Updated September 6, 2026. Quick answer: New Hampshire calls its version of this rule the “protected resource amount” and sets it as the highest of four figures: the spousal share up to a ceiling, a fixed minimum standard, a court-ordered transfer, or an amount an administrative appeals officer sets, not a single half-of-resources formula stated on its own.
What New Hampshire actually sets out
| What the state provides | What it says |
|---|---|
| The four-way test | “Determine the protected resource amount for the community spouse when the institutionalized individual files an application for medical assistance. The protected resource amount is the highest of the following figures: the spousal share, up to a maximum of $148,620; or the minimum spousal resource standard of $29,724; or an amount transferred to community spouse by a court support order; or an amount determined by the Administrative Appeals Unit.” |
| No hardship override at this stage | “Set the protected amount to the spousal share if it is between the minimum spousal resource standard and the spousal share maximum, or set it equal to the minimum or maximum limit as appropriate, regardless of the client’s or community spouse’s claim that the protected amount set creates a hardship for the community spouse.” |
| How to contest it | “If either member of the couple is dissatisfied with the amount set by the Bureau, either may appeal the protected amount through the administrative appeals process or court system.” |
| The income-adequacy override | “The Appeals Officer may also increase the community spouse resource allowance by an amount sufficient to generate additional income to the community spouse, if both of the following conditions are met: the institutionalized spouse has allocated the maximum amount of income available for allocation; and the Appeals Officer has determined that the community spouse resource allowance, in relation to the amount of income it generates, is inadequate to raise the community spouse’s income to the level of the maximum maintenance allowance.” |
How it works in practice
- New Hampshire names four separate paths to a number, not one formula: “the protected resource amount is the highest of the following figures: the spousal share, up to a maximum of $148,620; or the minimum spousal resource standard of $29,724; or an amount transferred to community spouse by a court support order; or an amount determined by the Administrative Appeals Unit.” Whichever of the four is largest is what the couple keeps.
- A hardship claim does not move the number by itself: the manual instructs the state to “set the protected amount to the spousal share if it is between the minimum spousal resource standard and the spousal share maximum, or set it equal to the minimum or maximum limit as appropriate, regardless of the client’s or community spouse’s claim that the protected amount set creates a hardship.” That door only opens through the separate appeals route below.
- Disagreement has a named path: “either may appeal the protected amount through the administrative appeals process or court system,” and an appeals officer can go further than the four-way test allows: increasing the allowance specifically to raise the community spouse’s income to the maximum maintenance allowance, but only once the institutionalized spouse has already allocated the maximum income available to allocate.
- The state’s own citation for this rule points to two authorities at once: its codified rule He-W 856.01(b) and (c), and the federal spousal-impoverishment statute at 42 U.S.C. § 1396r-5(f) and (g), independently confirmed this session, where He-W 856.01(c) ties the appeals-officer income-adequacy override to the same maximum-allocation condition the manual page states.
What the allowance is for, and why protecting the spouse at home is a federal requirement rather than a state kindness, is explained on the community spouse resource allowance page. The date the couple’s resources are counted is its own subject, on the snapshot date page, and the monthly income allowance that runs alongside it is on the MMMNA page. This page is the record for New Hampshire.
What this page does not settle
- The dollar figures on this page ($148,620 maximum / $29,724 minimum) are from the manual’s SR 23-01 revision, dated January 2023, the most recent version of this specific page this session could independently retrieve. New Hampshire’s live site blocks direct access to its Medical Assistance Manual (dhhs.nh.gov returns HTTP 403 on every route tried), so a possible 2024, 2025 or 2026 update to these two figures could not be confirmed or ruled out this session; the four-way mechanism and the appeal/override rules are not the kind of provision that changes annually and are reported as current.
- This page reads 2 sources, listed below. They are the state’s own materials on this rule, but no state puts its whole treatment of a couple’s resources in a single document, and a detail that decides your case may sit in one this page did not read.
- The resource rule is one hurdle. The income rules for the spouse at home are separate and are decided on their own numbers, the level-of-care test is separate again, and the transfer-of-assets look-back is separate from all of them. Clearing this rule does not clear any of the others.
- Every quotation here was read against the source on September 6, 2026. The federal minimum and maximum figures are reset each January, and a state can revise its own rule without the page around it changing. Open the source before you rely on a number.
Eligibility is decided by the state agency on the whole file, not by one rule on one page. Nothing here is legal advice, and no one should move, retitle or spend a couple’s savings on the strength of a web page.
Sources
- New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, Medical Assistance Manual, Section 419.03, Determining the Protected Resource Amount, SR 23-01, Dated 01/23 (AAM-A)
- N.H. Admin. Code § He-W 856.01(b)-(c), Resources – Basic Principles
The sources above were retrieved and read against the state text on September 6, 2026. Every quotation on this page was checked against those bytes.
Related: New Hampshire’s Long-Term Care Partnership Program status; a separate, policy-based way some families protect assets alongside this spend-down allowance.