Washington Community Spouse Resource Allocation: Which Rule Applies Depends on the Year Care Began

Updated August 27, 2026. Quick answer: Washington writes three different rules and picks between them by date. For a most recent continuous period of institutionalization beginning on or after August 1, 2003, “the agency or its designee allocates the greater of: (i) A spousal share equal to one-half of the couple’s combined countable resources, up to the federal spousal resource maximum;” For one that began earlier, “If the institutionalized spouse’s MRCPI began on or after October 1, 1989, and before August 1, 2003, the agency or its designee allocates the federal spousal resource maximum;” — the full federal maximum, with no half calculation at all.

What Washington actually sets out

How it works in practice

• The date that governs is not the application date. It is the start of the most recent continuous period of institutionalization, which for a long-stay resident can be years before any application, and Washington keeps the pre-2003 rule alive for exactly those cases.
• The older rule is more generous, not less. Before August 2003 Washington allocated the federal maximum outright: “If the institutionalized spouse’s MRCPI began on or after October 1, 1989, and before August 1, 2003, the agency or its designee allocates the federal spousal resource maximum;” The 2003 change introduced the half calculation and so reduced what many couples keep.
• The word “greater” still protects couples with modest savings. The current rule takes the greater of the half share and the state standard, so a couple whose half is small is floored rather than halved.
• Only two things can raise the allocation, and one of them is a court. “The amount of allocated resources under subsection (3) of this section can be increased, but only if: (a) A court has entered an order against the institutionalized spouse for the support of the community spouse or a dependent of either spouse;” The other route is an administrative order under chapter 182-526 WAC.
• The income-first rule gates the administrative route. Washington will move resources only “but only after the application of the income-first rule under 42 U.”S.C. 1396r-5 — the income of the spouse in care has to be exhausted toward the maintenance allowance before any additional resources are protected.
• Anyone in the couple can ask for the evaluation: “The agency or its designee completes a community spouse resource evaluation: (a) Upon request by the institutionalized spouse, or the institutionalized spouse’s community spouse;” Whether it can be done before the LTC application is a separate question with two conditions attached: “The community spouse resource evaluation can be completed prior to an application for LTC or as part of the LTC application if: (a) The beginning of the MRCPI was prior to the month of application; and (b) The spousal share exceeds the state spousal resource standard.” So an early evaluation is available to a couple whose period of institutionalization already began in an earlier month and whose spousal share is above the state standard — not to everyone who asks.
• The transfer deadline is tied to the review cycle, not to a fixed number of days. “The institutionalized spouse has until the end of the month of the first regularly scheduled eligibility review to transfer countable resources in excess of $2000 to the community spouse.” That is a longer window than families usually assume, but it ends on a date the agency sets rather than one the family chooses.

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 Washington.

What this page does not settle

• This page quotes the allocation rule alone. The resource limit it feeds, WAC 182-513-1350, and the maintenance needs allowance at WAC 182-513-1385 are separate rules this page did not read.
• This page reads one source: WAC 182-513-1355, Allocating resources to a community spouse when determining resource eligibility for SSI-related long-term care services. It is the state’s own publication 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 August 27, 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

• WAC 182-513-1355, Allocating resources to a community spouse when determining resource eligibility for SSI-related long-term care services

The source above was retrieved and read against the state text on August 27, 2026. Every quotation on this page was checked against those bytes.