Hhs Computer Matching Agreement

The matching title II-NDNH program is justified because the use of NDNH information by sSAs supports program management and reduces excessive payments. It also complies with the Government Accountability Office`s recommendations to improve the SSA`s ability to effectively identify federal public servants who may receive overpayments, recover debts and avoid excess payments by providing more timely information on the incomes of FDI recipients who may be working. There is no other administrative activity that can fulfill the same objective and provide the same safety precautions with the same degree of effectiveness as the matching title II-NDNH program. Description: This matching program defines the safety conditions and precautions in which the Centers for Medicare – Medicaid Services (CMS) Of Social Security (SSA) Medicare reveals non-use information for Title II Social Security recipients from the age of 90. Description: This matching agreement includes the following information exchange operations between OCSE and SSA of the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH): Online access to the Security Supplement (SSI), Disability Insurance (DI) and Ticket-to-Work and Self-Suffficiency (Ticket) programs and SSI Quarterly Batch Batch Match. This agreement helps SSA determine or verify eligibility or payment amounts, or both under the ISS program; (2) determining or verifying eligibility or continuing eligibility under the FDI program; and (3) managing ticket programs. After verifying previously unknown revenues, the government agencies participating in the GJ2018 jointly reported the closure or reduction of benefits for 140,535 cases. As a result, SNAP`s government agencies avoided some $27.687,975 million in inappropriate payments to SNAP recipients, with previously unknown revenues. The savings are due to employment and salary information from the DNAP-NDNH Computer-Matching program; Therefore, information about use in the correspondence program is always warranted. The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (the Act), Pub.L.100-503, amends the Privacy Act of 1974 and establishes procedural safeguards that compromise the use of Privacy Act data by authorities in the execution of certain types of computerized matching programs. The law regulates the use of computer registration by federal authorities, who are required to keep personally identifiable data records in a recording system subject to the Data Protection Act.

The law requires agencies to have written agreements setting out the conditions under which matches must be implemented. The law applies to computerized comparison between federal authorities of two or more automated data sets (or federal personnel or wage settlement systems) or between a federal authority and a non-federal authority. Computer matching programs are more often indicated than computer or CMA agreement agreements. Please indicate whether a cost-benefit analysis was conducted, the results of the cost-benefit analysis, and an explanation of why the Agency pursued a matching program for which the results of the cost-benefit analysis did not demonstrate that the program is likely to be cost-effective.