skip to content
Primary navigation

Appeals Archive

As part of our commitment to transparency, we make DHS appeals decisions available to the public in this appeals archive.

Results 1 - 10 of 2000
The issue raised in this appeal is: Whether the Agency correctly calculated the medical expense deduction used to determine Appellants’ eligibility for SNAP benefits. Recommended Decision: REVERSE and REMAND the Agency’s calculation of the medical expense deduction to the Agency. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. After Appellant provided verification for medical expenses, on August 4, 2020, County (agency) sent (appellant) a written notice of action informing the appellant that the Appellant’s application for SNAP was denied because Appellant’s expected income was more than regulations allow for the household size. Exhibit 1. On October 12, 2020, the appellant filed an appeal. Exhibit A. 2. On November 4, 2020, the human services judge held an evidentiary hearing on the matter by telephone. The record was held open until November 6, 2020. On November 6, 2020, the record closed consisting of the hearing testimony and three exhibits. 2
Date: December 11, 2020
Docket: 238502
Examiner: Tara P. Kalar
The issue raised in this appeal is: Whether the agency correctly decided to deny appellant’s application for SNAP benefits because she failed to complete the application process. Recommended Decision: REVERSE the agency’s decision as incorrect. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On September 22, 2020, County (the agency) sent (appellant) a written notice of decision stating that her application for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits had been denied because she failed to complete the application process. On October 7, 2020, appellant filed an appeal. 2. On November 2, 2020, the human services judge held an evidentiary hearing on the matter by telephone conference. On the same date, the record closed, consisting of the hearing testimony and two exhibits. 2
Date: November 05, 2020
Docket: 238456
Examiner: KEVIN T. SLATOR
The issue raised in this appeal is: Whether respondent should be disqualified from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP) for one year because he committed an intentional program violation. Recommended Decision: REVERSE the agency’s decision as not supported by clear and convincing evidence. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On August 26, 2020, County (the agency) filed a request for an administrative disqualification hearing (ADH) with the Appeals Division of the Minnesota Department of Human Services (Appeals Division) regarding an alleged intentional program violation (IPV) by (respondent). In the request, the agency asked that respondent be disqualified from the SNAP and MFIP programs for one year. Id. 2. On August 31, 2020, the Appeals Division sent written notice to respondent by first class mail that a hearing on the agency’s allegations was set for October 6, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. Along with the hearing notice, the Appeals Division sent respondent copies of all information it had received from the agency related to the allegations, along with information about the hearing process. The information was not returned by the postal service. 3. On October 6, 2020, the human services judge held an evidentiary hearing on the matter by telephone conference. On the same date, the record closed, consisting of the hearing testimony and one exhibit. 1
Date: November 05, 2020
Docket: 237605
Examiner: KEVIN T. SLATOR
The issues raised on appeal is: 1. Whether Appellant filed an appeal in time to grant review; and if so 2. Whether the Agency correctly determined Appellant is responsible for an overpayment of $9,804.54 for Medical Assistance benefits that her mother obtained on behalf of Appellant, when Appellant was ineligible to receive benefits, from February 1, 2016 through December 31, 2017. Recommended Decision: 1. DISMISS, because Appellant filed an untimely appeal.
Date: October 21, 2020
Docket: 236490
Examiner: Calynn M.W. Schuck
The issue raised in this appeal is: Whether the agency correctly determined that appellants were overpaid Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits totaling $689 between September 9, 2019, and January 31, 2020. Recommended Decision: AFFIRM the agency’s decision as correct. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On January 7, 2020, County (the agency) sent and (appellants) a Notice of Overpayment of SNAP benefits totaling $689 between September 9, 2019, and January 31, 2020. Exhibit 1, On August 19, 2020, appellants filed an appeal. Exhibit A . 2. On September 15, 2020, the human services judge held an evidentiary hearing on the matter by telephone conference. On the same date, the record closed consisting of the hearing testimony and two exhibits. 2
Date: October 07, 2020
Docket: 237456
Examiner: KEVIN T. SLATOR
The issue raised in this appeal is: Whether properly placed Recipient Program (MRRP). on the Minnesota Restricted Recommended Decision: REVERSE the agency’s decision. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On July 31, 2020, (agency) sent (appellant) a written notice of action informing him that he will be placed on the Minnesota Restricted Recipient Program (MRRP), effective September 1, 2020. Agency Exhibit 1, page 11. 2. On August 3, 2020, the appellant appealed the placement to the agency. Agency Exhibit 1, page 26. 3. On August 11, 2020, the agency upheld the decision to place appellant on the MRRP. Agency Exhibit 1, page 27. 4. On August 26, 2020, the appellant filed an appeal with the State Appeals Office. Exhibit A. 5. On September 23, 2020, the Human Services Judge held an evidentiary hearing on the matter by telephone conference. The record was closed on September 23, 2020 including hearing testimony and two exhibits. 2
Date: September 29, 2020
Docket: 237689
Examiner: Kathleen McDonough
Date: September 29, 2020
Docket: 237642
Examiner: Kalli Bennett
The issue raised in this appeal is: Whether the Agency correctly reduced Appellant’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to $90.00 per month effective September 1, 2020. Recommended decision: AFFIRM the Agency’s reduction of Appellant’s SNAP benefits to $90.00 per month effective September 1, 2020. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On August 4, 2020, County (Agency) sent (Appellant) a written notice of action informing the Appellant that, beginning September 1, 2020, his SNAP benefits would change from $125.00 to $90.00 because: his Cash grant changed from $0.00 to $81.00; and his allowed shelter costs changed from $208.00 to $215.00. 2 2. On August 19, 2020, the Appeals Office received Appellant’s appeal. 3 3. On September 24, 2020, the human services judge held an evidentiary hearing on the matter by telephone conference. On September 24, 2020, the record closed consisting of the hearing testimony and five exhibits. 4
Date: September 28, 2020
Docket: 237457
Examiner: Kalli Bennett
The issue raised in this appeal is: Should the Respondent be disqualified from receiving benefits from the SNAP and MFIP programs for one year because the Respondent committed an intentional program violation? Recommended Decision: Yes. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On July 31, 2020, County (Agency) filed a request for an administrative disqualification hearing with the Appeals Division of the Minnesota Department of Human Services (Appeals Division) regarding an alleged intentional program violation(s) by (Respondent). Exhibit 1. In the request, the Agency asked that the Respondent be disqualified from the SNAP and MFIP programs for one year. Id. 2. On August 10, 2020 the Appeals Division sent written notice to the Respondent by first class mail that a hearing on the Agency’s allegations was set for September 15, 2020. Along with the hearing notice, the Appeals Division sent the Respondent copies of all information it had received from the agency related to the allegations, along with information about the hearing process. This notice was not returned as undeliverable. 3. On September 15, 2020, the Human Services Judge held an evidentiary hearing on the matter by telephone conference. The Respondent appeared and indicated that she received the notice and attachments and had enough time to review them before the hearing. One exhibit was accepted into evidence during the hearing. 1 At the end of the hearing, the record was held open until September 22, 2020 for the Appellant to submit an additional exhibit. On September 22, 2020, having received no additional exhibits, the record was closed consisting of the sworn testimony and one exhibit.
Date: September 25, 2020
Docket: 237059
Examiner: Nicole Kralik
The issue raised in this appeal is: Whether the Agency demonstrated by a preponderance of evidence that it correctly reduced the Appellant’s eligibility for Personal Care Assistance (PCA) services. Recommended Decision: The Agency is AFFIRMED regarding Mobility and Toileting. The Agency is REVERSED regarding Eating.
Date: September 25, 2020
Docket: 237568
Examiner: Deborah L. Coxe
loading dates...
Disclaimer: As part of its commitment to transparency, DHS makes publicly available this library of appeals decisions. Consistent with the requirements of applicable state and federal laws, protected information is removed from the decisions in this library. This library is not intended to give legal advice. You should not interpret these decisions as binding on anyone except the parties to the decision. The decisions are not precedent for any dispute between parties in the future. The laws affecting these programs may change frequently and information provided in this library of decisions may not reflect the current state of the law. The decisions also may be subject to further review. Therefore, please consult with a knowledgeable expert before you take action in reliance on any information provided here.
back to top