Estimating Eligibility and Participation for the WIC Program Final Report (2003) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5. Income and Adjunctive Eligibility of Infants and Children
5. Income and Adjunctive Eligibility of Infants and Children
Pages 50-67
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 50... ...
, concluded that the use of annual income in lieu of a shorter time period for measuring income (e.g., over a month) , combined with the failure to fully account for adjunctive eligibility results in a serious understatement of the numbers of infants and children who are potentially eligible for WIC.
|
From page 51... ...
The final section of the chapter examines the impact of using monthly income instead of annual income and allowing for eligibility through other means-tested programs. INCOME AND ADJUNCTIVE ELIGIBILITY RULES In determining income eligibility for WIC, there are three important concepts: the economic unit, the definition of income, and the time period for which the income is to be considered.
|
From page 52... ...
For example, a pregnant woman who is sharing an apartment with her sister may be determined to be a separate economic unit from her sister if the certifier can reasonably establish that she has a source of income and is paying her proportionate share of household, living and personal expenses (Final WIC Policy Memorandum 99-4:8~. Income is defined to be the gross cash income before deductions for income taxes, employees' social security taxes, insurance premiums, bonds, etc.
|
From page 53... ...
Cash income also includes student financial assistance, such as grants and scholarships, except those grants and scholarships excluded as income, as set forth in Section 246.7 (21 (iv) ofthe regulations, such as Pell Grants, State Student Incentive Grants, and National Direct Student Loans (Food and Nutrition Service Instruction Memo 80331.
|
From page 54... ...
1 In this chapter, we estimate the effect of using monthly data instead of annual data, accounting for adjunctive eligibility and accounting for certification periods.2 One might believe that, armed with all the relevant infor1Differences in how localities implement regulations could cause errors in the estimates presented in this report, as the estimates are made using a single method to account for income and the economic unit, while local practice may vary from that. Such variation increases the uncertainty level in the estimates, but there is no a priori reason to believe there would be a systematic bias in the estimates.
|
From page 55... ...
In this case, would the 2-year-old child be eligible for WIC and, if so, for how many months? If the mother goes to the WIC office in May, her child will meet the WIC income eligibility limits and will be certified to receive benefits for 6 months.
|
From page 56... ...
Otherwise they will have zero months of eligibility. The use of annual income to determine income eligibility provides an accurate determination of the number of months an infant or child is income eligible only if the family's monthly income is constant over the year.
|
From page 57... ...
This certification process will tend to dampen the impact of errors created because individuals have annual income less than or equal to 185 percent of federal poverty guidelines but monthly income that is not consistently below the income threshold. Certification, however, will increase the significance of the errors produced, because individuals have annual income greater than 185 percent of poverty but dips in monthly income below the eligibility threshold.
|
From page 58... ...
IMPACT OF MONTHLY INCOME AND ADJUNCTIVE ELIGIBILITY Using SIPP data Gordon et al.
|
From page 59... ...
(2002~. These results provide some evidence that the annualized SIPP data closely replicate the estimates found in the March CPS.
|
From page 60... ...
These differences are minor, however, so we conclude that the proportion of infants and children who are income eligible based on annual income is roughly equal from the March CPS and from the annualized SIPP data. The use of monthly certification periods (average monthly)
|
From page 61... ...
Compared with the use of annual income, 50 percent more infants and 35 percent more children may be income eligible for WIC when monthly income and certification periods are considered. Combined Impact of Monthly Income, Adjunctive Eligibility, and Certification Periods The current USDA methodology makes only a minor adjustment to account for infants and children who gain WIC eligibility by their enrollment in TANF, food stamps, or Medicaid.
|
From page 62... ...
The proportion of children increases from 41.1 to 45.2 percent in 1997, which is a 10 percent increase; a slightly larger increase is found in 1998. This comparison suggests that failing to consider adjunctive eligibility serves to understate the number of infants and children eligible for WIC, and the magnitude of these numbers may be overstated because some of these people may also qualify if a monthly income measure is used.
|
From page 63... ...
Compared with the estimates that incorporate monthly income and certification periods, adjunctive eligibility increases the estimates of the number of WIC-eligible infants by roughly 6 percent, while estimates of income-eligible children are increased by 5 percent. To the extent that comparisons between the CPS and SIPP can be made, these estimates suggest that a significant proportion of the impact of adjunctive eligibility found in the CPS reflected eligibility that also could be gained through consideration of low monthly income.
|
From page 64... ...
In comparing SIPP reports to CPS reports, it appears that SIPP data have a higher proportion of infants and roughly an equivalent proportion of children reporting Medicaid participation. In 1997, 26.2 percent of infants and 20.6 percent of children reported Medicaid participation.
|
From page 65... ...
; (2) those whose numbers of months of eligibility are less than the number of months they would be certified as eligible but who have annual incomes below 185 percent of poverty or who report participation in means tested programs TABLE 5-3 Percentage Distribution of the Number of Months of Simulated Certification by Simulated Months and Type of Eligibility for Infants and Children in 1997 Distribution of Simulated Months of Certification Simulated Months and Type of Eligibility Infants Children Total Every montha 67.8 74.3 72.8 Not every month but simulated eligibility based on annual or adjunctive~ 14]
|
From page 66... ...
Ofthe months that were certified to infants, 18 percent were to infants whose monthly household income exceeded eligibility limits in one or more of the months in which they were certified, whose annual household income exceeded 185 percent of poverty, and who did not report participation in programs that confer adjunctive eligibility during the calendar year (the third group from the above classification)
|
From page 67... ...
The SIPP data provide a more reliable estimate of monthly income, which is demonstrated by the large and significant effect of using monthly income for eligibility estimates. The use of the SIPP data requires that reported enrollment in means-tested programs must be employed to impute adjunctive eligibility.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.