Which state and federal agencies coordinate investigations into SNAP fraud?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Federal and state investigations into SNAP fraud are coordinated primarily between the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) — including its Office of Retailer Operations and regional offices — and state SNAP agencies, which run recipient investigations and benefit administration [1] [2]. FNS also works “in partnership with other federal agencies and state and local law enforcement,” and supports investigations of EBT card cloning/skimming through its Special Investigations Unit and data-sharing with EBT processors [3] [4] [5].
1. Who leads at the federal level: USDA FNS and its investigative units
The federal lead on SNAP program integrity is the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS). FNS oversees retailer functions, provides national guidance, conducts undercover and data-driven investigations, and houses a Special Investigations Unit within its Office of Retailer Operations and Compliance that tracks EBT card cloning, skimming, and suspicious transactions [1] [4] [3]. FNS regional offices also independently review state casework and select samples — about 25,000 cases a year — to validate state investigations and to compute national improper payment metrics [2].
2. State agencies: the frontline investigators and case managers
State SNAP agencies administer benefits, identify alleged recipient fraud and intentional program violations, and maintain fraud units or benefit-investigation teams (for example, Illinois’ SNAP Fraud Unit within the state Department of Human Services) that investigate recipients and coordinate prosecutions or administrative disqualification processes [1] [6]. States use data analytics, tips, call-center scripts, and partnerships with EBT processors to detect and investigate suspicious transactions [7] [5].
3. Law enforcement and cross-jurisdictional work: police, prosecutors and federal partners
FNS explicitly says it works “in partnership with other federal agencies and state and local law enforcement” to identify, prevent and prosecute retailer trafficking and sophisticated fraud schemes; FNS supports federal law enforcement by flagging suspicious EBT transactions and sharing locations where cloned cards are being used [3] [4]. States report difficulties prosecuting cross-state trafficking because of jurisdictional complications and therefore emphasize building relationships with peer-state investigative units and law enforcement to expedite responses [8].
4. Data, EBT processors and information-sharing agreements
A recurring practical partner in investigations is the EBT processor: FNS has obtained processor information to support investigations and has developed an information‑sharing agreement to allow states and FNS to exchange benefit‑theft data [5]. GAO reporting and FNS grant programs stress data analytics as central to detection and to measuring improper payments; FNS also funds state grants to implement the SNAP Fraud Framework, explicitly to improve detection, investigation and case management [2] [7].
5. Retailer investigations versus recipient investigations — divided responsibilities
Retailer oversight and enforcement (authorization, undercover retail stings, disqualification) are primarily federal FNS responsibilities, while recipient eligibility, overpayment recovery, and administrative or criminal proceedings typically fall to state agencies and their fraud units — although FNS reviews state dispositions and can work with prosecutors when retail trafficking spans jurisdictions [1] [2] [3].
6. Practical examples and state-level variations
State offices show how coordination operates in practice: Illinois runs a dedicated SNAP Fraud Unit that can assist federal and state officials and enter data‑sharing agreements [6]. South Carolina’s department emphasizes collaboration with statewide law enforcement and public tip lines; Texas’ OIG reports referrals to county district attorneys and large recoveries from investigations [9] [10]. These examples illustrate that day‑to‑day enforcement varies by state resources and organizational setup [6] [9] [10].
7. Limits, tensions and oversight gaps
Oversight bodies have flagged gaps: GAO and USDA OIG reports note issues with improper payment measurement, the need for better retailer‑trafficking metrics, and incomplete compliance with payment‑integrity criteria; FNS conducts regional re‑reviews of state cases but GAO continues to press for improvements [2]. States also report cross‑border prosecution challenges, meaning some trafficking schemes evade swift enforcement without multi‑state coordination [8].
8. What the sources do not say
Available sources do not mention a single, standing federal task force that subsumes all SNAP fraud investigations nationwide; they also do not provide a comprehensive list of every federal partner agency by name beyond “other federal agencies” and law enforcement [3] [5]. Sources do not quantify total nationwide investigative staffing or a ranked list of the most common interagency partners in every state [2] [7].
Summary: FNS is the federal hub — especially for retailer and EBT‑related probes — while state SNAP agencies run recipient investigations and administrative actions; both coordinate with EBT processors, state/local law enforcement and prosecutors, but jurisdictional friction and oversight shortcomings remain documented concerns [3] [1] [2] [5].