The Department of Transitional Assistance is buckling under surging SNAP caseloads and chronic understaffing, leaving Massachusetts at risk of hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties under federal law.
A new Massachusetts Law Reform Institute report warns that mounting administrative strain, long wait times and steep federal accuracy requirements could force the state to pay up to 15% of all SNAP benefits issued if it cannot dramatically improve its error rate under the One Big Beautiful Bill. Advocates say the consequences could hit both the state budget and the low-income families who rely on the program.
The state’s SNAP caseload remains 42% higher than before the pandemic — growth driven by elevated food costs, ongoing economic strain and recent state efforts to connect more households that receive MassHealth insurance benefits to food benefits as well. But the number of DTA caseworkers has not kept pace. The average worker now handles roughly 1,300 cases, up from 800 to 900 prior to 2020.
The pressure is showing. Three-quarters of callers attempting to reach a caseworker cannot get through, according to DTA records cited in the report.
In July and August, 93% of SNAP recipients — typically people trying to report changes that affect eligibility — were unable to connect at any point during the month.
“The consequences of not being able to get through are severe,” said Vicky Negus, a senior policy advocate at MLRI. “It causes eligible families to be denied or terminated from SNAP because they can’t get the help they need to navigate the check boxes and the red tape involved.”
Negus said the access barrier has eroded trust in the system, leaving both clients and workers “overtaxed and overstressed.”
The Legislature and Healey administration funded 300 additional caseworkers in fiscal year 2024, posted about 75 more positions this year and approved $10 million for operational enhancement at DTA related to improving recipients’ access to SNAP benefits. However, Negus said the system still remains far short of what is needed.
“These steps are huge and great and beneficial, and we need an additional investment on top of those,” she said.
Federal requirements, federal penalties
Under the One Big Beautiful Bill, states must keep their annual SNAP payment error rate below 6% or face a state-funded “price tag” equal to 5, 10 or 15% of all SNAP benefits issued for at least two years beginning in October 2027. The error rate measures administrative mistakes in a small sample of cases, Negus said.
She said that it does not measure fraud, but the errors that both recipients and DTA caseworkers make while navigating the complicated system — exacerbated by understaffing.
Proponents of the federal law say the reforms were needed to ensure accountability and curb what they view as systemic inefficiencies and overspending in food assistance programs. Under current law, state agencies do not contribute toward the cost of benefits. The new measure changes that — requiring states to pay a portion of SNAP benefits when their error rates climb above 6%.
Republicans Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman of Arkansas and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson of Pennsylvania argued the change will incentivize accuracy and ensure states “have skin in the game.”
“The status quo … has failed at maintaining program integrity in SNAP,” said a joint statement from the chairmen, per FOX Business News. “These historic reforms will give states skin in the game on SNAP benefits and ensure they have a real incentive to improve oversight and stop improper payments before they happen.”
Under the law, the cost-share structure scales with a state’s error rate: states with error rates of 6% to 8% will contribute 5%, 8% to 10% will pay 10%, and 10% or greater will pay 15% of benefit costs.
They argue that by shifting more responsibility to states, the program will operate more efficiently, with better oversight and fewer improper payments.
Massachusetts’s payment error rate was 14.1% in federal fiscal year 2024, the report said, citing federal data. DTA recently told stakeholders it expects the FY25 rate to be about 11% — an improvement, but still far above the federal threshold.
“If in FY26 the state’s error rate is not below 6%, then Massachusetts will have this price tag for two years,” Negus said.
For a 10% penalty level — triggered if the error rate lands between 8 and 10% — MLRI estimates the state would owe about $250 million per year, or roughly $500 million over two years.
“When it’s very difficult to get help from the department, the rate of mistakes is higher,” Negus said.
Staffing fix may not prevent penalties — but advocates say it’s necessary
MLRI is urging the state to hire roughly 200 additional full-time caseworkers to restore pre-pandemic workload levels and improve accuracy.
“If the staffing hole was fully filled tomorrow, it’s possible that it won’t have been done in time,” to avoid penalties for FY26, Negus said. “But it is the step that would put Massachusetts… in the best possible posture to improve accuracy.”
The OBBB’s payment error rate policy continues in future fiscal years as well, so Negus said the sooner Massachusetts reduces mistakes in the system, the less they’ll owe over time.
She said the hiring push is essential not only to save money but to address what she described as ongoing human harm.
“There’s the real human cost for our neighbors who are struggling to eat… and it’s happening now,” she said. “It is simply impossible” for every eligible family to access SNAP “with the current level of staffing.”
According to Negus, adding 200 workers would cost “somewhere in the ballpark of $30 million” based on union salary scales — a fraction of the potential two-year penalty under federal law.
Though DTA’s overall SNAP caseload has begun to decline, MLRI attributes part of the drop to residents’ inability to reach the agency. Children’s participation fell 7% between August 2024 and August 2025, even as unemployment, food prices and emergency food demand rose.
The report warns that the combination of diminishing access, heightened administrative burdens and steep federal penalties creates a “perfect storm” that could push more eligible families off the rolls while costing the state hundreds of millions of dollars.
