Why was the Michigan Program a Success?

a) Long-Term Investment in Data Systems

One crucial reason that Michigan was able to get their program off the ground quickly was its long-term investment in data infrastructure and cross-agency partnerships. As one official reported, the state has an updated reporting database in place and is already reporting school district data to the state. They also have data-sharing agreements in place with the DHHS.

This cross-agency partnership is 20 years old. In 2000, an executive order created the Center for Education Performance and Information (CEPI) as part of the State Budget Office with the purpose of coordinating the collection, management, and reporting of education data. In 2002, CEPI started collecting student data, assigning each student a unique identification code. By 2003, CEPI and the MDE was collecting student records three times per year, including addresses and eligibility for NSLP.

In 2007, CEPI and MDE began a partnership with DHHS to automate certifying students for free and reduced price meals. DHHS provided CEPI the records of children in households receiving SNAP or TANF. In the following years, the system was modified and improved, and CEPI, DHHS, and MDE expanded existing data sharing agreements.

Today, CEPI maintains records of all students eligible for NSLP based on migrant status, homelessness status, foster home status, Head Start enrollment, Medicaid enrollment, SNAP enrollment, TANF enrollment, and application-based criteria.

This investment paid off during the pandemic because they were able to use this existing data system to determine which students were eligible for P-EBT. For those already receiving SNAP, DHHS added the additional P-EBT benefit to their existing cards. The state also sent cards to those who were eligible but not already receiving benefits. This demonstrates that high quality data is critical for adequately responding to a crisis and can be repurposed in an emergency to better serve constituents.

b) Reduction of Administrative Hurdles

There were two main administrative hurdles that Michigan was able to eliminate. First, by using administrative data instead of requiring an application, families did not have to learn about the program, gather information, or have access to the internet to apply. All of these requirements are compounding barriers to access, and would have slowed down the process and delayed families from receiving their benefits. By using a data matching process, these delays were eliminated, and families received the help they needed quickly and efficiently. The state took on the administrative cost of distributing benefits, not the individual.

Second, Michigan received permission to provide the entire P-EBT benefit to children who were eligible at any point during the period in which P-EBT was distributed. For example, if a child became eligible in June, and not April, they would still receive benefits that covered the entire four month period. This means that the state did not have to create a recertification process, nor a procedure to provide different benefit levels to different families. FNS allowed Michigan to prioritize access, which enabled DHHS to get benefits out faster to families.

c) Collaboration Across all Levels of Government

As one administrator stated, they “knew immediately from the outset to not let this opportunity pass to bring money to Michigan families, and we had support from the administration to do what we needed to get it done. The approach we took was that this has to happen. We had lots of conversations based on the idea that this had to happen.” This level of commitment came both from the governor's office and across all levels of the MDE and DHHS.

Before the legislation was even passed, the administration made it clear that this was a priority, and that the P-EBT program needed to be implemented quickly. This high level mandate, as well as inter-agency collaboration, allowed the project to be prioritized and executed quickly. Without this level of executive buy-in, the significant investment in data-sharing and coordination across departments would not have been possible. This experience highlights the need for government actors to work in concert to ensure their constituents receive the benefits they need.