Kansas and Missouri have made progress to lower their food assistance program payment error rates, but still may have to pay millions for the program next year because of changes made in the One Big Beautiful bill.
States will have to pay a portion of their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits if their payment error rate is 6% or higher. Those states will also have to pay a higher share of administrative costs.
Under the current plan, Kansas would have to pay around $40 million, and Missouri’s share would be $151 million.
Elizabeth Keever is the chief resource officer with Harvesters, a regional food bank. She said this cost shift puts SNAP benefits at risk.
“There is a reality that if states can't pay and they simply don't have it in their budgets, the SNAP program in states will cease to exist,” Keever said. “And frankly, that's terrifying.”
Keever and others are seeking delays in the changes as states adapt.
The error rate is a measure of accuracy for SNAP food benefit payments. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, these payment errors are largely unintentional underpayments or overpayments. The error rate is not considered a metric for measuring fraud.
Every June, the USDA analyzes data collected from the states and uses it to determine national and state payment error rates.
The most recent national average payment error rate is 10.62%. Kansas had a rate of 9.4%, a slight decrease from 9.9% in 2024.
Missouri’s error rate is 8.7%, down from 9.42% in 2024.
Ty Jones Cox is the vice president for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research and policy institute. She said states are already erecting access barriers to SNAP because they’re concerned about the coming large payments.
“The only thing they can control is how to reduce their errors super quick, and that’s by making it more complicated for families to get on SNAP,” Jones Cox said.
These barriers include asking for more verification and asking people to renew certification more often, which can also reduce the program’s numbers as people get frustrated with the process and leave.
“It's really complicated when you have to verify everything from who's in your home, to maybe your medical expenses, to every detail of your life,” Jones Cox said.
Keever said the error rates have been affected by other factors aside from payment errors. The government shutdown last year created a lot of confusion around SNAP benefits being paid out.
“That really made opportunities for more technical errors to come out,” Keever said. “Any time that you divert from the normal process, you have challenges for there to be mistakes.”
The One Big Beautiful Bill also changed eligibility for certain individuals, with little time for state agencies to work out systems to implement the changes, Keever said. That also led to potentially more errors in the application process.
“There has not been enough time for agencies to be able to adequately lower their error rates,” Keever said. “Both Kansas and Missouri have made progress on getting theirs down, but it's not where we need to be.”
These complications from the cost shifts come as SNAP enrollment is dropping dramatically from cuts outlined in the One Big Beautiful Bill. Between last July, when the law was enacted, and April, SNAP participation fell by more than 4.5 million people nationwide, an 11% drop in nine months.
In Kansas, enrollment fell more than 21,000 in that time frame, a decrease of about 11%. In Missouri, there’s been almost a 50,000 drop in enrollment, a decrease of about 7%.
“SNAP is in the middle of the steepest, fastest decline in participation in decades, and it's not because the need is any lower,” Jones Cox said. “We are facing a hunger crisis that Congress has the power to mitigate if they course correct.”
Hunger relief agencies like Harvesters are urging lawmakers to delay the changes to SNAP until states can adjust. Letters signed by a bipartisan group of 210 mayors and the National Governors Association are both asking Congress the same thing.
“We need Congress to delay these changes, or else we are going to see the SNAP benefits disappear across the country, state by state, because states cannot afford the additional dollars for these programs,” Keever said.
Hunger relief agencies fear the ultimate result of the cost shift will be narrowing eligibility or states dropping SNAP altogether.
The American Public Human Services Association recently surveyed all 50 state SNAP agencies about their plans for dealing with the cost shift. In the survey, 29% of the states identified narrowing eligibility policies as a risk, and 11% of the states are considering withdrawal from SNAP.
Even if the action isn’t as drastic as withdrawing from SNAP, states will need to find some way to make up these costs. A delay would give states more time to figure out how to deal with the changes in a way that preserves hunger programs.
“We've heard of states saying they're no longer going to have universal school meals potentially,” Jones Cox said. “Some states are opting out of summer EBT. This is why states need more time, to both figure out and reduce their errors without cutting people off.”
Roger Nomer reports from the Wichita area for the Kansas News Service. You can email him at nomer@kmuw.org.
The Kansas News Service is a collaboration of KMUW, KCUR, Kansas Public Radio and High Plains Public Radio.
Kansas News Service stories and photos may be republished by news media at no cost with proper attribution and a link to ksnewsservice.org.
