NON REPRESENTATIVE PAY VERIFICATION

PRESENTED BY THE SOUTH REGION

WE WANT YOU !1. To be able to determine what representative

pay verification is, and what it isn’t.

2. To understand why it is, or isn’t, representative.

3. To have a clear grasp of what needs to be narrated regarding what was used, and why.

WORK NUMBER VERIFICATION

New SNAP case.

Filing date: 9/7/16

Work # (at time of the interview)

New job. 8/13 is first paycheck

(Notice, there is no 8/20 week pay visible)

Pay Period

End DatePay Date

Hours

Worked

Gross

Earnings

09/03/2016 09/10/2016 19.87 $210.32

08/27/2016 09/03/2016 32.17 $342.46

08/20/2016 08/27/2016 9.83 $102.52

08/06/2016 08/13/2016 34.64 $356.79

Historical Pay Period Summary

How would you address this case?

WORK NUMBER VERIFICATION

The worker narrated that pay date 8/20 was not used, since it wasn’t on Work # and customer didn’t know why.

Observations: 1st The 8/13 stub might not be representative since it was his first (and, likely, included training hours) 2nd Three weeks is not a month’s verification of income. 3rd 8/27 pay should have been excluded from calculation, as it is significantly less.

Conclusion: Not enough information to develop a good anticipation of income.

Pay Period

End DatePay Date

Hours

Worked

Gross

Earnings

09/03/2016 09/10/2016 19.87 $210.32

08/27/2016 09/03/2016 32.17 $342.46

08/20/2016 08/27/2016 9.83 $102.52

08/06/2016 08/13/2016 34.64 $356.79

Historical Pay Period Summary

Wkr used: 8/13, 8/27, 9/3 & 9/10 pay dates. $1012.09 / 4 x 4.3 =$1087.99

Case # 2

What was reported on the application: • $13.25/hr• 40hrs/wk• Paid Bi-weekly

This check is not representative, as it only reflects 40 hrs for the pay period

This check is representative ,40 hrs wk

Case # 3

7/16-7/22

• 40 hrs reg

• 7.73 ot

• 10.75 hr reg

• 16.125 ot

• Total=554.65

7/23-7/29

• 31.20 hrs reg

• 0.47 ot

• 10.75 hr reg

• 16.125 ot

• Total=342.98

8/6-8/12

• 40 hr reg

• 7.97 ot hrs

• 10.75 hr reg

• 16.125 ot

• Total=558.52

7/30-8/05

• 40.0 hrs reg

• 8.27 ot

• 10.75 hr reg

• 16.125 hr ot

• Total=563.35

Not representative! Reg., OT, and gross income much less

Need another week’s worth of verification or speak with employer

One pay stub is ½ the hours/pay of the other.

Address the difference in hrs/pay

Request more verification or speak with the employer

Case #4

Worker added the two for a monthly total, ignoring the differences.

FIRST STUB FROM NEW JOB

First check from new employment is often not representative of on-going pay

Customer anticipated 17 hrs/wk, so this stub would be representative (…unless worker gets contradictory information )

Case #5

Worker used 8/26, 9/02, 9/09, and 9/16 dates

Paid weekly

Correct # of pay stubs used

Case #6

Is the 8 hrs used from 9/16 representative?Pay history says “no” Needs a more representative pay period

New job

Worker only used 1st pay check received

Customer said it was “representative”

Is this a “month’s worth” of verification?

Is customer’s statement sufficient information?

Worker needs to verify with employer it is representative of future eml.

Case #7

If the employer will not provide any further information, we may use what we have and review at 6 months

THIS BRINGS US TO THE END OF OUR TRAINING FROM THE SOUTHERN OREGON REGION

South Region Reviewers:John PetersDan BlesseTracy SmithLinda JohnstonTara Holcomb

Further Questions? You can reach our region’s Outlook mailbox at: PROGRAM ACCURACY –South Region