Theo Wells-Spackman is a Report for America corps member who reports for VTDigger.
Vermont officials say roughly 1,400 households lost access to the state’s largest food assistance program in March, as federal work requirements took effect. Since last fall, advocates estimate more than 7,000 Vermont households have seen monthly grocery money decrease or disappear.
Roughly 61,000 Vermonters receive federal food assistance, and more than 150,000 are insured through Medicaid. Many more in those programs face rule changes that could see them lose those supports in the coming months and years, advocates warn.
As shifts from last July’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act take shape for food assistance and appear on the horizon for health insurance, service organizations say they need help guiding Vermont’s most vulnerable groups through the raft of new requirements. While some new ineligibility is unavoidable due to inflexible circumstances like visa status, they believe a large fraction of future losses could be avoided if Vermonters get access to appropriate help.
A coalition of 16 organizations across the state, including Hunger Free Vermont, the Vermont Parent Child Center Network and Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, has approached lawmakers with a proposal they say will equip local providers to help people navigate new requirements.
“We think it’s critical for Vermont to ensure that everyone who is eligible for health care and grocery benefits are able to stay enrolled,” said Ivy Enoch, director of policy and advocacy at Hunger Free Vermont. “It’s going to take the support of benefit assisters to help folks navigate this.”
The coalition’s proposal would disperse roughly $5 million to organizations in all corners of the state, primarily supporting new positions and training existing staff to help clients navigate complex paperwork and keep hold of their benefits.
In a tight budget year, a big-ticket proposal might be a stretch for budget writers — but legislative leadership believes support for constituents who face hunger and steep medical bills is a must.
Enoch’s organization already hosts trainings for providers who help applicants apply for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. The Department of Vermont Health Access runs a similar program for benefit assisters navigating health insurance systems. All providers participating in the proposal would expand their corps of staff trained in both areas, and increase their focus on keeping all clients up to date on required paperwork.
Last month’s attrition from SNAP, called 3SquaresVT in Vermont, occurred as federal rules went into effect eliminating proof-of-work exemptions for veterans, young adults exiting foster care and people experiencing homelessness. The federal budget law also increased the upper age limit for work requirements to 64, and narrowed an exemption for households with children.
Mike Fisher, the state’s health care advocate, said changes to Medicaid will be equally sweeping when they take effect next year. Work requirements will be introduced for some, and the “renewal” process — by which states confirm recipients still qualify for coverage — will occur every six months rather than annually for many adults in the program.
That renewal process is already a problem for Vermonters, Fisher noted. When people have been required to fill out paperwork in the past to re-enroll in Medicaid, he said, a “significant” fraction of them simply drop off the program after failing to complete the necessary steps. And as such requirements become more frequent, he worries that effect may worsen.
‘Be ready for virtually anything’
In a difficult budget year, $5 million is a big outlay for Vermont — and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act has already increased the state’s baseline cost for running benefit programs.
Changes to 3SquaresVT will saddle the Vermont Department for Children and Families with more than $5 million in extra administrative costs this year, department leadership estimated in a January budget report.
“The full impact of H.R. 1 (the federal budget bill) cannot be fully known at this time,” noted the report.
The Department of Vermont Health Access also told lawmakers this session that federal changes to Medicaid would increase their administrative workload significantly, requiring 12 new positions and roughly $1 million in total spending. Almost $300,000 will separately be needed just to print the extra letters necessary to inform Medicaid recipients of potential changes to their coverage.
Nonetheless, Fisher thinks the push to invest in the expertise of local benefit assisters makes “a lot of sense.”
“People turn to their community supports to get help,” he said. “The right way to reach them is through the natural connections they have in the community.”
Ellen Amstutz, who leads the Vermont Parent Child Center Network, which would be among the largest recipients under the provider coalition’s current proposal, said this proposed reinforcement of her colleagues’ work is a logical step. The state’s 15 parent child centers already help clients through such paperwork in their broad role as providers of child care, parent education and other support services.
Recently, Amstutz said, centers have found their resources increasingly stretched, in part due to widening gaps in social service programs.
“This would be an ideal way for us to really build the capacity and be ready for virtually anything that comes our way,” Amstutz said of the training proposal.
House Human Services Committee chair Rep. Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury, agreed. In a memo to House colleagues at work on next year’s budget, her committee recommended full funding for the plan in the strongest possible terms.
“It’s compelling,” she said in an interview of the coalition’s plan, given the “extraordinary” administrative burdens newly imposed on Vermonters under federal law. Due to time constraints, she added, most of the proposal “didn’t get the attention that it deserved” before the House’s version of the budget passed last month.
Wood recommended that her colleagues draw from a pot of money set aside last year to make up for cuts to federal grants. So far, the fund has been relatively untouched except for the state’s move to cover SNAP benefits for Vermonters during last fall’s federal shutdown.
Recent conversations with colleagues in both the House and Senate appropriations committees have left Wood optimistic that a somewhat slimmed-down version of the proposal will appear in the final version of the budget.
“If our partners at the federal level are not going to be partners in looking out for low-income individuals and people with disabilities,” Wood said, “then we’re going to do our best to do that here.”
