This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-05-839R 
entitled 'Administrative Expenditures and Federal Matching Rates of 
Selected Support Programs' which was released on July 28, 2005. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

June 30, 2005: 

The Honorable Wally Herger: 
Chairman: 
Subcommittee on Human Resources: 
Committee on Ways and Means: 
House of Representatives: 

Subject: Administrative Expenditures and Federal Matching Rates of 
Selected Support Programs: 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

The federal government spends billions of dollars annually for programs 
that help low-income families and other individuals. A significant 
portion of these funds cover administrative costs rather than direct 
benefits and services. To provide information on how these 
administrative costs compare across programs and the federal 
government's role in funding these programs' administrative costs, we 
examined (1) total funding and the amounts and types of administrative 
expenditures for selected programs and (2) the federal matching rates 
for these administrative expenditures. 

Our review included seven programs: Medicaid, State Children's Health 
Insurance Programs (SCHIP), Food Stamp Program, Foster Care, Adoption 
Assistance, Child Support Enforcement (CSE), and Child Care and 
Development Fund (CCDF).[Footnote 1] The Food Stamp Program is 
administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the 
remaining programs are administered by the U.S. Department of Health 
and Human Services (HHS). To determine the amounts and types of 
administrative expenditures for these programs as well as the federal 
role in funding their administrative costs, we examined information 
publicly available from legislation, governmentwide publications, and 
the relevant federal agencies. We determined that this information is 
sufficiently reliable for the purpose of this correspondence. We 
conducted our work during May and June 2005 in accordance with 
generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Total expenditures, including administrative and all other 
expenditures, for the seven programs in our review ranged from $2.9 
billion for Adoption Assistance to $295 billion for Medicaid, including 
both federal and state expenditures, as shown in table 1. Total 
expenditures generally include the costs of direct benefits, such as 
the costs of food stamps and medical services, as well as all other 
costs of administering the programs and providing benefits. For each of 
the programs in our review, both the federal and state governments 
provide program funding. The federal share of total program 
expenditures ranged from 53 percent for Foster Care to 91 percent for 
the Food Stamp Program. 

Table 1: Total Federal and State Expenditures for Selected Programs, 
Fiscal Year 2004: 

[See PDF for image] 

Source: GAO analysis of HHS and USDA data. 

[A] Includes local expenditures, where applicable. 

[B] Federal and state expenditures are reduced by child support 
collections that are used to reimburse the Temporary Assistance for 
Needy Families (TANF) and Foster Care programs and by fees collected 
for certain services. The federal total also includes administrative 
costs, payments to states that meet established performance measures, 
and costs for certain grants. 

[End of table]

Administrative expenditures for these programs are listed in table 2. 
The specific types of expenditures that are considered administrative 
differ considerably across the programs. For example, administrative 
costs for Foster Care include case planning, recruitment and licensing 
of foster care homes, and eligibility determination activities, as well 
as other activities. In contrast, administrative costs for CCDF do not 
include the costs of providing direct services, such as determining 
eligibility and placing children in child care. Both federal and state 
funds are used for administrative expenditures. The federal share of 
administrative expenditures ranged from 49 percent for the Food Stamp 
Program to 70 percent for SCHIP. 

Table 2: Federal and State Administrative Expenditures for Selected 
Programs, Fiscal Year 2004: 

[See PDF for image] 

Source: GAO analysis of HHS and USDA data. 

[A] CSE administrative expenditures exceed total expenditures because 
total expenditures are reduced by child support collections distributed 
to TANF and Foster Care programs and fees collected for certain 
services. 

NA = data not available. 

[End of table]

The sharing of administrative costs between the federal and state 
governments is based largely on federal matching rates, in accordance 
with federal laws and regulations.[Footnote 2] Table 3 provides 
information on the federal matching rates and other rules governing 
federal expenditures for administrative costs for each program. The 
federal matching rate is 50 percent for most administrative 
expenditures for Medicaid, the Food Stamp Program, Foster Care, and 
Adoption Assistance, although higher federal matching rates may apply 
to certain expenses. For CSE, the federal matching rate is 66 percent 
for most administrative expenditures. For a portion of CCDF 
administrative expenditures, the federal matching rate varies by state 
and ranges from 50 percent to 77 percent. For SCHIP, the federal 
matching rate also varies by state and ranges from 65 percent to about 
84 percent. In addition, administrative expenditures in SCHIP and CCDF 
are capped at 10 percent and 5 percent, respectively, of total 
expenditures.[Footnote 3]

Table 3: Federal Matching Rates and Other Rules Governing Federal 
Expenditures of State Administrative Costs: 

[See PDF for image]

Source: GAO analysis of HHS and USDA data. 

[A] The 50 percent federal share of state and local administrative 
expenses is reduced by $197 million a year to account for costs covered 
by grants for TANF, resulting in an actual federal share paid under the 
Food Stamp Program that is slightly below 50 percent. 

[B] Federal matching rates for CCDF are determined using the Federal 
Medical Assistance Percentages. States' federal matching rates are 
inversely related to their average per capita income levels. Federal 
matching rate applies only to one component of CCDF funding, which is 
available to states that achieve required levels of state spending. 

[C] Federal matching rates for SCHIP are determined using the Enhanced 
Federal Medical Assistance Percentages. States' federal matching rates 
are inversely related to their average per capita income levels. 

[End of table]

We shared a draft of this document with knowledgeable officials from 
each program for their technical review. We discussed the draft with 
Child Care and Development Fund and Food Stamp Program officials and 
incorporated their comments where appropriate. 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents 
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this letter until 30 days 
after its date. At that time, we will send copies of this letter to the 
Secretaries of HHS and USDA, appropriate congressional committees, and 
other interested parties. We will also make copies available to others 
upon request and on GAO's Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you have any questions about this letter, please contact me at (415) 
904-2272. You may also reach me by e-mail at bellisd@gao.gov. Gale 
Harris served as assistant director on this engagement. Heather Hahn 
was the analyst-in-charge. Cindy Ayers, Rebecca Christie, Susan 
Higgins, and Carolyn Taylor provided key information. 

Sincerely yours,

Signed by: 

David D. Bellis: 

Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues: 

Enclosure: 

Enclosure I: 

PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS: 

Adoption Assistance: 

The purpose of the Adoption Assistance program, authorized under title 
IV-E of the Social Security Act, is to assist states in finding 
adoptive homes for eligible children with special needs. This program 
provides funds to states to assist in providing adoptive families with 
ongoing financial and medical assistance for adopted children with 
special needs as well as funds to support staff training and 
administrative costs. 

Child Care and Development Fund: 

The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), authorized by the Personal 
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, Pub. L. 
No. 104-193, assists low-income families, families receiving temporary 
public assistance, and those transitioning from public assistance in 
obtaining child care so that they can work or attend training or 
education. With this block grant, states develop and pay for child care 
programs. Within certain federal guidelines, states have discretion in 
deciding how these funds will support child care, who will be eligible, 
and what payment mechanism will be used. 

Child Support Enforcement: 

The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program is a joint federal and 
state partnership established in 1975 under title IV-D of the Social 
Security Act to ensure that parents provide support to their children. 
State CSE programs are responsible for carrying out the basic 
activities for locating absent noncustodial parents, establishing 
paternity and support orders, and collecting and distributing child 
support payments. Although the states administer the child support 
enforcement program, the federal government plays a major role, which 
includes funding most of the program, establishing policies and 
guidance, and overseeing and monitoring state CSE programs' compliance 
with federal requirements. 

Food Stamp Program: 

The Food Stamp Program, established in 1964 and administered at the 
federal level by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Food and 
Nutrition Service (FNS), is designed to provide basic nutrition to low- 
income individuals and families in the United States by supplementing 
their income with benefits to purchase food. FNS pays the full cost of 
food stamp benefits and shares the states' administrative costs. FNS is 
responsible for promulgating program regulations and ensuring that 
state officials administer the program in compliance with program 
rules. The states administer the program by determining whether 
households meet the program's income and asset requirement, calculating 
monthly benefits for qualified households, and issuing benefits to 
participants on an electronic benefits transfer card. 

Foster Care: 

The purpose of the Foster Care program, authorized under title IV-E of 
the Social Security Act, is to help states provide proper care for 
eligible children who need placement outside their homes--in a foster 
family home or an institution. This program provides funds to states to 
assist with the costs of foster care maintenance for eligible children, 
administrative costs to manage the program, and training for program 
staff and foster parents. 

Medicaid: 

Medicaid (title XIX of the Social Security Act) is an entitlement 
program that pays for medical assistance for certain individuals and 
families with low incomes and few resources. This program became law in 
1965 and is jointly funded by the federal and state governments 
(including the District of Columbia and U.S. territories) to assist 
states in providing medical assistance to people who meet certain 
eligibility criteria. Medicaid is the largest source of funding for 
medical and health-related service for people with limited income. 
Within broad federal guidelines, each state (1) establishes its own 
eligibility standards; (2) determines the type, amount, duration, and 
scope of services; (3) sets the rate of payment for services; and (4) 
administers its own program. 

State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP): 

SCHIP programs are established and administered by a state, jointly 
funded with the federal government, to provide child health assistance 
to uninsured, low-income children through a separate child health 
program, a Medicaid expansion program, or a combination program. Title 
XXI of the Social Security Act, enacted by the Balanced Budget Act of 
1997, authorizes federal grants to states for provision of child health 
assistance to uninsured, low-income children. Within broad federal 
rules, each state decides eligible groups, types and ranges of 
services, payment levels for benefit coverage, and administrative and 
operating procedures. 

(130490): 

FOOTNOTES

[1] See enclosure I for descriptions of these programs. We agreed with 
your staff on this set of programs that provide assistance to low- 
income families and other individuals. Each of these programs is 
jointly funded by federal and state governments, employs federal 
matching rates, and has annual federal outlays of over $1.5 billion. 

[2] The federal matching rate and the actual share of expenditures that 
the federal government pays, in practice, differ slightly, because of 
the detailed rules governing the sharing of expenses and application of 
the federal matching rate. 

[3] The 10 percent cap applies to expenditures for administration, 
outreach, health initiatives, and certain other child health 
assistance.