Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of FCB program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering FCB programs. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information. The Lifeline specific costs and benefits are as follows: NEW NATIONAL VERIFIER APPLICATIONS North Carolina consumers submit an average of 51,339 Lifeline applications per month, according to National Verifier application data for a recent 3-month period in 2022. Based on 2020 American Community Survey (ACS) data that USAC uses to estimate the number of households eligible for the Lifeline benefit, USAC expects as many as 45% of households eligible for Lifeline in North Carolina to automatically prove eligibility via National Verifier connections with the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) databases. Based on 2020 ACS data, USAC expects an additional 16% of households eligible for Lifeline in North Carolina whose eligibility cannot be confirmed through the available federal databases to be able to automatically prove eligibility via a connection to the state’s SNAP database due to their participation in SNAP. Thus, on a monthly basis, approximately 8,247 (16% of 51,339) North Carolina consumers may be able to automatically prove eligibility via the state SNAP database and would not be required to submit paper documentation for National Verifier manual review. At the cost of $3 per application, the manual review process results in a monthly cost of $24,740 and an annual cost of $296,879 to the Lifeline program. There are no incremental costs for automated database checks. The connection to North Carolina’s SNAP database would thus enable the National Verifier to avoid an estimated $339,919 in annual costs to the Lifeline program as a result of automated eligibility verification for new applications that would otherwise require manual review. There will be additional cost savings from avoiding manual reviews for the ACP and any future FCB programs, although it is uncertain at this time exactly how many eligibility checks will be conducted for those programs. RECERTIFICATION NATIONAL VERIFIER APPLICATIONS Approximately 89,314 North Carolina subscribers undergo the eligibility recertification process on an annual basis, according to recent 2022 National Lifeline Accountabil...
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of FTB program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering FTB programs. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information.
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of FCB program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering FCB programs. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information. The Lifeline specific costs and benefits are as follows: NEW NATIONAL VERIFIER APPLICATIONS Florida consumers submit an average of 109,871 Lifeline applications per month, according to National Verifier application data for a recent 3-month period in 2022. Based on 2020 American Community Survey (ACS) data that USAC uses to estimate the number of households eligible for the Lifeline benefit, USAC expects as many as 45% of households eligible for Lifeline in Florida to automatically prove eligibility via National Verifier connections with the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) databases. Based on 2020 ACS data, USAC expects an additional 20% of households eligible for Lifeline in Florida whose eligibility cannot be confirmed through the available federal databases to be able to automatically prove eligibility via a connection to the state’s SNAP and Medicaid databases due to their participation in SNAP and Medicaid. Thus, on a monthly basis, approximately 21,696 (20% of 109,871) Florida consumers may be able to automatically prove eligibility via the state SNAP and Medicaid databases and would not be required to submit paper documentation for National Verifier manual review. At the cost of $3 per application, the manual review process results in a monthly cost of $65,089 and an annual cost of $781,064 to the Lifeline program. There are no incremental costs for automated database checks. The connection to Florida’s SNAP and Medicaid databases would thus enable the National Verifier to avoid an estimated $781,064 in annual costs to the Lifeline program as a result of automated eligibility verification for new applications that would otherwise require manual review. There will be additional cost savings from avoiding manual reviews for the ACP and any future FCB programs, although it is uncertain at this time exactly how many eligibility checks will be conducted for those programs. RECERTIFICATION NATIONAL VERIFIER APPLICATIONS Approximately 241,843 Florida subscribers undergo the eligibility recertification process on an annual basis, according to recent 2022 National Lif...
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. Based on historical data, USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of Lifeline program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering the Lifeline program. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information. Approximately 7 million subscribers participate in the Lifeline program, of which approximately 255,000 subscribers qualified for Lifeline by demonstrating receipt of federal SNAP or Medicaid benefits provided through DCF. At this time, subscriber eligibility based on federal SNAP or Medicaid benefits provided through DCF is verified manually by the service providers who participate in the Lifeline program. Going forward, this responsibility will be transferred to USAC as the National Verifier, and performed through an automated and streamlined process. Under the manual process, USAC estimates it costs service providers approximately $5 per subscriber to perform enrollment and recertification functions each year. Without the automated computer matching process, the cost of this manual review would shift from the service providers to USAC and would be funded by the federal Fund. Once the National Verifier is developed and operating at full capacity utilizing computer matching processes with DCF and other federal and state agencies, USAC estimates that the cost to enroll and recertify will be reduced to approximately $1 per subscriber where automated verification is enabled. This results in annual savings of approximately $1,020,000 specifically related to the 642,000 subscribers who qualified for Lifeline by demonstrating receipt of federal SNAP or Medicaid benefits provided through DCF. Given that many other subscribers likely could have used receipt of federal SNAP or Medicaid benefits as a qualifying criterion rather than another program, this has the potential to create annual savings across the full Lifeline population of up to approximately $21 million per year.
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. Based on historical data, HUD and FEMA anticipate that computer matching will help eliminate duplication of benefits. For example, FEMA received 2,160,284 registrations in response to hurricanes Xxxxxxx and Xxxx, of which 5,140 were deemed ineligible because of duplicate rental housing assistance. Additionally, an estimated 27 percent of the more than 160,000 recipients for HUD’s Xxxxxxx-Xxxx CDBG-DR grantee homeowner rehabilitation programs had received IHP assistance from FEMA. An estimated 37 percent of homeowner beneficiaries2 for Xxxxxxx and Xxxx had an NFIP flood insurance payout. FEMA received 176,157 NFIP flood insurance claims from these events that had a claim payment associated with the claim. IHP, CDBG-DR, and NFIP assistance may not be duplicative if they do not cover the same need. However, the risk of CDBG-DR assistance duplicating IHP and NFIP assistance increases if the homeowner received more than one form of assistance. In the Xxxxxxx-Xxxx data examples in the above paragraph, since no CMA or automated duplication of benefits check was in place, the staff implementing the recovery benefits could not allocate the funds in a timely manner due to a delay caused by manually checking for duplication of benefits. Due to delays, half of the homeowners who experienced damage from 2 Termed as “CDBG recipients” in the referenced study, Housing Recovery on the Gulf Coast - Phase II (Results of Property Owner Survey in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas (xxxxxxx.xxx). Hurricane Xxxxxxx did not complete rebuilding until 18 months or more after the event. With a CMA and an automated duplication of benefits check in place, homeowners will be able to rebuild faster due to the quick, accurate, and efficient allocation of funds resulting from the elimination of the manual and error-prone duplication of benefits check. The associated cost-benefit analysis indicates the Agreement will have a tangible savings to both agencies. If approved, the annual savings would equal approximately $119,370,000 for HUD and approximately $919,000 for FEMA. The cost-benefit analysis was based on a seven- year Life Cycle Cost Estimate (LCCE), like a Capital Investment Plan (CIP), composed of five budget years and two out years. It is estimated that one catastrophic disaster season, like the Xxxxxxx-Xxxx hurricane season, will occur within the seven-year cost estimate. This assumption was made by the Disaster Assistance Improvement Program (DAIP) finance team. In June 2009, DHS...
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of FCB program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering FCB programs. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information. The Lifeline specific costs and benefits are as follows: NEW NATIONAL VERIFIER APPLICATIONS In the most recent Computer Matching Agreement that the Parties executed in August 2021, the Parties estimated that the benefits of this program would greatly outweigh its costs. This estimate was based partly on the fact that the cost of verifying an applicant or subscriber’s eligibility through the automated process described in this Agreement would be significantly less expensive than the cost of manually reviewing evidence that an applicant or subscriber qualifies for Lifeline benefits. It was also based on the fact that an automated review conducted by USAC (rather than by the eligible telecommunications carrier that provides the service) would reduce waste, fraud and, abuse in the Lifeline program. Since the most recent matching agreement was executed in August 2021, the actual cost- benefit results of the matching program were consistent with those the Parties estimated in the initial April 2017 Agreement. For example, over this period, the National Verifier used the automated connection between USAC and HUD to approve at least 324,154 Lifeline applicants and subscribers who qualified through their participation in a HUD program. USAC estimates that these successful automated checks saved the Lifeline program more than $972,462 compared to the cost of manual eligibility verification. There will be additional cost savings from avoiding manual reviews for the ACP and any future FCB programs. For example, since May 2021, the National Verifier used the automated connection between USAC and HUD to approve at least 235,347 ACP applicants and subscribers who qualified through their participation in a HUD program. USAC estimates that these successful automated checks saved the ACP more than $706,041 compared to the cost of manual eligibility verification.
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of FTB program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering FTB programs. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information. The Lifeline specific costs and benefits are as follows: NEW NATIONAL VERIFIER APPLICATIONS Indiana consumers submit an average of 12,303 Lifeline applications per month, according to National Verifier application data for a recent 3-month period in 2020. Based on 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) data that USAC uses to estimate the number of households eligible for the Lifeline benefit, USAC expects as many as 48% of households eligible for Lifeline in Indiana to automatically prove eligibility via National Verifier connections with the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) databases. Based on 2019 ACS data, USAC expects an additional 12% of households eligible for Lifeline in Indiana whose eligibility cannot be confirmed through the available federal databases to be able to automatically prove eligibility via a connection to the state’s SNAP and Medicaid databases due to their participation in SNAP and Medicaid. Thus, on a monthly basis, approximately 1,476 (12% of 12,303) Indiana consumers may be able to automatically prove eligibility via the state SNAP and Medicaid databases and would not be required to submit paper documentation for National Verifier manual review. At the cost of $3 per application, the manual review process results in a monthly cost of $4,429 and an annual cost of $53,149 to the Lifeline program. There are no incremental costs for automated database checks. The connection to Indiana’s SNAP and Medicaid databases would thus enable the National Verifier to avoid an estimated $53,149 in annual costs to the Lifeline program as a result of automated eligibility verification for new applications that would otherwise require manual review. There will be additional cost savings from avoiding manual reviews for EBBP and any future FTB programs, although it is uncertain at this time exactly how many eligibility checks will be conducted for those programs. RECERTIFICATION NATIONAL VERIFIER APPLICATIONS Approximately 90,964 Indiana subscribers undergo the eligibility recertification process on an annual basis, according to recent 2020 National Lifeline Acco...
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of FCB program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering FCB programs. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information. USAC estimates that roughly 500 Lifeline and 1,000 ACP applicants per month will not be required to upload Veterans Pension and Survivors Pension benefits documentation with the connection in place. This could result in $4,500 in monthly savings related to eligibility documentation review, at $3 per application.
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC and the FCC anticipate that computer matching will verify the eligibility of ACP subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering the ACP. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information. USAC and the FCC estimate that roughly 7,000 ACP applicants per month (84,000 annually) will not be required to upload Federal Pell Grant documentation with the connection in place. This could result in $252,000 in annual savings related to eligibility documentation review, at $3 per application. It is anticipated that approximately 25,000 ACP subscribers that qualified via the Federal Pell Grant will be recertified annually via the ED connection. This could result in $75,000 in annual savings related to the manual review of recertification applications, at $3 per application. In total, the connection to ED’s Federal Pell Grant database would enable the National Verifier to avoid an estimated $327,000 in annual costs to the ACP based on electronic eligibility determinations for both new applications and required recertifications. Currently, the verification of ACP eligibility costs $3 per application for an annual cost of $327,000. ED’s one-time development costs for FY23 are $121,777; ED’s recurring maintenance for the labor to maintain this Agreement and contractor oversight are $4,117; and the recurring costs to maintain ED’s system are $47,250 for a total of $173,144. USAC’s one-time development costs are $170,000. The first year savings will be a negative savings of -$16,144 ($327,000 – ($173,144 + $170,000)). In future years, ED anticipates that the cost will be $51,367 for normal operations and maintenance and $4,117 for contractor oversight and FCC/USAC anticipates that the cost will be $25,000 for normal operations and maintenance. FCC anticipates seeing an annual savings of $246,516 after reimbursing ED for the normal operations and maintenance and contractor oversight of $55,484. FCC will reimburse ED for the development and all recurring costs to maintain this Agreement, contractor oversight, and the system. Total newly imposed costs for the matching program are estimated to be $343,144 in the initial matching period. This matching program will improve eligibility determinations for the ACP applicants and subscribers who qualify via the receipt of Federal Pell Grant disbursements in an active award year. Therefore, additional cost ...
Expected Results - Cost-Benefit Analysis. USAC anticipates that computer matching will verify the eligibility of FCB program subscribers and help prevent ineligible individuals from entering FCB programs. This Agreement and related processes will also reduce administrative costs for processing and provide increased protection for consumer personal information.
