Category: Uncategorized

Accessing SNAP and TANF Benefits after a Drug Conviction: A Survey of State Laws

We are pleased to present a new report, “Accessing SNAP and TANF Benefits after a Drug Conviction: A Survey of State Laws.” This report offers a comprehensive and up-to-date picture of the differing ways states have responded to the 1996 federal ban on access to SNAP and TANF benefits for those with a felony drug conviction, either by opting out of the ban or by modifying it, and includes illustrative maps and relevant sections of statutory text to facilitate analysis and comparison. ******* The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) imposed a lifetime ban on federal food assistance benefits (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) for anyone with a drug felony conviction obtained after passage of the Act.1 PRWORA allowed states to opt out of the ban or to modify it, and over the years all but one state has opted out of the ban or modified it for at least one of the two benefit programs. That said, fully half the states remain committed in some fashion to this outdated artifact of the War on Drugs. Over the years there have been numerous reports critical of the policy underpinnings of the categorical ban on public welfare benefits imposed by PRWORA, and researchers have generally concluded that the ban is counterproductive even in modified form, including in criminal justice terms.2 Indeed, a recent empirical study of modified versions of the SNAP/TANF bans concluded that by “introducing greater state scrutiny of recipients’ conformity to state-sanctioned behavioral norms,” modified bans are “not inherently less punitive” than full bans.3 We do not intend to dwell on the policy arguments against the PRWORA ban in this report. Rather, our purpose here is the more modest one of providing a detailed description of state laws that currently modify participation in the SNAP/TANF bans, for use by policymakers and advocates seeking further reforms. Surprisingly, this has not been done in the more than 25 years since PRWORA’s enactment. Two recent private sector studies have identified the extent of state participation in one or both of the PRWORA bans, but their conclusions are not consistent with one another or, in all cases, with our own research.4 Notably, neither of these studies documents the specific features of modified bans, which can vary widely from state to state in scope and effect. Significantly, no previous report on the SNAP/TANF bans has included statutory text that would permit analysis of the ways various states have modified them, and comparisons between and among states. Our report attempts to remedy this shortcoming. We illustrate the national landscape of participation in the SNAP/TANF bans through a set of maps: one map shows the national landscape of participation in the PRWORA ban for all 50 states, and two additional maps show how states have modified the ban for each of the two benefit programs. A 30-page Appendix includes the text and an analysis of each state’s relevant law(s), providing additional detail about how access to benefits may be controlled differently even within the same general category of modification. We hope that advocates in states that have not yet fully opted out of both the PRWORA bans will find this unique collection of research tools helpful as they work to complete this important law reform project.  Preparation of “Access to SNAP and TANF Benefits after a Drug Conviction: A Survey of State Laws” was made possible by a generous grant from Arnold Ventures. Citation: Margaret Love & Nick Sibilla, Access to SNAP and TANF Benefits after a Drug Conviction: A Survey of State Laws, Collateral Consequences Res. Ctr. (December 2023) National Landscape As of December 5, 2023, 25 states and the District of Columbia have opted out of both federal bans, so that people with drug felony convictions may receive both SNAP and TANF benefits for which they are otherwise eligible without conditions imposed pursuant to federal law. Another four states – Florida, Iowa, Maryland, and Utah—have opted out of the ban on SNAP but have modified the ban on TANF to impose conditions.5 Fourteen states have modified bans for receiving both SNAP and TANF benefits. An additional six states—Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, Nebraska, Texas, and West Virginia—have modified the ban on SNAP but maintain the complete federal ban on TANF benefits. South Carolina is the only state in the Nation that has declined to opt out of or modify either PRWORA ban. Just in the last four years, eight states have taken steps to move from full or modified bans to a full opt out for both types of benefits. Colorado, Kentucky, Michigan, Nevada, South Dakota, and Virginia have moved from modified bans to full opt out for both, Illinois moved from a modified TANF ban to full opt out for both, and Mississippi and South Dakota moved from full bans to full opt out for both. West Virginia enacted a modified ban for SNAP, and Minnesota eased its treatment conditions.    Several state legislatures took steps toward reform in 2023, including Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, and South Carolina.   Pennsylvania is the only state during this period that moved the other way, from full opt out back to modified bans for both SNAP and TANF.  Pennsylvania currently imposes a regime of conditions on access to both benefits that is among the toughest of all the states.    For additional detail on how each state treats access to SNAP and TANF benefits in light of the PRWORA ban, you may click on the national map below to jump to an excerpt of the state’s relevant statutory text in the Appendix, and return to the map via the link at the bottom of the state entry.   Opted out for both SNAP and TANF Opted out for SNAP, modified ban for TANF Modified ban for both SNAP and TANF Modified ban for SNAP, complete ban for TANF Complete ban for both SNAP and TANF Modified Bans Although roughly half of the country—24 states—has implemented a modified ban for either SNAP or TANF benefits, or for both, these modified bans vary widely. Broadly, the conditions imposed by modified bans can be grouped into five different categories. The most common condition on benefits is completion of sentence or compliance with terms of court-imposed supervision. Eight states impose this condition without more, and another six states couple it with program participation in the form of drug treatment and/or drug testing, potentially extending supervision long after the sentence has been discharged. For example, Indiana conditions access to SNAP on compliance with probation or parole terms, but for TANF it adds program participation conditions plus a waiting period.   Seven additional states require program participation in the form of drug treatment or drug testing for one or both benefits without regard to whether sentence-related supervision has been completed.  Five states limit access to benefits to those convicted of less serious offenses (e.g., drug possession or use as opposed to selling) and four states (including Indiana for TANF) require a waiting period before any benefit may be obtained. North Carolina is the only state that limits offense eligibility and requires a waiting period for access to both SNAP and TANF.  A handful of states impose unusually arduous conditions on access to benefits, coupling limits on what convictions may be eligible with mandatory program participation, waiting periods, and random drug testing. These include Arizona, Missouri and Nebraska for SNAP, Indiana for TANF, and North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee for both SNAP and TANF. (Note that Arizona, Missouri and Nebraska have not opted out of TANF at all.) Pennsylvania and Tennessee join Indiana in imposing stricter conditions on access to TANF than to SNAP, and of course seven states have declined to opt out of the full TANF ban at all.       In sum, there is wide variation in the way states have conditioned access to SNAP and TANF benefits with a modified opt-out. A third of the states have chosen to rely on supervision that will end when the person’s sentence is discharged, but the other 2/3 require participation in drug treatment or testing programs that may have little or no connection to a disqualifying conviction in the distant past — a conviction that itself may or may not have been connected with the individual’s own drug use. It is true that in some states the requirement of treatment is qualified in the applicable law by an “as required” proviso, and testing may be limited to a period of time after conviction. But in many other states required program participation is not defined by individual circumstances.    In this fashion, the conditions imposed by many states on access to SNAP and TANF benefits extend state supervision over an individual’s behavior long after their sentence has been fully served, frequently without a determination that supervision is warranted, a circumstance that has been aptly described as “not inherently less punitive” than full bans.6 The maps below show the variant pattern of conditions imposed by different states for each type of benefit, and the hover labels provide some detail for those states that impose more than one type of condition on access to the same benefit. Those who are interested in additional detail can find it in the Appendix. States colored pale blue have opted out entirely.  Completion of sentence/ compliance with supervision Drug treatment required Drug testing required Other/Multiple conditions on access  Complete ban on benefits SNAP Modified Opt-Out   TANF Modified Opt-Out Completion of sentence/ compliance with supervision Drug treatment required Drug testing required Other/Multiple conditions on access  Complete ban on benefits Footnotes [1] See 21 U.S. Code § 862a; Government Accountability Office, Drug Offenders: Various Factors May Limit the Impacts of Federal Laws That Provide for Denial of Selected Benefits, September 27, 2005, https://www.gao.gov/assets/a247941.html. See also Congressional Research Service, Drug Testing and Crime-Related Restrictions in TANF, SNAP, and Housing Assistance, November 28, 2016, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R42394. [2] See, e.g., Tracy Sohoni and Sylwia Piatkowska, Begging for Crime? The Effect of State Laws Restricting Access to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families on Unsuccessful Completion of Parole, Crime & Delinquency, 68(11), 2115-2145 (2022)(finding that “states that imposed restrictions on TANF saw an increase in state rates of unsuccessful parole completion,” as well as “no significant difference between full bans and partial bans of TANF, indicating that even partial bans may undermine efforts to successfully reintegrate former offenders”); Cody Tuttle, Snapping Back: Food Stamp Bans and Criminal Recidivism, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 11 (2): 301-27 (2019), https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/pol.20170490 (finding that Florida’s modified ban on SNAP benefits for people convicted of drug trafficking “increased their likelihood of recidivism”); Crystal S. Yang, Does Public Assistance Reduce Recidivism? American Economic Review 107(5): 551-55, May 2017, https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.p20171001 (finding that “public assistance eligibility for drug offenders reduces one-year recidivism rates by 10 percent”).  [3] See Brittany Martin and Sarah Shannon, State variation in the drug felony lifetime ban on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Why the modified ban matters, 22 Punishment & Society 439–460 (2020). [4] See Darrell Thompson, Ashley Burnside, No More Double Punishments: Lifting the Ban on SNAP and TANF for People with Prior Felony Drug Convictions, CLASP, April 2022, https://www.clasp.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2022Apr_No-More-Double-Punishments.pdf; Network for Public Health Law, The Effects of Denying SNAP Benefits to People with a Felony Drug Conviction, Robert Wood Johnson, 2020, https://www.networkforphl.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Issue-Brief-Snap-Felon-Ban-Updated-1.pdf. Chart with statutory citations:  https://www.networkforphl.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/50-State-Survey-SNAP-Felony-Ban-Updated.pdf [5] In the case of both Florida and Maryland, our reading of the law by which each state opted out of the federal ban appears to differ not just from the two private sector reports bited in note 4, but also from state agencies responsible for administering the benefit scheme in the two states. As noted in the Appendix, these agencies continue to impose conditions on access to SNAP benefits despite what we interpret as a complete opt-out for SNAP (though not for TANF). [6] See Martin and Shannon, note 3 supra.  State Law Analysis  Alabama  SNAP: Modified Ban TANF: Modified Ban Conditions: Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision terms   Ala. Code § 38-1-8  Pursuant to subsection (d) of 21 U.S.C. § 862a, a person convicted of a drug related felony who is otherwise ineligible for aid under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, or the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or both shall be eligible for the aid upon completion of his or her sentence or if the person is satisfactorily serving a sentence of a period of probation, including if the person has satisfactorily completed mandatory participation in a drug treatment program, provided the person meets all other requirements for eligibility under the program or programs. Any person eligible for aid pursuant to this provision shall still comply with all other requirements for receiving aid, including those related to drug testing. Back to Map Alaska  SNAP: Modified Ban TANF: Modified Ban Conditions: Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision terms OR participation in drug treatment  Alaska Stat. § 47.27.015(i) (i) A person convicted after August 22, 1996, of an offense that is classified as a felony under AS 11.71.010 – 11.71.040 or by the law of another jurisdiction that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in AS 11.71.900, is disqualified from receiving temporary assistance under this chapter or food stamps under AS 47.25 unless the person demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the department, that the person (1) is satisfactorily serving, or has successfully completed, a period of probation or parole; (2) is in the process of serving, or has successfully completed, mandatory participation in a drug or alcohol treatment program; (3) has taken action toward rehabilitation, including participation in a drug or alcohol treatment program; or (4) is successfully complying with the requirements of the person’s reentry plan. Back to Map Arizona  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Complete Ban Conditions (SNAP): Drug testing; Participation in drug treatment OR compliance with supervision conditions In Arizona, those convicted of drug felonies may be eligible for SNAP if they agree to random drug testing and either comply with the terms of their probation or participate in, complete, or be determined not to need drug treatment. But anyone who has been convicted of a drug felony remains subject to a lifetime ban on receiving TANF.   SNAP: Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 46-219  A. Notwithstanding section 13-3418 and if the person agrees to random drug testing, a person who is convicted after August 22, 1996 of a felony offense that has as an element of the offense the use or possession of a controlled substance as defined in 21 United States Code section 802(6) may be eligible for the supplemental nutrition assistance program if the person meets at least one of the following criterion [sic]: Successfully completes a substance abuse treatment program. Is currently accepted for treatment in a substance abuse treatment program but is subject to a waiting list to receive available treatment, and the person remains enrolled in the treatment program and enters the treatment program at the first available opportunity. Is currently accepted for treatment in and is participating in a substance abuse treatment program. Is determined by a licensed medical provider to not need substance abuse treatment. If applicable, is in compliance with all terms of probation. B. The department shall adopt rules related to drug testing pursuant to this section that include more frequent drug testing for offenses that occurred within twenty-four months of the date of application. Back to Map Arkansas  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  Ark. Code § 20-76-409  The State of Arkansas opts out of Section 115 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-193. Back to Map California  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Condition: Compliance with supervision terms   SNAP: Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 18901.3 (a) Subject to the limitations of subdivision (b), pursuant to Section 115(d)(1)(A) of Public Law 104-193 (21 U.S.C. Sec. 862a(d)(1)(A)), California opts out of the provisions of Section 115(a)(2) of Public Law 104-193 (21 U.S.C. Sec. 862a(a)(2)). An individual convicted as an adult in state or federal court after December 31, 1997, including any plea of guilty or nolo contendere, of any offense classified as a felony that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in Section 102(6) of the federal Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. Sec. 802(6)) or Division 10 (commencing with Section 11000) of the Health and Safety Code, shall be eligible to receive CalFresh benefits as provided for under this section.   (b) As a condition of eligibility to receive CalFresh benefits pursuant to subdivision (a), an applicant or recipient described in subdivision (a) who is on probation or parole shall comply with the terms of the probation or parole, including participation in a government-recognized drug treatment program, if required. If the county human services agency receives verification that the individual is in violation of probation or parole or that the individual is a fleeing felon pursuant to federal law, the individual shall be ineligible for CalFresh benefits under this section until the person is no longer in violation of probation or parole or a fleeing felon pursuant to federal law. Verification shall be obtained using existing county human services agency protocols to determine eligibility. TANF : Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 11251.3 (a) Subject to the limitations of subdivision (b), pursuant to Section 115(d)(1)(A) of Public Law 104-193 (21 U.S.C. Sec. 862a(d)(1)(A)), California opts out of the provisions of Section 115(a)(1) of Public Law 104-193 (21 U.S.C. Sec. 862a(a)(1)). . . .    (b) As a condition of eligibility for CalWORKs pursuant to subdivision (a), an applicant or recipient described in subdivision (a) who is on probation or parole shall comply with the terms of the probation or parole, including participation in a government-recognized drug treatment program, if required. If the county human services agency receives verification that the individual is ineligible pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 11486.5, the individual shall be ineligible for CalWORKs benefits under this section until he or she is no longer in violation of probation or parole or a fleeing felon. Verification shall be obtained using existing county human services agency protocols to determine eligibility. Back to Map Colorado  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  In 2022, Colorado eliminated its previously modified bans on receiving SNAP and TANF.   C.R.S. § 26-2-706(3) (3) A person convicted of a drug-related felony offense under the laws of this state, any other state, or the federal government on or after June 3, 1997, is eligible for assistance under the works program. Back to Map Connecticut  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Conditions: Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision terms   Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 17b-112d  A person convicted of any offense under federal or state law, on or after August 22, 1996, which (1) is classified as a felony, and (2) has as an element the possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in Subsection (6) of 21 USC 802, shall be eligible for benefits pursuant to the temporary assistance for needy families program or the supplemental nutrition assistance program pursuant to the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, if such person has completed a sentence imposed by a court. A person shall also be eligible for said benefits if such person is satisfactorily serving a sentence of a period of probation or is in the process of completing or has completed a sentence imposed by the court of mandatory participation in a substance abuse treatment program or mandatory participation in a substance abuse testing program. Back to Map Delaware  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  SNAP: Del. Code Ann. Tit. 31 § 605 Pursuant to the option granted the State by 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d)(1), an individual convicted under federal or state law of a felony involving possession, distribution or use of a controlled substance shall be exempt from the prohibition contained in 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a) against eligibility for food stamp program benefits for such convictions. TANF : Del. Code Ann. title 31 § 524 Pursuant to the option granted the State by 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d)(1), an individual convicted under federal or state law of any offense which is classified as a felony by the law of the jurisdiction involved and which has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance shall be exempt from the prohibition contained in 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a) against eligibility for assistance under 42 U.S.C. § 601 et seq. if the individual is otherwise eligible for assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funded program. Back to Map District of Columbia   SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  D.C. Code § 4 – 205.71  An adult who is a drug felon shall not be denied cash or food assistance benefits, including TANF, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, POWER, GAC, or Interim Disability Assistant benefits, solely because he or she is a drug felon. Back to Map Florida    SNAP: Fully Opted Out    TANF: Modified Ban  Condition (TANF): Excludes drug trafficking convictions  We read this law to condition only TANF benefits, since that is the import of the section where it appears, and we have identified no comparable restrictions in the sections of the Florida code governing food assistance that can fairly be linked to the federal ban. We are aware that the Florida Dept. of Children and Families has taken the position in its manuals that anyone convicted of drug trafficking is ineligible for both SNAP and TANF, without qualification or condition. See https://www.myflfamilies.com/sites/default/files/2023-02/1410.pdf (p. 28 for SNAP, p. 71 for TANF). While we do not know if the FDCF may be applying some provision of state law to condition SNAP benefits, its position seems inconsistent with the state law opting out of the federal PRWORA ban cited below. Fla. Stat. Ann. § 414.095(1)  414.095 Determining eligibility for temporary cash assistance.— (1) ELIGIBILITY. . . . . Benefits may not be denied to an individual solely based on a felony drug conviction, unless the conviction is for trafficking pursuant to s. 893.135. To be eligible under this section, an individual convicted of a drug felony must be satisfactorily meeting the requirements of the temporary cash assistance program, including all substance abuse treatment requirements. Within the limits specified in this chapter, the state opts out of the provision of Pub. L. No. 104-193, s. 115, that eliminates eligibility for temporary cash assistance and food assistance for any individual convicted of a controlled substance felony. Back to Map Georgia  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Complete Ban  Conditions (SNAP): Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision terms.   SNAP: Ga. Code Ann. § 49-4-22 a. An individual who was convicted under any state or federal law of an offense which has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as such term is defined in Code Section 16-13-21, and which is or would be classified as a felony under the laws of this state shall not be eligible for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program while he or she is serving any term of imprisonment. If such individual was not sentenced to imprisonment, he or she shall be eligible for such program, provided that he or she remains compliant with the applicable general and special conditions of probation imposed. If such individual is sentenced to a term of imprisonment, after release from confinement, he or she shall be eligible for such program, provided that he or she remains compliant with the applicable general and special conditions of probation or parole imposed. If such individual violates the terms of probation as determined by court order or violates the terms of parole as determined by an order of the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, he or she shall lose eligibility for such program. If such individual successfully completes the original sentence imposed, he or she shall remain eligible for such program.   b. Any individual eligible for aid pursuant to this Code section shall be required to meet all other requirements for eligibility for such program. Back to Map Hawaii  SNAP: Modified Ban   TANF: Modified Ban Condition: Compliance with drug treatment  Hawaii Code §346-53.3  Temporary assistance for needy families and food stamps for individuals with a felony conviction which has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance. Section 115(a) of Public Law 104-193 shall not apply in Hawaii to persons who are complying with treatment or who have not refused or failed to comply with treatment. Back to Map Idaho  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban   Condition: Compliance with supervision terms   Idaho Code Ann. § 56-202(g)  The director of the state department of health and welfare shall:.. (g) Exercise the opt out provision in section 115 of the personal responsibility and work opportunity reconciliation act of 1996, P.L. 104-193. Consistent with this, the department may provide food stamps and services funded under title 4A (including cash assistance, TANF supportive services and at risk payments) to a person who has been convicted of a felony involving a controlled substance as defined in chapter 27, title 37, Idaho Code, if they comply with the terms of a withheld judgment, probation or parole. Back to Map Illinois    SNAP: Fully Opted Out   TANF: Fully Opted Out   In 2021 Illinois fully opted out of its previously modified ban for TANF.  305 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 5/1-10  (c) Persons shall not be determined ineligible for food stamps provided under this Code based upon a conviction of any felony or comparable federal or State criminal law which has an element the possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in Section 102(6) of the federal Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(c)).  (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section to the contrary, persons shall not be determined ineligible for cash assistance provided under Article IV of this Code based upon a conviction for any drug-related felony under State or federal law. Back to Map Indiana  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Conditions (SNAP): Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision terms. Conditions (TANF): Excludes trafficking convictions, requires drug treatment and drug testing for eligible offenses, limits benefits to one year In order to receive SNAP in Indiana, individuals with a drug felony conviction must either have completed probation, parole, or any other postconviction monitoring program, or be currently in compliance with those conditions. Eligibility for TANF benefits is much more limited: Any felony that involves distribution or manufacturing is automatically excluded, while individuals with eligible offenses must undergo or have completed drug treatment and submit to regular drug testing. Even so, people with drug felony convictions are only eligible to receive TANF assistance for up to one year.  SNAP: Ind. Code Ann. § 12-14-30–3 (a) Beginning January 1, 2020, and in accordance with 21 U.S.C. 862a(d)(1), the state elects to opt out of the application of 21 U.S.C. 862a(a) for individuals who have been convicted of an offense under IC 35-48 (controlled substances), or an offense in another jurisdiction that is substantially similar, for conduct occurring after August 22, 1996, if any of the following circumstances are met: (1) The individual has successfully completed probation, parole, community corrections, a reentry court program, or any other postconviction monitoring program ordered by a court. (2) The individual is successfully complying with the individual’s conditions of probation, parole, or community corrections, the terms of participation in a reentry court program, or the requirements of any other postconviction monitoring program ordered by a court. (3) The individual is eligible for SNAP benefits under IC 12-14-29-2 as a participant in a program described in IC 12-14-29-2(4). (b) If the individual violates any terms of the probation, parole, community corrections, or reentry court program described in subsection (a), the individual is not eligible for SNAP.  TANF: Ind. Code Ann. 12-14-28-3.3 (a) An individual who: (1) except for 21 U.S.C. 862a(a), meets the federal and Indiana TANF program eligibility requirements; (2) has been convicted of an offense under federal or state law that: (A) is classified as a felony; (B) has as an element the possession or use of a controlled substance (as defined in 21 U.S.C. 802(6)); and (C) does not have as an element the distribution or manufacturing of a controlled substance (as defined in 21 U.S.C. 802(6)); and (3) either has completed or is participating in substance abuse or mental health treatment provided by [an official provider]… is eligible to receive assistance under this chapter for not more than twelve (12) months… (d) An individual who is receiving TANF under this section must be tested not less than one (1) time every two (2) months for drugs at a time chosen by the provider of the substance abuse or mental health treatment the individual completed or is participating in under this section. Nothing in this section shall prevent the provider from testing for drugs more frequently if more frequent testing is part of the program operated by the provider. Back to Map Iowa  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Modified Ban  Condition: Participation in “drug rehabilitation activities”    SNAP: Iowa Code Ann. §234.12(2) The provisions of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-193, §115, shall not apply to an applicant for or recipient of food stamp benefits in this state. However, the department of human services may apply contingent eligibility requirements as provided under state law and allowed under federal law. Our research reveals no “contingent eligibility requirements” imposed by the state DHS that would move Iowa into the “Modified Ban” category for SNAP benefits. TANF: Iowa Code 239B.5(3)(b) 3. a. The provisions of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L.No. 104-193, §115, shall not apply to an applicant or participant.  b. However, unless exempt for good cause under rules adopted by the department for this purpose, an applicant or participant convicted under federal or state law of a felony offense, which has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in 21 U.S.C. §802(6), shall be required to participate in drug rehabilitation activities or to fulfill other requirements to verify that the applicant or participant does not illegally possess, use, or distribute a controlled substance. Back to Map Kansas  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Condition: Participation in drug treatment if necessary   KSA § 39-709e  (a) Except as provided in K.S.A. 39-709, and amendments thereto, under the authority of subsection (d)(1)(A) of 21 U.S.C. § 862a, the state of Kansas hereby exercises its option out of subsection (a) of 21 U.S.C. § 862a, which makes any individual ineligible for certain state and federal assistance if that individual has been convicted under federal or state law of any offense which is classified as a felony by the law of the jurisdiction and which has as an element of such offense the possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance as defined by subsection (6) of 21 U.S.C. § 802, only if, after such conviction, such individual has: (1) Been assessed by a licensed substance abuse treatment provider as not requiring substance abuse treatment; or (2) been assessed by a licensed substance abuse treatment provider and such provider recommended substance abuse treatment and such individual: (A) Is participating in a licensed substance abuse treatment program; or (B) has successfully completed a licensed substance abuse treatment program. (b) An individual shall be disqualified for any state or federal assistance permitted by this section if confirmation of illegal drug use is found as a result of testing that occurs while the individual is on probation, parole, conditional release or postrelease supervision or during required substance abuse treatment. Thereafter, such disqualified individual may reapply for assistance after 30 days. Back to Map Kentucky   SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  In 2021, Kentucky eliminated its modified ban on receiving SNAP and TANF benefits, and now allows anyone convicted of a drug felony to be eligible for those programs.  Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 205.2005  Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. sec. 862a(d)(1), all individuals residing in Kentucky shall be exempt from the application of 21 U.S.C. sec. 862a(a). Back to Map Louisiana   SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out Let. Fox. State. Ann. 46:233.3   As authorized by 21 U.S.C. 862a(d)(1), this state hereby exempts all individuals domiciled in the state from the application of the prohibition provided in 21 U.S.C. 862a(a) on eligibility for the following assistance programs and benefits: (1) Cash benefits under any state program funded under Part A of Title IV of the Social Security Act. (2) Benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program as defined in Section 3 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 or any state program carried out under that Act. Back to Map Maine   SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 22, § 3104(14) Prohibition against denial of assistance based on drug conviction. A person who is otherwise eligible to receive food assistance under the federal Food Stamp Act of 1977, 7 United States Code, Sections 2011 to 2036 and under the federal Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 may not be denied assistance because the person has been convicted of a drug-related felony as described in the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Public Law 104-193, Section 115, 110 Stat. 2105. Back to Map Maryland SNAP: Fully Opted Out TANF: Modified Ban Conditions (TANF): Drug treatment if necessary. We read Maryland’s “Opt Out” provision § 5-601(b) to impose a condition on access only for TANF benefits, by virtue of the “Subject to” phrase in the governing statute that directs to a law governing drug treatment as a condition of cash benefits, and that specifically exempts “medical assistance and food stanps.” See § 5–314, below. Despite this, the agency responsible for administering the SNAP program appears to have determined that eligibility for those with a drug conviction depends upon compliance with drug treatment and testing requirements for a period of two years after application. See Code of Maryland Regs. 07.03.17.04 (SNAP). In addition, the provisions of § 5-601(c) appear on their face to apply only to people who are convicted of a crime after receiving SNAP and TANF benefits, so that these conditions are in the nature of a penalty rather than a limitation on access in the first instance. Md. Code, Human Services § 5-601   (b)    Subject to § 5–314 of this title and as authorized under 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d)(1), the State removes itself from the application of § 115 of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 to allow the Department to provide temporary cash assistance and food stamps to a resident who has been convicted of a felony involving the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled dangerous substance.     (c) (1)    Notwithstanding subsection (b) of this section, if a resident receiving temporary cash assistance or food stamps is found to be in violation of § 5–612 or § 5–613 of the Criminal Law Article, the resident is:             (i)    ineligible for temporary cash assistance or food stamps for 1 year after the date of the conviction; and             (ii)    subject to testing for substance abuse, as provided by the Department, and to treatment as required under § 5–314 of this title, for 2 years beginning on the later of: the date the individual is released from incarceration; the date the individual completes any term of probation; or the date the individual completes any term of parole or mandatory supervision.         (2)    A recipient who fails to comply with the testing required under this subsection or the treatment required under § 5–314 of this title or who tests positive for the abuse of controlled dangerous substances is subject to the sanctions provided under § 5–314 of this title.         (3)    In consultation with the Maryland Department of Health, the Secretary shall adopt regulations to establish the testing methods and procedures, consistent with § 5–314 of this title, to be required by the Department under this subsection, including the intervals of testing and methods required. Md. Code, Human Services § 5-314 Section 5-314 – Temporary Cash Assistance — Adult or Minor Parent Substance Abuse Treatment   (b)(1) An addictions specialist shall assess the need of any adult or minor parent applicant or recipient for substance abuse treatment: (i) at the initial application for temporary cash assistance; or  (ii) when considered appropriate by the FIP case manager of the local department. . . . .   (c)(1) If the screening performed by the addictions specialist reveals that an applicant or recipient has a substance abuse problem, the addictions specialist shall: (i) conduct, or refer for, an assessment of the applicant’s or recipient’s substance abuse problem and, if appropriate, determine placement for treatment and related support services; (ii) refer the applicant or recipient for appropriate substance abuse treatment and related support services . . . .   (j) The denial or reduction of temporary cash assistance under this section does not affect an adult or minor parent applicant or recipient’s eligibility for medical assistance and food stamps, as long as the applicant or recipient meets the medical assistance and food stamp program requirements. Code of Maryland Regs. 07.03.17.04 (SNAP) Code of Maryland Regs. 07.03.03.09 (TANF) Back to Map Massachusetts   SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  Conditions on SNAP and TANF were incorporated into Massachusetts’ annual appropriations law in the early years of this century, but have been eliminated in recent years. Back to Map Michigan  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  In 2020, Michigan eliminated its modified bans on SNAP and TANF eligibility. Since Michigan defines violation of probation or parole requirements to mean there is an active arrest warrant for the individual, the independent “fleeing felon” exclusion from benefits applies, rather than the ban in PRWORA based on a past drug conviction.  House Bill 5396 (2020), Sec. 619  Sec. 619. The department shall not deny title IV-A assistance and food assistance benefits under 21 USC 862a to any individual who has been convicted of a felony that included the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, for which the act that resulted in the conviction occurred after August 22, 1996, if the individual is not in violation of his or her probation or parole requirements. Back to Map Minnesota   SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Condition: Random drug testing (within 10 years of conviction for SNAP, lifetime for TANF)   SNAP: Min. State. Ann. Section 256J.26(1)  (a) An individual who has been convicted of a felony level drug offense during the previous ten years from the date of application or recertification is subject to the following: (1) Benefits for the entire assistance unit must be paid in vendor form for shelter and utilities during any time the applicant is part of the assistance unit. (2) The convicted applicant or participant may be subject to random drug testing. Following any positive test for an illegal controlled substance, the county must provide information about substance use disorder treatment programs to the applicant or participant. (b) Applicants requesting only SNAP benefits or participants receiving only SNAP benefits, who have been convicted of a felony-level drug offense during the previous ten years from the date of application or recertification may, if otherwise eligible, receive SNAP benefits. The convicted applicant or participant may be subject to random drug testing. Following a positive test for an illegal controlled substance, the county must provide information about substance use disorder treatment programs to the applicant or participant. (c) For the purposes of this subdivision, “drug offense” means a conviction that occurred during the previous ten years from the date of application or recertification of sections 152.021 to 152.025, 152.0261, 152.0262, 152.096, or 152.137. Drug offense also means a conviction in another jurisdiction of the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, or conspiracy to commit any of these offenses, if the conviction occurred during the previous ten years from the date of application or recertification and the conviction is for a crime that would be a felony if committed in Minnesota. (d) This subdivision does not apply for convictions or positive test results related to cannabis, marijuana, or tetrahydrocannabinols. TANF : From. State. Ann. § 609B.435(2) A person who is an applicant for benefits from the Minnesota family investment program or MFIP, the vehicle for temporary assistance for needy families or TANF, and who has been convicted of a felony-level drug offense may be subject to random drug testing. Following any positive test for a controlled substance, the county must provide information about substance use disorder treatment programs to the applicant or participant. This subdivision does not apply for convictions or positive test results related to cannabis, marijuana, or tetrahydrocannabinols. Back to Map Mississippi   SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  In 2019, Mississippi fully opted out of the federal bans on SNAP and TANF.  Miss. Code Ann. §43-12-71   As provided in 21 USC Section 862a(d)(1), Mississippi opts out of the application of 21 USC Section 862a(a) to all individuals domiciled in the state. Back to Map Missouri   SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Complete Ban  Conditions (SNAP): Compliance with supervision conditions, participation in drug testing and drug treatment, with certain convictions excluded from eligibility.   Missouri maintains a complete ban on receiving TANF and has one of the nation’s most stringent bans for receiving SNAP benefits. Only people who have been convicted of a single drug possession or use may be eligible; multiple felonies for possession or use as well as any felony conviction for drug manufacturing and distribution are ineligible. For those who are eligible, individuals must comply with the conditions of their probation or parole, submit to regular drug testing, and must be either participating in or have completed drug treatment.  Mon. Ann. Stat. § 208.247  1.  Pursuant to the option granted the state by 21 U.S.C. Section 862a(d), an individual who has pled guilty or nolo contendere to or is found guilty under federal or state law of a felony involving possession or use of a controlled substance shall be exempt from the prohibition contained in 21 U.S.C. Section 862a(a) against eligibility for food stamp program benefits for such convictions, if such person, as determined by the department: (1)  Meets one of the following criteria: (a)  Is currently successfully participating in a substance abuse treatment program approved by the division of alcohol and drug abuse within the department of mental health; or (b)  Is currently accepted for treatment in and participating in a substance abuse treatment program approved by the division of alcohol and drug abuse, but is subject to a waiting list to receive available treatment, and the individual remains enrolled in the treatment program and enters the treatment program at the first available opportunity; or (c)  Has satisfactorily completed a substance abuse treatment program approved by the division of alcohol and drug abuse; or (d)  Is determined by a division of alcohol and drug abuse certified treatment provider not to need substance abuse treatment; and (2)  Is successfully complying with, or has already complied with, all obligations imposed by the court, the division of alcohol and drug abuse, and the division of probation and parole; and (3)  Does not plead guilty or nolo contendere to or is not found guilty of an additional controlled substance misdemeanor or felony offense after release from custody or, if not committed to custody, such person does not plead guilty or nolo contendere to or is not found guilty of an additional controlled substance misdemeanor or felony offense, within one year after the date of conviction.  Such a plea or conviction within the first year after conviction shall immediately disqualify the person for the exemption; and (4)  Has demonstrated sobriety through voluntary urinalysis testing paid for by the participant. 2.  Eligibility based upon the factors in subsection 1 of this section shall be based upon documentary or other evidence satisfactory to the department of social services, and the applicant shall meet all other factors for program eligibility. 3.  The department of social services, in consultation with the division of alcohol and drug abuse, shall promulgate rules to carry out the provisions of this section including specifying criteria for determining active participation in and completion of a substance abuse treatment program. 4.  The exemption under this section shall not apply to an individual who has pled guilty or nolo contendere to or is found guilty of two subsequent felony offenses involving possession or use of a controlled substance after the date of the first controlled substance felony conviction. Back to Map Montana   SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Conditions: Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision terms   Mont. Code Ann. 53-4-231(3)  A person who has been convicted of a felony offense, an element of which involves the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in 21 U.S.C. 802, is eligible for public assistance if the person is actively complying with the conditions of supervision, including participating in treatment if required, or has discharged the sentence associated with the felony conviction. Back to Map Nebraska  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Complete Ban  Conditions (SNAP): Participation in drug treatment, with certain convictions excluded from eligibility. In Nebraska, only people who have been convicted of one or two drug possession or use felonies may be eligible for SNAP. Individuals who have been convicted of more than three possession felonies or have any felony convictions involving selling or distributing are excluded. To be eligible, individuals must also be participating in or have completed drug treatment. Nebraska also maintains a complete ban on receiving TANF benefits.   SNAP: Neb. Rev. Stat. § 68-1017.02(4) (4)(a) Within the limits specified in this subsection, the State of Nebraska opts out of the provision of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, as such act existed on January 1, 2009, that eliminates eligibility for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for any person convicted of a felony involving the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance.  (b) A person shall be ineligible for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits under this subsection if he or she (i) has had three or more felony convictions for the possession or use of a controlled substance or (ii) has been convicted of a felony involving the sale or distribution of a controlled substance or the intent to sell or distribute a controlled substance. A person with one or two felony convictions for the possession or use of a controlled substance shall only be eligible to receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits under this subsection if he or she is participating in or has completed a state-licensed or nationally accredited substance abuse treatment program since the date of conviction. The determination of such participation or completion shall be made by the treatment provider administering the program. Back to Map Nevada  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  In 2021, Nevada ended its modified bans and now allows individuals who have been convicted of drug felonies to be eligible for both SNAP and TANF benefits.  NRS 422A.345  1. A person who has been convicted of a felony, an element of which is the possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance, may receive any public assistance for which he or she is otherwise eligible. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d)(1)(A), all persons domiciled in this State are exempt from the application of 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a). 2. As used in this section, “controlled substance” has the meaning ascribed to it in 21 U.S.C. § 802(6). Back to Map New Hampshire  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. 167:81-a  Pursuant to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, section 115(a)(1)-(2) of Public Law 104-19, all individuals domiciled in this state shall be exempt from the application of section 115(d)(1)(A) of Public Law 104-19 which makes any individual ineligible for certain state and federal assistance if that individual has been convicted under federal or state law of any offense which is classified as a felony by the law of the jurisdiction and which has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance as defined in section 102(6) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802(6)). Back to Map New Jersey  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  NJ Rev Stat § 44:10-48(d) Pursuant to the authorization provided to the states under 21 U.S.C. s.862a(d)(1), this State elects to exempt from the application of 21 U.S.C. s.862a(a). Back to Map New Mexico  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  NM Stat § 27-2B-11(C)  Pursuant to the authorization provided to the states in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, 21 U.S.C. Section 862a(d)(1)(A), New Mexico elects to exempt all persons domiciled in the state from application of 21 U.S.C. Section 862a(d)(1)(A) concerning the restriction of eligibility for benefits on the basis of a conviction for distribution of a controlled substance. Back to Map New York  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  In New York, anyone who has been convicted of a drug felony may be eligible to receive SNAP and TANF benefits.   1997 N.Y. Laws § 121436 (no link available) Back to Map North Carolina  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Conditions: Six-month waiting period, participation in drug treatment if required, with certain convictions excluded from eligibility.  In North Carolina, people who have been convicted of Class H or I drug felonies may be eligible to receive SNAP and TANF benefits following a six-month waiting period, if they have completed or are participating in drug treatment determined to be appropriate.  N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 108A-25.2  Individuals convicted of Class H or I controlled substance felony offenses in this State shall be eligible to participate in the Work First Program and the food and nutrition services program: (1) Six months after release from custody if no additional controlled substance felony offense is committed during that period and successful completion of or continuous active participation in a required substance abuse treatment program determined appropriate by the area mental health authority; or (2) If not committed to custody, six months after the date of conviction if no additional controlled substance felony offense is committed during that period and successful completion of or continuous active participation in a required substance abuse treatment program determined appropriate by the area mental health authority. A county department of social services shall require individuals who are eligible for Work First Program assistance and electronic food and nutrition benefits pursuant to this section to undergo substance abuse treatment as a condition for receiving Work First Program or electronic food and nutrition benefits, if funds and programs are available and to the extent allowed by federal law. Back to Map North Dakota  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  SNAP: N.D. Cent. Code § 50-06-05.1(16) The department may not deny assistance under the supplemental nutrition assistance program to any individual who has been convicted of a felony offense that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance as defined in section 102(6) of the Controlled Substances Act [21 U.S.C. 802(6)]. TANF: N.D. Cent. Code § 50-09-29(5)  The state agency may not deny assistance to any individual who has been convicted of a felony offense that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance as defined in section 102(6) of the Controlled Substance Act [21 U.S.C. 802(6)]. Back to Map Ohio  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 5101.84  An individual otherwise ineligible for aid under Chapter 5107. Or 5108. Of the Revised Code or supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) because of paragraph (a) of 21 U.S.C. 862a is eligible for the aid or benefits if the individual meets all other eligibility requirements for the aid or benefits. Back to Map Oklahoma SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  Oklahoma has completely opted out of both federal bans, allowing individuals who have been convicted of a drug felony to be eligible for SNAP and TANF benefits.  1997 Okla. Sess. Laws 414 § 28 (no citation available) Back to Map Oregon  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  ORS § 411.119(1) …a person who is otherwise eligible to receive public assistance, including supplemental nutrition assistance, or medical assistance may not be denied assistance because the person has been convicted of a drug-related felony. Back to Map Pennsylvania  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Conditions: Compliance with court obligations and supervision, participation in drug treatment and drug testing, with certain offenses subject to a waiting period.    In 2019 Pennsylvania re-instituted its own modified bans on access to SNAP and TANF, after having earlier opted out of both entirely.  The state now conditions benefits on compliance with court obligations, participation in or completion of court-ordered drug treatment, and submission to regular drug testing (5 years for SNAP, 10 years for TANF). The Commonwealth also disqualifies those who have been convicted of two or more drug trafficking felonies from receiving TANF for up to 10 years.   SNAP: 62 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 432.24 (Unconsolidated Statutes) (a) To the extent permitted by Federal law, a person who is otherwise eligible to receive public assistance shall not be denied assistance solely because he has been convicted of a felony drug offense, provided: (1) He is complying with or has already complied with the obligations imposed by the criminal court. (2) He is actively engaged in or has completed a court-ordered substance abuse treatment program and participates in periodic drug screenings for five years after the drug-related conviction or for the duration of probation, whichever is of longer duration. (b) Under the screening for the drug test and retest program the department shall: (1) Require a recipient be scheduled to be tested if he has either a felony conviction for a drug offense which occurred within five years or a felony conviction for a drug offense for which he is presently on probation subject to the following conditions: (i) An individual who is applying for public assistance is required to be tested and shall be tested at the time the application for public assistance is made. (ii) A recipient already receiving public assistance as of the effective date of this section shall be scheduled to be tested in accordance with paragraph (2). (2) Develop and implement a system for randomly testing no less than twenty percent of the individuals receiving public assistance benefits during each six-month period following the effective date of this section who are subject to testing for the presence of illegal drugs under this section. (3) Deny public assistance to an individual who refuses to take the drug test or the drug retest required by this section and terminate the public assistance benefits for anyone who refuses to submit to the random drug test required by this section… “Public assistance” means Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), Federal food stamps, general assistance and State supplemental assistance. TANF: 62 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 432.25 (Unconsolidated Statutes) (a)(1) Notwithstanding sections 405.1 and 432.24, to the extent permitted by Federal law, no individual who, after the effective date of this section, has been convicted under section 13(a)(14), (30) or (37) of the act of April 14, 1972 (P.L.233, No.64), known as “The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act,” when the amount of controlled substances involved is equivalent to or greater than the amount of controlled substances set forth in 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508(a)(1)(iii), (2)(iii), (3)(iii), (4)(iii), (7)(iii) or (8)(iii) (relating to drug trafficking sentencing and penalties) while receiving public assistance shall be eligible for public assistance unless: (i) the individual is complying with or has already complied with the obligations imposed by the criminal court; and (ii) the individual is actively engaged in or has completed a court-ordered substance abuse treatment program, as applicable, and participates in periodic drug tests for ten years after the drug-related conviction or for the duration of probation, whichever is of longer duration. (2) Upon a second or subsequent conviction under section 13(a)(14), (30) or (37) of “The Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act” when the amount of controlled substances involved is equivalent to or greater than the amount of controlled substances set forth in 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508(a)(1)(iii), (2)(iii), (3)(iii), (4)(iii), (7)(iii) or (8)(iii), the individual shall be suspended from receiving public assistance for a period of ten years to the extent permitted by Federal law. After the ten-year suspension, the individual may apply for public assistance… (f) As used in this section, the term “public assistance” means Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), general assistance and State supplemental assistance. Back to Map Rhode Island  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  SNAP: R.I. Gen. Laws § 40-6-8(d)  No person shall be ineligible for food stamp benefits due solely to the restricted eligibility rules otherwise imposed by § 115(a)(2) of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub. L. No. 104-193), 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a)(2), and as this section may hereafter be amended. TANF: R.I. Gen. Laws § 40-5.2-10(d)  (d) All individuals domiciled in this state shall be exempt from the application of subdivision 115(d)(1)(A) of Pub. L. No. 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, PRWORA [21 U.S.C. § 862a], which makes any individual ineligible for certain state and federal assistance if that individual has been convicted under federal or state law of any offense that is classified as a felony by the law of the jurisdiction and that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance as defined in § 102(6) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 802(6)). Back to Map South Carolina  SNAP: Complete Ban  TANF: Complete Ban  South Carolina is the only state that has failed to opt out of the ban on receiving either SNAP or TANF benefits.  Back to Map South Dakota  SNAP: Fully Opted Out TANF: Fully Opted Out In 2020, South Dakota opted out of both SNAP and TANF.  SNAP: South Dakota Codified Law 28-12-3   Pursuant to section 115(d)(1)(A) of Public Law 104-193, South Dakota opts out of the provisions of section 115(a)(2) of Public Law 104-193.  TANF: South Dakota Codified Law 28-7A-4.1  As permitted in accordance with 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d)(1)(A), this state exempts itself from the application of 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a)(1). The department may not deny benefits otherwise available under this chapter to an applicant solely because the applicant has been convicted, under state or federal law, of an offense that is classified as a felony and which has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in § 34-20B-3 or 21 U.S.C. § 802. Back to Map Tennessee  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Conditions: Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision, participation in drug treatment, certain convictions excluded from eligibility or subject to a waiting period.    In Tennessee, people who have been convicted of a drug felony that was not a Class A felony may be eligible to receive SNAP and TANF, provided they have completed their sentence or are complying with the conditions of their probation and parole and are either participating in or have completed drug treatment. The state also places a three-year waiting period on access to TANF benefits for anyone who has been convicted of two or more drug felonies.    SNAP: Tenn. Code Ann. § 71-5-308   a. When an application for food stamp assistance is filed with the county office, the area manager, or a designated agent, shall promptly make or cause to be made such investigation as it may deem necessary. The object of such investigation shall be to ascertain facts supporting the application and such other information as may be required by the rules and regulations of the department. Upon the completion of such investigation, the area manager or the area manager’s designated agent shall, within a reasonable period of time, determine eligibility. b. 1. Pursuant to the option granted the state by 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d), an individual convicted under federal or state law of a felony involving possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance shall be exempt from the prohibition contained in 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a) against eligibility for food stamp program benefits for such convictions, if such person, as determined by the department: A. i. Is currently participating in a substance abuse treatment program approved by the department of human services; ii. Is currently enrolled in a substance abuse treatment program approved by the department of human services, but is subject to a waiting list to receive available treatment, and the individual remains enrolled in the treatment program and enters the treatment program at the first available opportunity; iii. Has satisfactorily completed a substance abuse treatment program approved by the department of human services; or iv. Is determined by a treatment provider licensed by the department of health, division of alcohol and drug abuse services, not to need substance abuse treatment according to TennCare guidelines; and B. Is complying with, or has already complied with, all obligations imposed by the criminal court, including any substance abuse treatment obligations. 2. Eligibility based upon the factors in subdivision (b)(1) must be based upon documentary or other evidence satisfactory to the department, and the applicant must meet all other factors for program eligibility. 3. Notwithstanding subdivision (b)(1)(A) or (b)(1)(B) to the contrary, no person convicted of a Class A felony for violating a provision of title 39, chapter 17, part 4 shall be eligible for the exemptions provided by this subsection (b). TANF: Tenn. Code Ann. § 71-3-104(k)(2) (k)(2) A. Pursuant to the option granted the state by 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d), an individual convicted on or before June 30, 2011, under federal or state law of a felony involving possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance shall be exempt from the prohibition contained in 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a) against eligibility for families first program benefits for such convictions, if such person, as determined by the department: i. (a) Is currently participating in a substance abuse treatment program approved by the department of human services; a. (i)(a) Is currently participating in a substance abuse treatment program approved by the department of human services; b. Is currently enrolled in a substance abuse treatment program approved by the department of human services, but is subject to a waiting list to receive available treatment, and the individual remains enrolled in the treatment program and enters the treatment program at the first available opportunity; c. Has satisfactorily completed a substance abuse treatment program approved by the department of human services; or d. Is determined by a treatment provider licensed by the department of mental health and substance abuse services not to need substance abuse treatment according to TennCare guidelines; and ii. Is complying with, or has already complied with, all obligations imposed by the criminal court, including any substance abuse treatment obligations. B. Eligibility based upon the factors in subdivision (k)(2)(A) must be based upon documentary or other evidence satisfactory to the department, and the applicant must meet all other factors of program eligibility, including, specifically, being accountable for the requirements of the personal responsibility plan required by this part. C. Notwithstanding subdivision (k)(2)(A) or (k)(2)(B) to the contrary, no person convicted of a Class A felony for violating a provision of title 39, chapter 17, part 4 shall be eligible for the exemptions provided by subdivision (k)(2)(A) or (k)(2)(B). D. Pursuant to the option granted the state by 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d), an individual convicted on or after July 1, 2011, under federal or state law of a felony involving possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance shall be exempt from the prohibition contained in 21 U.S.C. § 862a(a) against eligibility for families first program benefits for such convictions, if such person meets the following requirements: i. Requirements contained in subdivision (k)(2)(A) or (k)(2)(B) and (C); ii. If treatment was prescribed according to the requirements in subdivision (k)(2)(A) or (k)(2)(B), successful completion of a substance abuse program must occur within three (3) attempts. If such person does not complete the originally prescribed treatment program within three (3) attempts, the individual shall be ineligible for a period of three (3) years. E. Pursuant to the option granted the state by 21 U.S.C. § 862a(d), an individual convicted of a second drug felony under federal or state law of a felony involving possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance on or after July 1, 2011, shall not be eligible for families first program benefits for a period of three (3) years from the date of conviction. Texas  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Complete Ban  Conditions (SNAP): Completion of sentence/compliance with supervision terms   SNAP: Texas Human Resources Code Sec. 33.018 (a) As authorized by 21 U.S.C. Section 862a(d)(1) and except as provided by this section, 21 U.S.C. Section 862a(a)(2) does not apply in determining the eligibility of any person for the supplemental nutrition assistance program.  (b) 21 U.S.C.  Section 862a(a)(2) applies in determining the eligibility for the supplemental nutrition assistance program of a person who has been convicted of, and released on parole or placed on community supervision for, any felony offense that has as an element the possession, use, or distribution of a controlled substance, as defined in 21 U.S.C. Section 802, if the person violates any condition of that parole or community supervision.  A person described by this subsection is ineligible for the supplemental nutrition assistance program only for a two-year period beginning on the date the person is found to have violated the condition of parole or community supervision, as authorized by 21 U.S.C. Section 862a(d)(1)(B).  (c) A person convicted of an offense described by Subsection (b) who is receiving supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits and who is convicted of a subsequent felony offense, regardless of the elements of the offense, is ineligible for the supplemental nutrition assistance program. Back to Map Utah  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Modified Ban  Conditions (TANF): Drug treatment for drug-dependent individuals    Utah Code Ann. § 35A-3-311(2) (2)(a), The State exercises the opt out provision in Section 115 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-193. (b), Consistent with Subsection (2)(a), the department may provide cash assistance and SNAP benefits to a person who has been convicted of a felony involving a controlled substance, as defined in Section 58-37-2. (c), As a condition for receiving cash assistance under this part, a drug dependant [sic] person, as defined in Section 58-37-2, shall: (i), receive available treatment for the dependency; and (ii), make progress toward overcoming the dependency.  Back to Map Vermont   SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  33 V.S.A. § 1203a  An individual domiciled in Vermont shall be exempt from the disqualification provided for in 21 U.S.C. § 862a. Back to Map Virginia  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  In 2020, Virginia ended both its modified ban on SNAP and its complete ban on TANF, and now allows anyone who has been convicted of a drug felony to receive benefits from both programs.  SNAP: Va. Code § 63.2-505.2  A person who is otherwise eligible to receive food stamp benefits shall be exempt from the application of § 115(a) of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, P.L. 104-193, and shall not be denied such assistance solely because he has been convicted of a drug-related felony. TANF: Va. Code § 63.2-607.1  A person who is otherwise eligible to receive TANF assistance shall be exempt from the application of § 115(a)(1) of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, P.L. 104-193, and shall not be denied such assistance solely because he has been convicted of a drug-related felony. Back to Map Washington  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 74.08.025   Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 862a(d)(1), the department shall exempt individuals from the eligibility restrictions of 21 U.S.C. 862a(a)(1) and (2) to ensure eligibility for temporary assistance for needy families benefits and federal food assistance. Back to Map West Virginia  SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Complete Ban  Condition (SNAP): Certain offenses involving violence or misuse of SNAP benefits excluded from eligibility SNAP: W.V. Code §9-2-3a. Pursuant to the authority and option granted by 21 U.S.C. §862a(d)(1)(A) to the states, West Virginia exempts all individuals domiciled within the state from the application of 21 U.S.C. §862a(a)(2) unless the offense of conviction has as an element thereof misuse of supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits, loss of life, or the causing of physical injury. Back to Map Wisconsin   SNAP: Modified Ban  TANF: Modified Ban  Condition: Drug testing required if conviction within five years of application     SNAP: Wis. Stat. Ann. 49.79(5)  (a) The department shall require an applicant for, or recipient under, the food stamp program to state in writing whether the applicant or recipient or any member of the applicant’s or recipient’s household has been convicted, in any state or federal court of a felony that has as an element possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance. The department shall require an applicant or recipient, or member of the applicant’s or recipient’s household to submit to a test for use of a controlled substance as a condition of continued eligibility if, after August 22, 1996, but not more than 5 years prior to the date the written statement is made, the applicant or recipient or the member of the applicant’s or recipient’s household was convicted in any state or federal court of a felony that had as an element possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance.  If the test results are positive with respect to any individual, the department may not consider the needs of that individual in determining the household’s eligibility for the food stamp program for at least 12 months from the date of the test. The department shall, however, consider the income and resources of that individual to be available to the household.   (b) If an individual whose needs are not considered under par. (a) submits to a test for use of a controlled substance at least 12 months after the date that the department first disregarded that individual’s needs under par. (a), and if the test results are negative, the department shall consider the individual’s needs in determining the eligibility of the individual’s household. TANF: Wis. Stat. Ann. §49.148(4) (a) A Wisconsin works agency shall require a participant in a community service job or transitional placement who, after August 22, 1996, was convicted in any state or federal court of a felony that had as an element possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance to submit to a test for use of a controlled substance as a condition of continued eligibility. If the test results are positive, the Wisconsin works agency shall decrease the presanction benefit amount for that participant by not more than 15 percent for not fewer than 12 months, or for the remainder of the participant’s period of participation in a community service job or transitional placement, if less than 12 months. If, at the end of 12 months, the individual is still a participant in a community service job or transitional placement and submits to another test for use of a controlled substance and if the results of the test are negative, the Wisconsin works agency shall discontinue the reduction under this paragraph.    (b) The Wisconsin Works agency may require an individual who tests positive for use of a controlled substance under par. (a) to participate in a drug abuse evaluation, assessment, and treatment program as part of the participation requirement under s. 49.147 (4) (as) or (5) (bs).    (c) Paragraph (a) does not apply if the participant was convicted more than 5 years prior to the date on which the participant applied for a Wisconsin works employment position. Wisconsin Department of Children and Families Wisconsin Works (W-2) Manual 11.7.1 For W-2 purposes, the definition of a drug felon is an adult (over 18) who is convicted of a felony, which occurred within the last five years in state or federal court, involving the possession, use or distribution of a controlled substance.  As a condition of continuing eligibility, a CSJ or W-2 T participant must report if he or she is convicted of a drug-related felony.  If the W-2 agency finds out by another means that the participant received a drug felony conviction and that the participant did not report the conviction, the participant may be ineligible for W-2.  Participants that report receiving a drug felony conviction must submit to a test for use of a controlled substance. Back to Map Wyoming  SNAP: Fully Opted Out  TANF: Fully Opted Out  WY Stat. §42-2- 103(b)(xiii)  Exempt individuals domiciled in Wyoming from the application of section 115, subsection (a) of P.L. 104-193 allowing payment of benefits under the personal opportunities with employment responsibilities program (POWER) and the supplemental nutrition assistance program. Back to Map Read more

Comments on SBA proposal to eliminate criminal history loan restrictions

On November 14, CCRC filed comments on the SBA’s proposal to roll back criminal history restrictions in its federally guaranteed business and disaster loan programs. (The SBA’s proposal is described in our post on September 15.)  We were joined with the Washington Lawyers Committee on Civil Rights and Urban Affairs and the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, and with more than sixty other organizations concerned with fair chance lending for justice-impacted entrepreneurs. A preliminary summary of comments posted is at the end of this post, and a fuller summary will be published next week. Our comments are generally supportive of the SBA’s proposal. Their salient points are these: The SBA has concluded, based on existing empirical research, that there is no defensible justification for continuing to inquire into a loan applicant’s criminal history. Specifically, there is “no evidence of a negative impact on repayment for qualified individuals with criminal history records in any American business loan program.” Accordingly, the existing regulations “reflect an outdated, inaccurate structural bias against individuals with criminal history records.” The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has reached a similar conclusion.  The proposed changes in the rules will be particularly beneficial for communities of color that have been adversely affected by the current rules because of systemic racism embedded in the criminal law system. A history of discrimination against Black and Hispanic business owners demonstrates the importance of ensuring that there are not unnecessary restrictions barring justice-impacted individuals from accessing capital and ultimately building wealth for themselves and their communities. Reducing barriers to successful entrepreneurship is aligned with the SBA’s mission of strengthening the economy. As the SBA noted, “entrepreneurship provid[es] an important and distinct avenue for economic stability” for justice-impacted individuals given the “persistent stigma from employers who may decline to hire people with criminal history records.” The SBA has proposed not only to revise its formal rules, but also to omit from application forms inquiries about business owners’ criminal history.  Last spring, it revised its Standard Operating Procedures to discontinue the requirement that applicants reporting a prior felony conviction submit to an FBI background check and undergo a “character determination” by the SBA. Statistics cited by the SBA in its proposed rule appear to show that the unexpected prospect of referral to the FBI for investigation may have discouraged many justice-impacted business owners from completing the application process.   While generally commending the SBA’s proposal, we also urge the agency to reconsider its decision to continue categorical ineligibility for a business if any one of several owners is incarcerated, even if other owners are fully able to managing the business successfully:   We understand that this remaining criminal history restriction is based on an assumption that a confined person will likely “lack the ability to manage and execute day-to-day business operations,” and therefore be unable to satisfy the statutory requirement that SBA-guaranteed loans be “of such sound value or so secured as reasonably to assure repayment.” While this assumption may have some validity in the case of sole proprietors who are incarcerated, the collateral consequence that the SBA proposes to retain applies to any 20% owner of a business. Thus, a business owned and operated by several individuals could be disqualified based on one owner’s imprisonment, even if the other owners were fully able “to manage and execute day-to-day business operations.”  For example, we can imagine a situation where a family-owned business could be effectively managed by four family members who were not incarcerated, even if the fifth family member owner was.  Accordingly, we question whether it makes sense, in terms of the statutory concern for “sound value,” to retain this consequence as a categorical basis for ineligibility. To disqualify an entire business because of the circumstances of one of its several owners appears unnecessary and punitive. We propose that the SBA consider loosening the categorical exclusion to allow case-by-case decisions when some owners of the business who are not in prison are fully capable of managing the business and securing the value of the loan, even though one owner may be serving a prison sentence. If the disqualifying circumstances of one owner can disqualify the entire business without regard to practicalities, this consequence appears rooted in unwarranted assumptions about an individual’s “just deserts” as opposed a concern for the “sound value” of the loan. Finally, while we recognize that the proposed rules revisions are a significant change, we urge the government to go further and to encourage private lenders to follow suit. We believe that the SBA’s regulations can set the standard for private lenders, noting that “some financial institutions look to SBA’s rules in forming their own internal policies on lending to business applicants with criminal histories.” Accordingly, we urge the SBA to do more to explicitly and directly encourage intermediary lenders not to discriminate against those with criminal records. The commentary to the proposed regulation states that the SBA does not intend to affect a lender’s ability to conduct criminal history background checks according to their own policies, as long as a policy complies with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and other applicable laws. However, we think that the SBA would do better to encourage lenders to revisit their own practices regarding the use of criminal history in light of SBA’s finding that “there is no evidence of a negative impact on repayment for qualified individuals with criminal history records in any American business loan program.” That is, we believe that the SBA should encourage lending institutions to limit disqualification based on criminal history to cases where an applicant is unable to provide assurances of sound value because they are incarcerated. Preliminary summary of comments posted: Almost all of the 18 published comments – including seven that were not signed – supported the SBA’s effort to open access to federally guaranteed loans to entrepreneurs with a criminal history. One commenter joined our recommendation that incarceration of an owner – including one of several owners – should not be grounds for automatic disqualification. Several commenters, noting the SBA’s specific recognition that lending institutions could continue to apply their own record-based disqualification standards in deciding who would qualify for a federally guaranteed loan, urged the SBA to provide additional guidance and standards to ensure its new policy posture would influence if not prevail in the marketplace. For example, a comment filed by the Small Business Majority, which CCRC joined, specifically urged the SBA for additional clarity on the impact of lifting these restrictions as they flow down to lending institutions, in the hope that “the proposed rule will create a domino-effect among banks and other lending institutions to reevaluate their underwriting standards to reflect our 21st century economy:” Since the banking system has historically discriminated against marginalized communities, we encourage the SBA to work with and uplift institutions that are willing to reassess their underwriting standards (or already have) to mirror the changes in this proposed rule. This would enhance the impact of this rule on the small business ecosystem.   We expect to publish a summary of the comments received shortly after Thanksgiving, and hope to organize a conference in the spring to discuss how lending institutions can implement the SBA’s new policy on considering an owner’s criminal history. Read more

SBA proposes to remove criminal record restrictions in loan programs

On September 15, the SBA published for comment a series of rule changes eliminating criminal record restrictions in all of its various federally guaranteed business and disaster loan programs, including rules making business owners ineligible for loans if they are on parole or probation or under indictment.  Application forms and procedures will no longer inquire about a business owner’s criminal history, with one exception: Owners and principal employees who are “actually incarcerated” will remain ineligible. Comments on the proposed rule must be filed by November 14, 2023. The proposed new rule follows the agency’s removal last spring of “character” as a loan criterion in the 7(a) and 504 programs, and its amendment of the applicable Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) to eliminate the “character determination” through which business owners with a felony record had been denied access to federally guaranteed loans.  These earlier changes were described in our post of September 7. The comments accompanying the proposed rule revision explain that it is “narrowly tailored to reduce barriers to access for qualified justice-impacted small business owners.” While the SBA will no longer verify an applicant’s criminal history (other than the fact of current incarceration) the rules changes do affect a lending institution’s ability to do so, “in accordance with their own policies, provided they do so in a manner that complies with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and other relevant laws.” Significantly, in proposing these new and important regulatory changes, the SBA relies upon empirical research to emphasize that criminal history has not been shown to have any negative impact on creditworthiness: Importantly, SBA reviewed the relevant research and found no evidence of a negative impact on repayment for qualified individuals with criminal history records in any American business loan program. This lack of data demonstrates that continuing to rely on this restriction for that purpose would contradict the available evidence and although the restrictions may have been originally put in place with the goal of protecting program performance, the lack of data suggests continuing to rely on this restriction would reflect an outdated, inaccurate structural bias against individuals with criminal history records.   The SBA again relies upon research in stressing the policy benefits of its regulatory changes: Specifically, research demonstrates that employment increases success during reentry and decreases the risk of recidivism, with entrepreneurship providing an important and distinct avenue for economic stability given persistent stigma from employers who may decline to hire people with criminal history records. It is refreshing to see this federal policy grounded in factual research instead of unfounded assumptions about the risk of extending opportunities to justice-affected individuals, as so many other federal policies are. At the same time, we remain concerned that, without the SBA acting in a screening capacity, lending institutions will themselves conduct background investigations of loan applicants, and apply record-related restrictions that mirror those previously applied by the SBA, or perhaps ones even more restrictive.  We noted in a post last spring, in connection with the SBA’s deletion of “character” as a loan criterion: [T]he good news is that it appears the SBA will no longer bar banks from making loans to otherwise qualified applicants based on their criminal history. The less good news is that the agency seems to expect banks and other lending institutions to step into the void and apply their own restrictions on loans based on an applicant’s criminal history.   We expect to post further analysis of these important proposed SBA actions. Read more

Biden Administration announces actions to promote reintegration

Reprinted below is a list of the actions announced on this day by the Administration to promote successful reentry and rehabilitation.  Notably, the list includes an intention to expand action to business capital by justice-affected entrepreneurs:   Expanding Access to Business Capital. The Small Business Administration will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking, that, if adopted, would remove barriers to eligibility for people with criminal history records who want to start a small business. We understand that the new SBA proposal will be to eliminate almost all inquiries about criminal history on SBA own application forms, and no cease SBA’s policy of conducting “good character” inquiries based on criminal history.  Instead, it will permit SBA lenders to conduct their own inquiries about a loan applicant’s criminal history if they choose to do so.  We will post about this new rule as soon as it is published for comment in the Federal Register.  We will have further comment on some of the other proposed actions described below as they relate directly to collateral consequences.  April 28, 2023 FACT SHEET: Biden-⁠Harris Administration Takes Action During Second Chance Month to Strengthen Public Safety, Improve Rehabilitation in Jails and Prisons, and Support Successful Reentry   HOME BRIEFING ROOM STATEMENTS AND RELEASES America is a nation of second chances. Our nation must provide people who have been incarcerated meaningful opportunities for redemption and rehabilitation. America was founded on fresh starts, new possibilities, and the belief that every person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. Yet, for people returning home to their communities from jail or prison, obstacles often stand in the way of turning this promise into a reality. Bipartisan elected officials, faith leaders, civil rights advocates, and law enforcement leaders agree that our criminal justice system can and should reflect core values that promote safer and stronger communities, such as tackling the root causes of crime, improving individual and collective outcomes, and ensuring taxpayer dollars are delivering the highest degree of public safety and equal justice. That’s why, today, the Biden-Harris administration is releasing an evidence-informed, multi-year Alternatives, Rehabilitation, and Reentry Strategic Plan to strengthen public safety by reducing unnecessary criminal justice system interactions so police officers can focus on fighting crime; supporting rehabilitation during incarceration; and facilitating successful reentry. The plan builds upon President Biden’s Safer America Plan – his comprehensive strategy to prevent and combat gun crime and violence – and outlines more than 100 concrete policy actions to improve the criminal justice system and strengthen public safety by leveraging data, research, and proven successful strategies from state and local governments across the country. The Strategic Plan supports justice-involved persons and promotes public safety by utilizing a whole-of-government approach through which the Biden-Harris administration will: Expand access to health care; Secure access to safe and affordable housing; Enhance educational opportunities; Expand access to food and subsistence benefits; Create and enhance job opportunities and access to business capital; Strengthen access to banking and other financial services; and Reduce barriers to the ballot box for eligible persons. During Second Chance Month, President Biden is also using his authority under the Constitution to uphold the values of redemption and rehabilitation by commuting the sentences of 31 fellow Americans who are serving sentences for non-violent drug offenses. These individuals, who have been successfully serving sentences on home confinement, have demonstrated a commitment to rehabilitation, including by securing employment and advancing their education. Many would have received a lower sentence if they were charged with the same offense today, due to changes in the law, including the bipartisan First Step Act. Taken together, our collective efforts will move us toward a safer, stronger, and more just America. To read the full White House Alternatives, Rehabilitation, and Reentry Strategic Plan, click here. Its elements, reflecting the current and future work of the federal government, include: Expanding Access to Health Care. Pursuant to the SUPPORT Act of 2018, on April 17, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced a new section 1115 demonstration opportunity to allow Medicaid coverage for select services provided to certain incarcerated persons in the period shortly before expected release from jail or prison. For Medicare, in November 2022, CMS issued a final rule establishing a special enrollment period for formerly incarcerated individuals so they can enroll up to 12 months following their release from a correctional facility and avoid potential gaps in coverage or late enrollment penalties. With support from the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is working to expand access to medications for opioid use disorder in federal custody, and in state and local facilities through federal funding. Expanding Access to Safe and Affordable Housing. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) launched a new initiative that will provide 62 communities, including in rural areas, with $486 million in grants and 3,300 rental assistance vouchers to implement proven, cost-effective approaches to solving unsheltered homelessness, including in rural areas, by connecting people to housing and voluntary supportive services. The White House Domestic Policy Council and the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness have also announced a state and local initiative to expedite efforts to shift from criminalizing homelessness to ensuring housing access. In the coming months, HUD will take steps to implement changes in its regulations and guidance to reduce barriers to HUD programs to ensure that applicants with criminal history records are fairly screened at admission, using holistic individualized assessments, to avoid unnecessary denials, and to enhance public safety for all. Developing and Amplifying Educational Opportunities. Beginning on July 1, 2023, the Department of Education (ED) will implement changes resulting from a 2020 federal law that could allow an estimated 760,000 persons to become eligible for a Pell Grant through prison education programs. The Department of Commerce’s (DOC) State Digital Equity Planning Grant, funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), will provide $60 million to states and Puerto Rico to plan investments in digital literacy and equity programs for underserved communities, including current and formerly incarcerated persons. Expanding Access to Government-Issued Identification. The Department of Transportation, with support from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and DOJ, will engage with the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, which represents all state licensing agencies, to survey jurisdictions for a toolkit of best practices for providing state-issued identification for eligible persons with criminal history records. The Federal Bureau of Prisons is coordinating with other federal agencies to support eligible formerly incarcerated individuals seeking to access the documents they need to obtain a state-issued identification card, such as working with the Social Security Administration to extend the timeframe during which incarcerated persons can request their Social Security Cards from six months prior to release to one year. Expanding Access to Food and Subsistence Benefits. Studies show that increased access to economic supports is associated with reduced recidivism for people returning home from jail and prison. The Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service will provide technical assistance and issue guidance to SNAP state agencies promoting program flexibilities, including an administrative waiver that allows them to accept and process SNAP applications before someone is released from jail or prison. The Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families will take action to improve Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), such as refocusing TANF funds for use on basic assistance, employment and training, and family strengthening services for parents and their families experiencing the greatest economic needs. In February 2023, the SSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to remove food from the calculation of In-Kind Support and Maintenance in the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. If the rule is adopted, SSI payments would not be reduced when eligible individuals, including eligible formerly incarcerated persons, receive food from family or friends. Capping the Cost of Intrastate Calls to and from Jails and Prisons. In March 2023, the Federal Communications Commission published a proposed rule that, if finalized, will cap the cost of intrastate calls to and from people in jails and prisons. Expanding Access to Business Capital. The Small Business Administration will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking, that, if adopted, would remove barriers to eligibility for people with criminal history records who want to start a small business. Expanding Federal Job Opportunities. In 2022, the Biden-Harris Administration reinvigorated and expanded the Second Chance Fellow program, and DOJ welcomed two Second Chance Fellows. Building upon this success, ED will launch its first-ever Second Chance fellowship in FY23. This summer, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will issue final rules implementing the Fair Chance Act, expanding the positions covered by the federal government’s “ban the box” policy and establishing new due process and accountability measures for hiring officials who are alleged to violate it. OPM will leverage its newly launched Chief Diversity Officers Executive Council, along with the Chief Human Capital Officers Council, to help agencies establish tailored work plans, leadership groups, and metrics for enhancing federal employment opportunities for qualified workers with criminal history records. Creating Good-Quality Jobs. The Department of Energy (DOE), DOC, and DOT are encouraging their respective competitive grant recipients, where appropriate, including those funded by the BIL, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act, to employ qualified workers who face systemic barriers to quality employment, including those with criminal history records. Enhancing National Service. AmeriCorps will revise its policy to enable national service participants to request an extension to use their earned education awards if they were incarcerated and clarify the limited scope of criminal history precluding participation in national service programs. Expand Access to Banking and Other Financial Services. To explore avenues for expanding access to consumer financial products and services, including for justice-involved persons, the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) will: outline how recipients may leverage the American Rescue Plan’s State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund programs; convene recipients of its Community Development Financial Institutions Fund and Minority Deposit Institutions to explore potential paths through which Treasury can encourage or help expand access to capital and bank accounts for justice-involved persons; convene relevant external stakeholders and financial regulators to develop recommendations on how to improve access; convene a public meeting of the Financial Literacy and Education Commission in April 2023 to discuss the challenges justice-involved persons face when trying to access banking and capital, as well as the implications of lack of credit and fines and fees; and more. Supporting Veterans. Beginning in 2023, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) will require quarterly VA benefits outreach to incarcerated veterans in federal and state facilities to augment VA’s Homeless and Justice-Involved Veteran Outreach Program, ensuring awareness of available benefits and services. For veterans who are homeless or at risk of it, VA’s newly launched Legal Services for Veterans Grant Program will fund legal services to help meet their underlying needs concerning housing stability, including civil matters and criminal case-related barriers such as sealing and expunging records. Supporting Tribal Members. Using Tiwahe funding requested in the FY24 budget, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs will fund Tribal efforts to prevent and reduce Native youth involvement in the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems by improving Native youth well-being and educational, health, housing, employment, childcare, and cultural connection outcomes. Encouraging Private Sector Hiring. DOC will partner with the Department of Labor (DOL) and external stakeholders later this year to highlight employers that are excelling at and benefiting from hiring and retaining justice-impacted individuals and to encourage other employers to join this effort. Similarly, DOE and DOL will convene a roundtable later this year to spotlight promising practices and partnerships between union and trade associations, workforce development programs, and reentry organizations. SBA will host an event in partnership with small business owners who have successfully hired people with arrest or conviction records. DHS will electronically publish general information on the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC), necessary for jobs in secure areas in ports facilities and vessels, to include guidance on eligibility, including for those with criminal history records; how to apply for a TWIC; and opportunities to seek redress if a TWIC is initially denied. Addressing harmful and unlawful fines and fees. This month DOJ issued a Dear Colleague Letter for state and local courts and juvenile justice agencies on common court-imposed fines and fees practices, and cautions against those practices that may be unlawful, unfairly penalize individuals who are unable to pay, or otherwise have a discriminatory effect. DOJ will build a best practices guide highlighting innovative work by states and court leaders. Reduce barriers for eligible voters. Most people in jail are eligible to vote, since jails primarily detain people awaiting trial, who have not been convicted of any crime, or those serving misdemeanor sentences that do not preclude voting. In May 2022, DOJ released a guide to state voting rules that apply after criminal convictions and will provide guidance on state-specific voter rights for incarcerated persons and promote strategies to reduce barriers for eligible voters. Supporting Sealing and Expungement. DOJ has requested $15 million in the President’s FY24 budget to help young people expunge, seal, or vacate their juvenile records in accordance with state laws and policies and has clarified that two existing grants can be used to support similar efforts. The private sector; state, Tribal, local, and territory governments; academia; and nonprofit and community groups must also take action to improve public safety and the criminal justice system. Taken together, our collective efforts will move us toward a safer, stronger, and more just America. ### Read more

CCRC has a new Deputy Director!

CCRC’s Board of Directors is delighted to announce that Rob Poggenklass has accepted its offer to serve as CCRC Deputy Director.  Rob has served as a public defender and legal aid lawyer in Virginia and Iowa for more than a decade, and has the technical legal skills, the field experience, and the passion for the policy issues that make him an ideal fit for the position. “I’m excited to join an organization dedicated to many issues I care so deeply about,” Rob told the CCRC board. “Everyone deserves a chance to live with dignity, and the effects of a criminal record often stand in the way. I have spent much of my career fighting against these barriers. I look forward to elevating these issues across the country at CCRC.” We first met met Rob three years ago, when he was seeking amicus support for a cert petition to the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving an Iowa woman who the state courts had ruled ineligible for record clearing because she could not pay the costs of the court-appointed lawyer who had represented her in her diversion case a decade before. CCRC was happy to file an amicus brief in support of Rob’s excellent petition, and while in the end the petition was not granted, Rob impressed us all then as a supremely talented and committed advocate. We at CCRC are thrilled at our good fortune to have been able to lure Rob away from the client work that has engaged him for more than a decade.  We will welcome him on board in September. Here are some of Rob’s career highlights: Argued at two state supreme courts (Virginia, Iowa). Won a unanimous decision from the Iowa Supreme Court holding that a person could not be denied expungement of a non-conviction criminal record because of fines and fees owed in other cases. Produced 30 expungement and employment barriers clinics across the state while at Iowa Legal Aid. Organized and lobbied for passage of Virginia’s 2021 record sealing law, which will allow sealing of convictions in Virginia for the very first time when it takes effect in 2025. Wrote the Legal Aid Justice Center’s “know your rights” materials on the new law, as well as a comment for the CCRC website. Authored a report on the unparalleled power of Virginia’s commonwealth’s attorneys during a legal fellowship at the ACLU of Virginia. Represented hundreds of indigent clients in misdemeanor and felony cases as a public defender in Newport News, Va. Read more