ANALYSIS AND DECISION:
In this case, the Appellant appealed the Department’s decision to reduce the household’s SNAP benefits after a change in household size. The Appellant and the Department’s Representative agreed to the gross monthly income received in the household from Social Security, however; the Appellant did not agree with the cash assistance belonging to his granddaughter and great-grandson, being used in the eligibility determination. At the administrative hearing, the Department’s Representative’s testified to SNAP amount being based on the Appellant’s total household income minus the HSUA deduction and the Appellant’s shelter expenses. The Department’s Representative was not prepared to explain the calculation of the Appellant’s net income based on the information provided and verified at the time of the calculation. The Notice (Exhibit B-1) was not reflective of the HSUA deduction, for utility expenses, that the …show more content…
The Appellant’s Notice was issued on June 16, 2016 but the appeal was not filed until July 15, 2016 which is considered untimely filed for a continuation of benefits. Furthermore, the Notice (Exhibit B-1) indicates that the Appellant was given a new certification period beginning July 2016. The ALJ finds that the Department was correct not to continue benefits pending the outcome of the administrative hearing however, prior to the closing of the hearing record, the Department sent a letter to BHA admitting to the errors made by the Department during the processing of the Appellant’s SNAP benefit
In this case, the Appellant appealed the Department’s decision to reduce the household’s SNAP benefits after a change in household size. The Appellant and the Department’s Representative agreed to the gross monthly income received in the household from Social Security, however; the Appellant did not agree with the cash assistance belonging to his granddaughter and great-grandson, being used in the eligibility determination. At the administrative hearing, the Department’s Representative’s testified to SNAP amount being based on the Appellant’s total household income minus the HSUA deduction and the Appellant’s shelter expenses. The Department’s Representative was not prepared to explain the calculation of the Appellant’s net income based on the information provided and verified at the time of the calculation. The Notice (Exhibit B-1) was not reflective of the HSUA deduction, for utility expenses, that the …show more content…
The Appellant’s Notice was issued on June 16, 2016 but the appeal was not filed until July 15, 2016 which is considered untimely filed for a continuation of benefits. Furthermore, the Notice (Exhibit B-1) indicates that the Appellant was given a new certification period beginning July 2016. The ALJ finds that the Department was correct not to continue benefits pending the outcome of the administrative hearing however, prior to the closing of the hearing record, the Department sent a letter to BHA admitting to the errors made by the Department during the processing of the Appellant’s SNAP benefit