on June 14, ) The Appellant s caseworker telephoned the Appellant three (3) times (D-6) on June 14, 2016, to complete the telephone interview, but was unable to contact the Appellant. 4) The caseworker left a message for the Appellant to reschedule his telephone interview. 5) The Department issued a Notice of Decision (D-5) on June 16, 2016, advising the Appellant that his SNAP benefits would be terminated effective June 30, 2016, for a failure to complete an eligibility review. 6) The Appellant submitted a request for hearing (D-2) to the district office on June 22, ) The Appellant s caseworker left a message (D-6) for the Appellant on June 22, 2016, advising that his telephone interview was rescheduled for June 23, ) The Appellant s caseworker telephoned the Appellant three (3) times (D-6) on June 23, 2016, but was again unable to speak with the Appellant. APPLICABLE POLICY West Virginia Income Maintenance Manual 1.4(S)(4)(5) states that SNAP assistance groups (AGs) which are due for redetermination and for whom a redetermination has not been completed are automatically closed by the data system on the adverse action deadline of the month when a redetermination is due. A redetermination is not considered completed until SNAP benefits have been confirmed as approved or denied within the data system. West Virginia has implemented waivers to eliminate the face-to-face interview at application and redetermination. A telephone interview is required for all applications unless the household requests a face-to-face interview or the Worker determines a face-to-face interview is warranted for the household. RAPIDS form CSLE/CSLR or inroads is used. The CSLE/ CSLR inroads redetermination or the DFA-2 and DFA-RR-1 or DFA-SNAP-1 may be used for a redetermination. RAPIDS automatically mails the CSLE in the last month of the certification period. The form must be completed and returned prior to the scheduled telephone interview date specified on the CSLE/CSLR. 16-BOR-2198 Page 2

4 A SNAP redetermination is a reapplication for benefits. Under no circumstances are benefits continued past the month of redetermination, unless a redetermination is completed and the client is found eligible. DISCUSSION The Appellant contended that he never received a telephone call from the Department to complete an eligibility interview, only a closure letter. The Appellant stated his current telephone number is The Department representative testified that the number on record for the Appellant is. The eligibility review form received on May 25, 2016, from the Appellant listed the aforementioned telephone number, which was not corrected or amended to reflect a different telephone number for the Appellant. It was the responsibility of the Appellant to report any changes on the eligibility review form and because the Appellant did not report a change in his telephone number, the Department was unable to contact him to complete his telephone interview. Periodic reviews are required by law to determine continued eligibility for SNAP benefits, therefore, the Appellant s SNAP benefits were correctly terminated for failure to complete his review. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1) Policy mandates that SNAP benefits be reviewed periodically to determine continued eligibility for the program. 2) The Appellant did not report a change in his telephone number on his eligibility review form. 3) The Department was unable to contact the Appellant for a telephone interview based on the incorrect information provided by the Appellant. 4) The Appellant did not complete a telephone interview as part of the redetermination process, therefore, SNAP benefits were correctly terminated. DECISION It is the decision of the State Hearing Officer to uphold the decision of the Department to terminate the Appellant s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. 16-BOR-2198 Page 3

5 ENTERED this 20 th day of July 2016 Kristi Logan State Hearing Officer 16-BOR-2198 Page 4