![]() To collect the repayments – some as high as $187,000 – the state garnished wages, levied bank accounts and intercepted tax refunds. Without any human intervention, the state demanded repayments plus interest and civil penalties of four times the alleged amount owed. The results for low-income families with little margin for error can be disastrous.įor instance, in Michigan, a $47 million automated fraud detection system adopted in 2013 made roughly 48,000 fraud accusations against unemployment insurance recipients – a five-fold increase from the prior system. They analyze large sets of data to recognize patterns or make predictions.īut officials should approach these systems with caution. Some algorithms use machine learning – a form of artificial intelligence – to replace decisions that would otherwise be made by humans. These types of automated decision-making systems rely on algorithms, or mathematical instructions. And the federal government is providing support to state Medicaid programs to upgrade their decades-old technology with more advanced software. Another report identified 20 states using AI tools in unemployment insurance. Many states have begun using “sophisticated data mining” techniques to identify fraud in the food stamp program, according to the General Accountability Office. Nonetheless, many states seem to be adopting systems that assume criminal intent on the part of the needy. Spencer Platt/Getty Images When algorithms fail There’s little evidence of fraud in the food stamps program. Have been made or that were made in an incorrect amount, but intentional fraud estimates are much lower. Within unemployment insurance, the “improper payment” rate for 2019 is 10.6%, which includes payments that should not Despite regular denigration of food stamp recipients, less than 1% of benefits go to ineligible households, according to the federal government.Īnd, of those families, the majority of overpayments result from mistakes by recipients, state workers or computer programmers as they navigate complex regulatory requirements – not any intent to defraud the system.Īs for Medicaid, which provides health insurance for low-income people, research has shown that the bulk of fraudulent activity is committed by health care providers – not by the 64 million needy people that use the program. ![]() ![]() Facts about fraudįirst, it’s important to make one thing clear: The evidence suggests incidents of user fraud in government welfare programs are rare.įor instance, the food stamp program, formally called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, currently serves about 40 million people monthly at an annual cost of US$68 billion. As a clinical law professor who has researched safety net programs and has represented low-income clients in public benefits cases for over 20 years, I believe it’s essential these systems are designed in ways that are fair, transparent and accountable to prevent hurting society’s most vulnerable.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |