< Back to Current Version

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions

Changes from July 26, 2011 to October 11, 2011

This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.


. The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions Gene Falk Specialist in Social Policy July 26October 11, 2011 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL32760 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress c11173008 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Summary The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide range of benefits and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193). This report responds to some frequently asked questions about TANF; it does not describe TANF rules (see, instead, CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk). TANF Funding. TANF provides fixed funding to states, the bulk of which is provided in a $16.5 billion-per-year basic block grant. States are required in total to contribute, from their own funds, at least $10.4 billion under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement. The basic block grant is not adjusted for inflation or changes in the cash welfare caseload (see “The Caseload,” below). It has lost 26% of its value to inflation from FY1997 through FY2010. P.L. 111-291 funds TANF through the end of FY2011. President Obama’s FY2012 budget proposal would continue TANF funding, except contingency funds, at its FY2006 through FY2010 levels through FY2012112-35 funds TANF through December 31, 2011. State Spending. Though TANF is best known for funding cash welfare payments for needy families with children, the block grant and MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2009, expenditures on basic assistance (cash welfare) totaled $9.3 billion—28% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. TANF also contributes funds for child care and services for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected. Cash Welfare Caseload. In December 2010, the number of families receiving TANF cash welfare was 1.9 million families, consisting of 4.7 million recipients, of which 3.5 million were children. The cash welfare caseload is very heterogeneous. The type of family historically thought of as the “typical” cash welfare family—one with an unemployed adult recipient—accounted for less than half of all families on the rolls in FY2008. Additionally, 15% of cash welfare families had an employed adult, while almost half of all families had no adult recipient. Child-only families include those with disabled adults receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI), adults who are nonparents (e.g., grandparents, aunts, uncles) caring for children, and families consisting of citizen children and ineligible noncitizen parents. Cash Welfare Benefits. TANF cash benefits are set by states. In July 2009, the maximum monthly benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. Benefits in all states represent a fraction of poverty-level income. In the median state (Kansas), the maximum monthly benefit of $429 for a family of three represents 28% of poverty-level income. Cash Welfare Work Requirements. TANF requires states to engage 50% of all families and 90% of two-parent families in work activities. However, these standards are reduced by caseload reduction from FY2005. Further, states may get an extra credit against these standards by spending more than required under the TANF MOE. In FY2009, states achieved an all-family participation rate of 29.4% and a two-parent rate of 28.3%. That year, eight jurisdictions failed the all-family standard, and seven jurisdictions failed the two-parent standard. States that fail to meet work standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction in their block grant. Congressional Research Service . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Current Topics .................................................................................................................................. 1 What is TANF’s Current Funding Level?...............................................................................1 Was TANF Funding Included in the Full-Year Continuing Resolution?..................................2 What Does the President’s FY2012 Budget Propose..... 1 Has the President Proposed Reauthorization Legislation for TANF? ............................................ 2 Is the Cash Welfare Caseload Rising Because of the Current Recession? ...............................3. 2 How Can States Pay for Any Caseload Increases Caused by the Recession? ........................... 34 May States Require Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients? ........................................................ 3 History .4 History........................................................................................................................................4.... 3 When was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant Created?.................................................................................................................................. 34 Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law? ............................................................ 45 Funding and Expenditures ..............................................................................................................5. 4 How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? .............................. 45 How Have States Used TANF Funds? .......................................................................................6 5 How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? ...............................................................7.. 6 The Caseload ................................................................................................................................... 78 How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services? .......................8 7 How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Cash Welfare? .................................................................................................................................8. 7 How Does the Current Cash Welfare Caseload Level Compare With Historical Levels? ..............................................................................................................................8..... 7 What Are the Characteristics of Cash Welfare Families?.......................................................... 89 TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month? .......... 1110 TANF Work Participation Standards ............................................................................................ 13. 12 What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? ....................................... 1312 What Actual Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved? ......................................... 1413 Figures Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2009, by Major Benefit and Service Category......................................................................................................................7..... 6 Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Welfare .................................................................9. 8 Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Welfare Caseload: FY2008 ...................................................... 109 Tables Table 1. TANF Funding: FY2006 through FY2011 ......................................................................1 Table 2. TANF Funding: FY2011 and FY2012 FY2012............................................................................3 1 Table 32. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars ........................................................5.. 4 Table 43. TANF and MOE-Funded Cash Welfare Rolls, December 2010 .......................................8 Congressional Research Service . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ . 7 Table 54. Monthly TANF Cash Welfare Maximum Benefit Amount for a Family Sizes of Two and Three, July 2009 ...................................................................................................... 11 ..... 10 Congressional Research Service . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006 .................................................... 14 15 Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011 ........-FY2012 ......................................................... 15 Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2009 ................................. 16. 15 Table A-4.Cash Welfare Families by Family Type: FY1988, FY1994, and FY2008 .................... 1615 Table B-1. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category .................................................. 1817 Table B-2. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding ..................................................................................... 20 Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2009 ............................................................... 2321 Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Cash Welfare, December 2010 ........................................................................................................... 23 24 Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, December 1994, 2008, 2010 ......... 2725 Table B-6. Families Receiving Cash Assistance, By Number of Parents Receiving Assistance on Their Own Behalf: December 2010 .................................................................... 2927 Table B-7. TANF Work Participation Rates: FY2009 ................................................................. 31.. 29 Appendixes Appendix A. Supplementary Tables ............................................................................................. 15. 14 Appendix B. State Tables ............................................................................................................ 18... 17 Contacts Author Contact Information .......................................................................................................... 32. 30 Congressional Research Service . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Introduction This report provides responses to frequently asked questions about the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy access to information and data. This report does not provide information on TANF program rules. For such information, see CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk. For a non-technical overview of TANF, see CRS Report R40946, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block Grant: An Introduction, by Gene Falk. For a discussion of current TANF legislative issues, see CRS Report R41781, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block Grant: Issues for the 112th Congress, by Gene Falk. Current Topics What is TANF’s Current Funding Level? The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-291) included a one-year extension of TANF funding and program authority through the end of FY2011. It generally extended TANF funding for FY2011 at its FY2010 levels. The bulk of TANF funding is in a basic block grant (state family assistance grant) that totals $16.5 billion per year. This is the same level of funding as has existed since the creation of TANF in the 1996 welfare reform law (P.L. 104-193). Under current law, two TANF grants are not funded in FY2011 at last year’s levels. P.L. 111-291 limited contingency fund obligations to those that occurred before its date of enactment (December 8, 2011). Thus, no new additional contingency funds are available for the remainder of FY2011. P.L. 111-291 also funded supplemental grants only through June 30, 2011 (the end of the third quarter of FY2011), and provided that they are subject to reduced funding. Table 1 shows funding for TANF grants for FY2006 through FY2011. The expiration of the TANF ECF, limiting the TANF regular contingency fund obligations to those that occurred before the date of enactment of P.L. 111-291, and providing supplemental grant funding for only three quarters of FY2011 would result in a reduction in overall TANF funding from the FY2008 through FY2010 levels. Table 1.TANF Funding: FY2006 through FY2011 (Dollars in millions) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 (enacted) 16,489 16,489 16,489 16,489 16,489 16,489 Supplemental grants 319 319 319 319 319 211a Healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood grants 150 150 150 150 150 150 State family assistance grant Congressional Research Service 1 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Grants to the territories Grants for tribal work programs Regular contingency funds 2007 2008 2009 2010 78 78 78 78 78 78 8 8 8 8 8 8 93 59 428 1,107 212 617 4,383 18,768 21,639 Emergency contingency funds Totals 2011 (enacted) 2006 17,137 17,103 17,472 334b 17,270 Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS. a. Preliminary estimate based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). b. Total obligations for the contingency fund before enactment of P.L. 111-291. Information from HHSTANF currently operates under a three-month extension of funding, through December 31, 2011. P.L. 112-35 extended TANF basic block grants (the state family assistance grant), healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood grants, and certain other funds at their FY2011 funding level through the first quarter of FY2012. In addition, legislation enacted in 2010 (P.L. 111-242) provided an FY2012 appropriation of $612 million for TANF contingency funds. P.L. 112-35 provided no funds for TANF supplemental grants. Table 1 shows TANF funding for FY2006 through FY2012. The FY2012 figure represents annualized funding for the first three months of FY2012 as provided under P.L. 112-35. Table 1. TANF Funding: FY2006 through FY2012 (Dollars in millions) 2006 2007 2008 $16,489 $16,489 Supplemental grants 319 Healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood grants State family assistance grant Grants to the territories 2009 2010 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 319 319 319 319 211 0 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 Congressional Research Service 2011 2012 (first three months under P.L. 11235, at the fullyear rate) 1 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ 2006 Grants for tribal work programs Regular contingency funds 2007 2008 2009 2010 2012 (first three months under P.L. 11235, at the fullyear rate) 2011 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 93 59 428 1,107 212 334 612a 617 4,383 18,768 21,639 17,270 17,337 Emergency contingency funds 17,137 17,103 17,472 Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS. a. The FY2012 appropriation for the contingency fund was provided in P.L. 111-242. In addition to federal TANF funds, states are required in total to contribute, from their own funds, at least $10.4 billion per year for TANF-related activities for low-income families with children. This level of state funding, known as maintenance-of-effort (MOE) funding, was also established in the 1996 welfare law and has not been changed since then. Was TANF Funding Included in the Full-Year Continuing Resolution? No. The FY2011 appropriation for TANF was provided in the Claims Resolution Act, as discussed above. What Does the President’s FY2012 Budget Propose for TANF? Table 2 shows TANF grants for FY2011 as enacted under current law and under President Obama’s budget. It also shows President Obama’s budget request for FY2012. The budget proposes an increase in funding for FY2011 supplemental grants above the currently enacted level, from $211 million to $319 million, or an increase of $108 million. The budget would also fund FY2012 supplemental grants at $319 million. The FY2012 TANF basic block grant would be funded at $16.5 billion, the same level it has been funded at since TANF was created in the 1996 welfare reform law. Funding for healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood programs would be funded at $150 million. The budget proposes no additional contingency funds for FY2011 but would provide FY2012 funding for the contingency fund at $612 million. The $612 million is based on an appropriation provided under P.L. 111-242. Most TANF grants are entitlements to the states. TANF funding has traditionally been included in authorizing legislation; funding has not been provided in annual appropriations. TANF funding comes under the rules that apply to mandatory spending. Under budget rules, both the $108 Congressional Research Service 2 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ million funding increase for supplemental grants in FY2011 and the full $319 million for supplemental grants in FY2012 would require offsets.1 Table 2.TANF Funding: FY2011 and FY2012 (Dollars in millions) FY2011 (Enacted Claims Resolution Act) President Obama’s Budget FY2011 President Obama’s Budget FY2012 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 Supplemental grants 211 319 319 Healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood 150 150 150 78 78 78 Tribal work grants 8 8 8 Contingency funds 334 334 612 Basic block grant Grants to the territories Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS. Notes: The $334 million in contingency funds for FY2011 both under the Claims Resolution Act and under President Obama’s budget proposal has already been obligated. Under current law and under the proposal, there are no new contingency funds. The budget itself doesHas the President Proposed Reauthorization Legislation for TANF? No. The President’s FY2012 budget proposed funding for TANF in FY2012 at current law levels plus funding for supplemental grants at the historical level ($319 million per year). While the budget itself did not propose a long-term reauthorization of TANF. Rather, it provides some “general , it provided some “general principles” for reauthorization. The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) FY2012 Budget in Brief says When TANF reauthorization is considered, the Administration would be interested in exploring with Congress a variety of strategies to strengthen the program’s ability to improve outcomes for families and children, including helping more parents succeed as workers by building on the recent successes with subsidized employment, using performance indicators to drive program improvement; and preparing the program to respond more effectively in the event of a future economic downturn. Is the Cash Welfare Caseload Rising Because of the Current Recession? The TANF cash welfare caseload has been increasing since the summer of 2008. The caseload hit its lowest level since 1969 in July 2008, but has increased since then. From July 2008 to December 2010, the TANF cash welfare caseload increased by 16%, adding about 273,000 families to the benefit rolls. 1 Supplemental grants require offsets to maintain funding at prior year levels because of a provision in TANF law that directs the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to assume in their budget baselines that no additional supplemental grants will be made beyond their current funding period. For example under current law, these agencies are to assume no supplemental grants will be made after June 30, 2011. Congressional Research Service 3Congressional Research Service 2 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ How Can States Pay for Any Caseload Increases Caused by the Recession? There is no additional, recession-related funding provided in the one-year TANF extension included in P.L. 111-291 for the remainder of FY2011. Absent additional funding, states will have to reallocate funds from other block grant activities to finance any cash welfare caseload increases resulting from the lingering effects of 2007-2009 recession. Over the period FY2007 to the first quarter of FY2011, states drew $7.1 billion in combined funds from the TANF regular contingency fund created in the 1996 welfare reform law and the TANF “Emergency Contingency Fund” (ECF) created in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) to provide extra funding in FY2009 and FY2010. It expired, as originally scheduled, on September 30, 2010. Not all these contingency funds financed cash welfare caseload increases. Regular contingency funds helped pay for increased costs in the wide range of benefits, services, and activities funded through TANF. The ECF helped pay for increased costs of cash welfare, non-recurrent short-term aid, and subsidized employment. May States Require Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients? Yes. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the option of requiring drug tests for welfare recipients and penalizing those who fail such tests. (See Section 902 of P.L. 104-193.) In addition to this option, the 1996 welfare reform law contained two other provisions related to drug abuse and TANF applicants or recipients. The law established a lifetime ban on eligibility for TANF and food stamps for those convicted of a drug-related felony. However, states may either opt out entirely or modify and limit this lifetime ban. (See Section 115 of P.L. 104-193.) Further, TANF allows states to establish Individual Responsibility Plans (IRPs) for their TANF families. The IRP may require participation in a substance abuse treatment program. A family may be sanctioned for failure to comply with its IRP. History When was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant Created? The TANF block grant was created by the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193). TANF replaced the program of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which dated back to the Social Security Act of 1935, and several other related programs. Congressional Research Service 43 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law? The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) included provisions establishing “welfare-towork” grants for FY1998 and FY1999 and made several other policy and technical changes to TANF. No new welfare-to-work grants were made after FY1999. The original funding authority for TANF ended on September 30, 2002. Over the four-year period from 2002 through 2005, Congress considered, but did not pass, legislation to modify and reauthorize TANF (see CRS Report RL33418, Welfare Reauthorization in the 109th Congress: An Overview, by Gene Falk, Melinda Gish, and Carmen Solomon-Fears). Over this four-year period, Congress passed 12 “temporary extensions” of TANF and related programs as stop-gap measures until it could reach agreement on a longer-term reauthorization. (See Appendix A, Table A-1 for a listing of the temporary extensions.) The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171) includes a long-term extension of funding for TANF through FY2010. It also modified TANF work participation standards; established $100 million per year in TANF research and technical assistance funds for “healthy marriage promotion” initiatives; and provided $50 million per year for “responsible fatherhood initiatives.” (For a discussion of TANF provisions in the DRA, see CRS Report RS22369, TANF, Child Care, Marriage Promotion, and Responsible Fatherhood Provisions in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), by Gene Falk.) Funding and Expenditures How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? From FY1997 (the first full year of TANF funding) through FY2010 (ended September 30, 2010), the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 26%. On the basis of the January 2011 inflation projections of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the block grant would decline in value by 28% from FY1997 through FY2011. Table 32. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars Fiscal Year Value of the Block Grant in Billions of FY1997 Dollars Cumulative Loss of Value in Percent 1997 16.5 0 1998 16.2 -2% 1999 15.9 -3% 2000 15.4 -6% 2001 14.9 -9% 2002 14.7 -11% 2003 14.4 -13% 2004 14.1 -15% Congressional Research Service 54 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Fiscal Year Value of the Block Grant in Billions of FY1997 Dollars Cumulative Loss of Value in Percent 2005 13.6 -17% 2006 13.1 -20% 2007 12.8 -22% 2008 12.3 -25% 2009 12.3 -25% 2010 12.1 -26% 2011 11.9 -28% Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Constant dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U). Actual inflation was used to compute constant dollars for FY1997-FY2010 using data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Constant dollars for FY2011 are based on the inflation assumptions of the Congressional Budget Office, published in January 2011. How Have States Used TANF Funds? TANF is best known as a funding source of cash welfare benefits for needy families with children. However, states have considerable discretion in using TANF funds, and have used them for a wide range of benefits and services. Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2009. In FY2009, a total of $33.5 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance, the category that most closely reflects cash welfare, had expenditures of $9.3 billion in FY2009—28% of total TANF and MOE dollars. All three expenditure categories commonly associated with “welfare” for needy families with children—basic assistance, administrative costs, and work activities—accounted for less than half ($14.2 billion or 42%) of all funds. TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2009, 18% of all TANF funds used were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF is also a major contributor to the child welfare system, which provides foster care, adoption assistance, and services to families with children who either have experienced or are at risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect. However, TANF’s accounting system does a poor job of capturing expenditures associated with spending on the child welfare system. 21 Most TANF funding for these programs is subsumed in the catch-all “other” expenditure category. 21 For a discussion of the shortcomings of TANF financial data reporting, see the U.S. Government Accountability Office, Better Information Needed to Understand Trends in States’ Uses of the TANF Block Grant, GAO-06-414, March 2006. For an estimate of TANF’s contribution to child welfare agencies’ funding, see Scarcella et al, The Cost of Protecting Vulnerable Children V, Urban Institute, May 2006. Congressional Research Service 65 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2009, by Major Benefit and Service Category Total federal and state MOE funds used—$33.5 billion (dollars in billions) Basic Assistance, $9.3 Other, $10.9 Administration, $2.5 Other Work Supports, $2.6 Work Programs, $2.4 Child Care, $5.9 Work Programs, $2.4 Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). See Appendix A, Table A-3 for percentages of total federal TANF and state MOE funds associated with each of these categories. For state-specific information on the use of TANF funds, see Appendix B, Table B-1, and Table B-2. How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? TANF law permits states to “reserve” unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to “save” funds for unexpected occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters). At the end of FY2009 (the most recent data available), a total of $3.7 billion of federal TANF funding had neither been transferred nor spent. However, some of that $3.7 billion represented funds that states had already committed to spend later. At the end of FY2009, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.6 billion. Generally, obligations are binding commitments to spend, and they come in the form of contracts and grants to provide benefits and services. However, the definition of “obligation” varies from program to program, and because TANF essentially consists of 54 different programs (one for each state, the District of Columbia, and the territories), what constitutes an obligation may vary. Congressional Research Service 76 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ The remaining $2.1 billion in unspent funds is called the “unobligated balance.” These funds are available to states to make new spending commitments. Table B-3 in Appendix B shows unspent TANF funds by state. The Caseload How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services? This number is not known. Federal TANF reporting requirements focus on families receiving only ongoing assistance (generally cash welfare), with no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF benefits and services. As discussed in a previous section of this report, a little less than half of all TANF funds are used on activities not considered part of a traditional “welfare” program. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements that pertain to families receiving “assistance” are very likely to undercount the number of families receiving any TANFfunded benefit or service. How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOEFunded Cash Welfare? Table 43 provides cash welfare caseload information. A total of 1.9 million families, composed of 4.7 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in December 2010. The bulk of the “recipients” were children—3.5 million in that month. For state-by-state cash assistance caseloads, see Table B-4 in Appendix B. Table 4.3. TANF and MOE-Funded Cash Welfare Rolls, December 2010 Families 1,947,957 Total Recipients 4,682,609 Children 3,488,716 Adults 1,193,893 Source: Congressional Research Service on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). How Does the Current Cash Welfare Caseload Level Compare With Historical Levels? The number of families receiving cash welfare peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families. The cash welfare caseload fell rapidly in the late 1990s (after the 1996 welfare reform law) before leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace than in the late 1990s. Nationally, the caseload began to rise beginning in August 2008. Congressional Research Service 87 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving cash welfare, from July 1959 to December 2010. Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash welfare families by state. Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Welfare July 1959 to December 2010 6 March 1994 5.1 million 5 4 3 Dec. 2010: 1.9 million 2 1 July 2008: 1.7 million Ju l-5 9 Ju l-6 2 Ju l-6 5 Ju l-6 8 Ju l-7 1 Ju l-7 4 Ju l-7 7 Ju l-8 0 Ju l-8 3 Ju l-8 6 Ju l-8 9 Ju l-9 2 Ju l-9 5 Ju l-9 8 Ju l-0 1 Ju l-0 4 Ju l-0 7 Ju l-1 01 -1 0 -0 7 Ju l -0 4 Ju l -0 1 Ju l -9 8 Ju l -9 5 Ju l -9 2 Ju l -8 9 Ju l -8 6 Ju l -8 3 Ju l -8 0 Ju l -7 7 Ju l -7 4 Ju l -7 1 Ju l -6 8 Ju l -6 5 Ju l -6 2 Ju l Ju l Ju l -5 9 0 Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). What Are the Characteristics of Cash Welfare Families? Historically, the “typical” cash welfare family has been headed by a single parent (usually the mother) with one or two children. The single parent has also typically been unemployed. However, the cash welfare caseload decline has occurred together with a major shift in the composition of the rolls. Today, less than half of all cash welfare families are headed by an unemployed adult recipient. Almost half of all cash welfare families had no adult recipient at all, with the adults in the family ineligible for aid and the benefits paid only on behalf of the child (these are known as “child-only” families). This shift occurred because the caseload decline was concentrated among the families thought of as the “typical” cash welfare families, and welfare-towork efforts have been concentrated on this population. Figure 3 shows the composition of the cash welfare caseload in FY2008. Families with an unemployed adult recipient represent 36% of all cash welfare families. Families with an employed (in a regular job) adult recipient, who receive cash welfare as an earnings supplement, Congressional Research Service 98 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ comprise an additional 15% of the cash welfare rolls. Within the “child-only” portion of the caseload, families with a parent (usually a disabled parent) receiving SSI and the children receiving TANF as a supplement to that benefit represent 11% of the cash welfare caseload. Families that are made up of children living with a non-parent relative (grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc.) represent 16% of the cash welfare caseload. Families with adults who were either sanctioned or time-limited off the rolls (and thus had their family’s benefit reduced) represented about 6% of all cash assistance families. Families of child citizens living with ineligible parents who are noncitizens or who have not reported their citizenship status make up 9% of the total cash welfare caseload. The remainder of the cash welfare caseload represents child recipients for whom data on the adults they live with are not available. Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Welfare Caseload: FY2008 Child-only/other , 114,250 Child-only/noncitizen or unknown citizenship of parent, 159,447 Family with adult recipients/ Not employed, 616,240 Child-only/caretaker relative, 267,486 Child-only/SSI parent, 183,392 Child-only/Adults(s) time-limited, 55,843 Child-only/Adult(s) sanctioned, 43,067 Families with adult recipients/At least 1 Employed, 254,284 Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of the FY2008 TANF National Data Files. As previously discussed, the composition of the caseload has changed considerably over time. Table A-4 shows the change in this categorization of families over time. Congressional Research Service 109 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month? There are no federal rules that help determine the amount of TANF cash benefits paid to a family. (There are also no federal rules that require states to use TANF to pay cash benefits, though all states do so.) Benefit amounts are determined solely by the states. Table 54 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a family of two and a family of three in July 2009.32 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-parent family with children. Some states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent families or “child-only” cases. States also vary their benefits by other factors such as housing costs and sub-state geography. Most states base TANF cash benefit amounts on family size, paying larger cash benefits to larger families on the presumption that they have greater financial needs. The maximum monthly cash benefit is usually paid to a family that receives no other income (e.g., no earned or unearned income) and complies with program rules. Families with income other than TANF often are paid a reduced benefit. Moreover, some families are financially sanctioned for failure to meet a program requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit. The table also shows the benefit amounts relative to poverty-level income. TANF pays a family in cash only a fraction of poverty level income (as officially determined and published by the Department of Health and Human Services). For a family of two, the maximum TANF benefit paid in July 2009 varied from $142 per month in Tennessee (12% of poverty-level income) to $821 per month in Alaska (54% of poverty-level income). For a family of three, the maximum TANF benefit paid in July 2009 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi (11% of poverty-level income) to $923 per month in Alaska (48% of poverty-level income). Table 54. Monthly TANF Cash Welfare Maximum Benefit Amount for a Family Sizes of Two and Three, July 2009 Family Size of Two State Alabama Family Size of Three Dollars Percent of Poverty Threshold Dollars Percent of Poverty Threshold $190 15.6% $215 Percent of Poverty Threshold 14.1% Alaska 821 54.1 923 48.4 Arizona 220 18.1 278 18.2 Arkansas 162 13.3 204 13.4 California 561 46.2 694 45.5 Colorado 364 30.0 462 30.3 32 States are not required to report to the federal government their cash welfare benefit amounts in either the TANF state plan (under section 402 of the Social Security Act) or in annual program reports (under section 407 of the Social Security Act). The benefit amounts shown are from the “Welfare Rules Database,” maintained by the Urban Institute and funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Congressional Research Service 1110 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Family Size of Two Family Size of Three Dollars Percent of Poverty Threshold Dollars Percent of Poverty Threshold Connecticut 457 37.6 560 36.7 Delaware 270 22.2 338 22.2 District of Columbia 336 27.7 428 28.1 Florida 241 19.8 303 19.9 Georgia 235 19.4 280 18.4 Hawaii 506 36.2 636 36.2 Idaho 309 25.4 309 20.3 Illinois 318 26.2 432 28.3 Indiana 230 18.9 288 18.9 Iowa 361 29.7 426 27.9 Kansas 352 29.0 429 28.1 Kentucky 225 18.5 262 17.2 Louisiana 188 15.5 240 15.7 Maine 363 29.9 485 31.8 Maryland 453 37.3 574 37.6 Massachusetts 531 43.7 633 41.5 Michigan 403 33.2 492 32.2 Minnesota 437 36.0 532 34.9 Mississippi 146 12.0 170 11.1 Missouri 234 19.3 292 19.1 Montana 401 33.0 504 33.0 Nebraska 293 24.1 364 23.9 Nevada 318 26.2 383 25.1 New Hampshire 606 49.9 675 44.2 New Jersey 322 26.5 424 27.8 New Mexico 357 29.4 447 29.3 New York 524 43.1 721 47.3 North Carolina 236 19.4 272 17.8 North Dakota 378 31.1 477 31.3 Ohio 355 29.2 434 28.4 Oklahoma 225 18.5 292 19.1 Oregon 436 35.9 514 33.7 Pennsylvania 316 26.0 403 26.4 Rhode Island 449 37.0 554 36.3 State Congressional Research Service 1211 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Family Size of Two Family Size of Three Dollars Percent of Poverty Threshold Dollars Percent of Poverty Threshold South Carolina 215 17.7 271 17.7 South Dakota 482 39.7 539 35.3 Tennessee 142 11.7 185 12.1 Texas 211 17.4 244 16.0 Utah 380 31.3 474 31.1 Vermont 536 44.1 640 41.9 Virginia 254 20.9 320 21.0 Washington 453 37.3 562 36.8 West Virginia 301 24.8 340 22.3 Wisconsin 628 51.7 628 41.2 Wyoming 514 42.3 546 35.8 Maximum 821 54 923 48.0 Minimum 142 12 170 11.0 Median 352 29 429 28.0 State Source: Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules Database, funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). TANF Work Participation Standards What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? The TANF statute requires states to have 50% of their caseload meet standards of participation in work or activities—that is, a family member must be in specified activities for a minimum number of hours.43 There is a separate participation standard that applies to the two-parent portion of a state’s caseload, requiring 90% of the state’s two-parent caseload to meet participation standards. States that fail the TANF work participation standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction in their block grant amounts. However, the statutory work participation standards are reduced by a “caseload reduction credit.” The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each percentage point decline in the caseload. Through FY2006, states were given credit for caseload declines that occurred since FY1995. 43 Some families are excluded from the participation rate calculation. Congressional Research Service 1312 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Beginning in FY2007, states were only credited with caseload declines that have occurred since FY2005. The FY2007 effective (after-credit) standard is based on caseload declines from FY2005 to FY2006. However, under a regulatory provision, states may get “extra” credit for caseload reduction if they spend more than required under the TANF MOE. States can exclude those families funded by state funds in excess of required state spending. The ARRA temporarily modifies the caseload reduction credit states receive toward their TANF work participation. The modification is effective for the FY2009 through FY2010 standards. The ARRA provides that a state’s credit would not be reduced for any caseload increases that occurred in FY2008 through FY2010. What Actual Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved? In FY2009, the national average work participation rate achieved by states for all families was 29.4%. The participation rate within TANF achieved nationwide for the two-parent portion of the caseload was 28.3%. These rates are well below the statutory target of 50% for all families and 90% for two-parent families. They are also well below the targets even when adjusting for actual caseload reduction between FY2005 and FY2008. However, only eight jurisdictions failed the allfamily standard, and seven jurisdictions failed the two-parent standard. This is because (1) many states obtained fairly large “extra” credits for spending above the required MOE level; (2) states were “held harmless” for any caseload increases between FY2007 and FY2008 (based on the temporary ARRA modification to the caseload reduction credit, noted above); and (3) many states eliminated two-parent families from their TANF and MOE caseloads. Presumably, many states aided two-parent families with their own funds. The jurisdictions that failed to meet the all-family standard were California, the District of Columbia, Guam, Maine, Missouri, Ohio, Oregon, and Puerto Rico. The jurisdictions that failed to meet the two-parent standard were Alaska, Guam, Kentucky, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and Rhode Island. States that fail to meet work standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction in their block grant. States can avoid the penalty by entering into a corrective compliance plan with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). They can also claim reasonable cause for failing to meet the penalty. Further, penalties are reduced based on the degree of noncompliance, and may be reduced by the Secretary of HHS for those states that were economically needy during FY2009. See Table B-7 for state-by-state FY2009 work participation rates. Congressional Research Service 1413 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Appendix A. Supplementary Tables Table A-1.Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006 Public Law Time Period Notes P.L. 107-229 Oct. 1, 2002-Dec. 31, 2002 Extension as part of a continuing resolution. P.L. 107-294 Jan. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2003 Extension as part of a continuing resolution. P.L. 108-7 Apr. 1, 2003-June 30, 2003 Extension as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act. P.L. 108-40 July 1, 2003-Sept. 30, 2003 Free-standing bill that amended the Social Security Act to extend TANF and related programs. P.L. 108-89 Oct. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2004 Multipurpose bill that extended programs through the first half of FY2004. P.L. 108-210 Apr. 1, 2004-June 30, 2004 Freestanding bill that extended funding authority for the program through June 30, 2004. P.L. 108-262 July 1, 2004-Sept. 30, 2004 Freestanding bill that extended funding authority for the program through Sept. 30, 2004. P.L. 108-308 Oct. 1, 2004- Mar. 31, 2005 Freestanding bill that extended funding authority for the programs through Mar. 31, 2005. P.L. 109-4 Apr. 1, 2005-June 30, 2005 Freestanding bill that extended funding authority for the programs through June 30, 2005. P.L. 109-19 July 1, 2005-Sept. 30, 2005 Freestanding bill that extended funding authority for the programs through Sept. 30, 2005. P.L. 109-68 Oct. 1, 2005-Dec. 31, 2005 Bill to provide extra funding to help states provide benefits to families affected by Hurricane Katrina, suspend certain requirements in states affected by the hurricane, and extend the funding authority for the programs through December 31, 2005. P.L. 109-161 Jan. 1, 2006-Mar. 31, 2006 Freestanding bill that extended funding authority for the programs through March 31, 2006. It reduced the bonus for reducing out-of-wedlock births for FY2006-FY2010 to offset the costs of the temporary extension. Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS). Congressional Research Service 14 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Table A-2.Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2012 Public Law Time Period Notes P.L. 111-242 Oct. 1, 2010-Dec. 3, 2010 Extension as part of a continuing resolution. P.L. 111-290 Dec. 4, 2010-Dec. 7, 2010 Extension as part of a continuing resolution. P.L. 111-291 Dec. 8, 2010-Sept. 30, 2011 (except supplemental grants, Dec. 8, 2010-June 30, 2011) Extension as part of the Claims Resolution Act of 2010. It funded supplemental grants only through the first three quarters of FY2011 and at a reduced rate. Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS). Congressional Research Service 15 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQP.L. 112-35 Oct. 1, 2011-Dec. 31, 2011 Free-standing bill to extend TANF for three months. No funding for TANF supplemental grants. Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS). Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2009 Dollars (in billions) Percent of Total Dollars Basic Assistance $9.3 27.8% Administration 2.5 7.4 Work Programs 2.4 7.0 Child Care 5.9 17.5 Other Work Supports 2.6 7.9 Other 10.9 32.4 Totals 33.5 100.0 Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Table A-4.Cash Welfare Families by Family Type: FY1988, FY1994, and FY2008 Family with adult recipients/ not employed Families with adult recipients/at least one employed Child-only/adult(s) sanctioned 1988 1994 2008 3,136,566 3,798,997 616,240 243,573 378,621 254,284 — — 43,067 Child-only/adults(s) time-limited Child-only/SSI parent 55,843 59,988 171,391 183,392 188,598 328,290 267,486 Child-only/noncitizen or unknown citizenship of parent 47,565 184,397 159,447 Child-only/other 71,660 184,567 114,250 Child-only/caretaker relative Congressional Research Service 15 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ 1988 1994 3,747,950 5,046,263 3,747,950 5,046,263 1,694,009 Family with adult recipients/ not employed 83.7 75.3 36.4 Families with adult recipients/at least one employed 6.5 7.5 15.0 Child-only/adult(s) sanctioned 0.0 0.0 2.5 Child-only/adults(s) time-limited 0.0 0.0 3.3 Child-only/SSI parent 1.6 3.4 10.8 Child-only/caretaker relative 5.0 6.5 15.8 Child-only/noncitizen or unknown citizenship of parent 1.3 3.7 9.4 Child-only/caretaker relative Total As a Percent of All Cash Welfare Families Congressional Research Service 16 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Child-only/other Total 1988 1994 2008 1.9 3.7 6.7 100.0 100.0 100.0other 1.9 3.7 6.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 Total 2008 1,694,009 As a Percent of All Cash Welfare Families Total Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the 1988 AFDC Quality Control Public Use Data File; the 1994 AFDC Quality Control Public Use Data File; and the 2008 TANF National Data File. Note: For FY2008, the cash welfare caseload includes those whose benefits were funded from TANF dollars as well as those whose benefits were funded with MOE dollars under SSPs. “Family with an adult, unemployed” includes families reported as “child-only” who are under a sanction. Congressional Research Service 1716 . Appendix B. State Tables Table B-1. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category (Dollars in millions) Basic Assistance Administrative Expenditures Work Program Expenditures Other Work Supports Other Total $42.3 $17.0 $21.5 $7.5 $6.4 $65.1 $159.7 Alaska 31.9 6.0 9.6 30.7 1.3 6.0 85.5 Arizona 138.0 43.6 12.6 57.2 0.7 157.3 409.5 Arkansas 16.5 13.5 25.8 15.5 4.4 65.1 140.9 California 3,509.5 611.6 485.4 1,020.2 205.6 1,051.1 6,883.5 Colorado 51.8 14.2 0.9 30.6 9.8 266.4 373.7 Connecticut 89.3 36.9 18.9 27.3 5.7 326.1 504.2 Delaware 18.2 7.3 0.6 30.9 0.3 5.3 62.5 District of Columbia 22.7 12.3 20.5 81.2 3.9 35.7 176.2 Florida 180.0 38.7 65.2 375.5 6.5 375.0 1,040.7 Georgia 55.0 22.1 17.9 22.2 15.7 388.6 521.5 Hawaii 70.1 19.4 142.4 33.4 2.8 97.1 365.2 Idaho 5.9 12.0 6.6 8.7 0.1 9.3 42.6 Illinois 61.1 28.2 68.7 490.7 18.7 463.0 1,130.4 Indiana 108.6 30.9 20.3 52.5 31.7 109.0 353.1 Iowa 61.9 10.8 18.5 45.4 18.4 63.8 218.8 Kansas 46.5 11.2 2.1 38.2 46.7 53.3 198.0 Kentucky 117.4 12.8 25.9 83.1 6.4 29.9 275.5 Louisiana 42.8 7.8 9.1 38.2 5.2 148.6 251.7 Maine 74.6 3.9 13.9 18.0 20.1 4.0 134.6 Maryland 107.1 55.5 36.9 31.5 132.9 180.9 544.9 Massachusetts 324.7 44.1 22.8 336.0 87.1 379.3 1,194.0 State Alabama CRS-1817 Child Care . Basic Assistance Administrative Expenditures Work Program Expenditures Child Care Other Work Supports Other Total 336.4 136.2 113.1 174.6 74.6 766.6 1,601.6 Minnesota 90.0 47.5 76.0 119.6 135.6 59.8 528.5 Mississippi 18.9 4.8 28.3 27.2 25.4 24.5 129.1 Missouri 104.5 14.6 23.4 77.6 0.0 139.1 359.2 Montana 16.4 5.9 11.6 9.5 0.0 8.3 51.7 Nebraska 26.4 5.5 21.5 22.5 29.4 0.6 105.7 Nevada 46.7 10.6 5.0 0.0 5.0 62.2 129.5 New Hampshire 33.9 11.7 9.6 8.0 1.7 23.3 88.1 New Jersey 181.8 73.3 102.2 107.1 227.0 516.6 1,207.9 New Mexico 60.1 15.2 15.1 39.0 45.1 26.4 200.8 1,458.0 456.6 181.7 516.0 1,234.4 1,860.2 5,706.9 North Carolina 89.3 45.0 59.6 237.2 36.0 268.8 735.9 North Dakota 8.5 4.9 3.2 1.0 1.9 16.7 36.3 432.0 158.0 46.7 327.2 22.9 385.1 1,372.0 22.0 20.2 0.2 124.1 22.3 73.2 262.0 Oregon 115.0 27.7 27.4 37.0 8.2 97.8 313.1 Pennsylvania 197.7 77.0 155.5 428.4 36.8 242.4 1,137.9 Rhode Island 45.2 12.7 7.0 19.8 9.5 31.4 125.7 South Carolina 40.5 15.7 26.2 4.1 9.9 93.5 189.7 South Dakota 13.6 3.3 3.8 0.8 0.0 6.2 27.9 127.8 33.1 64.1 95.0 0.0 85.9 405.9 Texas 84.2 92.1 78.3 26.8 1.3 548.3 831.1 Utah 32.8 12.4 32.6 14.0 4.2 39.6 135.5 Vermont 16.9 7.5 0.3 23.9 24.2 13.7 86.5 Virginia 73.8 25.5 54.7 40.2 9.3 78.3 281.8 318.5 52.0 130.2 216.5 4.0 843.8 1,564.9 State Michigan New York Ohio Oklahoma Tennessee Washington CRS-1918 . Basic Assistance Administrative Expenditures Work Program Expenditures 31.8 25.7 1.5 Wisconsin 113.4 26.4 Wyoming 11.3 9,323.5 State West Virginia Totals Other Work Supports Other Total 28.2 16.9 54.3 158.4 33.5 254.9 24.6 192.1 644.9 1.7 0.5 5.8 0.4 11.8 31.5 2,482.7 2,358.8 5,860.6 2,641.0 10,850.2 33,516.8 Child Care Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). CRS-19 Total . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Table B-2. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding State Basic Assistance Administrative Expenditures Work Program Expenditures Alabama 26.5% 10.7% 13.413.4% Child Care Other Work Supports 4.7% 4.0% Other 40.7% Total Alabama 26.5% Alaska 37.3 7.1 11.2 35.9 1.5 7.1 100.0 Arizona 33.7 10.7 3.1 14.0 0.2 38.4 100.0 Arkansas 11.7 9.6 18.3 11.0 3.1 46.2 100.0 California 51.0 8.9 7.1 14.8 3.0 15.3 100.0 Colorado 13.9 3.8 0.3 8.2 2.6 71.3 100.0 Connecticut 17.7 7.3 3.8 5.4 1.1 64.7 100.0 Delaware 29.1 11.7 1.0 49.4 0.4 8.4 100.0 District of Columbia 12.9 7.0 11.6 46.1 2.2 20.2 100.0 Florida 17.3 3.7 6.3 36.1 0.6 36.0 100.0 Georgia 10.5 4.2 3.4 4.3 3.0 74.5 100.0 Hawaii 19.2 5.3 39.0 9.2 0.8 26.6 100.0 Idaho 13.8 28.2 15.5 20.5 0.3 21.8 100.0 Illinois 5.4 2.5 6.1 43.4 1.7 41.0 100.0 State CRS-20 Child Care 4.7% Other Work Supports 4.0% Other 40.7% Total 100.0% . Basic Assistance Administrative Expenditures Work Program Expenditures Child Care Other Work Supports Other Total Indiana 30.8 8.8 5.7 14.9 9.0 30.9 100.0 Iowa 28.3 4.9 8.5 20.7 8.4 29.2 100.0 Kansas 23.5 5.7 1.1 19.3 23.6 26.9 100.0 Kentucky 42.6 4.6 9.4 30.2 2.3 10.9 100.0 Louisiana 17.0 3.1 3.6 15.2 2.1 59.0 100.0 Maine 55.5 2.9 10.3 13.4 15.0 3.0 100.0 Maryland 19.7 10.2 6.8 5.8 24.4 33.2 100.0 Massachusetts 27.2 3.7 1.9 28.1 7.3 31.8 100.0 Michigan 21.0 8.5 7.1 10.9 4.7 47.9 100.0 Minnesota 17.0 9.0 14.4 22.6 25.7 11.3 100.0 Mississippi 14.6 3.8 21.9 21.0 19.7 19.0 100.0 Missouri 29.1 4.1 6.5 21.6 0.0 38.7 100.0 Montana 31.8 11.4 22.4 18.3 0.0 16.1 100.0 Nebraska 25.0 5.2 20.3 21.3 27.8 0.5 100.0 Nevada 36.1 8.2 3.8 0.0 3.9 48.0 100.0 New Hampshire 38.5 13.2 10.9 9.1 1.9 26.4 100.0 New Jersey 15.0 6.1 8.5 8.9 18.8 42.8 100.0 New Mexico 29.9 7.6 7.5 19.4 22.4 13.2 100.0 Congressional Research Service 10.7% Work Program Expenditures 100.0% 20 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Basic Assistance State Administrative Expenditures Work Program Expenditures Child Care Other Work Supports Other Total New York 25.5 8.0 3.2 9.0 21.6 32.6 100.0 North Carolina 12.1 6.1 8.1 32.2 4.9 36.5 100.0 North Dakota 23.5 13.5 8.8 2.8 5.3 46.1 100.0 Ohio 31.5 11.5 3.4 23.8 1.7 28.1 100.0 8.4 7.7 0.1 47.4 8.5 28.0 100.0 Oregon 36.7 8.8 8.7 11.8 2.6 31.2 100.0 Pennsylvania 17.4 6.8 13.7 37.6 3.2 21.3 100.0 Rhode Island 36.0 10.1 5.6 15.8 7.6 25.0 100.0 State Oklahoma CRS-21 . Basic Assistance Administrative Expenditures Other Work Supports Other Total South South Carolina 21.3 8.3 13.8 2.2 5.2 49.3 100.0 South Dakota 48.9 11.9 13.8 2.9 0.1 22.3 100.0 Tennessee 31.5 8.2 15.8 23.4 0.0 21.2 100.0 Texas 10.1 11.1 9.4 3.2 0.2 66.0 100.0 Utah 24.2 9.2 24.0 10.3 3.1 29.2 100.0 Vermont 19.5 8.7 0.3 27.6 28.0 15.9 100.0 Virginia 26.2 9.1 19.4 14.3 3.3 27.8 100.0 Washington 20.3 3.3 8.3 13.8 0.3 53.9 100.0 West Virginia 20.1 16.2 0.9 17.8 10.7 34.3 100.0 Wisconsin 17.6 4.1 5.2 39.5 3.8 29.8 100.0 Wyoming 35.9 5.4 1.6 18.3 1.1 37.6 100.0 Totals 27.8 7.4 7.0 17.5 7.9 32.4 100.0 State Work Program Expenditures Child CareOklahoma Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). CRS-22 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2009 September 30, 2009; dollars in millions State Obligated but Unspent Alabama Unobligated and Unspent Total Unspent $4.8 $26.8 $31.7 Alaska 0.0 58.3 58.3 Arizona 21.5 0.0 21.5 Arkansas 2.6 56.8 59.3 California 370.7 0.0 370.7 Colorado 0.0 76.6 76.6 Connecticut 0.0 0.0 0.0 Congressional Research Service 21 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ State Obligated but Unspent Unobligated and Unspent Total Unspent Delaware 0.0 4.6 4.6 District of Columbia 3.3 35.4 38.8 Florida 26.3 6.9 33.2 Georgia 59.2 33.4 92.6 Hawaii 19.4 48.4 67.8 Idaho 12.3 0.0 12.3 Illinois 0.0 0.0 0.0 Indiana 53.4 0.0 53.4 Iowa 6.4 22.3 28.7 Kansas 0.0 44.7 44.7 Kentucky 0.0 48.8 48.8 Louisiana 23.6 0.0 23.6 0.0 -0.3 -0.3 11.6 79.1 90.8 Massachusetts 3.0 0.0 3.0 Michigan 0.0 244.7 244.7 Minnesota 0.0 103.4 103.4 Mississippi 9.9 18.6 28.5 Missouri 0.0 0.0 0.0 Montana 0.4 44.8 45.1 Nebraska 0.1 43.0 43.1 Nevada 0.0 11.3 11.3 New Hampshire 0.0 17.5 17.5 New Jersey 103.1 12.8 115.9 New Mexico 43.8 0.0 43.8 New York 317.4 311.2 628.7 North Carolina 196.2 3.5 199.7 Maine Maryland Congressional Research Service 23 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ State Obligated but Unspent Unobligated and Unspent Total Unspent 0.0 16.3 16.3 Ohio 48.2 0.0 48.2 Oklahoma 41.7 0.0 41.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pennsylvania 61.0 119.9 180.9 Puerto Rico 2.1 20.8 22.9 Rhode Island 0.0 0.0 0.0 South Carolina 0.0 40.0 40.0 South Dakota 0.0 19.9 19.9 Tennessee 0.0 147.6 147.6 Maine Maryland North Dakota Oregon Congressional Research Service 22 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ State Obligated but Unspent Unobligated and Unspent 128.8 0.0 128.8 Utah 0.0 91.9 91.9 Vermont 0.0 0.0 0.0 Virginia 0.8 19.9 20.7 Washington 0.0 131.4 131.4 West Virginia 0.0 63.0 63.0 Wisconsin 11.4 0.0 11.4 Wyoming 2.7 41.8 44.5 1,585.6 2,065.1 3,650.7 North Dakota Oregon Texas TotalsTexas Totals Total Unspent Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Cash Welfare, December 2010 Families Total Recipients Children Adults 24,212 59,569 43,819 15,750 Alaska 3,572 9,767 6,648 3,119 Arizona 19,366 44,103 31,709 12,394 Arkansas 8,632 19,724 13,997 5,727 California 601,226 1,480,156 1,144,238 335,918 Colorado 8,064 21,364 16,319 5,045 16,750 33,360 23,446 9,914 Delaware 5,754 16,455 10,208 6,247 District of Columbia 6,122 14,437 11,417 3,020 State Alabama Connecticut Congressional Research Service 24 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Families Total Recipients Children Adults Florida 58,144 107,027 85,930 21,097 Georgia 20,686 39,122 35,006 4,116 Guam 1,260 2,994 2,233 761 Hawaii 10,136 30,147 20,256 9,891 Idaho 1,858 2,881 2,640 241 Illinois 27,177 78,766 66,424 12,342 Indiana 31,461 75,880 56,890 18,990 Iowa 21,100 54,462 36,968 17,494 Kansas 15,647 40,454 27,134 13,320 Kentucky 31,336 64,352 50,280 14,072 Louisiana 11,117 25,427 21,326 4,101 Maine 15,448 40,045 26,053 13,992 State Alabama Connecticut Congressional Research Service 23 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Families Total Recipients Children Adults Maryland 26,160 63,973 46,116 17,857 Massachusetts 51,179 100,509 67,009 33,500 Michigan 67,596 177,079 126,627 50,452 Minnesota 24,726 54,213 40,691 13,522 Mississippi 12,078 25,555 18,646 6,909 Missouri 39,606 95,727 65,407 30,320 Montana 3,694 9,354 6,547 2,807 Nebraska 8,445 20,869 16,309 4,560 11,066 28,559 21,058 7,501 6,168 13,300 9,458 3,842 New Jersey 35,330 84,509 58,934 25,575 New Mexico 21,664 57,085 40,610 16,475 158,133 396,204 286,712 109,492 North Carolina 23,639 45,323 38,176 7,147 North Dakota 1,931 4,944 3,731 1,213 103,513 238,143 171,630 66,513 9,471 21,614 17,415 4,199 Oregon 32,884 86,785 58,865 27,920 Pennsylvania 59,034 144,067 106,410 37,657 Puerto Rico 14,615 39,764 26,495 13,269 Rhode Island 6,778 15,950 11,003 4,947 South Carolina 19,038 45,275 33,776 11,499 South Dakota 3,290 6,876 5,756 1,120 Tennessee 63,149 162,182 117,038 45,144 63,149 162,182 117,038 45,144 State Nevada New Hampshire New York Ohio Oklahoma Tennessee Congressional Research Service 25 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Families Total Recipients Children Adults Texas 52,972 121,938 103,832 18,106 Utah 5,716 14,635 10,365 4,270 Vermont 3,335 7,767 5,357 2,410 511 1,489 1,070 419 Virginia 37,105 82,885 58,655 24,230 Washington 69,805 169,887 118,085 51,802 West Virginia 10,676 24,422 17,392 7,030 Wisconsin 25,270 60,611 46,079 14,532 Wyoming 312 624 521 103 1,947,957 4,682,609 3,488,716 1,193,893 State Nevada New Hampshire New York Ohio Oklahoma Virgin Islands Wyoming Totals Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Congressional Research Service 2624 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, December 1994, 2008, 2010 Percentage Change Dec 1994 to Dec 2010 Dec 2007 to Dec 2010 Dec 2009 to Dec. 2010 Dec-94 Dec-07 Dec-09 Dec-10 Alabama 47,903 18,584 20,902 24,212 -49.5 30.3 15.8 Alaska 12,370 2,989 3,082 3,572 -71.1 19.5 15.9 Arizona 72,158 37,122 38,513 19,366 -73.2 -47.8 -49.7 Arkansas 25,047 8,741 9,062 8,632 -65.5 -1.2 -4.7 California 923,358 477,465 570,889 601,226 -34.9 25.9 5.3 Colorado 40,244 9,094 11,445 8,064 -80.0 -11.3 -29.5 Connecticut 60,965 19,424 17,409 16,750 -72.5 -13.8 -3.8 Delaware 11,227 3,997 4,915 5,754 -48.7 44.0 17.1 District of Columbia 27,420 5,237 9,626 6,122 -77.7 16.9 -36.4 Florida 238,564 48,608 61,097 58,144 -75.6 19.6 -4.8 Georgia 141,154 22,740 21,444 20,686 -85.3 -9.0 -3.5 Guam 2,088 NR 2,522 1,260 -39.7 Hawaii 21,489 6,621 9,870 10,136 -52.8 53.1 2.7 Idaho 8,953 1,527 1,706 1,858 -79.2 21.7 8.9 Illinois 241,091 20,562 21,828 27,177 -88.7 32.2 24.5 Indiana 69,933 31,103 37,298 31,461 -55.0 1.2 -15.6 Iowa 38,022 19,762 21,427 21,100 -44.5 6.8 -1.5 Kansas 28,838 12,853 14,606 15,647 -45.7 21.7 7.1 Kentucky 76,824 29,323 30,243 31,336 -59.2 6.9 3.6 Louisiana 82,792 11,106 11,269 11,117 -86.6 0.1 -1.3 Maine 22,025 12,235 14,384 15,448 -29.9 26.3 7.4 Maryland 80,890 20,466 25,594 26,160 -67.7 27.8 2.2 Massachusetts 105,769 52,473 60,776 51,179 -51.6 -2.5 -15.8 Michigan 209,695 69,327 70,138 67,596 -67.8 -2.5 -3.6 Minnesota 61,343 26,387 22,887 24,726 -59.7 -6.3 8.0 Mississippi 53,221 11,631 12,624 12,078 -77.3 3.8 -4.3 Missouri 91,802 39,054 39,635 39,606 -56.9 1.4 -0.1 Montana 11,660 3,192 3,869 3,694 -68.3 15.7 -4.5 Nebraska 15,427 7,515 8,950 8,445 -45.3 12.4 -5.6 Nevada 15,559 7,410 10,070 11,066 -28.9 49.3 9.9 New Hampshire 11,078 4,497 6,161 6,168 -44.3 37.2 0.1 Congressional Research Service NR -50.0 2725 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Percentage Change Dec 1994 to Dec 2010 Dec 2007 to Dec 2010 Dec 2009 to Dec. 2010 Dec-94 Dec-07 Dec-09 Dec-10 New Jersey 113,293 34,175 33,686 35,330 -68.8 3.4 4.9 New Mexico 34,854 12,195 19,747 21,664 -37.8 77.6 9.7 New York 463,692 155,798 156,735 158,133 -65.9 1.5 0.9 North Carolina 128,848 24,544 25,676 23,639 -81.7 -3.7 -7.9 5,309 2,072 2,136 1,931 -63.6 -6.8 -9.6 236,298 80,629 103,690 103,513 -56.2 28.4 -0.2 Oklahoma 45,893 8,951 9,858 9,471 -79.4 5.8 -3.9 Oregon 39,967 19,299 29,373 32,884 -17.7 70.4 12.0 Pennsylvania 208,949 55,389 51,991 59,034 -71.7 6.6 13.5 Puerto Rico 56,132 12,356 13,577 14,615 -74.0 18.3 7.6 Rhode Island 22,599 8,349 7,785 6,778 -70.0 -18.8 -12.9 South Carolina 50,251 14,428 18,847 19,038 -62.1 32.0 1.0 6,521 2,904 3,269 3,290 -49.5 13.3 0.6 Tennessee 105,616 55,161 62,760 63,149 -40.2 14.5 0.6 Texas 281,011 57,002 51,423 52,972 -81.1 -7.1 3.0 Utah 17,240 5,140 7,071 5,716 -66.8 11.2 -19.2 Vermont 9,707 4,242 3,268 3,335 -65.6 -21.4 2.1 Virgin Islands 1,264 399 530 511 -59.6 28.1 -3.6 74,203 31,041 37,236 37,105 -50.0 19.5 -0.4 102,603 52,013 68,819 69,805 -32.0 34.2 1.4 West Virginia 39,546 8,725 9,663 10,676 -73.0 22.4 10.5 Wisconsin 73,714 17,788 20,157 25,270 -65.7 42.1 25.4 Wyoming 5,400 265 327 312 -94.2 17.7 -4.6 4,971,819 1,703,910 1,931,865 1,947,957 -60.8 14.2 0.8 North Dakota Ohio South Dakota Virginia Washington Totals Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Notes: Caseload data includes those aided under TANF and under separate state programs (SSPs) funded by TANF maintenance-of-effort (MOE) dollars. NR denotes that caseload data were not reported for the month. Total percentage change for Dec. 2007 to Dec. 2009 exclude Guam, which did not report data for Dec. 2007. Congressional Research Service 2826 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Table B-6. Families Receiving Cash Assistance, By Number of Parents Receiving Assistance on Their Own Behalf: December 2010 As a Percent of All Families Receiving Assistance No Parent Families Single Parent Families TwoParent Families No Parent Families Single Parent Families TwoParent Families Totals 8,690 15,371 151 24,212 35.9 63.5 0.6 100.0 988 2,115 469 3,572 27.7 59.2 13.1 100.0 Arizona 7,912 10,784 670 19,366 40.9 55.7 3.5 100.0 Arkansas 3,109 5,305 218 8,632 36.0 61.5 2.5 100.0 California 259,243 281,339 60,644 601,226 43.1 46.8 10.1 100.0 Colorado 3,427 4,195 442 8,064 42.5 52.0 5.5 100.0 Connecticut 6,962 9,788 0 16,750 41.6 58.4 0.0 100.0 Delaware 3,032 2,686 36 5,754 52.7 46.7 0.6 100.0 District of Columbia 2,261 3,861 0 6,122 36.9 63.1 0.0 100.0 Florida 39,954 16,880 1,310 58,144 68.7 29.0 2.3 100.0 Georgia 16,676 4,010 0 20,686 80.6 19.4 0.0 100.0 Guam 683 418 159 1,260 54.2 33.2 12.6 100.0 Hawaii 1,897 6,007 2,232 10,136 18.7 59.3 22.0 100.0 Idaho 1,674 184 0 1,858 90.1 9.9 0.0 100.0 Illinois 14,869 12,308 0 27,177 54.7 45.3 0.0 100.0 Indiana 9,683 19,565 2,213 31,461 30.8 62.2 7.0 100.0 Iowa 5,382 14,650 1,068 21,100 25.5 69.4 5.1 100.0 Kansas 4,194 9,990 1,463 15,647 26.8 63.8 9.4 100.0 Kentucky 18,120 12,470 746 31,336 57.8 39.8 2.4 100.0 Louisiana 7,099 4,018 0 11,117 63.9 36.1 0.0 100.0 Maine 2,477 10,967 2,004 15,448 16.0 71.0 13.0 100.0 Maryland 8,223 17,937 0 26,160 31.4 68.6 0.0 100.0 Massachusetts 17,743 30,995 2,441 51,179 34.7 60.6 4.8 100.0 Michigan 17,214 50,382 0 67,596 25.5 74.5 0.0 100.0 Minnesota 10,937 13,789 0 24,726 44.2 55.8 0.0 100.0 Mississippi 5,227 6,851 0 12,078 43.3 56.7 0.0 100.0 Missouri 8,883 30,723 0 39,606 22.4 77.6 0.0 100.0 Montana 1,394 1,910 390 3,694 37.7 51.7 10.6 100.0 Nebraska 3,786 4,659 0 8,445 44.8 55.2 0.0 100.0 Nevada 4,791 5,117 1,158 11,066 43.3 46.2 10.5 100.0 New Hampshire 2,502 3,520 146 6,168 40.6 57.1 2.4 100.0 State Alabama Alaska Congressional Research Service Totals 2927 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ As a Percent of All Families Receiving Assistance No Parent Families Single Parent Families TwoParent Families No Parent Families Single Parent Families TwoParent Families Totals New Jersey 9,526 25,804 0 35,330 27.0 73.0 0.0 100.0 New Mexico 7,265 12,791 1,608 21,664 33.5 59.0 7.4 100.0 New York 60,013 95,469 2,651 158,133 38.0 60.4 1.7 100.0 North Carolina 16,771 6,590 278 23,639 70.9 27.9 1.2 100.0 721 1,210 0 1,931 37.3 62.7 0.0 100.0 46,405 48,854 8,254 103,513 44.8 47.2 8.0 100.0 5,272 4,199 0 9,471 55.7 44.3 0.0 100.0 Oregon 10,130 19,762 2,992 32,884 30.8 60.1 9.1 100.0 Pennsylvania 21,952 35,986 1,096 59,034 37.2 61.0 1.9 100.0 Puerto Rico 1,830 12,785 0 14,615 12.5 87.5 0.0 100.0 Rhode Island 2,255 4,005 518 6,778 33.3 59.1 7.6 100.0 South Carolina 7,278 11,760 0 19,038 38.2 61.8 0.0 100.0 South Dakota 2,170 1,120 0 3,290 66.0 34.0 0.0 100.0 Tennessee 12,636 48,787 1,726 63,149 20.0 77.3 2.7 100.0 Texas 35,210 17,762 0 52,972 66.5 33.5 0.0 100.0 Utah 2,667 3,049 0 5,716 46.7 53.3 0.0 100.0 Vermont 1,314 1,636 385 3,335 39.4 49.1 11.5 100.0 22 489 0 511 4.3 95.7 0.0 100.0 Virginia 11,828 25,277 0 37,105 31.9 68.1 0.0 100.0 Washington 25,406 37,297 7,102 69,805 36.4 53.4 10.2 100.0 4,847 5,829 0 10,676 45.4 54.6 0.0 100.0 Wisconsin 12,163 12,500 607 25,270 48.1 49.5 2.4 100.0 Wyoming 215 90 7 312 68.9 28.8 2.2 100.0 796,928 1,045,845 105,184 1,947,957 40.9 53.7 5.4 100.0 State North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Virgin Islands West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Totals Totals Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Notes: Caseload data includes those aided under TANF and under separate state programs (SSPs) funded by TANF maintenance-of-effort (MOE) dollars. Congressional Research Service 3028 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ Table B-7. TANF Work Participation Rates: FY2009 All Family Standard State Participation Rate Met Standard? Two-Parent Standard Participation Rate Met Standard? United States 29.4 Alabama 32.4 YES 24.7 YES Alaska 37.2 YES 40.5 NO Arizona 27.1 YES 62.6 YES Arkansas 37.1 YES 21.7 YES California 26.8 NO 28.6 YES Colorado 37.8 YES 33.3 YES Connecticut 34.4 YES NA NA Delaware 37.5 YES NA NA Dist. Of Col. 23.5 NO NA NA Florida 46.1 YES 54.4 YES Georgia 57.1 YES NA NA Guam 0.0 NO 0.0 NO Hawaii 40.3 YES NA NA Idaho 52.0 YES NA NA Illinois 49.3 YES NA NA Indiana 17.5 YES 17.8 YES Iowa 35.4 YES 27.0 YES Kansas 23.9 YES 25.6 YES Kentucky 37.3 YES 35.1 NO Louisiana 34.4 YES NA NA Maine 16.8 NO 16.6 NO Maryland 44.0 YES NA NA Massachusetts 47.5 YES 92.8 YES Michigan 27.9 YES NA NA Minnesota 29.8 YES NA NA Mississippi 67.5 YES NA NA Missouri 13.2 NO NA NA Montana 44.2 YES 58.7 YES Nebraska 50.3 YES NA NA Nevada 39.4 YES 46.8 NO New Hampshire 46.5 YES NA NA Congressional Research Service 28.3 3129 . The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ All Family Standard Two-Parent Standard Participation Rate Met Standard? New Jersey 20.1 YES NA NA New Mexico 43.1 YES 63.0 YES New York 33.4 YES NA NA North Carolina 32.3 YES 46.6 YES North Dakota 61.0 YES NA NA Ohio 23.3 NO 23.1 YES Oklahoma 23.0 YES NA NA 9.5 NO 5.9 NO Pennsylvania 45.8 YES 84.2 YES Puerto Rico 8.7 NO NA NA Rhode Island 13.8 YES 13.6 NO South Carolina 45.1 YES NA NA South Dakota 59.4 YES NA NA Tennessee 25.5 YES 0.0 YES Texas 37.0 YES NA NA Utah 32.6 YES NA NA Vermont 29.0 YES 24.0 YES 7.1 YES NA NA Virginia 44.3 YES NA NA Washington 23.0 YES 18.6 YES West Virginia 19.6 YES NA NA Wisconsin 39.9 YES 33.0 YES Wyoming 61.3 YES 75.7 YES State Oregon Virgin Islands Participation Rate Met Standard? Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Note: NA denotes not applicable. State did not service two-parent families in its TANF or MOE-funded programs. NR denotes not reported. Author Contact Information Gene Falk Specialist in Social Policy gfalk@crs.loc.gov, 7-7344 Congressional Research Service 3230