Final Report

Grant # 59-3198-01-021

Increasing Access to Food Stamps through Web-Based Food

Stamp Screening and Application Tool and Private/Public
Partnerships: The RealBenefits™ Pilot Project in Illinois

Darnell Coleman
Project Coordination and Evaluation

Project Funded by the United States Department of Agriculture—Food and

Nutrition Services

This report will assess the outcome of our efforts to increase access to the Food Stamp
Program through strengthening collaborative efforts between community partners in
Cook, Lake and DuPage Counties and the Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS)
to implement, field test and evaluate a web-based screening and application tool. We will
describe the history and development of the project and list our objectives. We will then
discuss the technical development of RealBenefits™ project in Illinois; characteristics of
the agencies involved in the project and how they were recruited; discuss the training and
educational phase of the project; present data on number of applications submitted and
disposition of applications and applicant demographic characteristics; discuss barriers
encountered during the course of the pilot project and actions taken to address barriers;
and finally we will discuss our findings and implications for future research and food
stamp outreach. This will include our evaluation of the screening tool and effective
practices for implementation at the community level.
 Executive Summary

The Illinois Hunger Coalition (IHC) is a non-profit organization committed to alleviating

hunger through education, community organizing, advocacy and promoting progressive
public policy. Due to drops in food stamp caseloads in Illinois and increased need of
clients for income supports, IHC proposed to conduct food stamp outreach through the
USDA-FNS Food Stamp Outreach project. The primary purpose of this food stamp
outreach project was twofold: 1) to increase enrollment in the Food Stamp Program for
working families and individuals; and 2) to develop and evaluate a web-based screening
and application tool for food stamps as to its effectiveness in increasing enrollment. This
would be done by identifying and training various community-based organizations to use
a web-based screening and application tool for food stamps that allowed them to
determine whether clients were potentially eligible for food stamps and complete a
printed food stamp application for clients on the spot. The applications could then be
printed and faxed to the local IDHS office along with any verification documents. Clients
could also request waivers of face-to-face verification interviews if they were elderly,
disabled, lacked available child care, had transportation issues or were in school or
working during IDHS office hours.

Increasing Access to Food Stamps:

Over a nine-month period from March 2002 to December 2002, 200 service providers at
various non-profit community-based organizations were trained to use RealBenefits™.
During the course of the project, over 1700 people were screened for food stamps with
790 food stamp applications completed and $53,000 in food stamp benefits generated
(assuming that each client only received one month of benefits). Sixty-two percent of the
applications completed by community partners were approved for food stamp benefits.
Forty-percent of applicants were from working families and 92 percent were from
applicants who stated they have never received assistance from IDHS (food stamps,
medical or cash assistance).

Evaluating RealBenefits™:

The successful implementation of RealBenefits™ by some community partners is

promising for using web-based screening tools to increase access to the Food Stamp
Program. Clients indeed feel more comfortable applying for food stamps at places where
they have already built positive relationships. Clients do not have to spend time waiting
at IDHS offices and can potentially get connected with a number of government
programs at places where they are receiving other services. A screening tool like
RealBenefits™ can aid organizations in delivering comprehensive services to clients. As
screening capabilities for additional income support programs are added, it will become
more of an asset for community-based organizations who can use the tool to determine
potential eligibility for a number of programs. The type of agency (i.e., welfare-to-work,
emergency assistance center, food pantry) appeared less important in this project than an
agency’s commitment and ability to incorporate RealBenefits™ in a formal way and to
reach out to those clients that are potentially eligible for food stamps.
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 2
Introduction

The need for finding innovative ways to increase access to the Food Stamp Program has
become even more important since the inception of this project. When we began this pilot
project, food stamp caseloads nationwide were on the decline and many people remained
uneducated, misinformed and disillusioned about the food stamp application process. 1
Participation rates in the Food Stamp Program in Illinois for those persons who are
eligible hovered around 67 percent in September 1997, with over 30 percent of those
eligible for food stamps not receiving them. 2 Our underlying assumption was that by
providing community partners with the tools to screen clients for food stamp eligibility
and determine a potential benefit amount, participation in the Food Stamp Program
would increase for those working families who were potentially eligible and not receiving
food stamps.

Connecting households to the Food Stamp Program has become essential as many
households are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet and provide nutritious
meals on a consistent basis to household members. 3 Welfare reform and rising
unemployment rates combined with shortfalls in the Illinois state budget resulting in
layoffs and early retirements at many Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS)
offices, point to the increasing need for collaboration between governmental and non-
governmental agencies to increase access to the Food Stamp Program for needy
individuals and families. The USDA—Economic Research Service (ERS) reports that
nine percent of American households were food insecure throughout the entire year of
2001, meaning they did not always have access to enough food for “active, healthy lives”
for all household members because of lack of sufficient money or other resources for
food. 4 ERS estimates that nine percent of the population in Illinois was food insecure in
2001. Increasing access to the Food Stamp Program will relieve some of the pressures on
families to find resources to purchase needed food.

Although food stamp caseloads have been increasing nationwide over the past two years,
increasing demand at local food pantries and emergency assistance centers point to the
need for continued education and outreach aimed at increasing access to the Food Stamp
Program. 5 Many anti-hunger agencies in Illinois report substantial increases in the
number of clients requesting emergency food. A township supervisor in a southern
suburb outside of Chicago reports a one hundred percent increase and rising in request for

1
Food Research and Action Center. “Food Stamp Participation Drops by Over 8.8 Million from February
1996 to February 2001.” (May 2001).
Ponza, Micheal, James Ohls, Lorenzo Moreno, Amy Zambrowski and Rhoda Cohen. “Customer Service in
the Food Stamp Program.” Mathematica Policy Research, Inc: July 1999.
2
Schirm, A. “Reaching Those in Need: Food Stamp Participation Rates in States.” Mathematica Policy
Research, Inc: July 2000.
3
Lowe, Eugene. “A Status Report on Hunger and Homelessness in American Cities.” The United States
Conference of Mayors: 2002.
4
Nord, Mark, Margaret Andrews, and Steven Carlson. “Household Food Security in the United States,
2001.” United States Department of Agriculture: Economic Research Services, October 2002.
5
Llobrera, Joseph. “Food Stamp Caseloads are Rising.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: November
2002.
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 3
emergency food. 6 A community partner interviewed as part of this project reports a four
hundred percent increase in the number of clients served by their emergency food
program over the past year. 7 In addition, the US Conference of Mayors reports increases
in request for emergency assistance in one hundred percent of the 48 cities surveyed, with
an average increase in Chicago of about 28 percent. 8 Over ten percent of the households
requesting emergency food have recently become unemployed or are single mothers. A
Chicago area food pantry survey reported that 43 percent of 4200 households surveyed
requesting emergency food were not receiving food stamps. 9

The barriers to access to the Food Stamp Program are varied. One barrier is that many
IDHS offices remain understaffed and overworked. In addition, many clients have
become disillusioned with the food stamp application process, complaining about the
harsh treatment that they encounter at local Illinois Department of Human Services
offices. A survey conducted in November 2000 by Anti-Hunger Action of Chicago, a
collaborative of over 40 anti-hunger agencies convened by the Illinois Hunger Coalition
(IHC), reports that many clients perceive IDHS workers as “disrespectful” and “rude.”
Other clients insist that they simply do not have the time to go to local offices to apply for
food stamps due to work schedules or lack of available child care. The RealBenefits™
Pilot Project was conceived to address some of these barriers to access to the Food Stamp
Program.

History and Development of Project

One of the primary missions of the Illinois Hunger Coalition is to establish networks of
community based organizations and government agencies to increase access to nutritious
food for Illinois residents. IHC educates community partners and individuals about public
and private nutrition programs and advocates for clients who need assistance during the
food stamp application process. IHC runs a statewide, toll free “Hunger Hotline” where
residents of Illinois can receive referrals to food pantries, soup kitchens and shelters, and
receive eligibility screenings for WIC, food stamps, school breakfast, summer food
service programs, KidCare and other nutrition programs. IHC provides individualized
follow-up for clients until a determination is made regarding clients eligibility. IHC also
convenes Anti-Hunger Action, monthly meetings with anti-hunger agencies in the
Chicago area to discuss issues and policies related to alleviating hunger. Through these
networks, IHC heard first-hand accounts from clients and community partners about the
increasing demand for emergency food and concerns regarding barriers to the Food
Stamp Program.

IHC seeks innovative ways to increase access to public benefits. Toward this end, IHC
reviewed a report published by the Brookings Institute that examined the benefits of
using the internet to help working families connect with a broad range of income and

6
Grigas, Don. “Township Food Pantry Feeling Pinch of Economy.” The Reporter: October 31, 2002.
7
Personal Interview, Grace Robinson, Catholic Charities, August 6, 2002.
8
Lowe, Eugene. “A Status Report on Hunger and Homelessness in American Cities.” The United States
Conferences of Mayors: 2002.
9
Chicago Anti-Hunger Action Food Stamp Survey, Illinois Hunger Coalition, November 2000.
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 4
work supports such as food stamps, health insurance and child care, Temporary
Assistance to Needy Families and the Earned Income Tax Credits. 10 IHC also connected
with Community Catalyst, Inc of Boston, a private, non-profit health care policy
organization who had previously used MicroMax, a web-based screening and application
tool in Massachusetts for the publicly funded health programs.

The Illinois Hunger Coalition collaborated with Community Catalyst (CC) to program
MicroMax™ with the food stamp application. IHC partnered with major human service
entities who agreed to assist us in implementing, testing, and evaluating the web-based
screening tool. These agencies included: Catholic Charities, the Mayor’s Office of
Workforce Development, Day Care Action Council of Illinois and several local anti-
hunger service providers, IHC member agencies and emergency assistance centers in the
Chicago Metropolitan area. IHC and Community Catalyst made the screening tool
available to over 200 staff of community based organizations. The screening tool,
RealBenefits™, calculates potential food stamp eligibility for a family, and produces a
completed application form ready for signature. IHC and Community Catalyst proposed
to provide training and technical assistance to the participating community partners. IHC
proposed to monitor and track utilization of the screening tool by the community partners
in collaboration with IDHS.

IHC negotiated commitments from IDHS to collaborate in developing polices for

processing computer generated application forms and in collecting information to track
applications submitted under the project. IDHS administers the Food Stamp Program for
the state. IDHS is divided into regions. Each region has a regional director that oversees
several local offices in their respective regions. Each local office has a Local Office
Administrator (LOA) that oversees the local office and reports directly to the regional
director. Meetings were conducted with IDHS state-level food stamp administrators,
regional directors and LOAs to develop and test the screening tool as well as develop
policies and procedures for processing applications. IDHS established IHC research
project liaisons in local offices in three counties covered in this project that would
retrieve and process applications faxed to offices by community partners. The IHC
project liaisons primary role at IDHS offices were as Intake Coordinators who initially
processed applications for food stamps, TANF and Medicaid submitted to their offices.
Staff at IDHS central office agreed to provide IHC with monthly reports on all
applications received along with the disposition. In this way, IHC could monitor the
number of applications submitted to IDHS, track whether applications were received and
processed, and track how many applications were approved or denied, reasons for denials
and benefit amounts received.

The primary goals of the project were to: 1) test and evaluate RealBenefits™ as to its
effectiveness in improving access to the Food Stamp Program for eligible families; 2) to
devise and evaluate practical strategies to improve access to the Food Stamp Program for
customers who have been screened and determined to be eligible for food stamps, and

10
O’Connor, Michael A. “Using the Internet to Make Work Pay for Low-Income Families.” The Brookings
Institute, May 2002.
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 5
who are working or disabled; and 3) to train and establish effective partnerships with
community social service agencies as a means of utilizing the web-based screening tool
to reach potential customers.

The underlying assumption of the project was that by establishing good working
relationships between community partners and IDHS, access to the food stamp program
would improve significantly for clients in the project area. If community partner staff
were more informed about the Food Stamp Program and provided with a quick, efficient,
way to screen applicants for food stamps, many of the barriers to access to the program
could be overcome. Working poor and disabled clients would benefit by gaining
increased access to the Food Stamp Program. The benefits expected from the project
were threefold: 1) clients would benefit by being able to find out if they were eligible for
food stamps and complete and submit a food stamp application with the community
partners, places where clients feel more comfortable applying and, in many cases, where
clients have already built positive relationships. Clients could apply and begin receiving
food stamps without visiting IDHS offices; 2) community partners would benefit by
addressing at least one of the underlying causes of the increase in request for emergency
assistance by connecting their clients to a potentially long-term solution to their
household food needs; and 3) increasingly understaffed IDHS offices would benefit by
having clients complete at least the initial phase of the food stamp application process
with the community partners.

Agency Recruitment and Characteristics of Agencies Involved

Although community partners were identified from the onset of the pilot project, many
agencies after hearing about the web-based screening tool, wanted to participate. IHC
initially planned to train 100 staff at community partner agencies to participate in the
pilot project. Three initial criteria were used to identify community partners: 1) whether
the agency had the technological capacity at their respective offices; 2) whether the
agencies were willing and able to commit staff time for training, education and
supervision for conducting the actual food stamp screenings; and 3) whether the
populations served by particular agencies were our desired targeted populations.

In terms of technological capacity, having access to the internet was essential for
agencies to participate in the pilot project. Some agencies utilized dial-up connections,
while others utilized high speed DSL connections. In addition to internet access, agencies
attempting to view and print RealBenefits™ applications had to have Adobe Acrobat™
installed on their computers. IHC conducted a survey of technological capabilities of
agencies who expressed an interest in the project prior to implementation of
RealBenefits™.

If agencies had the appropriate technological capabilities, individual meetings were

conducted with senior-level management at the community partners to discuss the types
of services provided to clients, how they envisioned implementing RealBenefits™, the
availability of staff to conduct food stamp screenings and their training needs.

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 6

Agencies were recruited from three counties in the Chicago Metropolitan Area (Cook,
Lake and DuPage), areas with significant declines in participation rates in the Food
Stamp Program and overall poverty rates in these areas. Food stamp caseloads dropped
by 25 percent in Cook County, by 20 percent in DuPage County, and by 23 percent in
Lake County between 1996-2000. 11 Cook County has an estimated population of over 5
million people with an average income of $23,000 dollars, with 13.5 percent of the
population with incomes below the federal poverty level in 1999. DuPage County has a
population of nearly 1 million people with an average income of $31,000 and with seven
percent of the population with incomes below the poverty level in 1999. Lake County has
a population of nearly 700,000 with an average income of $32,000 with six percent of the
population earning income below the poverty level in 1999. All three counties targeted in
this project have a diverse population: In Cook County 45 percent of the population is
either African-American or Hispanic. In both Lake and DuPage Counties nearly 20
percent of the population is either Hispanic or African-American. In addition there were
substantial immigrant populations in each county. Foreign born persons represented on
average 15 percent of the population in each county. 12

IHC worked with management of three primary community partners in these counties to
identify appropriate affiliated agencies to train. These three primary agencies included:
Catholic Charities, which provides an array of human services to clients that include
housing assistance, child care programs, job training, emergency assistance centers, food
panties, soup kitchens, homeless shelters and other services; the Mayor’s Office of
Workforce Development (MOWD), which subcontracts with 44 welfare-to-work
agencies in the Chicago Metropolitan area; and the Day Care Action Council of Illinois, a
child care resource and referral agency for Cook County. Three additional agencies not
affiliated with the three primary agencies mentioned above also were selected to
participate in the study. These agencies included the Franciscan Outreach Association,
Polish American Association, People’s Resource Center, Cathedral Shelter and Township
of Evanston. Ultimately, 27 agencies were selected to participate in the pilot project (see
Appendix 1 for agency descriptors). There were 14 emergency assistance centers that run
food pantries or soup kitchens and provide an array of case management services to
clients; six welfare-to-work programs; five day care centers, and two family shelters. The
focus was on agencies that had a “family-focus” and that potentially provided access to
working poor families.

Technical Development of RealBenefits™ for Illinois

IHC sub-contracted with CC to reprogram the eligibility screening tool for the Illinois
Food Stamp Program. Initially, two Technical Advisory Panels (TAPs) were established
that would test the web-based screening tool for accuracy and usability before its full
implementation. One TAP consisted of management from community partners that would
participate in the pilot project. Community partners reviewed the program for

11
Illinois Hunger Coalition (August 2001) Analysis of Illinois Department of Human Services Participation
Data.
12
Demographics on counties from U.S. Census Bureau, State and County Quick Facts, 2001.
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 7
understandability, ease of use/navigation and aesthetics; a second TAP from IDHS
evaluated the accuracy of the eligibility calculations and benefit allotments; and the
appropriateness of the interpretation of IDHS policy for the interview process. The TAP
also assisted in developing the “Quickscreen” (a tool that allows community partners to
determine a client’s potential eligibility by asking 10 questions) and discussed which
application would be used for the screening tool. It was decided that the combined food
stamp, cash assistance and Medicaid application would be used in the RealBenefits™
pilot project. IDHS workers would check to see if clients were eligible for cash assistance
and Medicaid if the clients so desired. The TAP from IDHS consisted of representatives
from several department and divisions including Operations, Policy, Management
Information Systems and the Bureau of Food Stamps, directors, regional directors, local
office administrators (LOAs), intake coordinators and caseworkers (see Appendix 2 for
list of TAP participant agencies). Presentations of RealBenefits™ were given at IDHS
regional meetings with LOAs in the Cook, Lake and DuPage Counties.

Once fully developed the Illinois Food Stamp web-based screening tool, RealBenefits™,
determined whether an Illinois resident was potentially income eligible for food stamps in
about 3 minutes using the “Quickscreen”; if determined potentially eligible, a completed
food stamp application could be completed for the client on the spot in about twenty
minutes (see Appendix 3 for sample Quickscreen). The completed online food stamp
application with an IHC research project identifier could then be printed out, signed by
the applicant and faxed or mailed to the local IDHS office. Development of
confidentiality forms, appropriate user manuals and training materials were also
discussed with both TAPs.

Training Sessions, Site Visits and Support

Service providers selected for training were determined on an agency-by-agency basis.

Supervisors at participating community partners were also trained to use the screening
tool. The initial training sessions were conducted by Community Catalyst and IHC.
Training sessions were typically four hours. Trainees were issued log-in names and
passwords, and then introduced to the web-based screening tools capabilities and
presented with case studies that they would encounter when screening clients for food
stamp eligibility. Service providers were also issued user manuals developed by
Community Catalyst and outreach materials developed by IHC about the Food Stamp
Program and the location of IDHS offices and the geographic area covered by each
office. On-going, one-on-one and group trainings and retrainings continued throughout
the course of the project. Many agencies identified additional staff that should be trained.
Some agencies began to train staff to use the screening tool on their own. By the end of
the project, over 200 service providers were trained to use the web-based screening tool.

Although internal procedures for incorporating RealBenefits™ into day-to-day operations

varied from agency to agency, generally agencies were trained to: 1) identify clients that
may be potentially eligible for food stamps through continued onsite outreach; 2) discuss
nature of IHC research project, privacy and confidentiality policies to clients; 3) complete
“Quickscreen” of clients to determine if they were potentially eligible; 4) if potentially
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 8
eligible, how to complete on-line food stamp applications; 5) have clients sign
applications; 6) fax or mail applications to local IDHS office liaisons; and 7) discuss
verification documents needed by IDHS to process applications. Community partners
could also fax or mail any verification documents clients provided with applications as
well as request a wavier of face-to-face interviews at IDHS for clients who were disabled,
working, had transportation difficulties or lacked appropriate child care.

After the training sessions, site visits were conducted by IHC to each of the twenty-seven
participating community partners a minimum of three times during the course of the
project. Initially, the site visits were conducted on an as needed basis, as many sites were
experiencing difficulties with some part of the food stamp on-line application process. At
these site visits that typically ranged from one to four hours, IHC would work with
agencies to resolve technical problems, retrain or train additional staff on site, discuss
appropriate outreach methods and provide additional support for conducting food stamp
screenings. IHC assisted community partners at agency health fairs and other events
where community partners expected a large turnout of clients who would be potentially
eligible for food stamps. As the project progressed, site visits became shorter and were
typically used to encourage continued use of the web-based screening tool and to get
feedback from users.

In addition to onsite technical assistance, IHC offered technical support via IHC’s toll
free Hunger Hotline during regular business hours. Participating community partners
would call with any problems they experienced using the web-based screening tool or
with questions about the Food Stamp Program in general. Calls for technical support and
questions by community partners were greatest in the beginning of the project, averaging
around twenty calls per week and continually declined to about six to ten calls per week
by the end of the project. IHC also advocated for many clients through our Hunger
Hotline. These were clients who completed RealBenefits™ and had not heard from IDHS
about the status of their applications or clients that were denied benefits and had
questions about the denial reasons.

IHC issued monthly reports to community partners on usage of the web-based screening
tool by their agency and by each individual service provider at their respective agencies.
Community partners were also issued reports on how many of the applications completed
using the web-based screening tool were approved or denied by IDHS and the food stamp
benefits generated and amounts and reasons for denials.

RealBenefits™ Usage Data and Disposition of Food Stamp Applications

A total of 790 food stamp applications were completed by community partners using
RealBenefits™ between March 2002 and December 2002, with 425 (54 percent) of those
applications being from families (more than 1 household member) and 365 (46 percent)
from individuals for a total of 1748 total people screened. Of those 790 applications, 643
(81 percent) were submitted to IDHS by the community partners either by fax or mail,
141 (18 percent) of the applications were given to clients to submit themselves, and six
applications (one percent) were withdrawn by applicants. Sixteen percent of applications
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 9
(127 cases) were reportedly submitted to IDHS by the community partners yet IDHS has
no record of these applications. (See Figures 1 and 2 below)
Figure 1. Food Stamp Applications Generated by Community Partners Using RealBenefits (March 2002 to
December 2002)

250

200

150

100

50

December
November
October
September
August
July
0
June
May
April
Hours of Usage

March
Applications

March April May June July August September October November December
Applications 9 34 61 47 100 74 133 113 100 119
Hours of Usage 2.75 15.75 57.00 205.75 133.1 103.7 123.4 133.42 125.7 111.20

Figure 2. RealBenefits Applicants (by household size)

Total applicants: 790

>5
10%

4
10%

1
46%

3
17%

2
18%

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 10

Of the 790 applications completed, IDHS received and processed 516 applications (65
percent) with an approval rate of 68 percent (350 applications). Twenty-seven percent of
the 516 applications (140 cases) were denied with 86 cases (62 percent) being denied for
failure of applicants to appear for eligibility interviews, 23 cases (16 percent) where
applicants did not submit necessary documentations to determine eligibility, 18 cases (13
percent) where applicants’ gross income exceeded the standard, six cases (four percent)
where applicants’ net income exceeded the standard, six cases (four percent) where
applicants’ had open cases that were pending some kind of resolution, and one case (one
percent) where the applicant’s assets exceeded the asset limit. Four applications were
withdrawn by the clients after the applications were submitted to IDHS. Twenty-two of
the applications are pending a determination at this time. (See Figures 3 and 4 below)

Figure 3. Disposition of RealBenefits Food Stamp Application

Total applications received by IDHS: 516

Pending
4%
Withdrawn
1%

Denied
27%

Approved
68%

Figure 4. RealBenefits Applicants (by reason for denial)

Total denials: 140

Had Open Cases

4%
Failed to Submit Information
Required
16%

Asset Exceeded Limit

1%
Net Income Exceeded
Standard
4%

Failed to Appear for Eligibility

Gross Income Exceeded Interview
Standard 62%
13%

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 11

Of the 350 cases approved by IDHS, RealBenefits™ found 324 to be potentially eligible
for food stamps. Of the 140 applicants denied by IDHS, RealBenefits™ listed only nine
as being ineligible. That is, of the 140 cases denied, RealBenefits™ listed only 9 as being
ineligible. There was agreement (plus or minus $20) on the amount of benefits IDHS
approved applicants for and amounts calculated by RealBenefits™ in 70 cases (20
percent). In 50 percent of the cases (174) RealBenefits™ overestimated the benefit
amount an average of $161. In 30 percent of the cases RealBenefits™ underestimated the
benefits amount an average of $179. (See Figure 5 and 6 below)

Figure 6. Potential (RealBenefits) versus Actual (IDHS) Food Stamp Benefit Comparison
Total approvals: 350

RealBenefits/IDHS Agreement
(+/- $20)
20%

RealBenefitsoverestimated
(Avg. $161)
50%

RealBenefits underestimate
(Avg. $179)
30%

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 12

Fifteen percent of the applicants (122 cases) requested waivers of the face-to-face
eligibility interview: 57 percent (70 cases) due to conflict between applicants’ work or
school schedules and IDHS hours, 25 percent (31 cases) due to health problems of
applicants, 7 percent (9 cases) due to applicant not having available child care, seven
percent (nine cases) due to all household members being elderly or disabled and two
percent for other reason such as client being on house arrest. Fourteen percent of
applicants (107 cases) were either homeless individuals (54 cases) or homeless families
(53 cases). (See Figure 7 below)

Figure 7. RealBenefits Applicants (requesting waiver of face-to-face interview)

Total applicants requesting waiver: 122

Elderly/Disabled
7%
Other
2%

Health Problems
25%

Work/Education Conflict with

IDHS hours
57%

Lack of Available Child Care

7%

Of the 350 approved applications, 43 percent were for families and 57 percent were for
individuals. Total food stamp benefits generated from the 350 approvals was $53,398
assuming that each client only received one-month of food stamps. Median benefit
amount was $100.50 with a benefit range from $10-$544.

The majority of the 790 applicants were female (74 percent). Seventy percent of
applicants were black, 17 percent were white and 10 percent were Hispanic. Seventy-nine
applicants (10 percent) were non-U.S. citizens with other household members being
potentially eligible. Forty-one percent of the applicants (327 cases) were households
where at least one of the household members earned wages from work. Fifty-one percent
(399 cases) of the applicants and their families had no household income. Ten percent of
applicants were disabled and five percent were elderly. Ninety-two percent of applicants
(728 cases) reported never receiving assistance from IDHS prior to completing the food
stamp application using RealBenefits™. The majority of cases were from Cook County
(88 percent). (See Figures 8-11 below)

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 13

Figure 9. RealBenefits Applicants (by race/ethnicity)
Total applicants: 790

Other
Asian
2% Hispanic
1%
White 10%
17%

Black
70%

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 14

Community partners continue to use RealBenefits™ at an increasing rate. In January
2003 community partners completed 204 food stamp applications using RealBenefits™.
In February 2003 community partners completed 244 applications.

Effective Practices, Barriers, Actions and Outcomes

IHC obtained feedback on the benefits and barriers to RealBenefits™ usage from
community partners and IDHS through meetings, focus groups, site visits and via
telephone. Continual readjustments were made in procedures and approach in submitting
applications, conducting outreach and various other areas during the course of the pilot
project when effective practices or significant barriers were identified. Initially, overall
usage by community partners of the web-based screening tool was sporadic. Usage
gradually increased—and has become relatively consistent—as community partners
became more familiar and comfortable using the tool, technical problems were resolved,
and effective internal procedures were developed within individual agencies.

Individual service providers’ computer skills varied within and between agencies. Some
service providers experienced little difficulty using the web-based screening and
application tool after the initial trainings, but most service providers required individual
retrainings and tutorials. Telephone assistance on proper RealBenefits™ usage and one-
on-one tutorials during site visits was quite common in the beginning. Service providers
called IHC frequently when they experienced difficulties using RealBenefits™ or had
questions about food stamp regulations. IHC staff members also provided follow-up on
individual cases for community partners clients when issues with their particular cases
arose. Service providers were encouraged to practice completing mock applications and
they generally became comfortable using the tool after site visits by the project
coordinator who sat side-by-side with service providers as they used RealBenefits™ with
actual clients. These on-site tutorials also allowed any technical problems at particular
sites to be identified and resolved.

Technical and Procedural Issues

Some community partners experienced problems with internet access. Many community
partners who did not have internet access available for service providers initially agreed
to obtain access by the beginning of the project. Most eventually acquired internet access.
Other agencies never acquired internet access; continued to have connection problems; or
had computers that operated so slowly as to make the tool inefficient. These six agencies
were allowed to exit the pilot project.

In addition, many community partners experienced difficulties viewing and printing

applications as they did not have an updated version of Adobe Acrobat on their
computers. Other technical problems experienced by community partners were related to
required software needed to use RealBenefits™ (i.e., most community partners had
Adobe Acrobat 4.0 but Adobe Acrobat 5.0 was required to view and print applications).

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 15

One of the primary aims of this project was to expedite the food stamp application
process by allowing clients to apply through the community partners and to allow clients
to request telephone interviews in lieu of face-to-face interviews. Toward this end,
procedures were developed with IDHS to process faxed applications completed using
RealBenefits™. This would alleviate the need for working clients to visit local IDHS
offices to complete applications. Verification documents could also be faxed for clients
who requested waivers of face-to-face interviews. Problems with faxed applications were
discovered as community partners informed us that many clients who completed on-line
food stamp applications were complaining that they had not heard from IDHS regarding
the status of their applications. As listed above, about 16 percent (127 applications)
identified as being submitted to IDHS by community partners were not received by
IDHS, meaning they were either lost or never submitted.

In addition 18 percent (140 applications) not received by IDHS were given to clients to
submit themselves. It was not readily clear from the pilot project whether clients
submitted these applications or not. . IHC developed a survey that was mailed to each
client whose application had not been received asking what the client did with their
completed application, if the client submitted the application to IDHS and whether they
received a response (see Appendix 4 for sample survey). We wanted to determine
whether the applications were not turned in by clients or whether there was some
mishandling of documentation by IDHS or the community partners. Follow-up was
provided for clients who responded to the survey to ensure that they received a
determination on their food stamp application. Forty-six of the 268 (17 percent) clients
who completed applications with the community partners but whose applications were
not processed by IDHS responded to the survey. Thirty-six surveys (14 percent) were
returned as undeliverable due to address changes and 17 clients (seven percent) could not
be contacted due to not having an address or phone number listed on their original
applications. Of the 46 surveys returned, 12 clients reported mailing the applications to
IDHS themselves, 20 reported that the agencies faxed the application to IDHS on their
behalf, seven clients stated that they had been approved for food stamps, three clients
reapplied independently and were approved for food stamps, one client took the
application to the IDHS office and three clients stated that they were denied food stamp
benefits. The seven applications that were listed as being approved by clients were
applications that were subsequently verified by IDHS as being approved. At the
completion of the project, IDHS re-checked all applications that were listed as being
completed by community partners to determine whether they had been received and
processed by IDHS. After checking applications by multiple types of identifying
information (i.e., date of birth, address, and social security number), it was found that
many of the applications that were thought to have been missing initially were actually
received and processed by IDHS. The final data listed under the “usage data” section
reflect changes after IDHS re-checked the data for accuracy.

The problems with applications not being submitted to or received by IDHS were
attributed to a number of factors: clients not submitting applications given to them or
waiting months before they turned the applications in, problems with timely forwarding
of changes in fax numbers and liaison contact information by IDHS to IHC resulting in
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 16
community partners faxing applications to the wrong fax number or person; applications
being misplaced and mishandled at local IDHS offices; and problems with community
partners and IDHS fax machines (i.e., faxes not going through properly). Procedures were
subsequently developed to address the problem with faxed applications not being
received. The community partners were encouraged to contact IDHS liaisons by email or
phone to determine whether applications they submitted were received. IHC and IDHS
also developed a procedure whereby the IHC project coordinator would send bi-weekly
emails of application submitted to IDHS using RealBenefits™, and IDHS would notify
the IHC project coordinator as to whether they were received. If IDHS had not received
applications, applications would be resubmitted by community partners. Community
partners were urged to keep fax confirmations and if approved, client benefits would
begin from the date of the initial fax. This procedure worked relatively well as
applications received by IDHS from community partners increased substantially,
although as indicated above, some of the applications completed by the community
partners continued to be unaccounted for by IDHS.

Procedural problems were also experienced with clients who were determined eligible for
expedited food stamps and completed RealBenefits™ applications. Eligibility interviews
for expedited food stamps must occur the day of application or the next business day and
a determination must be made within five calendar days if clients have no or very low
income. Frequently these applicants were not processed for expedited food stamps or
experienced delays in their benefits. IDHS reports that their attempts to contact these
clients by phone and mail in the designated time period were often unsuccessful due to
clients not being available. IHC recommended to the community partners that when it
was determined that applicants were potentially eligible for expedited food stamps that
these clients either hand-deliver their applications to IDHS or contact the office within 48
hours after applications were faxed to the liaisons.

Outreach and Education

Many clients and service providers involved in this project believed that they or their
clients were not eligible for food stamps for various reasons. When RealBenefits™
initially went on-line service providers were reluctant to reach out to clients as they
assumed their clients were ineligible or uninterested. When queried in focus groups as to
why service providers were not using RealBenefits™, many of the direct service
providers stated that their clients were “already receiving food stamps”; were “not
eligible for food stamps”; or “did not want to apply for food stamps” (see Appendix 5 for
focus groups information). The IHC project coordinator conducted site visits and
demonstrated to agencies how outreach at appropriate times can reach a high number of
clients that are potentially eligible and willing to apply for food stamps. The project
coordinator worked with community partners to conduct outreach at agency orientations,
health fairs, WIC clinics and during emergency food distribution. These events included
the Veterans Affairs Standdown in July 2002, an annual fair that provides veterans with
an array of services. Over 40 applications were completed in a 6 hour period by IHC at
the Veterans Affairs Standdown at the request of IDHS. The project coordinator also
worked with some community partners to develop outreach material targeted to clients to
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 17
educate them, and address their particular issues about the Food Stamp Program, and to
notify clients that they could apply with the community partners. Usage of
RealBenefits™ and clients’ interest increased substantially when community partners
conducted outreach and educated clients about the Food Stamp Program and how using
the on-line application could simplify the food stamp application process.

Community Partners Internal Procedures

Implementation of RealBenefits™ varied from agency-to-agency depending on

organizational structure, technological infrastructure and staff availability. IHC
conducted formal meetings with senior-level management and direct service providers at
participating community partners to develop internal procedures on how to implement
RealBenefits™ in the most effective and least intrusive manner. We will present
examples to capture the essence of how organizations that used RealBenefits™ on a
consistent basis typically implemented the screening and application tool into their day-
to-day operations.

Catholic Charities

The Catholic Charities Emergency Assistance Department (EAD) in Chicago serves

4,000 clients per month and consists of three sites on Chicago’s west side, south side and
near north area. The EAD offers an array of services for clients that include food pantries,
clothing, housing assistance, case management and information and referrals. EAD
service providers initially set aside two-hours, once-a-week to conduct food stamp
screenings for interested clients. Once demand increased, EAD generally asked all clients
if they were receiving food stamps and if they were not, they were screened at that time.
The EAD regional director is intimately involved in the planning process and daily
supervision of staff. EAD service providers posted signs and distributed outreach material
to clients about the Food Stamp Program that notified clients when, where and with
whom to apply at their respective agencies. The EAD also conducts food stamp outreach
on days when they issue emergency food and clothing to clients, and schedule food stamp
screenings on an individual basis when conducting case management services for clients.
As the number of clients requesting RealBenefits™ screenings continually increased,
EAD recruited and trained volunteers to assist the agency in completing RealBenefits™
applications. EAD faxes the application and verification documents to local IDHS offices
on clients’ behalf. Catholic Charities continues to use the tool on a continuous basis that
is consistent with it organizational objectives of connecting families with all available
resources. Overall Catholic Charities Emergency Assistance Department, Central Intake
and Referral and Early Childhood Development Centers completed 36 percent (286
applications) of the 790 applications completed during the course of this project with 75
percent (215) of the completed applications being received and processed by IDHS and
an approval rate of 65 percent. Seventy staff were trained to use RealBenefits™ at
Catholic Charities.

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 18

Day Care Action Council of Illinois

Day Care Action Council of Illinois (DCACI) is a child care resource and referral agency
for Cook County. IDHS contracts with DCACI to make child care eligibility
determinations for about 100,000 families annually. DCACI has an array of other
programs such as leadership training, Earned Income Tax Credit help and child safety
programs. DCACI has 371 staff, 50 who were trained to use RealBenefits™. DCACI
screens clients for child care eligibility via telephone. With the implementation of
RealBenefits™, DCACI staff asks clients if they are receiving food stamps. If clients are
not receiving food stamps, DCACI screens clients over the phone using RealBenefits™.
DCACI service providers then mail clients applications to sign and submit to IDHS.
DCACI sends clients detailed information on what to do with applications when they are
received. Clients can either fax, mail or hand-deliver applications to IDHS offices.
DCACI has conducted its own focus groups regarding RealBenefits™ usage at their
agency. DCACI with the assistance of IHC also conducted its own training sessions for
service providers. The Director of Research and Development at DCACI is intimately
engaged in the planning of implementation at DCACI. DCACI completed 25 percent
(195) of the total applications with 42 percent (82) of their applications being received
and processed by IDHS and an approval rate of 70 percent.

Franciscan Outreach Association

The Franciscan Outreach Association (FOA) provides low-income, homeless men,

women and children with basic necessities they need to survive from day to day. FOA
offers overnight shelter for up to 215 men and 35 women every night of the year. FOA
also runs soup kitchens and provides case management and mental health services. FOA
has 15 staff members and 11 volunteers. Three staff members, whose primary
responsibilities are case management, were trained to use RealBenefits™. Usage by FOA
was sporadic as some service providers were not convinced that the tool was effective
due to clients potentially having to make a visit to IDHS for face-to-face eligibility
interviews. Others became discourage when applications were not accepted or were
misplaced by IDHS. FOA completed 11 (one percent) of the total applications with 50
percent (5) of the applications being received and processed by IDHS and an approval
rate of 69 percent.

Illinois Hunger Coalition

In addition to administering and supervising the Food Stamp Outreach Project and
providing follow-up, IHC staff members also used RealBenefits™ to complete food
stamp applications for clients who called our toll-free Hunger Hotline. IHC has one part-
time and 5 full-time staff members. Three IHC staff members and two IHC interns were
trained to use RealBenefits™. IHC staff members completed application for clients over
the telephone and mailed application to clients to sign and submit to IDHS. IHC staff
conducted follow-up with IDHS to ensure that applications were received and processed
in a timely manner. IHC completed 106 (14 percent) of the total applications with 62

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 19

percent (67) of those application being received and processed by IDHS and an approval
rate of 69 percent.

Mayors Office of Workforce Development

The Mayor’s Office of Workforce Development contracts with about 33 social service
agencies throughout the Chicago area to provide welfare-to-work services for clients.
These agencies range from welfare-to-work programs, shelters and soup kitchens to job
placement facilities. Fifty-five service providers at eight MOWD agencies were trained to
use RealBenefits™. MOWD sites experienced significant difficulties implementing
RealBenefits™ due to the belief by service providers that many clients were already
receiving food stamp benefits upon entry into their welfare-to-work programs. In
addition, staff availability and contract changes were significant barriers to usage by
MOWD agencies who found it difficult to allocate staff time to complete food stamp
applications. MOWD affiliated agencies completed eight percent (49) of total
applications with 61 percent (30) of applications being received and processed by IDHS
and an approval rate of 70 percent.

People’s Resource Center

The People’s Resource Center (PRC) provides housing, food and transportation
assistance in addition to computer literacy, language and art programs to over 1700
families in DuPage County annually. Half of their clients are immigrant and working
families. PRC has two staff member who are trained to use RealBenefits™. One of the
staff is the director of programs who uses the tool to screen and complete applications for
clients frequently. The two staff at PRC complete applications at a rate of about six per
month and have consistently used the tool. PRC completed 5 percent (43) of the total
applications with 74 percent (32) of applications being received and processed by IDHS
and an approval rate of 63 percent.

Polish American Association

The Polish American Association (PAA) provides a range of bilingual and bicultural
services to the Polish community and others in need. Through its 31 programs and
services PAA provides clients with the resources for changing their lives and enhancing
their ability to become contributing members of the community. Programs include:
English-as-a-Second Language and citizenship classes, literacy tutoring, vocational
training, job development and placement, career counseling, crisis intervention and other
services. Four case managers at PAA’s two sites were trained to use RealBenefits™.
They typically asked clients who visited their office if they were receiving food stamps, if
clients were not they were screened. PAA had numerous computer problems that
inhibited usage. They completed 3 applications with 1 of these applications being
received and processed by IDHS. The application was approved.

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 20

Township of Evanston

The Township of Evanston was not originally involved in the pilot, but during the course
of the project, IHC conducted outreach to the agency and trained staff members to use
RealBenefits™. Evanston Township General Assistance (ETGA) program is designed to
assist area residents who are not eligible for other public benefit programs in maintaining
basic items such as food and housing. Evanston is a northern suburb immediately outside
of Chicago. ETGA runs an “interim” assistance program, meaning that the program is
available as long clients show need. ETGA offers clients access to cash assistance that
can be used for housing, food and/or utilities, GED programs and job placement
assistance. Clients receive cash allotments on a bi-weekly basis. In addition, a portion of
the cash assistance goes to housing costs that are paid directly to clients’ landlords. Two
service providers at ETGA were trained to use RealBenefits™. They screen clients not
already receiving food stamps as part of their initial intake process. The Township
commissioner was an integral part of the planning process and continually evaluates how
to use RealBenefits™ to the agency’s advantage. ETGA service providers fax
applications to local IDHS and follow-up by phone and email with office liaisons to
ensure that applications are received.

ETGA requires that clients apply for food stamps and follow the application process
through to its conclusion in order to continue receiving cash assistance. IHC reports to
ETGA on a monthly basis on the disposition of clients’ food stamp applications. If one of
their clients is approved for food stamps, ETGA does not decrease their cash assistance.
If clients are denied food stamps because they did not turn in documents or missed
appointments, ETGA will insist that clients reapply for food stamps as a condition for
receiving continued cash assistance. The two service providers at ETGA completed 12
percent (98) of the total applications with 89 percent (87) of applications being received
and processed by IDHS and an approval rate of 66 percent.

Discussion of Findings

The primary objectives of the IHC Food Stamp Outreach Project were to increase access
to the Food Stamp Program for families and individuals by strengthening partnerships
between community partners and IDHS. This would be done by making available and
evaluating a web-based screening and application tool. This tool would allow community
partners to identify potentially eligible clients and to complete food stamp applications
for clients on site. It would also allow clients the ability to complete the food stamp
process without a face-to-face interview. As our findings indicate, IHC met these
objectives. It should be noted that over 50 percent of the applicants that completed
applications during the course of this project were from households with no income and
41 percent were from households where at least one household member received wages
from work. These findings point to the need to conduct outreach to all underserved
populations who may be eligible for food stamps but not enrolled for various reasons.
Many of these applicants—both working and unemployed—need to be encouraged to
apply.

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 21

As noted above, 92 percent of the applicants in this project state that they have never
received assistance from IDHS in the past. Many of these applicants may be experiencing
difficulties going to local offices as 15 percent of our sample stated that they were unable
to visit the local office because of conflicts between their work hours and IDHS hours,
health, transportation and dependent care issues. Further, the overwhelming majority of
applicants that were denied food stamp benefits were due to their failure to attend
eligibility interviews (62 percent) and not submitting all necessary documentation (16
percent). In order to increase access to the Food Stamp Program, steps must be taken to
minimize or eliminate the number of visits that clients are required to make to local
offices and the amount of paperwork they have to submit. If face-to-face interviews were
waived for all applicants in this project, the approval rate for this project could have been
over 90 percent!

It appears that providing community partners with a web-based screening tool for food
stamps can be effective and efficient and provide benefits to clients and the agencies if
particular institutional structures and procedures are in place. Food stamp applications
completed by community partners using RealBenefits™ got off to a relatively slow start,
but continually picked up momentum as technical problems were resolved after many
months of unanticipated delays with the development of the screening tool, internal
procedures were developed at participating agencies and appropriate service providers
were re-trained. Use of RealBenefits™ and outreach activities officially began in March
of 2001. Most service providers required retraining and one-on-one, on-site technical
assistance and demonstrations of how to use RealBenefits™ with their clients after the
initial group training sessions. The onsite support and training offered by IHC also served
to identify and work out any technical problems at participating agencies and to assist
community partners in identifying effective ways to implement the tool and outreach to
clients. In addition, service providers typically felt more comfortable using
RealBenefits™ after one-on-one demonstrations on their office computers.

As the analysis mentioned above shows, there appears to be mixed results in terms of the
accuracy of RealBenefits™ in determining the exact food stamp benefit amount a
household would actually receive. There was agreement in the calculated food stamp
benefit amount the client would receive between the screening tool and IDHS in only 20
percent of the applications approved (plus or minus $20). This could be due to clients not
disclosing accurate information to community partners or simply that the applicant’s
circumstances changed by the time they completed their eligibility interviews.
RealBenefits™ tended to err more on the side of higher benefits amounts and in
determining clients as being eligible for food stamps who were later found to be
ineligible by IDHS. Of the 140 applicants that were determined to be ineligible for food
stamps by IDHS, RealBenefits™ found 9 of those applicants as being ineligible, and of
the 350 applications approved by IDHS, 324 were listed as being potentially eligible for
food stamps by RealBenefits™. These findings are consistent with the fact that
community partners were trained by IHC to have their client submit the food stamp
application even if the screening tool determined that the applicant was potentially
ineligible for benefits. Future research would need to examine more closely to what
degree clients’ information changes from the time they complete their RealBenefits™
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 22
applications until the time that they complete their eligibility interviews to determine why
these discrepancies in food stamp benefit amounts exist.

Indeed the web-based screening and application tool was successfully implemented at
some agencies more than others. The belief by some community partners that clients
were already receiving food stamps or not interested in applying was overcome when
community partners educated clients about the Food Stamp Program and explained to
them how RealBenefits™ could simplify the application process. Although, the numbers
vary from agency-to-agency, all community partners participating in this project serve
clients that are not receiving food stamps who are potentially eligible and willing to
apply. At Catholic Charities Emergency Assistance Department, IHC project coordinator
spent six hours a week for three weeks assisting service providers in conducting outreach
to clients who were potentially eligible for food stamps on days when the EAD
distributed emergency food. The project coordinator would approach clients while they
waited in line for food and asked them if they were interested in applying for food
stamps. The EAD service provider, with the support of the IHC project coordinator,
completed an average of 10 applications per-day during the six hours the EAD distributed
food. Subsequently, the director of the EAD assigned a permanent staff member to
conduct outreach and complete food stamp screenings on days when emergency food is
distributed. Christine Dykes-Sorrells, director of the EAD, states:

Because of the effectiveness of our participation in RealBenefits™, we looked to

expand our participation and have already begun to offer the service at our
Tuesday night supper population [weekly soup kitchen]. Persons come to our
agency for supper and are offered the opportunity to sign up for food stamps
through RealBenefits™. Many of these clients are homeless individuals and
families and would not have applied for food stamps because of the process and
abuse they receive in local IDHS offices. Some people also believe that they are
ineligible. Our participation in the Illinois Hunger Coalition project has allowed
us to combat both of these issues. Even though clients still have to go into the
food stamp office, they now go in knowing what they may receive and that there
is someone outside of IDHS that will assist them in getting their benefits.

Agency commitment and upper-level management involvement in the process of

implementation and execution is critical to the successful use of RealBenefits™. IHC
engaged upper-level management of participating agencies throughout the project.
Numerous meetings and focus groups were conducted with management of the
community partners to discuss implementation at their agencies and to troubleshoot any
difficulties they experienced. Agencies that successfully implemented RealBenefits™
were agencies where management was willing and able to formally incorporate
RealBenefits™ into their day-to-day operations such as during intake processes or during
agency events such as health fairs and food distribution, and followed-up with direct
service providers to ensure that food stamp applications were completed. The type of
agency (i.e., welfare-to-work, food pantry, shelter, emergency assistance center) appeared
less important in determining whether RealBenefits™ was implemented successfully than
an agency’s commitment and ability to reach out to those potentially eligible for food
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 23
stamps, and to follow-up with IDHS to ensure that applications were processed.
Individual agencies must make decisions as to whether they have the available resources
to reach out to these clients.

There were some agencies where management remained interested throughout the course
of the project; however, many of these agencies continued to run into barriers such as
clients’ lack of interest, internet access, staff availability and staff willingness to conduct
outreach to clients that inhibited usage. Ceandra Daniels, a case worker supervisor at
Inner Voice (MOWD), states that it was difficult for them to successfully use the tool as
clients typically did not want to add more time to the intake process: “I think
RealBenefits™ is a wonderful concept. But when put into practice at our agency, many
clients did not want to do it. They come into the agency looking for housing or
employment services and it is hard to try to convince them that this is something that they
should do. We also typically see clients only once and then we refer them out.” In
addition to management involvement, direct service providers must be offered support
and education so that they feel comfortable using the tool and answering clients’
questions about food stamp eligibility. Direct service providers must also understand the
significance of conducting food stamp outreach. Monthly reports to supervisors on
RealBenefits™ usage by particular service providers at their agencies and the disposition
of applications filed were integral to successful implementation. This kept managers
abreast of usage by their agency and provided motivation to staff members who knew
that their usage was being tracked. Reports from IHC to community partners on how
many applicants were approved for food stamp benefits were also motivating to staff who
saw that their efforts were not in vain.

Upper-level management involvement and direct worker education was equally as

important at IDHS as with the community partners. Procedures for processing and
tracking completed RealBenefits™ applications were continually reevaluated during the
course of the project. As mentioned above, problems arose regarding the processing of
faxed applications at IDHS. Community partners and clients reported barriers such as
applications being lost by local offices. Changes in liaisons and contact information, lack
of adequate internal procedures for distributing faxes that often resulted in liaisons not
receiving applications, and lack of knowledge by some IDHS workers of the IHC
research project resulted in applicants having to complete new applications. Many clients
and community partners became discouraged about the project when situations such as
these arose. Sister Pam Falter of the Franciscan Outreach Association states, “We are not
quite convinced that RealBenefits™ helps the application for food stamps go faster. I
think this is often due to the challenge of efficient communication with individuals at the
IDHS office.”

Procedures were developed by IHC, community partners and IDHS that decreased the
number of lost applications. As many community partners mentioned in focus groups and
interviews, submitting completed applications to IDHS electronically would be ideal as it
could practically eliminate problems with fax machines and decrease the amount of staff
time needed to follow-up to ensure that applications were received. Agencies such as
Catholic Charities and the Township of Evanston where applications were completed
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 24
with clients in their respective offices (face-to-face interactions) and provided follow-up
and advocacy for clients were agencies that completed more applications, had more
received and processed by IDHS and had high approval rates. Again, follow-up with
IDHS to ensure that applications were received and processed was critical. Although IHC
completed applications with clients over the phone, aggressive follow-up by IHC resulted
in a high number of these applications being both received and processed by IDHS.

Continually updating contact information and ensuring that this information was
forwarded to community partners, and keeping records of when and to whom
applications were faxed was essential. In addition, follow-up was needed by community
partners with IDHS liaisons to ensure that applications were received. Regular interaction
between IHC, IDHS local offices and community partners during the project strengthened
relationships as community partners that continually used the tool interacted with IDHS
more and developed their own procedures for tracking applications to ensure that the
applications were received by IDHS. Juanita Linder of Catholic Charities states that “it
has been a lot of work developing relationships with IDHS. Some of the workers are
responsive and others are not. Once the relationships were developed though, the process
worked pretty well.”

Lessons learned from this project regarding successful implementation of RealBenefits™

at the community level include:

1) A commitment from community partners to incorporate RealBenefits™ into their

day-to-day operation in a formal manner, and follow-up with direct service
providers to ensure usage
2) An ability to conduct food stamp screenings and complete applications by
community partners by allotting staff time and investing in technology
3) Timely hands-on training sessions for community partners, preferably onsite,
where potential problems can be identified and resolved before full
implementation of RealBenefits™ usage begins at respective agencies
4) Education about the Food Stamp Program for service provider is a critical part of
training sessions in enabling service providers to advocate effectively on their
clients’ behalf and so that the service providers feel comfortable answering
clients’ questions
5) Appropriate and aggressive outreach to clients by service providers regarding
food stamp eligibility and how RealBenefits™ can simply the process (i.e.,
posting signs in agency, asking clients if they are eligible, educating clients about
the Food Stamp Program)
6) Timely and consistent reporting to agencies on usage by individual
RealBenefits™ users and disposition of food stamp applications by IHC or
someone with access to data from IDHS
7) Commitment from IDHS to ensure that applications are received and processed in
a timely manner
8) IDHS should not encouraged clients to request waivers of face-to-face interviews
when they are unable to come to local offices

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 25

 9) Investment from IDHS to ensure that sufficient fax machines are available to
receive faxes
10) Follow-up with IDHS to ensure that faxed applications are received
11) Timely updating and forwarding of contact information at local IDHS offices and
information about office closings and phone numbers or liaisons changes to
community partners by IDHS and IHC
12) Timely updates on policy and administrative changes to the Food Stamp Program
from IDHS

Conclusions

The successful implementation of RealBenefits™ by some community partners is

promising for using web-based screening tools to increase access to food stamps. Clients
indeed feel more comfortable applying for food stamps at places where they have already
built positive relationships. Clients do not have to spend time waiting at IDHS offices and
can potentially get connected with a number of government programs at places where
they are receiving other services. A screening tool like RealBenefits™ can aid
organizations in delivering comprehensive services to clients. As screening capabilities
for more programs are added to RealBenefits™, it will become even more of an asset for
community partners who can use the tool to determine potential client eligibility for a
number of programs such as Earned Income Tax Credit, child and health care programs
and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), and help to educate people about
income support programs to help them and their families.

Developing ways to electronically submit food stamp applications completed by

community partners should be explored in future projects to increase access for working
families and individuals and expedite and simplify the application and tracking process.
In addition, procedures should be put in place at IDHS to ensure that lost applications are
kept to a minimum. We watched problems with misplaced applications increase as local
offices closed and staff retirements and lay offs increased (two IDHS offices closed in
Cook County during the project). Efforts to decrease the amount of paperwork required
from clients should be pursued to alleviate some of the administrative burdens for IDHS
workers. Taking advantage of state options for semi-annual reporting to cut down on
office visits and paperwork, and investing in new technologies to track and electronically
file applications would be advantageous for IDHS workers and food stamp recipients. 13

Collaborations between government and non-government agencies must continue as state

budgets cuts and the economic downturn increases the number of families and individuals
in need of income supports. At the same time need is increasing, staff at local IDHS
offices are being pushed to their limits. Government agencies should welcome and
encourage assistance from community partners to help ease the burden at local offices
and help support staff. Private and public partnerships are essential to meeting the myriad
needs of our citizenry during these difficult times.

Rosenbaum, Dorothy. “Improving Access to Food Stamps: New Reporting Options Can Reduce
13

Administrative Burdens and Error Rates.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, September 2000.
Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 26
Waiver of face-to-face interviews for eligible applicants should also be more commonly
accepted by IDHS. Many clients requesting waivers of face-to-face interviews due to
disabilities, work schedules or lack of transportation were sent appointments to come into
the local offices. Telephone interviews could alleviate some of the pressure on local
offices and would increase access for clients who do not have time to take off work, are
disabled or lack available child care. Future research should explore in a more systematic
manner whether clients who request telephone interviews are typically persuaded to come
to local offices by IDHS workers.

This project also points to the benefit of exploring on-line applications for food stamps as
clients have shown that they are more likely to apply for food stamps if they can decrease
the amount of time they spend in IDHS offices. On-line applications combined with
waiver of face-to-face interviews could substantially increase food stamp caseloads.
Clients in our project showed initiative by mailing and faxing applications themselves to
IDHS that were completed over the phone by community partners and mailed to clients.
Allowing applicants to prescreen themselves for public benefits programs and complete
applications online and submit verification documents via fax or mail has the potential to
alleviate some of the pressure on local offices and allow clients to not spend time at the
office simply to determine that they are not eligible for a particular program, although we
also found that advocacy by community partners and IHC on clients behalf was
extremely beneficial to clients.

Many clients in need of food stamps continue to complain about the stigma and
difficulties attached to applying for food stamps. Instituting appropriate organizational
structures and technologies that encourage and support eligible clients to be prescreened
and complete applications with community partners and to waive face-to-face interviews
would help to eliminate the stigma of the Food Stamp Program for many clients and
make them more likely to apply, but it would also alleviate the burden of an ever
increasing shortage of overworked staff at government agencies.

Illinois Hunger Coalition (Final Report) 27