An earmarked sharing computation is similar to a sharing computation (see
SI 00835.160C. “Sharing”). However, no $20 tolerance applies for earmarked sharing.

If the individual's contribution is earmarked for shelter, determine the individual's pro rata share of shelter expenses. If the earmarked contribution equals or exceeds the pro rata share for shelter, earmarked sharing exists. The ISM received by the individual from within the household is in the form of food and is valued under the PMV rule (SI 00835.300). To compute the actual value (AV) of ISM from within the household, follow the instructions in SI 00835.340C “Computation of In-Kind Support and Maintenance from Within a Household”.

If the individual's contribution is earmarked for food, determine the individual's pro rata share of food expenses. If the earmarked contribution equals or exceeds the pro rata share of food expenses, earmarked sharing exists. The ISM received by the individual from within the household is in the form of shelter and is valued under the PMV rule. To compute the actual value (AV) of ISM from within the household, follow the instructions in SI 00835.340C “Computation of In-Kind Support and Maintenance from Within a Household”.

When an individual earmarks a specific portion of his contribution for food and another specific portion for shelter, it is called double earmarking. Compute the individual's pro rata share of food expenses and compare it to the portion of the contribution earmarked for food.

Compute the individual's pro rata share of shelter expenses and compare it to the portion of the contribution earmarked for shelter.

If either earmarked contribution equals or exceeds a pro rata share of the item for which it is earmarked, earmarked sharing exists. The individual is receiving ISM in the form of the item for which he is not earmarking. This ISM is valued under the PMV rule. To compute the actual value (AV) of ISM from within the household, follow the instructions in SI 00835.340C “Computation of In-Kind Support and Maintenance from Within a Household”.

EXAMPLE: Determining if double earmarking applies

Kathleen Daly applies for SSI as an aged individual. For the past three years, she has been living with her nephew and his family in an apartment for which he has rental liability.
She says she contributes $150 per month and says it is supposed to be half for food and half for shelter. She does not allege anything higher in the LA sequence than sharing.

When the claims representative (CR) explains sharing to her and asks if she believes that her contribution meets her pro rata share of household operating expenses (one-fifth, in this case), she replies that she does not believe $150 is anywhere near her share. Because the CR identifies this as a token contribution, the CR documents the token contribution on the Householder of Another page (See SI 00835.160D.2. “Sharing – Token Contribution”).

Although the CR can curtail development of sharing, the CR must consider earmarked sharing. The CR asks if her $75 contribution equals or exceeds her share of the shelter expenses. She says “no”, because the rent alone is $450 per month.

The CR asks whether her $75 food contribution meets her share of food expenses. Ms. Daly is unsure because the household receives food stamps. Ms. Daly estimates the food expenses to be $400 per month. The CR must obtain evidence of earmarking because her alleged earmarked contribution of $75 is within $20 of her alleged food share of $80 ($400 ÷ 5).

The CR informs Ms. Daly that a statement from her nephew or his wife (knowledgeable adults in the household) regarding her earmarked contribution and the household food expense is needed for verification.
The CR would obtain a signed statement on an SSA-8011-F3 or use a report of contact (DROC) screen to document the nephew’s or his wife’s statement regarding the earmarked contribution and the household food expense made by Ms. Daly.

The CR would then update the appropriate Household of Another page within MSSICS, documenting verification of the earmarked contribution. This type of documentation is needed because chargeable ISM in the form of shelter is also a consideration; evidence of the shelter expense is required.

Ms. Daly submits the requested statement (SSA-8011-F3) that shows the food expenses are $450 per month and shelter expenses are $600 per month.

The statement verifies Ms. Daly's allegations about her contribution ($75 for food and $75 for shelter).

Because Ms. Daly is not paying her earmarked share for food, $90 ($450 ÷ 5), the CR determines that she is subject to the VTR, as she is receiving food and shelter throughout the month from the household in which she resides.

If the individual contributes, document the contribution on the Household of Another page.

Unless a developmental curtailment described in this section at SI 00835.170D.2. applies, obtain a signed statement (SSA-8011-F3) or a report of contact (DROC) from a knowledgeable adult member of the household other than the individual's spouse. This statement should confirm the amount of the earmarked contribution, as well as the household operating expenses for food or shelter, or both, if these expenses were not obtained for a sharing determination (see Sharing SI 00835.160). If evidence of household operating expenses and the earmarked contributions cannot be obtained, charge the VTR.

For more information about using the SSA-8011-F3 to document sharing, see SI 00835.625B “SSA-8011—Statement of Household Expenses and Contributions”.

Fax and store the SSA-8011-F3 in either eView or the Non-Disability Repository for Evidentiary Documents (NDRED) using the Evidence Portal (EP). You can access the Evidence Portal (EP) at View Evidence - Evidence Portal. Once the documentation is stored and viewed for content in either eView or NDRED by using the Evidence Portal (EP) there is no need to retain the documents.

You may curtail development based on the individual's statements when:

1. a. 

   The individual agrees that the earmarked contribution does not equal the pro rata share of food or shelter expenses (i.e., makes only a token contribution). Record this information on the Household of Another page; or

2. b. 

   The individual provides information on the Household of Another page that establishes that the alleged pro rata share of food or shelter expenses exceed the alleged earmarked contribution by $20 or more.

In these situations, earmarked sharing does not exist. Assume that the household operating expenses include both food and shelter. Charge the VTR unless the file shows that the household operating expenses do not include both food and shelter. The individual’s answers on the Household of Another page are sufficient documentation that earmarked sharing does not apply.

Develop earmarked sharing whenever the individual alleges earmarking in connection with an undeveloped breakpoint event or a redetermination (see SI 00835.510 “Breakpoints” and SI 00835.520 “Redetermination Guidelines – LA and ISM”).