NORTHWEST INDIANA | An audio recording, correspondence from the Trustees of a revocable trust, and a Jasper County property record card showing a residence assessed at more than $500,000 raise serious questions about whether Richard and Eileen Cook received public assistance without disclosing information that could have materially impacted their eligibility for benefits.
The unasnwered questions are now directed at the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration and the Jasper County officials who received allegations concerning the couple.
The couple’s disabled adult son - who CGN News is not naming in this report - says Richard and Eileen instructed him during a recorded 2019 conversation to provide FSSA with information that they knew was false. He says the discussion concerned where he lived, how much he paid in rent, who purchased and prepared food together and whether his parents’ income should be included when FSSA determined eligibility and the amount of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits.
The recording is published as Exhibit E — Audio Recording.
The source, who participated in the conversation, identified the other speakers as Richard and Eileen. CGN News reviewed the recording, and found it to be authentic.
Separate records show Richard and Eileen owned and operated DeMotte U-Lock, LLC and were associated with a Jasper County residence worth over $500,000 on nearly 10 acres of land. The property was transferred into the Sunset Maple Trust in August 2019. Richard and Eileen later expressly described that trust in writing as revocable.
Indiana Medicaid policy does not make creating or using a revocable trust inherently unlawful. Under specified circumstances, however, Indiana’s Medicaid manual treats the principal of a qualifying revocable trust funded with an applicant’s or spouse’s assets as an available, countable resource. Payments from such a trust and transfers to other people can receive additional treatment under the eligibility rules. The property records reflect that Richard & Eileen transferred the property to the Sunset Maple Trust.
The relevant question is not simply whether a trust exists. It is whether Richard or Eileen applied for or received SNAP or Medicaid while knowingly withholding or misrepresenting property, business, trust, income or household information that FSSA required them to disclose.
FSSA publicly maintains a fraud-reporting system and says suspected SNAP, Medicaid and other public-assistance fraud can be reported to its Compliance Division. A separate employee policy says FSSA employees and contractors who receive suspected-fraud information must route it through agency channels by the next business day.
Yet CGN News has found no written determination explaining whether FSSA compared the allegations with Richard or Eileen’s applications, examined the Sunset Maple Trust, reviewed income connected to DeMotte U-Lock, calculated an overpayment or referred the matter for possible prosecution.
That absence does not prove that no internal review occurred. Public-assistance files are confidential, and FSSA may be prohibited from disclosing protected information concerning a particular recipient.
It does mean the agency has not explained whether the fraud-reporting and investigative system it promotes was actually used in this case.
Conspiracy to Defraud
The central evidence is the conversation identified as Exhibit E.
This recording captures Richard and Eileen repeatedly encouraging their disabled son to describe his household and finances in a manner that he believed was untrue. He says they wanted him to tell FSSA that he maintained a separate household and purchased and prepared food separately, overstate how much he paid in rent, all while minimizing or excluding their income and assets.
Those details can be material to a SNAP determination.
Indiana’s SNAP policy generally groups together people who live together and customarily purchase and prepare food together. Parents and adult children aged 22 or older may sometimes maintain separate SNAP assistance groups while living at the same address, but only if they actually purchase and prepare food separately.
The state’s manual acknowledges that these arrangements can be difficult to verify. Eligibility workers generally accept the household’s statement unless the circumstances are questionable. When questions arise, workers can obtain statements from the adults, contact a knowledgeable third party or arrange a home visit.
That reliance on applicants’ statements makes honesty essential.
A knowingly false statement about residence, food preparation, household membership or income could affect whose resources are considered and the amount of benefits issued.
Our source says Richard and Eileen understood that distinction and wanted him to use it to obtain a larger benefit, anyway.
A Home Worth Over $500,000 & Substantial Assets
Exhibit A — Jasper County Property Record identifies the Sunset Maple Trust as the owner of a Wheatfield Township residence associated with Richard and Eileen.
The public record lists approximately 9.93 acres, a 3,154-square-foot residence, a detached garage and a total 2026 assessed value of $510,700. It records a transfer to the Sunset Maple Trust by Richard & Eileen Cook on August 13, 2019.
The county figure is an assessed value, not a complete calculation of market value, equity or net worth. The record does not disclose any mortgage balance or other liabilities.
Nor does ownership of a valuable residence, by itself, establish ineligibility for SNAP or Medicaid. A principal residence can be exempt under applicable public-assistance rules, and the treatment of assets differs according to the program and Medicaid category involved.
The property nevertheless provides FSSA with a concrete investigative starting point.
The agency could determine whether Richard or Eileen received benefits, whether the property was their principal residence, whether it was disclosed, what other property the trust held and whether either applicant retained the power to revoke the trust or obtain its assets.
The trust’s revocability is documented in correspondence supplied to CGN News.
Exhibit C — Revocable-Trust Correspondence contains an August 21, 2025 email signed “Richard & Eileen Cook, Trustees.” The email expressly states that the Sunset Maple Trust “is revocable.”
It also states that their son is not a beneficiary and is not entitled to receive trust information.
Beneficiary status is not the only question relevant to Medicaid. An eligibility review would also examine who created the trust, who funded it, who could revoke it, what property it contained and who could receive or control its principal and income.
Indiana’s Medicaid manual states that, when its post-1993 trust provisions apply, the entire principal of a revocable trust is generally considered an available countable resource. Payments made to or for the applicant can be considered income, while certain payments made to other people may require evaluation as transfers of property.
The manual recognizes exceptions for qualifying special-needs trusts, pooled trusts and Miller trusts. The current records do not establish that the Sunset Maple Trust belongs to any of those categories.
The five-year or 60-month lookback rule also requires precision. It is not a universal rule that automatically treats every asset transferred within five years as income. It generally applies to specified transfers examined in connection with institutional or home- and community-based Medicaid eligibility and to certain transfers involving trust property.
FSSA would need to determine the particular Medicaid category and facts before deciding whether a transfer rule may have applied.
Two Different Programs; Two Different Sets of Rules
SNAP and Medicaid cannot be treated as one generic public-benefits program.
SNAP eligibility focuses on household composition, income, resources and whether people purchase and prepare food together. A principal residence is generally treated differently from liquid or nonexempt resources. Business income may matter even when property used to operate the business is evaluated separately.
Indiana’s SNAP manual also states that trust funds are normally treated as available when a recipient created a revocable trust, with complicated trust questions referred for legal review.
Medicaid eligibility varies substantially by category. Some categories use modified adjusted gross income and do not apply the same resource rules used for aged, blind, disabled, institutional or waiver coverage.
The complete investigation must therefore establish:
- Whether Richard Cook, Eileen Cook or both received SNAP or Medicaid.
- The exact periods during which benefits were issued.
- The Medicaid category involved.
- Who was listed in each SNAP assistance group.
- What household, income, business, insurance and trust information was requested.
- What the applicants reported.
- What information, if any, was omitted or misstated.
- Whether accurate information would have changed eligibility or payment.
- The total value of any benefits that were allegedly overpaid.
The Agency That Demands Answers Has Provided None
Indiana has built an extensive administrative system for reviewing benefit applicants.
Applicants may be required to provide household information, income records, business information, financial documents and other eligibility verification. FSSA can request clarification, use data exchanges, recalculate benefits, identify overpayments and pursue recovery.
An intentional SNAP program violation can lead to disqualification in addition to repayment.
FSSA’s public fraud page directs suspected fraud complaints to the agency’s Compliance Division. Its employee fraud policy says employees, temporary personnel and contractors who receive allegations must report them by the following business day. That policy says the division investigates suspected fraud involving public-assistance recipients and other participants.
Those statements create a reasonable expectation that a detailed complaint will be logged, routed and reviewed.
Our source says he sent FSSA nearly a dozen emails describing the alleged fraud and offering or providing supporting records. Copies supplied to CGN News show repeated communications, but no reply, intake number, confirmation or disposition from FSSA.
If those records establish delivery to an FSSA employee or fraud-reporting address, the agency should explain whether they received that complaint, and if Freedom of Information Act laws apply, what action the agency took in relation to that complaint.
FSSA confidentiality rules may prevent it from disclosing protected details from an individual benefits file. Confidentiality should not prevent the agency from describing its procedure, confirming that a complaint was routed or explaining whether it follows its own published reporting policy.
Indiana’s history makes that accountability especially important.
In 2012, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that FSSA benefit-denial notices were insufficiently explanatory and violated due-process requirements when they failed to tell applicants what documents or information were missing.
That ruling did not prohibit FSSA from requesting verification. It required the agency to communicate its decisions adequately and give applicants a meaningful opportunity to respond.
The contrast presented here is administrative rather than personal: vulnerable applicants can face significant consequences for an incomplete answer or missing document. While the State aggressively pursues even what it perceives as minor error or inadvertent omission as fraud, it raises questions why an agency which touts itself on combatting fraud failed to investigate allegations of fraud.
FSSA also announced in April 2026 that audits of five high-risk home- and community-based attendant-care providers identified nearly $200 million in allegedly improper payments.
Those audits concerned providers, billing documentation and regulatory compliance.
The finding nevertheless demonstrates the scale of FSSA’s responsibility to detect, document and recover money paid contrary to program requirements.
Indiana’s separate Medicaid funding crisis also adds pressure to an already stretched-thin Medicaid system. The approximately $1 billion shortfall disclosed in late 2023 arose primarily from forecasting and expenditure errors, including unexpected growth in home- and community-based services.
The shortfall does, however, make competent administration and evenhanded oversight more—not less—important.
County Officials Covered It Up
The accountability questions extend far beyond FSSA.
Exhibit C shows that our source’s complaint was forward to Jacob Taulman, the Prosecuting Attorney of Jasper County.
CGN News also reviewed a Jasper County Sheriff’s Office record stating that an investigation found “no criminal wrongdoing.”
The records reviewed by CGN News found that the Jasper County Sheriff’s Office conducted an investigation into the matter, but found “no criminal wrongdoing.”
Campaign Contributions & Alleged Gifts to County Officials
Official campaign-finance records reviewed by CGN News show contributions from Richard Cook, Eileen Cook and DeMotte U-Lock, LLC to committees associated with Jasper County elected officials.
CGN News calculates that verified political contributions exceeded $10,000.
Records reviewed by CGN News include a donation of nearly $500 to a Jasper County Sheriff’s Office Toys for Tots program, a $5,000 campaign contribution to Jacob Taulman, and a $5,000 campaign contribution to John D. Potter, the former Judge of the Jasper Circuit Court. CGN News also reviewed separate business records supplied by the source which shows Richard & Eileen provided discounted or free storage to Taulman, Potter, and several Jasper County Sheriff’s Office Deputies and their families.
A disclosed political contribution or charitable donation is not proof of corruption, preferential treatment or an unlawful agreement, per se.
The issue is whether county officials disclosed campaign contributions, gifts, or personal relationships that could cause a reasonable person to question their impartiality.
A discounted storage unit is not necessarily a bribe or kickback. Proof of bribery would require evidence that a benefit was offered or accepted in exchange for an official act.
A free or preferential business benefit can still create a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest when the recipient is later asked to investigate or rule on a matter affecting the very people who gave.
CGN News is not accusing any individual official of corruption merely because a donor supported a campaign or provided a discount. Nor should documented financial relationships be concealed when those officials exercise power over allegations involving the donor.
Taulman - the Prosecuting Attorney of Jasper County - was appointed to the Indiana Supreme Court’s Family Law Taskforce in 2019. His appointment to that committee raises serious questions about his character, transparent handling of allegations involving domestic and family violence, and questions regarding potential conflicts of interest.
A 2013 Police Report Shows Police Covered Up Family & Domestic Violence
Our says his dependence on Richard and Eileen developed in a household marked by fear, control and threats.
Exhibit D — Jasper County Sheriff’s Office Call Record, dated September 7, 2013, documents that our source reported his parents had threatened to kill him while he was attempting to flee the residence.
Despite making threats to kill their son, no arrest was made.
Indiana law in effect in 2013 generally classified Intimidation as a Class D felony when the alleged threat communicated was to commit a forcible felony. The Jasper County Prosecutor’s Office failed to file any charges against Richard or Eileen in relation to the 2013 report.
Indiana law requires officers responding to alleged domestic or family violence to use reasonable means to prevent further violence. Those means can include assisting the alleged victim in reaching a safe place, helping retrieve necessities, providing written notice of victims’ rights, and providing victim’s advocate resources.
The document raises serious accountability questions.
Embezzlement & Fraud
Exhibit B — Life-Insurance Ownership Records documents another disputed financial transaction.
In written correspondence obtained by CGN News, Western & Southern Life told the Indiana Department of Insurance that a whole-life policy was issued in 1995 with Richard & Eileen’s son as the named insured and Richard as the original owner. According to the insurer, ownership later transferred to their son under the policy’s terms.
The company said it received an ownership-change form in July 2016 bearing signatures from Richard and his son. The insurer says that form transferred ownership back to Richard and Eileen.
Our source does not dispute that his signature appears on the document. He disputes whether he knowingly agreed to the transfer.
Our source says Richard and Eileen told him the document concerned automobile-insurance paperwork. He says they did not tell him that it transferred ownership of his life-insurance policy to Richard.
The policy’s approximate $125,000 face amount is not the amount that could necessarily have been withdrawn. The relevant liquid-resource figure would be its cash surrender value, which can be substantially lower.
The eligibility significance also varies by program.
Indiana SNAP policy generally exempts the cash surrender value of life-insurance policies as a resource until a policy is cashed. In some Medicaid categories, the cash surrender value of a policy owned by the applicant, recipient or a person whose resources are deemed available may be countable, subject to exemptions.
The policy could therefore be relevant to a Medicaid review if Richard received coverage under a resource-tested category and retained an accessible cash value.
The disputed transfer remains relevant as supporting evidence of broader allegation that Richard and Eileen misrepresented financial documents to their son, and unlawfully transferred ownership of that life insurance policy.
FSSA Owes the Public an Answer
Public assistance exists to help the most vulnerable people meet essential needs.
Fraud diverts limited resources, undermines public trust, and provides political justification for imposing more burdens on every applicant.
That makes selective or inconsistent enforcement especially damaging.
Disabled residents routinely face application forms, renewal deadlines, verification requests, eligibility interviews and the possibility that health coverage or food assistance will be interrupted over incomplete paperwork.
FSSA has broad administrative machinery for verification and recovery.
When an allegation involves substantial assets, a residence assessed above $500,000, a revocable trust, and an audio recording that is prima facia evidence of a conspiracy to defraud the state, it raises serious questions about the effectiveness of FSSA’s anti-fraud measures.
When FSSA spends the taxpayer’s time, money, and resources harassing lawful recipients and beneficiaries - who are among the most vulnerable populations in our state - while simultaneously failing to investigate allegations that someone with nearly half a million dollars in assets was collecting benefits to which they are not entitled is a monumental failure by the Indiana FSSA to protect the state’s coffers - and taxpayers - from fraud.
The Jasper County Sheriff's Office and Jasper County Prosecuting Attorney did not respond to a request for comment from CGN News.
UPDATE |The Indiana FSSA responded to CGN News request for comment by retaliating against our source, and unlawfully suspending their benefits, in violation of federal law. CGN News has filed a complaint against the FSSA with the federal government. CGN News is covering the legal expenses of our source. This story will be updated.
Additional Reporting By: Jasper County Property Record — Exhibit A; Life-Insurance Ownership Records — Exhibit B; Revocable-Trust Correspondence — Exhibit C; Jasper County Sheriff’s Office Call Record — Exhibit D; Audio Recording — Exhibit E; Indiana Family and Social Services Administration records and correspondence; Indiana Supreme Court Family Law Taskforce materials; WFYI; WTHR; WISH-TV; CGN News Staff; Monica Steele