HARTFORD, CT — The number of state residents receiving federal food assistance fell by more than 62,000 recipients over the last year as a result of changes to eligibility in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA) – nearly twice as many recipients as state agencies’ worst-case scenarios projected.
That was the topline takeaway in a new report released Thursday by the nonprofit advocacy group CT Voices for Children. Titled Shifting Costs, Eroding Access, the report details the impacts that expanded work requirements for recipients and cost-shifting from the federal government to state governments has had over the last fiscal year.
The report also outlines changes to the formula for cost sharing between states and the federal government that could put Connecticut on the hook for potentially hundreds of millions of dollars.
“The central finding here is relatively simple,” Emily Knox, research and policy director at CT Voices for Children, said during a media presentation to present the report’s findings. “OBBA is shifting costs and responsibility away from the federal government while making food assistance harder to access.”
Overall, statewide SNAP enrollment declined from 359,811 to 297,041 recipients between July 2025 and July 2026. The decrease represents a 17.5% drop in statewide SNAP enrollment. Projections from the state Department of Social Services (DSS) had estimated that 24,000-36,000 state residents could lose access to food benefits. All together, the state stands to lose over $155 million in annual SNAP benefits.
According to the report, smaller communities including Windham, New London, Ansonia, and others are being particularly hard hit by the loss of SNAP benefits.
Knox said that the loss of benefits for residents includes a ripple effect for local economies and state coffers, as food benefits are typically spent quickly in local communities and generate economic benefits far above their purchasing power.
In a recent interview with NPR, the Trump administration argued “the law signed by President Trump had strengthened SNAP for future generations and provided tax cuts that improved all Americans’ financial situations.” Federal funding for SNAP stopped at the end of September 2025, but states with leftover money have until the end of this September to spend it.
Dr. Amy Chai, a Republican running for election in the 1st Congressional District this fall, said she supports provisions of OBBA that restrict SNAP benefits for non-citizens who once qualified for them, such as refugees and asylum seekers.
“I see many of my own addicted and homeless patients getting fewer aid dollars than non-citizens,” she said. “That is not fair. We are a very compassionate nation, but we cannot afford to feed the world.”
Chai said she also supports work requirements for able-bodied and mentally well adults, and that SNAP benefits should be reserved for veterans and citizens who are truly in need.
In addition to reducing SNAP enrollment, the OBBA also shifts significant costs for running the SNAP program from the federal government to the states. Beginning in FY 2027, the federal share of eligible administrative costs falls from 50% to 25%, raising Connecticut’s cost share by $46 million per year to roughly $120 million. The following year, changes to payment error rate penalties will add an additional annual obligation between $85 to $89 million.
Ruchi Sheth, research and policy associate at CT Voices for Children, called the projections for administrative cost increases conservative, stating that rule changes and uncertainty carry unpredictable costs.
“Federal law does not implement itself,” she said. “Agencies have to translate statutory language into notices, technology changes, staff training, eligibility rules, verification procedures, and individual case decisions. OBBA makes all of this work substantially harder. More cases now require assessment and verification, and all of this is occurring more often.”
Sheth also warned that what the state is seeing now is only a preview of similar changes coming to Medicaid/Husky Health, adding that work requirements and changes to recertification deadlines threaten to remove 110,000 residents from Husky Part D.
Both Knox and Sheth expressed gratitude for the state’s initial response to changes in SNAP eligibility and other federal changes, such as the $500 million emergency response fund, one-time payments of $300 to residents who lost SNAP benefits, and other efforts. However, they said that such one-off proposals were not enough in the face of permanent federal changes.
To help residents maintain access to food, the report recommends the state establish a non-lapsing food and nutrition fund with its own revenue stream, as well as creating a state-level nutrition assistance program modeled on SNAP to target assistance towards state residents who have lost federal benefits.
On the administrative side, the report calls for increased DSS staffing and a fix for the state’s beleaguered call back system. Finally, the report asks for new progressive taxation revenue options such as capital gains and dividend surcharges, as well as estate tax recapture.
Emily Byrne, executive director of CT Voices for Children, said that it was necessary to act because SNAP is being eroded at an alarmingly quick pace.
“In a perfect world, we’d want the federal government to stop the unwinding of this important program, but it’s clear no one in Washington DC is going to save SNAP, or at least not anytime soon,” she said. “So it’s up to states to act. No child should go to bed hungry, and everyone who believes Connecticut can be a state of opportunity and equity, like we do, should care about what’s happening to SNAP.”