Implementing Benefits Eligibility and Enrollment Systems StratML Part 1 rendition of the plan implicit in Beeck Center and Digital Government Hub publications on how states build, maintain, govern, and improve integrated eligibility and enrollment systems for core public benefits programs. The content of this StratML rendition has been inferred from the authoritative source documents with the assistance of ChatGPT. Principal source pages include the project overview, Executive Summary, Key Context, Insights on State Approaches and Processes, and State Responses to H.R. 1 pages on the Digital Government Hub. Implementing Benefits Eligibility and Enrollment Systems IEE Systems e9867e46-15c8-4a4a-a2ab-e5b7c54280c3 An inferred strategic plan for helping states and their partners design, govern, maintain, and improve integrated eligibility and enrollment systems that enable people to apply for and manage multiple public benefits through more coordinated processes. Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University The research organization leading the project documenting how states build and maintain integrated eligibility and enrollment systems. Digital Benefits Network The Beeck Center initiative under which this body of research was developed. Digital Government Network The broader Georgetown network identified with publication and dissemination of this research. State benefits agencies Primary implementers of integrated eligibility and enrollment systems for core benefits programs. State agency leaders Decision-makers responsible for governance, prioritization, budgeting, staffing, and coordination across program and technology functions. State policy teams Teams that interpret federal and state policy changes and provide direction for how rules should be reflected in system logic and operations. State technology teams Teams responsible for system architecture, development environments, testing, releases, interfaces, and maintenance. State procurement officials Officials responsible for contracting and vendor selection for eligibility systems and related services. Governor's offices Executive actors that shape priorities, budgets, and statewide performance expectations affecting benefits systems. State legislatures Legislative bodies that enact state policy, appropriate funding, and influence implementation priorities. Federal agencies Agencies that define program requirements, issue policy changes, and set compliance expectations for benefits administration. Congress The national legislative body whose enactments, including H.R. 1, can require substantial changes to state eligibility and enrollment systems. State administrators One of the intended audiences identified for the publications and an important user group for the recommended practices. Legislators One of the intended audiences for the executive summary and a stakeholder in policy, oversight, and resourcing. Advocates Intended users of the research and stakeholders in access, equity, accountability, and service quality. Delivery partners Organizations that help states implement, improve, or support benefits delivery systems and processes. Tech partners Technical collaborators and implementers involved in software development, systems integration, and modernization. Funders One of the audiences named in the Key Context publication and a stakeholder in capacity-building and reform efforts. Vendors Commercial providers of eligibility system software and implementation services in a market described as concentrated and weakly competitive. Applicants People seeking benefits who are affected by application burden, usability, identity proofing, interviews, and document verification processes. Beneficiaries People whose enrollment, renewal, and continued eligibility depend on system accuracy, policy translation, and operational effectiveness. Community-based organizations Partners mentioned in relation to implementation and outreach challenges, especially in the context of responding to H.R. 1. Tribal governments Governments specifically mentioned as stakeholders states need to engage when implementing policy and system changes. Labor unions Stakeholders in workforce impacts of automation and AI adoption in benefits administration. SNAP administrators Program leaders responsible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, one of the core programs commonly integrated into IEE systems. Medicaid administrators Program leaders responsible for Medicaid, a central program in integrated applications and a major focus of policy translation and compliance work. TANF administrators Program leaders responsible for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, one of the core programs included in many integrated systems. Child care administrators Program leaders responsible for child care assistance, another program area commonly incorporated into integrated systems. State benefits systems enable eligible people to access multiple programs through accurate, coordinated, efficient, and human-centered digital processes. 8ae01dbe-840e-482c-ae95-521d1034976c To support states and their partners in implementing integrated eligibility and enrollment systems that translate policy into code accurately, reduce burden, improve access, and adapt effectively to changing requirements. fde90d59-9378-4fef-a0ce-ffc99ed1cd7d Accuracy Ensure policy is translated into system logic correctly so eligibility determinations and renewals reflect governing rules. Accessibility Reduce redundant steps, usability barriers, and unnecessary burden for applicants and beneficiaries. Integration Coordinate processes, data, and systems across benefits programs so people can more easily access related services. Transparency Improve visibility into rules, governance decisions, testing, and system behavior. Coordination Bring policy, program, technology, procurement, and executive actors together to manage complexity across agencies and programs. Adaptability Maintain the capacity to respond to federal and state policy changes, operational needs, and emerging technologies. Access Enable people to apply for and manage multiple public benefits through more integrated and less burdensome processes. 50fbb3e8-b37e-4eae-bb44-11658e1c58b0 1 Applicants People who must navigate application, interview, and verification processes across one or more programs. Beneficiaries People whose access to benefits depends on the usability and accuracy of integrated systems. Applications Consolidate standalone application processes into integrated experiences covering multiple core programs where appropriate. 16b7882b-797d-4c59-9426-0a552cf5e11f 1.1 Burden Reduce duplicative questions, repeated document submission, multiple interviews, and other redundant steps for applicants. 54d51949-4732-49b8-9112-0cde7d0d12af 1.2 Enrollment Increase successful enrollment of eligible people by improving cross-program access and reducing barriers to completion. 9882495b-ef99-407b-94bf-aaf3b1030bc1 1.3 Translation Strengthen the interpretation and translation of policy and rules into software code and operational processes. 893dcae5-892f-4409-a8b9-af313f3a4c50 2 State policy teams Teams that interpret policy intent and communicate implementation requirements. State technology teams Teams that encode policy into system logic, workflows, interfaces, and data exchanges. Interpretation Improve shared understanding of how statutory, regulatory, and policy requirements should be represented in integrated systems. f053eb39-6f57-4851-8e1f-ed5c5df3cb99 2.1 Encoding Reduce errors and unintended consequences when translating human language rules into computer code. 9dd88dfa-6f70-475d-a794-65c68dc3810f 2.2 Maintenance Establish processes for updating encoded rules over time as laws, guidance, and operations change. 5170d1fd-c24b-495b-b7af-4a31a412afda 2.3 Governance Improve governance, prioritization, and cross-agency coordination for building and maintaining integrated eligibility and enrollment systems. 04a54a5d-47ce-4731-9a0e-d3071e28f8e3 3 State agency leaders Leaders who must prioritize changes, manage backlogs, and coordinate among programs and administrations. Governor's offices Executive stakeholders that influence priorities, budgets, and performance expectations. State legislatures Legislative stakeholders in appropriations, statutory changes, and oversight. Prioritization Create governance structures that help states rank and sequence policy, operational, and technical changes under constrained capacity. 357b71da-2572-48ba-9eb1-d604ffef3b05 3.1 Coordination Coordinate program, policy, and technical teams across agencies so one program's change does not create unintended harm in another. eebfc01f-a62e-47d6-842b-e7ec1202a72f 3.2 Roadmaps Maintain technology road maps that reflect planned releases, compliance dates, dependencies, and placeholders for emerging requirements. bf26c15b-14fe-49a9-962a-c1a19d4f4b02 3.3 Technology Modernize system architecture, data integration, testing, and documentation to improve reliability and adaptability. 0edbcb43-09f4-4eab-ba6d-9f874b43ddbf 4 State technology teams Teams responsible for architecture, interfaces, test environments, and documentation. Vendors External implementers and maintainers whose products and services shape state technology choices. Interfaces Manage data exchanges and system connections across federal, state, and third-party sources needed for eligibility and enrollment. ad112380-ba3f-4de1-93a1-57bae6a67be4 4.1 Testing Improve development and testing environments so states can simulate complex policy changes and assess likely impacts more accurately. d25421e8-8206-4815-94c0-20b5c967011a 4.2 Documentation Maintain technical documentation sufficient to explain system logic, support updates, and reduce dependence on implicit knowledge. 2956ec5f-3584-4a23-a9cd-7d273f069edb 4.3 Procurement Strengthen procurement and vendor management so states can obtain more suitable, competitive, and innovative technology support. adfb78b3-a1c0-42db-a8f4-f9d099ebec49 5 State procurement officials Officials responsible for contract strategy and vendor selection. Vendors Commercial actors competing, or failing to compete, in the eligibility systems market. Competition Increase competition and improve states' ability to distinguish among vendor offerings in a concentrated market. 9d78a574-e6ba-4cdd-8823-3fcca5d672ae 5.1 Fit Select and manage vendors based on actual program, policy, and technical needs rather than packaging similarity or market incumbency. 3ee1a7c5-713c-433b-95fd-5627a77a724a 5.2 Innovation Encourage solutions that better support flexibility, transparency, and responsiveness to changing benefits requirements. e1b039af-6645-44b5-b3e1-393bcc18e1ea 5.3 Automation Adopt automation and AI cautiously and responsibly where they can improve implementation without undermining rights, security, or service quality. bd987620-9a56-4b2f-9cb3-d4901203a054 6 State agency leaders Leaders who decide whether and how AI or automation should be adopted. Labor unions Stakeholders in workforce effects, role changes, and protections associated with automation. Evaluation Assess automation and AI use cases in light of risks to clients, systems, staff, and compliance obligations. 4e2a7863-a98e-424b-865c-1da3ec91a2a9 6.1 Guidance Develop and apply governance guidance on how agencies may adopt automation and AI in benefits administration. ede935db-bf19-47d3-8d2f-1edfcd5518ff 6.2 Protection Protect fairness, privacy, security, and workforce rights when introducing automated tools into benefits operations. ed2a9e9b-8c7c-42c7-9a29-9bf4a7618bdc 6.3 Compliance Prepare integrated eligibility and enrollment systems to respond effectively to major federal policy changes, including those enacted under H.R. 1. f95e4625-7d2d-4a54-ab29-b26195648ba4 7 Federal agencies Sources of program guidance, deadlines, and implementation requirements affecting state systems. Community-based organizations Partners states may need to engage in implementation, outreach, and problem-solving. Tribal governments Governments states may need to engage when implementing policy and operational changes. Analysis Analyze federal statutory and agency changes quickly enough to inform program, policy, and technology planning. 269aad68-af42-443c-8b0f-606e0b0940ef 7.1 Placeholders Reserve capacity on technology road maps for compliance-related system changes and release planning. 6b0aaeb8-65b0-4e32-831c-64a738e2c93c 7.2 Engagement Coordinate cross-agency and external stakeholder engagement to address reporting, customer flow, and implementation impacts. 60ed986b-40df-4ca7-ae03-aa6aa3a9a749 7.3 2026-03-09 https://digitalgovernmenthub.org/get-involved/implementing-benefits-eligibility-enrollment-systems-a-review-of-state-practices/ Owen Ambur Owen.Ambur@verizon.net