When Federal Capacity Declines: How States Absorb, Adapt, or Lose Administrative Capacity in SNAP

• In Event: From Administrative Burden to Participation and Compliance: Local Discretion in Federal Assistance Program Delivery

Abstract

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the second largest safety net program in the United States and relies on a shared administrative structure between federal and state governments. Federal agencies, primarily the USDA Food and Nutrition Service, provide rulemaking, oversight, technical assistance, and data infrastructure. States conduct eligibility determination, verification, recertification, and case management. This interdependence means that fluctuations in federal administrative capacity directly influence the volume, complexity, and cost of administrative work performed by states. From 2010 to 2024, federal SNAP administrative capacity experienced substantial variation in staffing levels, oversight intensity, and administrative expectations. These changes raise important questions about how states respond when federal support contracts or expands. Understanding these responses is essential for identifying when governance responsibilities shift across levels of government and when administrative capacity simply erodes. This project investigates how changes in federal administrative capacity shape state administrative burden, performance, and policy adaptation in SNAP. The central research question is when federal capacity declines, do states absorb the workload, adapt through policy changes, or experience losses in administrative performance. The study develops an empirical strategy to distinguish among capacity shifted, capacity lost, and capacity compensated, as well as adaptive governance responses. The analysis draws on multiple administrative and policy datasets. Federal capacity measures come from USDA Congressional Justifications, which provide annual information on staffing levels, occupational composition, and regional office presence. State administrative effort and cost measures come from State Activity Reports and SNAP administrative cost tables. Performance outcomes, including payment error rates, case and procedural error rates, and application processing timeliness, come from SNAP Quality Control data. State policy choices, including recertification intervals and reporting requirements, come from the ERS SNAP Policy Database. These sources support the construction of a state year panel from 2010 to 2024. The empirical strategy uses fixed effects regression models that relate lagged federal administrative capacity to state administrative burden, performance, and policy adaptation. The analysis tests four hypotheses. Capacity shifted occurs when federal declines prompt states to increase administrative effort while maintaining performance. Capacity lost occurs when federal declines are not offset by state effort and performance deteriorates. Capacity compensated occurs when states increase administrative effort and maintain or improve performance. Adaptive governance occurs when states respond to federal declines by adopting burden reducing policies such as longer recertification intervals or simplified reporting. Preliminary expectations suggest that states will follow different trajectories in response to federal capacity changes. Some states are likely to increase administrative effort to compensate for federal declines. Others may experience performance deterioration when state resources do not keep pace with federal reductions. A third group may adopt burden reducing policies to manage administrative strain. The analysis will identify these patterns and estimate the magnitude of each response. The findings will provide a clearer understanding of how federal administrative capacity shapes state level governance in SNAP.

Author

• Sungjin Lee, San Diego State University
  Presenting Author