Evaluate all trusts where an applicant, recipient, or spouse alleges an interest in a trust that needs a resource determination (such as a new or amended trust) in all initial claims (IC) and posteligibility (PE) events.

For PE events, do not reevaluate the trust resource determination (of a trust that has previously been reviewed) unless there is new and material evidence, such as an amendment to the trust or a clarification or change in policy that may affect the trust resource determination. However, evaluate all potential income implications, such as those of trust distributions and payments. For resource status changes in PE events, see SI 01120.201K.

Obtain a copy of the trust document (the original trust document is not required) and any related document(s) and review the document(s) to determine whether the:

• •

  individual is the grantor, trustee, or trust beneficiary;

• •

  trust was established before, on, or after 01/01/00;

• •

  assets were transferred into the trust before, on, or after 01/01/00;

• •

  trust was funded with assets of the individual or third parties or both;

• •

  trust is revocable or can be terminated and, if so, whether the individual has authority to revoke or terminate the trust and to use the principal for their own support and maintenance;

• •

  individual has access to the trust principal;

• •

  trust provides for or permits payments to the individual or on the individual’s behalf for the benefit of the individual;

• •

  trust principal generates income (earnings) and, if so, whether the individual has the right to any of that income;

• •

  trust provides for mandatory periodic payments and, if so, whether the trust contains a spendthrift clause that is valid under State law and prohibits the voluntary and involuntary alienation of any interest of the trust beneficiary in the trust payments; and

• •

  trust is receiving payments from another source.

Depending on the trust’s date of establishment and whose funds the trust principal contains, follow these instructions to determine the resource status and income treatment of the trust:

*If the SSI recipient is the beneficiary of an unfunded third-party trust (e.g., the trust will be funded upon the death of a parent), it is not necessary to review and submit the unfunded trust to SSITMS for SSI eligibility purposes until it is funded.

Consult any regional instructions that pertain to trusts to see if there are any State or Tribal laws to consider on such issues as revocability or irrevocability and grantor trusts. You may also consult the Title XVI Regional Chief Counsel (RCC) Precedents. For RCC precedents on trusts, see PS 01825.000.

If there are unresolved issues requiring clarification that prevent you from determining the resource status of a trust, or there are issues that you believe need a legal opinion, follow your regional instructions or consult with your RO program staff via vHelp. Once the specific question or issue submitted via vHelp is resolved, submit the case in SSITMS with the appropriate notes documenting the situation and resolution for the reviewer's reference for the resource determination. If necessary, the RO staff will seek guidance from the central office (CO) or the Office of Program Law (OPLaw). Do not contact or refer materials to OPLaw directly.

The field office may receive a request to reopen a trust resource determination by any party to the determination, including SSA, questioning its correctness. The request to reopen must be in writing and within the applicable time limit. For information on reopening SSI determinations, see SI 04070.015.

When applicable, issue a manual notice for trusts established with an individual’s assets on or after 01/01/00 as required per SI 01120.204. For such notices, specify using free-form text each reason the trust is countable (that is, why it does not meet the relevant exception(s) or requirements). In the notice, you must cite:

• •

  the applicable section of the trust (or any joinder agreement, if applicable) containing the problematic language or issue; and

• •

  the Program Operations Manual System (POMS) citation that contains the policy requirements on that subject.

Additionally, provide the following language indicating where the POMS can be found on-line: “You can find the Program Operations Manual System (POMS) on the Social Security website." For examples of manual notice language, see SI 01120.204.

If the State in question recognizes oral trusts as binding (see regional instructions):

• •

  record all relevant information;

• •

  obtain from all parties signed statements describing the arrangement; and

• •

  unless regional instructions specify otherwise, refer the case to your RO staff. The RO will refer the case, through the Assistant Regional Commissioner, Management and Operations Support (ARC, MOS), to OPLaw.

If the State does not recognize oral trusts as binding (see regional instructions), determine whether an agency relationship (a person or entity acting as an agent of the individual) exists and develop under regular resource-counting rules or transfer of resources rules, as applicable. For transactions involving agents, see SI 01120.020.

Obtain any written documentation and review the legal instrument or device to determine if it meets the requirements in SI 01120.201G.

If it does, determine whether the arrangement created by the legal instrument or device is a countable resource under regular SSI resource counting rules. If the resource is:

• •

  countable, develop the legal instrument or device under the other applicable resource rules.

• •

  not countable, develop the legal instrument or device following the procedures for developing trusts.

If you are unsure of whether the arrangement is one that you should develop as a legal instrument or device similar to a trust, refer the matter to the RO via the vHelp system. If necessary, the RO staff will seek guidance from the central office (CO) or OPLaw.

To submit your trust resource determination for RTRT review:

• •

  Access the SSITMS website and select the “Add New” tab. Add the applicant or recipient’s name, representative payee’s name (if any), social security number, and all other relevant trust information.

• •

  Select the appropriate type of trust in SSITMS (for example, third-party trust or special needs trust).

• •

  Add remarks describing your determination and rationale.

• •

  Submit the trust resource determination for RTRT review.

SSITMS sends an email notification after the trust reviewer (TR) or regional trust lead (RTL) reviews the trust resource determination and provides a response. To view the RTRT’s response:

• •

  Access SSITMS and select the case from the Summary page listing or use the link in the email to access the case, and

• •

  Click on the “Details/Update” tab.

The “Results” field will show that the RTRT member either agreed or disagreed with the trust resource determination. The RTRT member may provide feedback in the remarks field. When the Claims Specialist is ready to process the case, change the trust status to “FO Effectuated” using the “Edit” function.

To request a reevaluation of a trust resource determination that the FO disagrees with (after a decision has been made by the RTRT), access SSITMS and:

• •

  Change the Trust Status to “Referred to RTL” using the “Edit” function; and

• •

  Provide the rationale, a summary of supporting documentation, and appropriate references in SSITMS remarks and select “Submit.”

The RTL will select the case for review and determine if the central office (CO) or OPLaw needs to review the case. The RTL will respond to the request via the SSITMS website, and SSITMS will send an email notification when the RTL completes the reevaluation process.

When the applicant or recipient appeals the trust resource determination, the FO makes a proposed reconsideration determination, which the RTL must then review. To request a review of the proposed trust reconsideration determination, access SSITMS and:

• •

  Select “Recon Pending” from the Recon Trust Status dropdown using the “Edit” function for that case; and

• •

  Provide pertinent information about the reason for the appeal in FO remarks and select “Submit.”

When the RTRT requires additional information from the FO, it will return the case for further development. SSITMS will send an email notification about the further development requested to the FO mailbox. To view the RTRT’s request, access SSITMS and:

• •

  Select the case from the Summary page listings or use the link in the email to access the case, and

• •

  Click on the “Details/Update” tab.

View the request for additional information in the Remarks field. After completing the development requested, update the Trust Status to “FO Development Completed” using the “Edit” function and submit.

Select the case from the SSITMS Summary listing page or the link in the email notification and:

• •

  Update the Trust Status field to "Review Initiated."

• •

  Click the "Details/Update" tab.

• •

  Review information provided by the Claims Specialist in the SSI Claims System and eView by using the Evidence Portal (EP).

• •

  Determine if consultation with CO or OPLaw is necessary.

• •

  Submit pooled trust documents to OPLaw for a legal opinion when necessary.

• •

  Provide the review results in the Remarks field.

• •

  Update Trust Status to “Completed by RTL.”

• •

  Indicate “agree” or “disagree” with the FO’s determination in Results and click “Submit.”

For instructions on referring pooled trusts to OPLaw and establishing and managing pooled trust precedent files, see SI 01120.202C.3. in this section.

RTLs will receive an email notification whenever a trust resource determination needs reevaluation. To view the reevaluation request, access the case from the SSITMS Summary page listing.

To reevaluate the trust resource determination, follow the steps listed in SI 01120.202B.3.a. in this section. The Claims Specialist who submitted the case and the Claims Specialist’s FO mailbox will receive an automated email notification when the RTL makes a decision. The subject line will show “Response to Trust for Reevaluation.”

SSITMS sends the RTL an email notification when they need to review an FO determination on a trust reconsideration. An RTL who did not review the initial trust determination should review the FO reconsideration determination. To view appeal requests, access the case from the SSITMS Summary page listing or from the link in the email notification. To address the appeal request, follow the steps listed in SI 01120.202B.3.a. in this section.

The Claims Specialist who submitted the case and the Claims Specialist’s FO mailbox will receive an automated email notification when the RTL makes a decision. The subject line will show “Response to SSI Trust Recon for Review.”

If the precedent in SSITMS SharePoint is for the most current version of the master pooled trust, and the applicant or recipient submits a trust agreement that is the same version or an older version of the master agreement amended by the current version, you do not need to review the master agreement submitted to make your determination. Use the resource determination in the precedent file. However, review the joinder agreement for SI 01120.203 compliance. Additionally, note that, before using the resource determination in the precedent file, you should check to make sure that there have been no policy changes since the precedent determination that would affect the trust resource determination.

After determining the resource status of the master pooled trust and joinder agreements:

• •

  Document your determination and store the master agreement and joinder agreement in the Evidence Portal.

• •

  Continue the trust review process in SI 01120.202B in this section. See the example of a current precedent for a pooled trust in SI 01120.202H.8.a. in this section.

If the precedent in SSITMS SharePoint is for the most current version of the master pooled trust, but there has been a policy change since the precedent was established that may affect the resource determination for the master pooled trust, review the master agreement and joinder agreement for SI 01120.203 compliance, and take the following actions:

• •

  Document your determination and store the master agreement and joinder agreement in the Evidence Portal.

• •

  Continue the trust review process in SI 01120.202B. See the example of a current precedent for a pooled trust in SI 01120.202H.8.a. in this section.

If the applicant or recipient submits a new or amended version of a pooled trust master agreement and/or the precedent in the SSITMS SharePoint is not for the most current version of the trust or no precedent exists, review the master pooled agreement and joinder agreement for SI 01120.203 compliance. Then take the following actions:

• •

  Document your determination and store the master agreement and joinder agreement in the Evidence Portal.

• •

  Continue the trust review process in SI 01120.202B in this section. See the example of an outdated precedent for a pooled trust in SI 01120.202H.8.b. in this section.

Before adding or updating a pooled trust precedent in SSITMS SharePoint, RTLs must consult with OPLaw. After OPLaw evaluates the pooled trust documents, RTLs upload the trust precedent and related documents to the SharePoint site. Pooled trust precedents in SSITMS must contain the following information:

• •

  A copy of the master trust agreement;

• •

  A sample of a joinder agreement;

• •

  A copy of the OPLaw evaluation of the pooled trust; and

• •

  A precedent summary sheet containing the following information:

  1. a. 

     Title of the pooled trust.

  2. b. 

     Establishment date.

  3. c. 

     Amendment dates.

  4. d. 

     Resource determination (whether the master pooled trust agreement meets the requirements for exception) and date.

  5. e. 

     Evaluation of whether the master pooled trust meets each of the requirements in SI 01120.203D. State in the summary the specific reason why the pooled trust does not meet any requirement.

  6. f. 

     Conflicting trust provisions that render the trust countable: for example, a noncompliant early termination provision.

RTLs must consult with OPLaw before establishing and updating trust precedents in SSITMS SharePoint. OPLaw reviews all pooled trusts without a current precedent and provides a written evaluation on whether they meet the requirements for exception in section 1917(d)(4)(C) of the Act.

After consulting with OPLaw, RTLs add precedents to SSITMS SharePoint for all pooled trusts that do not have a precedent on file and update the precedents when pooled trusts have been amended.

1. 1. 

   Amended trusts that amend all prior versions

For amended trusts that amend all prior versions, update the precedent summary sheet with the most recent information for the pooled trust and note that the amendments apply to all prior versions of the trust. For example:

• •

  Add an amendment date and any reasons why the amended pooled trust is or is not in compliance.

• •

  Add to SSITMS the most recent versions of the master pooled trust and joinder agreement.

• •

  Do not delete prior versions of the pooled trust. Instead, identify them as “for historical purposes only.”

1. 2. 

   Amended trusts that do not amend all prior versions

For amended trusts that do not amend all prior versions, keep a precedent for each version of the master agreement. For example, keep and update the prior version of a precedent summary sheet, a copy of the master trust agreement, and a copy of the OGC evaluation for each version of the pooled trust.

Document the existence of a trust in the SSI Claims System by answering Yes on the Resource Selection page to the Trusts question. A Yes answer will bring the Trust page into the path.

• •

  Complete the applicable trust questions on the Trust page.

• •

  Enter the value of a trust that does not count as a resource in excluded amount, if an exception applies, and select the exclusion type (for example, meets special needs trust requirements or undue hardship) from the exclusion reason drop down menu.

• •

  Record all information used in determining whether the trust is a resource and whether it generates income in the Trust page in the SSI Claims System. For more information on what information to record, see MS 08113.005.

• •

  Record your conclusion and rationale on the Report of Contact page or SSA-5002 and store it in the Evidence Portal.

When listing the value of a trust with liquid assets, the field office (FO) technician may follow a high/low documentation option if the exact value is not material to the trust resource determination or claimant's eligibility. This means, if a trust has more than one liquid asset, you may use the highest verified value for any or all of them if doing so permits eligibility for all months in the period of review; or the lowest verified value for any or all of them if doing so results in ineligibility for all months in the period of review. If there is only one liquid asset, you may use the high/low option for any month within the period of review. Any high or low value used must be verified, and documentation must show that it applies throughout the period for which it is used. In addition, any non-liquid assets in the trust would be added to the selected liquid asset value when recording each monthly total value for the trust. Finally, for the first and final months of the review period, the verified values for all assets must be provided as the total value of the trust. FO technicians must still develop for distributions and additions, as discussed in SI 01120.201I to SI 01120.201J, in all months during the period of review. The high/low development policy does not change this requirement.

For documentation, the FO technician should:

1. 1. 

   note if the high/low development policy was used and, if so, state the specific liquid asset with the high or low value selected for it on the Report of Contact page;

2. 2. 

   provide the total value of the trust as the selected liquid asset plus any nonliquid assets for the encompassed months of review on the Trust page; and

3. 3. 

   provide the verified balance for all assets in the first and final months of the review period to reflect the total value of the assets in the trust on the Trust page.

Copy the trust information and send it to the same address used for assignment of rights (AOR) and third-party liability (TPL) information. See regional instructions or contact your RO staff for the correct address.

In States where SSA does not have an agreement to make the Medicaid eligibility determination:

• •

  copy the trust information and see, as applicable, regional instructions SI NY01150.110, SI DEN01150.110, and SI BOS01150.110; or

• •

  contact your RO staff for the correct address to send the information. For a discussion of section 209(b) and SSI criteria States, see SI 01715.010A.1. and SI 01715.010A.2.

A 20-year-old SSI claimant is the beneficiary of an irrevocable trust. The court established the trust in 02/2014 with the proceeds of the settlement of a lawsuit. The claimant lives with their parents, who support them fully. Their parents filed a medical malpractice suit on the claimant's behalf against their doctor. The doctor's insurance company settled the lawsuit before it went to trial for $400,000. The court approved the settlement agreement, whereby the insurance company placed the money in an irrevocable trust for the claimant, naming their parents as trustees. The trust permits payments for the claimant's special needs other than support and maintenance. The trust does not provide for reimbursement of Medicaid expenditures to the State on behalf of the claimant.

The trust was established with assets of the claimant. Although they never received them directly, the settlement proceeds meet the definition of assets in SI 01120.201B.2. Their parents, acting on their behalf, agreed to the settlement that established the trust. The court directed the proceeds to establish the trust after 01/01/00, so the instructions in SI 01120.201 apply. Although the trust is legally irrevocable under State law, it may be a resource because it permits disbursement of all the funds in the trust to or for the benefit of the claimant. The trust does not meet the exception for a special needs trust under SI 01120.203 because it does not require reimbursement of expenditures to the State(s) that provided medical assistance. Therefore, the trust is a resource in its full amount, $400,000. The claimant is ineligible due to excess resources.

Murray is an SSI recipient. Murray's spouse, who is not eligible, won $150,000 in the State lottery, of which Murray's spouse received $85,000. Murray's spouse used the money to establish the Murray Family Irrevocable Trust. The trust stipulates that Murray's spouse must use $40,000 for their child's college education. Murray's spouse can use the remainder of the money for a number of purposes, including supplemental needs for Murray and income payments to Murray's spouse, at the discretion of the trustee.

Since Murray's spouse established the trust with those assets and Murray's spouse can only pay $45,000 to or for the benefit of Murray, we will count $45,000 as a resource. We consider the remaining $40,000 in the trust a transfer of resources that we must evaluate under SI 01150.100.

Woody is a disabled young adult. In 08/2014, Woody's parents established an irrevocable special needs trust on Woody's behalf with $100,000 of their own funds. Prior to attaining age 18, Woody was ineligible because of the income and resources of Woody's parents through deeming. Now that Woody has attained age 18, Woody is reapplying for SSI.

Woody's resources do not include the trust established by Woody's parents since Woody was not the grantor of the trust, the trust is irrevocable, and Woody can't direct the use of the trust assets for Woody's support and maintenance. Thus, the trust is not a countable resource for SSI purposes. However, payments from the trust, to or for the benefit of Woody, may be income.

Becker is permanently disabled due to an injury they suffered in an automobile accident. Becker received a $3.5 million insurance settlement that they put into two irrevocable trusts. The first trust is a discretionary trust providing $2.5 million for the education and welfare of their children. The second trust is a charitable trust containing $1 million. The trustee must distribute annually the earnings on the trust in the form of scholarships for students at a nearby college.

Although Becker's trusts constitute a very large amount of money, none of the trust assets can be disbursed to them or to provide for their or their spouse's needs. SSA does not count the trusts as resources for SSI purposes. However, the establishment of the trusts is a transfer of resources under SI 01150.100. Becker will likely be ineligible for SSI for at least 36 months.

Walker, an SSI recipient, wishes to plan their funeral through a prepaid agreement. In the State where they live, recipients of public assistance, including SSI, must place the funds for their prepaid agreement into a funeral trust. Walker enters into a contract for a casket and vault valued at $5,000, and the funeral services they want are valued at $1,500. They place the full amount in a revocable trust. As required by State law, the trust shows Walker as the grantor and the funeral home as the trust beneficiary.

The revocable funeral trust is a resource under SSI burial trust policy in SI 01120.201H.2. because Walker is the grantor of the trust and the trust is revocable. The purpose of the trust is irrelevant for purposes of trust policy (see SI 01120.201C.2.d.).

However, since the trust is a resource, the SSI resource exclusions for burial spaces and funds apply. We exclude the vault and the casket as burial spaces. We exclude the $1,500 for funeral services under the $1,500 burial funds exclusion. Therefore, we exclude the total value of the trust. If the amount of funds for funeral services exceeds $1,500 (other than interest or appreciation), we would exclude up to $1,500, and the remaining amount would be countable.

For the burial space exclusion, see SI 01130.400, and for the burial fund exclusion, see SI 01130.409 through SI 01130.425.

Gonzales is a disabled adult SSI recipient. Gonzales received an award of $250,000 in a lawsuit in 06/2010 and the money went directly into a trust for their benefit. The trust does not meet any of the exceptions to the general SSI trust policy, so the trust would be a countable resource for SSI purposes. As a result, Gonzales has excess resources in 07/2010 (the month after the month in which the trust was established). The trustee uses all of the money in the trust to purchase a house for Gonzales (the trust holds the property title), and Gonzales moves into the home in 01/2011, when construction is completed. They contact SSA and inform us of what has happened.

Gonzales is ineligible due to excess income in 06/2010 and excess resources from 07/2010 to 01/11. When they move into the house in 01/2011, we consider them to be living in their own home because they have an equitable ownership interest under a trust. The house qualifies for the home exclusion as of 02/2011, and if Gonzales meets all other SSI eligibility requirements, we will reinstate their benefits. For information on the home resource exclusion, see SI 01120.200F.1.

Smith filed for SSI benefits on 04/21/09. During their initial interview, they provided The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust and their joinder agreement for our evaluation. The master agreement states that the trust was established on 11/12/07 and there is no evidence that it has been amended.

The precedent summary sheet in SSITMS SharePoint shows the trust was established on 11/12/07 and that it does not have any amendment dates. It also states that the master pooled trust meets the requirements of SI 01120.203 for exception.

Since SSITMS SharePoint has a current precedent on file for The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust, and there have not been any trust policy changes since 11/12/07 that would affect the resource determination in the precedent, we adopt the precedent determination for Smith’s pooled trust, evaluate the joinder agreement for compliance, document on the Report of Contact page, and submit our request for RTRT review via SSITMS.

During Baker’s redetermination (RZ) on 06/02/10, they provided The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust and their joinder agreement for our evaluation.

The master agreement states the trust was established on 11/12/07 and amended on 10/24/09.

The precedent summary sheet in SSITMS SharePoint shows the trust was established on 11/12/07, but does not indicate any amendments.

The precedent in SSITMS SharePoint is not up-to-date. Therefore, we evaluate the master and joinder agreements for compliance, document our determination, and submit our determination via SSITMS for review.

Once OPLaw evaluates the amended trust agreement, the RTL updates the precedent summary sheet in SSITMS SharePoint with the new determination information and a copy of the amended trust and updates all other trust-related documents.

Moore reports during their RZ interview on 10/08/15 that they are a trust beneficiary of the Greater Los Angeles Master Pooled Trust. Their account was established in 07/2015. Moore submits their trust documents for our evaluation. We do not have a precedent in SSITMS SharePoint for the Greater Los Angeles Master Pooled Trust.

The Greater Los Angeles Master Pooled Trust was established on 05/15/08 and amended 06/04/12. The amendments do not apply to the prior version. We do not need to evaluate the 05/15/08 version of the master agreement to make a determination in Moore’s case, because their trust was established under the 06/04/12 amended version of the trust. Therefore, we evaluate the 06/04/12 amended master trust agreement and joinder agreement for compliance and submit our determination via SSITMS for review.

Once OPLaw evaluates the trust, the RTL creates a precedent for the Greater Los Angeles Master Pooled Trust that includes all the items listed in SI 01120.202C.3. in this section.

If another applicant who has a trust established under the original 2008 version of the trust submits a copy later (because the 2012 amendments do not apply to the 2008 version), establish a separate precedent for the 05/15/08 version of the trust.

Scenario A: trust precedent is not current and 90-day trust amendment period does not apply

Thompson has been a trust beneficiary of The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust since 02/01/08 and an SSI recipient since 2003. They reported the trust for the first time during an RZ interview in 08/20/15 and submitted their master and joinder trust documents. The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust has been amended three times, on 10/24/09, 03/18/12, and 02/15/13, and the amendments apply to prior versions. Our precedent file is not current because it shows that the master trust meets the requirement for exception based on the amended version of 03/18/12.

During Thompson’s RZ, we evaluate the 02/15/13 amended version of the master pooled trust, because it is the most recent, and their joinder agreement. OPLaw finds that the 02/15/13 version does not meet the requirements for exception. We document the trust determination and count the balance of the trust as a resource back to the start of the period of review based on administrative finality.

Scenario B: trust precedent is not current and 90-day trust amendment period applies

Thompson has been a trust beneficiary of The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust since 02/01/08 and an SSI recipient since 2003. We first excepted their pooled trust from resource counting in 03/2008. During an RZ interview on 08/20/15, Thompson submitted a copy of 02/15/13 amended master and joinder trust documents. The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust has been amended three times, on 10/24/09, 03/18/12, and 02/15/13, and the amendments apply to prior versions. Our precedent file is not current because it shows that the trust meets the requirements for exception as a resource based on the amended version of 10/24/09.

During Thompson’s RZ, we evaluate the 02/15/13 version of the master pooled trust, because it is the most recent, and their joinder agreement. OPLaw finds that the 02/15/13 version does not meet the requirements for exception because the early termination provision is noncompliant.

Since we had previously excepted The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust in Thompson’s record (in 03/2008), we follow instructions in SI 01120.199 and offer them 90 days to amend the trust. On 11/11/15, the trust is amended and becomes compliant. Since the trust was amended during the amendment period, the trust remains excepted from resource counting during the amendment period and continuing.

Scenario C: trust amendments do not cover the entire period of review

Thompson has been a trust beneficiary of The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust since 02/16/08 and an SSI recipient since 2003. We first excepted their pooled trust from resource counting in 03/2008. During an RZ interview on 08/20/15, Thompson submitted a copy of 12/15/13 amended master and joinder trust documents. The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust has been amended three times, on 10/24/09, 03/18/12, and 12/15/13. Our precedent file is not current because it shows that the trust meets the requirements for exception as a resource based on the amended version of 10/24/09.

Thompson’s RZ period of review is 08/13 through 08/15. We evaluate the 12/15/13 version of the master pooled trust because it is the most recent and covers the period 12/13 to 08/15 and the 03/18/12 version of the trust because it is applicable to the other part of the period of review (08/13 – 12/13). (The 12/15/13 version of the trust amended the 03/18/12 version of the trust, but only after 12/15/13. The 12/15/13 amendment is not retroactive to 03/18/12.) We also evaluate their joinder agreements. OPLaw finds that the 03/18/12 version of the trust is compliant, but the 12/15/13 version does not meet the requirements for exception because the early termination provision is noncompliant.

Since we had previously excepted The Brothers of Townsville Master Pooled Trust in Thompson’s record (in 03/2008), we follow instructions in SI 01120.199, and offer them 90 days to amend the trust. On 11/11/15, the trust is amended and becomes compliant. Since the trust was amended during the amendment period, the trust remains excepted from resource counting during the amendment period and continuing.