Do people lie about FARMS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:facts always help.
Here is a link to this year's application from fairfax county- http://www.fcps.edu/fs/food/serve/documents/FRAppFormWLetterInstructions.pdf
It clearly states that all members of the household must be listed, and defines household as anyone living with you.
44Kper year for a family of 4 will get you reduced price meals- not free. Anything over that and you get nothing. (unless you have more kids.)

Knowledge helps too.

You do have to list everyone, much like you list everyone on a SNAP application. They do not consider the income of non-immediate family members in eligibility determination.

- Signed, someone who used to do this for a living

[Anonymous]

The problem is that people DO lie about how many are in the household. Of course, it is better to overlook this than to deprive the needy, but do not be deceived. There are many who take advantage of the system.

I taught two kids who lived with their grandma. I assume the grandmas were getting aid for the kids. Both were on free lunch--not reduced. During the school year, each child took a trip to two distant cities to visit their moms. Why? So she could collect welfare for them in that city. (The kids themselves told me this.)

[Anonymous]

Without a doubt, people lie (or are not fully forthcoming) regarding their household income. The ES I'm zoned for (Saratoga) has a 45% FARMs rate, but according to census statistics for Newington CDP, the poverty rate is 4.1% with a median household income of $133,456. There is no way 45% of the children attending Saratoga live in households with less income than the poverty line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is supposedly 6% farms. Which I find amazing because that means 45 kids/750.

In our district there are ZERO apartments and ZERO condos. I am not exaggerating. Literally zero. The cheapest townhome is worth $350k and rents for $1800/month. There is no Section 8 or anything like that.

So even figuring 2 kids per family on average, there are 22 families so poor they qualify for FARMS? I have a hard time believing that.

Foster kids?

Families doubled up with relatives in their home?

Families who bought their home in better times, and are now experiencing extended unemployment?

Widow trying to stretch out a life insurance payment?

Housekeeper or other domestic servant with an exception to bring their child to the school by their work?

Kids being brought in for a special education program?

But if you livibg with grandparents, shouldn't that factor into the FARMS formula? What is they are rich? Also, widows in a nice house with life insurance are not poor even if they have no income. Maybe these people do wualify but that seems unethical to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A neighbor of mine and her husband lied about their income so that their daughter would have preference in Montessori for APS. She had a few too many glasses of wine one night when we were hanging out with other neighbors and told me-well, more like bragged about it.

Her husband is self-employed and does a lot of his business in cash. He makes a lot more than he reports.

She was wasn't really working at the time.

She has her own business now and has classified it as a non-profit. There is NO way her business is a non-profit. Lies, lies, lies.

Did the Montissori not ask for any verification? (In FFX so I don't know how that works?)

They did, but reported income was much lower than actual income.

So they are just cheaters all around? Cheating on their income taxes, which allows them to cheat to get into Montessori at reduced tuition, too? That's extra crappy, because it's taking the spot from someone who might really need the assistance to afford preschool for their child. Gross.

Yep. Cheaters all around. Her husband gets paid in cash for a lot of the work he does. They only report income when he gets paid by checks, I guess.

Her business is not a cash business, but she has set it up as a non-profit (trust me it's not) so she can reap those benefits.

They are totally gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that people DO lie about how many are in the household. Of course, it is better to overlook this than to deprive the needy, but do not be deceived. There are many who take advantage of the system.

I taught two kids who lived with their grandma. I assume the grandmas were getting aid for the kids. Both were on free lunch--not reduced. During the school year, each child took a trip to two distant cities to visit their moms. Why? So she could collect welfare for them in that city. (The kids themselves told me this.)

How do you know grandma was getting aid?

The way cash assistance works, if they were majority with grandma, she is entitled to get the TANF. If mom was also getting it, that is mom committing fraud. However, mom could have been getting the SNAP benefits. They only have to be there part time for the SNAP. There is nothing illegal about that scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Without a doubt, people lie (or are not fully forthcoming) regarding their household income. The ES I'm zoned for (Saratoga) has a 45% FARMs rate, but according to census statistics for Newington CDP, the poverty rate is 4.1% with a median household income of $133,456. There is no way 45% of the children attending Saratoga live in households with less income than the poverty line.

You do not know what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school is supposedly 6% farms. Which I find amazing because that means 45 kids/750.

In our district there are ZERO apartments and ZERO condos. I am not exaggerating. Literally zero. The cheapest townhome is worth $350k and rents for $1800/month. There is no Section 8 or anything like that.

So even figuring 2 kids per family on average, there are 22 families so poor they qualify for FARMS? I have a hard time believing that.

Foster kids?

Families doubled up with relatives in their home?

Families who bought their home in better times, and are now experiencing extended unemployment?

Widow trying to stretch out a life insurance payment?

Housekeeper or other domestic servant with an exception to bring their child to the school by their work?

Kids being brought in for a special education program?

But if you livibg with grandparents, shouldn't that factor into the FARMS formula? What is they are rich? Also, widows in a nice house with life insurance are not poor even if they have no income. Maybe these people do wualify but that seems unethical to me.

No. Just because grandma provides a place to live doesn't mean they have any legal responsibility to provide money to their adult children. They are not counted if the adult child is over 22 (SNAP) or 18 (TANF.) It doesn't matter who COULD afford to help. It matters who has the legal responsibility to do so.

SNAP has resource limits. TANF does not. Someone with life insurance but no income might qualify for TANF. you might not like that, but that's the law. If people are following the law, you can't fault them for being unethical. Fault your lawmakers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Without a doubt, people lie (or are not fully forthcoming) regarding their household income. The ES I'm zoned for (Saratoga) has a 45% FARMs rate, but according to census statistics for Newington CDP, the poverty rate is 4.1% with a median household income of $133,456. There is no way 45% of the children attending Saratoga live in households with less income than the poverty line.

You do realize your little neighborhood is not the only one feeding into Saratoga, right?

[Anonymous]

You can be "legal" and still be a freeloader. But entitlement programs are full of fraud and the government doesn't give a shit, which really pisses me off. I have no trouble helping people truly in need. Why is it so hard to distinguish them from the rest?!?

[Anonymous]

FCPS requires no proof of income eligibility. When you get increased federal funding if you have greater numbers of FARM students, what incentive is there to require proof of eligibility? Whatever. I honestly don't care that much. What I think is silly is some of the people on boards like this who think FARMs rates are some sort of reliable measurement of actual poverty. They aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can be "legal" and still be a freeloader. But entitlement programs are full of fraud and the government doesn't give a shit, which really pisses me off. I have no trouble helping people truly in need. Why is it so hard to distinguish them from the rest?!?

I'm a foster parent, which means my foster children get free lunch-- no doubt bumping up some of those percentages you see in otherwise high income areas.
I certainly can afford to pay for lunch for the kids- I'm curious if you consider me to be a 'legal' freeloader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can be "legal" and still be a freeloader. But entitlement programs are full of fraud and the government doesn't give a shit, which really pisses me off. I have no trouble helping people truly in need. Why is it so hard to distinguish them from the rest?!?

Untrue, every county has dedicated fraud investigators. If you know of someone freeloading, make an anonymous referral. If you are just speculating, well LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FCPS requires no proof of income eligibility. When you get increased federal funding if you have greater numbers of FARM students, what incentive is there to require proof of eligibility? Whatever. I honestly don't care that much. What I think is silly is some of the people on boards like this who think FARMs rates are some sort of reliable measurement of actual poverty. They aren't.

They require proof for SNAP and TANF, which most FARMS students are. For everyone else, they take a random sampling of income - ie audit style. It's all listed on the federal program/USDA website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can be "legal" and still be a freeloader. But entitlement programs are full of fraud and the government doesn't give a shit, which really pisses me off. I have no trouble helping people truly in need. Why is it so hard to distinguish them from the rest?!?

I'm a foster parent, which means my foster children get free lunch-- no doubt bumping up some of those percentages you see in otherwise high income areas.
I certainly can afford to pay for lunch for the kids- I'm curious if you consider me to be a 'legal' freeloader.

No.