Putting Tribal Sovereignty
FAYETTEVILLE, ARK. – The recently introduced Native Children’s Commission Implementation Act (S.4976) advances Tribal food sovereignty by establishing two new demonstration projects for Tribal Nations to administer the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and certain child nutrition programs. However, the legislation does not explicitly exempt participating Tribal Nations from benefit cost-share requirements for SNAP, which would likely deter Tribal Nations from participating if it becomes law.
Led by Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), this bipartisan bill seeks to implement recommendations from the Alyce Spotted Bear & Walter Soboleff Commission on Native Children to improve the health and wellbeing of Native families and children. As a whole, this legislation addresses long-standing failures to support and protect Native children and advances pragmatic, Tribally-supported solutions for improving child welfare, physical and behavioral health, housing, workforce development, and education.
If signed into law, the legislation would increase federal funding for school meals in Indian Country, provide free school meals to all Native youth, and enable Tribes to assume administration of certain child nutrition programs through a pilot demonstration project. The legislation also establishes a demonstration project for Tribes to administer SNAP. Despite these important advances, however, the SNAP demonstration project lacks a clear path for funding. In addition, although it would cover Tribe’s administrative costs for operating SNAP, it does not provide robust protection against the new SNAP cost-share requirements for benefits. Tribal Nations will likely find it challenging to participate in the SNAP pilot due to these issues.
SNAP Tribal Pilot Program
The legislation would establish a pilot program for Tribal Nations to administer SNAP. Under the pilot, participating Tribal Nations in the lower 48 states and Tribal entities in Alaska would receive 3-year grants on a competitive basis to administer SNAP in their service area. Priority would be given to Tribes with demonstrated administrative capacity, previous experience working with States to administer SNAP, and located across the country. At least one Tribal entity in Alaska and five Tribes in the lower 48 states would be selected for participation in the first year of the pilot; up to one additional Tribal entity in Alaska and five additional Tribes in the lower 48 may be selected to participate in each subsequent year.
Funding would be provided directly to the Tribe (not passed through State agencies), and USDA would fully reimburse the costs of administering SNAP for participating Tribes. By contrast, States currently have an administrative cost share of 50%, which will rise to 75% in October 2026. In the lower 48 states, the program would be administered as a cooperative agreement between the Tribal Nation, USDA, and state agencies.
However, the legislation does not make clear whether a participating Tribal Nation would be subject to cost-share requirements for SNAP benefits that begin in fall 2027. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), States will be newly responsible for contributing 5-15% of the cost of SNAP benefits, with the percentage based on the State’s payment error rate. Previously, the federal government covered 100% of the cost of SNAP benefits.
The proposed legislation includes protections for States, ensuring that a State’s payment error rates will not be impacted by households served through the Tribal pilot. However, it is unclear if participating Tribes will be similarly protected from paying a cost-share based on the State’s payment error rate. It is also unclear if participating Tribes could be responsible for a benefits cost-share based on the payment error rate in their service area, rather than the state’s payment error rate. A section in the bill titled “Exemption from matching fund requirements” may aim to protect Tribes from a benefits cost-share, but lack of clarity in definitions means this section may not achieve its intended purpose.
A SNAP benefit cost-share requirement to participate in the pilot would be prohibitive for most, if not all, Tribal Nations. The Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) estimates the new benefits cost share requirement will cost States tens to hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Tribal Nations, who often have limited tax revenue and non-federal sources of funding, would likely not be able to absorb this increased cost of SNAP, even though the pilot reimburses all of a Tribe’s administrative costs.
In addition, the legislation does not set aside funding or authorize new funding for this pilot program. Presumably, the SNAP pilot would need to be funded out of the regular SNAP appropriation, which Congress has been keen to reduce in recent years to lower federal spending on the program. The application of a benefits cost-share to States in OBBBA is a good example of recent federal fiscal policy regarding SNAP, which focuses on the States paying additional costs and the federal government paying fewer costs. This situation will present a challenge to Tribes in seeking to fund key elements of the pilot program. Even if a Tribe is willing to take the risk of a benefit cost-share, Tribes will likely need federal support for key necessities required to implement the program, such as hiring new staff, equipment and software purchases, and training. Without new funding, these start-up costs would need to come from limited SNAP administrative funds, reducing the reach of the program.
For participating Tribes in the lower 48 states, the legislation does not provide information on how administrative funds for States may be impacted by the pilot program. In Alaska, administrative funds allocated to participating Tribal entities would be deducted from federal administrative funds for the State. If a similar approach is taken in the lower 48 states, this sets up a situation where States and Tribes may be competing for limited federal dollars. States may be reluctant to enter cooperative agreements with Tribes and the Federal government under this program if it could lead to loss of administrative funds.
Finally, it should be noted that some of the key definitions utilized in the Tribal SNAP pilot do not always align exactly with the same terms in the Food and Nutrition Act (FNA) of 2008, which this legislation amends. For example, the term “Tribal Organization” is used throughout the FNA, but the bill’s definition of “tribal pilot participant” does not fully incorporate FNA’s definition of Tribal Organization. This, and other definitional mismatches, could lead to implementation challenges for USDA if this bill becomes law.
Child Nutrition Programs Tribal Pilot Projects
The Native Children’s Commission Implementation Act also makes several changes strengthening school meal programs for Native children. First, the bill would allow USDA to adjust payment rates for school meals for schools in or around Indian reservations and in geographic areas serving BIA-funded schools. The cost of food is often much higher in Indian Country compared to national average, so this change may help ensure payment rates reflect the actual cost of food in Indian Country.
Second, the legislation would allow schools to automatically provide Native youth with free school meals without requiring additional paperwork certifying household income. This “categorical eligibility” simplifies the process for accessing free school meals for Native families while reducing administrative burden for schools. Currently youth in households receiving assistance from certain programs, including the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) and SNAP, and youth who are migrants, homeless, or in foster care are also categorically eligible for free school meals.
Many Tribes already successfully and efficiently administer federal nutrition programs for children, including the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), which provides supplemental foods for pregnant and breastfeeding women and children under the age of five, and Summer EBT, which provides grocery benefits to families with school aged children during the summer break. This pilot program builds on these successes, advancing Tribal sovereignty and access to food for Native youth.