• Skip to main content
Contact Newsletter Follow Us:
🤝 Support Our Work 🔗 Allies & Resources
True Signal Media
  • Home
  • Investigations
  • Daily Brief
  • Signal Dispatch
  • About True Signal Media
  • FOIA Tools
  • Meet the Team
  • FOIA Commons
Submit a Tip

SIGNAL DISPATCH

Massachusetts Sat on SNAP Records for Months — $92M Federal Threat Was Already on File

Published: March 20, 2026 - 8:59 AM UTC Updated: 12:04 PM CDT By: Marcus Hartwell - Signal Dispatch Correspondent

The Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance extended a public records request six times over two months before producing documents within days of an appeal determination — records that reveal a federal funding threat of more than $92 million against the state.

The Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance handed over public records on March 10, 2026 — four days after a state appeals ruling forced the issue, and four months after TSM filed the original request. The records — which DTA had claimed required more time to locate — arrived in a single production covering federal correspondence the agency had held since at least August 2025.

The records reveal that the U.S. Department of Agriculture threatened to withhold more than $92 million in federal SNAP administrative funding from Massachusetts — a threat DTA made no mention of in its six extension responses to TSM’s request.

TSM filed the public records request on November 18, 2025, seeking records related to USDA’s data demands, federal funding threats, multistate coordination, the state’s own fraud data, and data security protocols covering January 1, 2025 through the date of filing. What followed was a textbook stall: six separate extension requests from DTA’s Briana Malloy-Walker, arriving roughly every two weeks, stretching across December 2025 and into February 2026. At no point during this period did Malloy-Walker provide TSM with a tracking number for the request — a basic transparency practice the state’s own records law contemplates.

The central accountability question: why did a state agency sit on responsive records for four months, then produce them within days of being ordered to respond?


THE EVIDENCE

What Was Requested

TSM filed the public records request to DTA on November 18, 2025. The request covered six categories: USDA data demands to the state, federal funding threat correspondence, multistate coordination records, the state’s own SNAP fraud data submissions, and the security protocols governing any data sharing — for the period January 1, 2025 through the date of filing.

The records existed. The documents DTA ultimately produced are dated as early as May 2025 and run through November 2025. DTA had been receiving, generating, and responding to federal correspondence on this subject for months before TSM filed.

What TSM Got Instead: Six Extensions

Between November 18, 2025 and early February 2026, DTA records officer Briana Malloy-Walker requested six extensions — approximately one every two weeks. No tracking number was ever assigned to the request during this period, a procedural gap TSM noted in its subsequent appeal.

The Appeal

TSM filed an appeal on February 9, 2026. The appeals office responded the following day, February 10, requesting that TSM forward all correspondence with Malloy-Walker. Due to a medical absence, TSM submitted the email chain on February 20. The appeals office acknowledged receipt the same day and assigned tracking number SPR26/0590.

On March 6, 2026, appeals officer Alexander Gillis issued a determination in TSM’s favor.

On March 10, 2026 — four days later — Briana Malloy-Walker produced the records.

What the Records Show

The documents DTA produced are a paper trail of escalating federal pressure on Massachusetts over SNAP participant data. Beginning in May 2025, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins directed all state SNAP agencies to surrender years of recipient data — including names, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, addresses, and EBT transaction records — citing Executive Order 14243, signed March 20, 2025.

Massachusetts, through DTA Commissioner Jeff McCue, refused. In a July 30, 2025 letter to Secretary Rollins, McCue cited legal and logistical barriers, active multistate litigation in the Northern District of California, and the absence of any agreed-upon data security protocols. The letter was explicit: complying with the July 30 deadline was “virtually impossible.”

USDA responded by ignoring the objections entirely. A follow-up letter from Deputy Under Secretary Patrick Penn on August 12, 2025 declared Massachusetts “out of compliance” and gave the state a new deadline — August 15 — to submit a corrective action proposal. The letter allowed Massachusetts one business day to respond.

DTA Commissioner McCue replied on August 19, calling USDA’s posture a sign it was “not proceeding in good faith” and noting the new deadline of less than four days was itself impossible to meet. McCue also pointed out that USDA had imposed a parallel one-day deadline — August 13 — for Massachusetts to describe what it planned to do.

On August 20, 2025, USDA issued a formal warning letter to Governor Maura Healey threatening to disallow federal funding for DTA’s SNAP administrative expenses. The financial exposure stated in the letter: $92,314,320.90 per quarter — calculated using Massachusetts’ FY 2024 SNAP quality control payment error rate of 14.10%.

A federal court temporarily blocked USDA from acting on the warning letters on September 18, 2025. Massachusetts notified USDA of the injunction the following day.

By November 24, 2025 — after the court order — USDA sent another letter to Governor Healey, noting that 28 states had already complied with the data request and pressing Massachusetts to join them. The letter cited preliminary findings that an estimated $24 million per day in federal funds was being lost to fraud undetected by states.

Also produced in the records: a May 9, 2025 letter from Fidelity Information Services (FIS), the company that processes Massachusetts’ EBT transactions, informing DTA it intended to cooperate with USDA’s data request and seeking the state’s written consent. DTA’s position — protecting recipient PII pending litigation — put it in direct conflict with its own payment processor.

What Is Still Missing

The production does not include the state’s own internal fraud data submissions, if any exist. It does not include records of any multistate coordination between DTA and other state agencies resisting the USDA demand. TSM’s request for security protocol negotiations between DTA and USDA yielded the USDA-authored Fraud, Waste and Abuse Detection Protocol — but no DTA-generated counterproposals or internal legal analysis. TSM has not received confirmation whether DTA is withholding additional responsive records or whether the production is complete.

By The Numbers

6
Extension requests filed by DTA records officer Briana Malloy-Walker between November 2025 and February 2026, with no tracking number ever assigned to the request.
4
Days between TSM's appeal determination (March 6, 2026) and DTA's document production (March 10, 2026).
$92,314,320.90
The quarterly funding disallowance USDA threatened against Massachusetts for refusing to surrender SNAP participant data, per the August 20, 2025 formal warning letter.
0
Tracking numbers assigned to TSM's request during four months of extensions.
28
States that had complied with USDA's data demand by November 2025, according to USDA's own letter to Governor Healey.
"FNS will disallow up to $92,314,320.90 for…SNAP administrative expenses for each quarter." — USDA Deputy Under Secretary Patrick A. Penn, August 20, 2025

STATUS UPDATE

March 6, 2026

TSM appeal determination issued by Alexander Gillis in TSM's favor. Tracking number: SPR26/0590.

March 10, 2026

DTA produced responsive records. Production covers May–November 2025 federal correspondence.

Status: TSM reviewing documents for follow-up requests. Additional records may be outstanding.

More from True Signal Media

  • Explore FOIA Commons Documents
  • Explore Investigations
  • About True Signal Media
  • Get Signal Watch Briefings
  • Support This Work

Bottom Line

The documents DTA produced were in the agency's possession before TSM filed. The state extended the request six times, assigned no tracking number, and delivered the records within days of a successful appeal — a sequence that raises an unavoidable question about whether the delay was administrative or strategic. The records themselves document a federal agency threatening to strip more than $92 million per quarter from a state program serving hundreds of thousands of low-income residents. Massachusetts' position — that USDA's demand was legally and logistically unreasonable — is documented in detail. What is not documented is why it took a state appeal ruling to move records that were apparently ready to go.

Pattern Watch

The Massachusetts DTA experience is not an isolated case. True Signal Media has documented a consistent pattern across state agencies and subjects unrelated to SNAP data: an initial request is acknowledged, extensions are granted in serial fashion at roughly two-week intervals, and records that were apparently ready to produce arrive within days of an appeal filing or formal escalation. TSM has seen this same sequence in Illinois — where records officer Sean Reddington extended requests repeatedly before a complaint before the Public Access Counselor forced compliance — and in the Rojas-Banda matter, where a similar pattern of serial delay preceded production. The extension is not always a logistical necessity. In several TSM cases, it appears to function as a waiting strategy — one that works until it doesn't, and collapses the moment oversight arrives.

File Your Own Request

Massachusetts public records requests are filed through the Secretary of State's Supervisor of Records. True Signal Media's FOIA Commons has the full document production from this investigation, including all USDA correspondence and the appeal record. If you're researching SNAP data demands in your state, TSM's multi-state campaign templates are available at truesignalmedia.news/foia-commons.

If this story matters to you, share it. Investigations like this only reach the people who need to see them when readers pass them on.

More from True Signal Media

  • Explore FOIA Commons Documents
  • Explore Investigations
  • About True Signal Media
  • Get Signal Watch Briefings
  • Support This Work

Investigations like this one are funded entirely by readers like you. No advertisers. No corporate backing. Just FOIA requests, document review, and people who believe the public deserves the truth. If this work matters to you, please consider supporting True Signal Media.

Support This Investigation
Editor's Note

True Signal Media Director David Burger filed and pursued this public records request personally. The reporting is based entirely on documents obtained through that request and the formal appeal process. All claims are supported by records available for public review in the TSM FOIA Commons.

True Signal Media Logo
TRUE SIGNAL MEDIA
  • FOIA COMMONS
  • TSM INVESTIGATIONS
  • DAILY BRIEF
  • SIGNAL DISPATCH
SUPPORT OUR WORK
  • FOUNDING MEMBERS
  • GENERAL DONATION
  • MONTHLY SUPPORT
SITE INFORMATION
  • ACCESSIBILITY
  • COOKIE POLICY
  • TERMS OF USE
  • PRIVACY POLICY
"BECAUSE ACCOUNTABILITY JOURNALISM ISN'T DEAD — IT'S BEEN SYSTEMATICALLY OBSTRUCTED.
TRUE SIGNAL MEDIA EXISTS TO BREAK THE OBSTRUCTION."
------------------------------------------------------------------
"DOCUMENT-DRIVEN. FIELDWORK. INSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY."
© 2026 TRUE SIGNAL MEDIA — ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Manage Consent

We use cookies to deliver our investigations and understand what matters to readers. We don't sell your data. You control your privacy settings.

Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}