The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
October 17, 2013March 12, 2014
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL32760
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
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 federal block grant. States are also required in total to contribute, from their
own funds, at least $10.4 billion under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement.
Federal and State TANF Expenditures. Though TANF is best known for funding cash
assistance payments for needy families with children, the block grant and MOE funds are used for
a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2012, expenditures on basic assistance (cash
assistance) totaled $9.0 billion—28.6% 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 Assistance Caseload. A total of 1.87 million families, composed of 4.10 million recipients,
received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in MarchSeptember 2013. The bulk of the “recipients” were
children—3.10 million in that month. The cash assistance caseload is very heterogeneous. The type
of family historically thought of as the “typical” cash assistance family—one with an unemployed
adult recipient—accounted for less than half of all families on the rolls in FY2010. Additionally,
15% of cash assistance 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 Assistance Benefits. TANF cash benefits are set by states. In July 20112012, 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 jurisdiction (North
Dakota), the maximum monthly benefit of $427 for a family of three represents 2827% of povertylevel income.
Cash Assistance 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. Therefore, the effective standards states face
are often less than the 50% or 90% targets, and vary by state. In FY2010, states achieved an allfamily participation rate of 29.0% and a two-parent rate of 33.4%. That year, eight jurisdictions
failed the all-family standard, and six 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: FAQs
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
Current Topics.................................................................................................................................. 1
What Is TANF’s Current Funding Status? ................................................................................. 1
What Is TANF’s Funding Level? ............................................................................................... 1
Did the Cash Assistance Caseload Rise During the Recent Recession?What Does President Obama’s FY2015 Budget Propose for TANF? ....................................... 2
What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative? .................................................................... 2
Has Any State Formally Applied for a “Waiver” of TANF Work Participation
Standards? .............................................................................................................................. 2
May States Require Drug Testing of Assistance Recipients? .................................................... 23
History ............................................................................................................................................. 3
When Was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant
Created? .................................................................................................................................. 3
Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law? ............................................................ 3
Funding and Expenditures ............................................................................................................... 4
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? .............................. 4
How Have States Used TANF Funds? ....................................................................................... 5
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? ................................................................. 67
The Caseload ................................................................................................................................... 7
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services? ....................... 7
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Cash
Assistance? ............................................................................................................................. 7
How Does the Current Cash Assistance Caseload Level Compare with Historical
Levels? ................................................................................................................................... 78
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families? ..................................................... 89
TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month? ................ 1011
TANF Work Participation Standards ............................................................................................. 1415
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? ....................................... 1415
Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted Since the 1996
Welfare Reform Law? .......................................................................................................... 1416
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved? .................................................... 1516
What Has Been the National Average All-Family Work Participation Rate?.................... 1516
How Many Jurisdictions Have Failed the All-Families Standard From FY2002
Through FY2010? .......................................................................................................... 1617
Are States that Recently Failed the All-Family Standard Being Penalized? ..................... 1920
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard? ....................................... 1920
Figures
Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2012, by Major Benefit and
Service Category........................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2. Number of FamiliesNeedy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance: July
1959-MarchSeptember 2013 ................................................................. 8
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Assistance Caseload: FY2010.................................................. 9
Figure 4. National Average All-Families Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010 .................. 163. Composition of the Cash Assistance Caseload: FY2010................................................ 10
Congressional Research Service
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Figure 4. National Average All-Families Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010 .................. 17
Tables
Table 1. Federal TANF Funding: FY2006 Through FY2013FY2014 .......................................................... 1
Table 2. Basic TANFTANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Constant 1997(Inflation-Adjusted) Dollars .......................................................... 4 5
Table 3. TANF Cash Assistance Caseload: March 2013....September 2013 .............................................................. 7 8
Table 4. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash BenefitAssistance Benefits for a Family of Three: July 2011 and
as a Percent of the Federal Poverty Guideline by State: July 2012 ................................. 10........... 11
Table 5. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits by Family Size: July 2011 ........... 12 and State:
July 2012..................................................................................................................................... 13
Table 6. States Failing TANF All-Families Work Participation Standard: FY2002-FY2010 ........ 1718
Table 7. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
FY2002-FY2010 ......................................................................................................................... 1920
Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006 ..................................................... 2223
Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2013FY2014 ..................................................... 2324
Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2012 .................................. 2324
Table B-1. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category .................................................. 2425
Table B-2. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Funding ..................................................................................... 2627
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2012 ............................................................... 2930
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Cash
Assistance, March 2013 ................ by State: September 2013 .............................................................................................. 30 31
Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, March 1994, 2007,
2012, and 2013 ...............Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance by State,
September of Selected Years............................................................................................................ 32
Table B-6. Families Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, by Number of Parents Receiving
Assistance on Their Own Behalf: March 2013 33
Table B-6. TANF Families by Number of Parents in Assisted Unit by State: September
2013 ......................................................................................... 34................................................... 35
Table B-7. TANF All-Family Work Participation Rate by State: FY2002 Through FY2010 ........ 3637
Table B-8. TANF Two-Parent Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010 ................................... 38
Appendixes
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables .............................................................................................. 2223
Appendix B. State Tables ............................................................................................................... 2425
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 3940
Congressional Research Service
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
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.
Current Topics
What Is TANF’s Current Funding Status?
H.R. 2775, as it cleared Congress and was signed by the President,P.L. 113-76 funds TANF through January
15September 30, 2014. It funds TANF at the same levels as were
provided in FY2013 through that date. It
makes no changes in TANF policies.
What Is TANF’s Funding Level?
Table 1 shows TANF funding for FY2006 through FY2013FY2014. The bulk of TANF funding is in a
basic block grant (the state family assistance grant), which provides annual funding totaling $16.5
billion for the 50 states and District of Columbia. This grant and amount was established in the
1996 welfare reform law and has not been changed since then.
Table 1. Federal TANF Funding: FY2006 Through FY2013FY2014
(Dollars in millions)
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
Supplemental grants
319
319
319
319
319
211
0
0
0
Healthy
marriage/responsible
fatherhood fatherhood
grants
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
150
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
878
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
93
59
428
1,107
212
334
612
610a
617
4,383
18,768
21,639
17,270
17,3378
8
334
612
610a
610a
17,270
17,337
17,335
17,335
State family
assistance grant
Grants to the
territories
Grants for tribal
work programs
Regular contingency
funds
funds
93
59
428
Emergency contingency
funds
Totals
17,137
Congressional Research Service
17,103
17,472
2012
2013
1
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
17,103
17,472
1,107
212
617
4,383
18,768
21,639
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS.
a.
P.L. 112-275 appropriated $612 million to the TANF contingency fund for FY2013 and FY2014, and
reserved $2 million
in each year of these funds for a commission on child abuse and neglect fatalities. Thus,
$610 million is available for
FY2013 FY2013 and FY2014 TANF contingency fund grants to states.
Congressional Research Service
1
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
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.
Did the Cash Assistance Caseload Rise During the
Recent Recession?
The TANF cash assistance caseload rose from August 2008 through December 2010, increasing
17% from 1,675,297 families in July 2008 to a peak of 1,952,451 families in December 2010.
The caseload has declined since then, standing at 1,753,668 in March 2013What Does President Obama’s FY2015 Budget Propose for TANF?
The President’s FY2015 budget does not propose a comprehensive reauthorization of TANF. It
proposes to extend TANF funding for FY2015 at current levels. The Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) summary document of the FY2015 budget proposals states:
When Congress takes up reauthorization, the Administration will be prepared to work with
lawmakers to strengthen the program’s effectiveness in accomplishing its goals. This effort
should include using performance indicators to drive program improvement and ensuring
that states have the flexibility to engage recipients in the most effective activities to promote
success in the workforce, including families with serious barriers to employment.1
Though the budget proposal would not reauthorize TANF, it does propose several legislative
changes to the block grant. It would
•
change the purpose of the “contingency fund,” from providing extra funding
during economic downturns to finance any TANF activity to one focused on
subsidized employment;
•
provide that $10 million in funding (from the contingency fund) be used for
federal oversight of state TANF programs; and
•
restrict expenditures counted toward the MOE to those made by state and local
governments, eliminating the ability of states to count expenditures or the value
of services provided by third parties (e.g., charitable organizations) directed
toward a TANF-eligible activity.
What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative?
On July 12, 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it would
accept applications for “waivers” of the TANF work participation standards. In general, these are
waivers of the way the performance of state welfare-to-work programs are assessed. (The
requirements that apply to individuals are determined by the states, but the federal TANF work
participation standards influenced the design of state programs and requirements.) For a
, the Federal
work participation standards. For a discussion, see CRS Report R42627, Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF): Welfare
Waivers, by Gene Falk.
Has Any State Formally Applied for a “Waiver” of TANF Work
Participation Standards?
As of September 27, 2013, no statesFebruary 21, 2014, no state had formally applied for a waiver of TANF work
participation participation
standards under the Administration’s waiver initiative.
1
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Fiscal Year 2015 Budget in Brief, March 2014, p. 117.
Congressional Research Service
2
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
May States Require Drug Testing of Assistance Recipients?
Yes. The 1996 assistance reform law gave states the option of requiring drug tests for assistance
recipients and penalizing those who fail such tests. (See Section 902 of P.L. 104-193.) However,
specific state policies regarding drug testing raise constitutional issues. See CRS Report R42326,
Constitutional Analysis of Suspicionless Drug Testing Requirements for the Receipt of
Governmental Benefits, by David H. Carpenter.
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.)
Congressional Research Service
2
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
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.
For a discussion of states that require drug testing in TANF and related programs, see CRS Report
R42394, Drug Testing and Crime-Related Restrictions in TANF, SNAP, and Housing Assistance,
by Maggie McCarty et al.
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 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). PRWORA is also
referred to in this report as the 1996 welfare reform law. 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.
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.)
Congressional Research Service
3
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171) included 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.) The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (P.L.
111-291) provided that healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood initiatives would be funded
at $75 million each for FY2011. Temporary extension legislation continued these activities for
FY2012 and FY2013 at $75 million for responsible fatherhood and $75 million for healthy
marriage initiatives.
P.L. 112-96 (the law that extended the payroll tax cut through 2012) provided TANF funding
through the end of FY2012. It provided FY2012 funding for the basic TANF block grant, healthy
Congressional Research Service
3
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
marriage and responsible fatherhood competitive grants, and certain other funds at their FY2011
levels. It did not provide FY2012 funding for TANF supplemental grants.
In addition, P.L. 112-96
•
prevents electronic benefit transaction access to TANF cash at liquor stores,
casinos, and strip clubs; states are required to prohibit access to TANF cash at
Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) at such establishments; and
•
requires states to report TANF data in a manner that facilitates the exchange of
that data with other programs’ data systems.
Legislation that extended TANF funding for FY2013 and FY2014 did not include policy changes.
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 FY2012FY2013 (ended September 30, 20122013),
the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 30.131.2%. Table 2 shows the impact of inflation
on the value of the TANF block grant for each year, FY1997 through FY2012.
Table 2. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars
Fiscal Year
Value of the Block
Grant in Millions of
FY1997 DollarsFY2013. It also shows the
projected effect of inflation over the period FY2014 to FY2019 if the TANF basic block grant
remains at its current funding level. As shown on the table, if the block grant remains funded at
current levels, by FY2019 it would have lost almost 40% of its value due to inflation from
FY1997.
Congressional Research Service
4
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table 2. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Constant (Inflation-Adjusted) Dollars
Fiscal Year
Value of the
Basic TANF
Block Grant in
1997 Dollars
Cumulate Change
in Value of the
Block Grant from
FY1997
1997
$16.5
1998
16.2
-1.6%
1999
15.9
-3.5
2000
15.4
-6.4
2001
14.9
-9.4
2002
14.7
-10.7
2003
14.4
-12.7
2004
14.1
-14.7
2005
13.6
-17.4
2006
13.1
-20.4
2007
12.8
-22.2
2008
12.3
-25.5
2009
12.3
-25.3
2010
12.1
-26.5
2011
11.8
-28.4
2012
11.5
-30.1
Congressional Research Service
Percentage
Change from
FY1997 Value
4
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Source: Congressional Research Service. Constant dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for
All Urban Consumers (CPI-U).2013
11.3
-31.2
2014 (est.)
11.2
-32.2
2015 (est.)
11.0
-33.5
2016 (est.)
10.7
-34.9
2017 (est.)
10.5
-36.3
2018 (est.)
10.3
-37.7
2019 (est.)
10.0
-39.2
Source: Congressional Research Service based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and
Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
Notes: Inflation adjustment uses the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U). FY2014-FY2019
figures are based on the CBO February 2014 economic forecast.
How Have States Used TANF Funds?
TANF is best known as a funding source of cash assistance 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 FY2012. In
FY2012, a total of $31.4 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
Congressional Research Service
5
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance, the category that most
closely reflects cash assistance, represented 28.6% ($9.0 billion) of total FY2012 TANF and
MOE dollars.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2012, 16.0% 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. Most TANF funding for these programs is subsumed in the catch-all “other”
expenditure category.
Congressional Research Service
5
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2012, by Major Benefit and
Service Category
Total = $31.4 billion
Other
31.7%
Basic Assistance
28.6%
Administration
7.2%
Other Work
Supports
9.6%
Child Care
16.0%
Work
Expenditures
6.9%
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
See Appendix A, Table A-3 for dollar amounts 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 Table B-1 and Table B-2.
Congressional Research Service
6
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
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 FY2012 (September 30, 2012, the latest data currently available), a total of $3.1
billion of federal TANF funding remained neither transferred nor spent. However, some of these
unspent funds represent monies that states had already committed to spend later. At the end of
FY2012, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.4
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
6
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
At the end of FY2012, states also had $1.7 billion of “unobligated balances.” These funds are
available to states to make new spending commitments. Table B-3 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 cash assistance, with no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF
benefits and services. As discussed in a previous section of this report, TANF basic assistance
accounts for about 28.6% of all TANF expenditures. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements
that pertain to families receiving “assistance” are very likely to undercount the number of families
receiving any TANF-funded benefit or service.
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOEFunded Cash Assistance?
Table 3 provides cash assistance caseload information. A total of 1.87 million families, composed
of 4.10 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in MarchSeptember 2013. The bulk of the
the “recipients” were children—3.10 million in that month. For state-by-state cash assistance
caseloads, see Appendix B.
Congressional Research Service
7
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table 3. TANF Cash Assistance Caseload: March 2013
September 2013
Total Families
1,753,668711,437
Total Recipients
4,097,377
Children
3,094,144
Adults
1,003,233011,571
Total Children
3,027,634
Total Adults
983,937
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
How Does the Current Cash Assistance Caseload Level Compare
with Historical Levels?
The number of families receiving cash assistance peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families.
The cash assistance 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, peaking
in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families.
Congressional Research Service
7
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving cash
assistance, from July 1959 to MarchSeptember 2013.
Figure 2. Number of Families
Congressional Research Service
8
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Figure 2. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance: July
1959-March 2013
Families in Millions
6
March 1994: 5.1 million
5
4
3
Dec. 2010:
1.95 million
2
Mar. 2013:
1.8 million
July 2008:
1.7 million
September 2013
In Millions of Families
6
March 1994:
5.1 million
5
4
3
Sept. 2013:
1.7 million
2
1
Jul-59
Jul-61
Jul-63
Jul-65
Jul-67
Jul-69
Jul-71
Jul-73
Jul-75
Jul-77
Jul-79
Jul-81
Jul-83
Jul-85
Jul-87
Jul-89
Jul-91
Jul-93
Jul-95
Jul-97
Jul-99
Jul-01
Jul-03
Jul-05
Jul-07
Jul-09
Jul-11
Jul-13
0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: Represents families receiving cash assistance from Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), Aid to Families
with Dependent Children (AFDC), and TANF. For October 1999 through MarchSeptember 2013, includes families
receiving assistance from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF
maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash assistance families by state.
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families?
Historically, the “typical” cash assistance 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 assistance caseload decline has occurred together with a major shift in the
composition of the rolls. Today, less than half of all cash assistance families are headed by an
unemployed adult recipient. Almost 4 in 10 of all cash assistance families had no adult recipient
Congressional Research Service
8
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
or work-eligible individual 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 assistance families, and welfare-to-work efforts have been concentrated on this population.
Congressional Research Service
9
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Figure 3 shows the composition of the cash assistance caseload in FY2010. Families with an
unemployed adult recipient represent 46% of all cash assistance families. Families with an
employed (in a regular job) adult recipient, who receive cash assistance as an earnings
supplement, comprise an additional 15% of the cash assistance 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 10% of the cash assistance
caseload. Families that are made up of children living with a non-parent relative (grandparents,
aunts, uncles, etc.) represent 13% of the cash assistance caseload. Families of child citizens living
with ineligible parents who are noncitizens or who have not reported their citizenship status make
up 11% of the total cash assistance caseload. The remainder of the cash assistance caseload
represents child recipients for whom data on the adults they live with are not available.
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Assistance Caseload: FY2010
Child-Only/Other
5%
Child-Only/SSI
Parent
10%
ChildOnly/Ineligible
Immigrant Parent
11%
ChildOnly/Caretaker
Relative
13%
Family with an
Adult/Not
Employed
46%
Family with an
Adult/Employed
15%
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the FY2010 TANF National Data Files.
Notes: Includes families receiving assistance from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. Families with an adult include families with
nonrecipient parents who are “work-eligible.” Most non-recipient parents who are “work-eligible” are those
who have reached time limits or have been sanctioned off the rolls in states that permit continuation of aid to
children of such parents.
Congressional Research Service
9
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
For more information on the characteristics and the changes in the composition of the cash
assistance caseload, see CRS Report R43187, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF):
Characteristics of the Cash Assistance Caseload, by Gene Falk.
Congressional Research Service
10
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
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 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a family of three in July
2011.12012.2 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-parent family with two children. Some
states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent families or “childonly” 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 three, the maximum TANF benefit
paid in July 20112012 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi (11.010.7% of poverty-level income) to
$923 per month in Alaska (47.846.4% of poverty-level income).23
Table 4. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Benefit for a Family of Three: July 2011
Maximum Monthly
Benefit for a Family of 3
Maximum Monthly
Benefit as a Percent
of the 2011 Federal
Poverty Guidelines
Alabama
$215
13.9%
Alaska
923
47.8
Arizona
278
18.0
State
1Assistance Benefits for a Family of Three and
as a Percent of the Federal Poverty Guideline by State: July 2012
Benefits for a Single Parent and Two Children
Maximum Benefit Per
Month for a Family of
Three
As a Percent of the 2012
Federal Poverty
Guideline
Alabama
$215
13.5
Alaska
$923
46.4
Arizona
$277
17.4
Arkansas
$204
12.8
California
$638
40.1
State
2
States are not required to report to the federal government their cash assistance benefit amounts in either the TANF
state plan (under Section 402 of the Social Security Act) or in annual program reports (under Section 411 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).
23
Different poverty thresholds, with greater dollar amounts, apply in Alaska than in the 48 contiguous states and the
District of Columbia. New York’s benefit of $753770 per month represents 48.84% of the poverty guidelines that apply in
the 48 contiguous states and District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
1011
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Maximum Monthly
BenefitBenefit Per
Month for a Family of 3
Maximum Monthly
Benefit as
Three
As a Percent
of the 2011 Federal
Poverty Guidelines
Arkansas
204
13.2
California
638
41.3
Colorado
462
29.9
Connecticut
674
43.6
Delaware
338
21.9
District of Columbia
428
27.7
Florida
303
19.6
Georgia
280
18.1
Hawaii
610
34.3
Idaho
309
20.0
Illinois
432
28.0
Indiana
288
18.7
Iowa
426
27.6
Kansas
429
27.8
Kentucky
262
17.0
Louisiana
240
15.5
Maine
485
31.4
Maryland
574
37.2
Massachusetts
633
41.0
Michigan
492
31.9
Minnesota
532
34.5
Mississippi
170
11.0
Missouri
292
18.9
Montana
504
32.6
Nebraska
364
23.6
Nevada
383
24.8
New Hampshire
675
43.7
New Jersey
424
27.5
New Mexico
380
24.6
New York
753
48.8
North Carolina
272
17.6
North Dakota
427
27.7
Ohio
434
28.1
Oklahoma
292
18.9
Oregon
506
32.8
State
Congressional Research Service
11
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Maximum Monthly
Benefit for a Family of 3
Maximum Monthly
Benefit as a Percent
of the 2011 Federal
Poverty Guidelines
Pennsylvania
421
27.3
Rhode Island
554
35.9
South Carolina
221
14.3
South Dakota
555
35.9
Tennessee
185
12.0
Texas
260
16.8
Utah
498
32.3
Vermont
665
43.1
Virginia
389
25.2
Washington
478
31.0
West Virginia
340
22.0
Wisconsin
628
40.7
Wyoming
577
37.4
Median State
427
27.7
Maximum
923
48.8
Minimum
170
11.0
State
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the Urban Institute’s “Welfare Rules Database.” of the 2012
Federal Poverty
Guideline
Colorado
$462
29.0
Connecticut
$576
36.2
Delaware
$338
21.2
D.C.
$428
26.9
Florida
$303
19.0
Georgia
$280
17.6
Hawaii
$610
33.3
Idaho
$309
19.4
Illinois
$432
27.2
Indiana
$288
18.1
Iowa
$426
26.8
Kansas
$429
27.0
Kentucky
$262
16.5
Louisiana
$240
15.1
Maine
$485
30.5
Maryland
$574
36.1
Massachusetts
$618
38.8
Michigan
$492
30.9
Minnesota
$532
33.4
Mississippi
$170
10.7
Missouri
$292
18.4
Montana
$504
31.7
Nebraska
$364
22.9
Nevada
$383
24.1
New Hampshire
$675
42.4
New Jersey
$424
26.7
New Mexico
$380
23.9
New York
$770
48.4
North Carolina
$272
17.1
North Dakota
$427
26.8
Ohio
$450
28.3
Oklahoma
$292
18.4
Oregon
$506
31.8
Pennsylvania
$403
25.3
Rhode Island
$554
34.8
State
Congressional Research Service
12
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Maximum Benefit Per
Month for a Family of
Three
As a Percent of the 2012
Federal Poverty
Guideline
South Carolina
$216
13.6
South Dakota
$555
34.9
Tennessee
$185
11.6
Texas
$263
16.5
Utah
$498
31.3
Vermont
$640
40.2
Virginia
$320
20.1
Washington
$478
30.0
West Virginia
$340
21.4
Wisconsin
$653
41.0
Wyoming
$602
37.8
Maximum
$923
48.4
Minimum
$170
10.7
Median
$427
26.8
State
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules Database
and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
As discussed above, most states vary maximum benefits by family size, paying larger benefits for
larger families. The exceptions are Idaho and Wisconsin, which pay a flat maximum benefit.
Additionally, some states do not increase benefits—or provide a smaller than usual increase in
benefits—for a family already on the rolls when a new baby is born. This is known as the “family
cap” policy, which 17 states had in July 2011.32012.4 Table 5 shows maximum monthly TANF cash
assistance benefits by family size and state for July 2012.
Table 5. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits by Family Size: July 2011 and State:
July 2012
Benefits for a Single ParentMother and Children
State
Alabama
State
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
$190
$215
$245
$275
$Alabama
190
215
245
275
305
Alaska
821
923
1,025
1,127
1,229
Arizona
220
278
334
392
449
Arkansas
162
204
247
286
331
34
States that had a family cap policy as of July 20112012 are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida,
Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina,
Tennessee, and Virginia.
Congressional Research Service
1213
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
Two
Three
Four
Five
SixArizona
220
277
334
392
448
Arkansas
162
204
247
286
331
California
516
638
762
866
972
Colorado
364
462
561
665
767
Connecticut
544
674
786
886
992470
576
677
775
877
Delaware
270
338
407
475
544
District of ColumbiaDC
336
428
523
602
708
Florida
241
303
364
426
487
Georgia
235
280
330
378
410
Hawaii
486
610
736
861
986
Idaho
309
309
309
309
309
Illinois
318
432
474
555
623
Indiana
230229
288
347346
405
464463
Iowa
361
426
495
548
610
Kansas
352
429
497
558
619
Kentucky
225
262
328
383
432325
361
398
Louisiana
188
240
284
327
366
Maine
363
485
611
733
856
Maryland
453
574
695
805
885
Massachusetts
531
633
731
832
936518
618
713
812
912
Michigan
403
492
597
694
828
Minnesota
437
532
621
697
773
Mississippi
146
170
194
218
242
Missouri
234
292
342
388
431
Montana
401
504
606
709
812
Nebraska
293
364
435
506
577
Nevada
318
383
448
513
578
New Hampshire
606
675
738
798
879
New Jersey
322
424
488
552
616
New Mexico
304
380
459
536
613
New York
548
753
905
1,063
1,172562
770
928
1,091
1,204
North Carolina
236
272
297
324
349
North Dakota
328
427
523
620
717
Ohio
355
434
536
627
698368
450
555
650
723
Oklahoma
225
292
361
422
483
Oregon
432
506
621
721
833
Pennsylvania
330
421
514
607
687
Rhode Island
449
554
634
714
794
Congressional Research Service
13Five
Six
14
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
South Carolina
175
221
266
311
355Oregon
432
506
621
721
833
Pennsylvania
316
403
497
589
670
Rhode Island
449
554
634
714
794
South Carolina
171
216
261
307
350
South Dakota
496
555
613
671
730
Tennessee
142
185
226
264
305
Texas
225
260
312
347
399228
263
316
351
404
Utah
399
498
583
663
731
Vermont
560
665
751
842
904
Virginia
323
389
451
537
570536
640
726
817
879
Virginia
254
320
382
451
479
Washington
385
478
562
648
736
West Virginia
301
340
384
420
460
Wisconsin
628
628
628
628
628
Wyoming
543
577
577
611
611653
653
653
653
653
Wyoming
567
602
602
638
638
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with, based on data from the Urban Institute’s “Welfare Rules Database.”
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.45 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 a state’s caseload. Additionally, under a regulatory provision, a state
may get “extra” credit for caseload reduction if it spends more than required under the TANF
MOE. Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% and 90% targets,
and vary by state.
5
Some families are excluded from the participation rate calculation.
Congressional Research Service
15
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted
Since the 1996 Welfare Reform Law?
The 50% and 90% target standards that states face, as well as the caseload reduction credit, date
back to the 1996 welfare reform law. However, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171)
made several changes to the work participation rules effective in FY2007:
4
Some families are excluded from the participation rate calculation.
Congressional Research Service
14
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
•
The caseload reduction credit was changed to measure caseload reduction from
FY2005, rather than the original law’s FY1995.
•
The work participation standards were broadened to include families receiving
cash aid in “separate state programs.” Separate state programs are programs run
with state funds, distinct from a state’s “TANF program,” but with expenditures
countable toward the TANF MOE.
•
HHS was instructed to provide definition to the allowable TANF work activities
listed in law. HHS was also required to define what is meant by a “work-eligible”
individual, expanding the number of families that are included in the work
participation calculation.
•
States were required to develop plans and procedures to verify work activities.
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
HHS computes two work participation rates for each state that are then compared with the
effective (after-credit) standard to determine if it has met the TANF work standard. An “allfamilies” work participation rate is computed and compared with the all-families effective
standard (50% minus the state’s caseload reduction credit). HHS also computes a two-parent
work participation rate that is compared with the two-parent effective standard (90% minus the
state’s caseload reduction credit).
What Has Been the National Average All-Family Work Participation Rate?
Figure 4 shows the national average all-families work participation rate for FY2002 through
FY2010. For the period FY2002 through FY2010, states have achieved an all-families work
participation rate hovering around 30%. In FY2010, the all-families work participation rate was
29.0%. This is well below the statutory target of 50% for all families, but most (not all) states met
the standard because of credits against the 50% standard.
Congressional Research Service
1516
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Figure 4. National Average All-Families Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
28.9%
27.5%
29.4%
30.3%
30.6%
29.7%
29.4%
29.4%
29.0%
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2002
2003
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: FY2002 through FY2006 work participation rates are based on federal work participation standard rules.
They exclude the effects of “grandfathered” waivers of pre-1996. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the
option to continue their pre-reform “waiver” programs and have their work participation rates based on the
rules of the state waivers, not the federal rules. The last of these pre-1996 waivers expired in 2006. The all
family work participation rates for FY2002 through FY2006 that include the effect of the waivers are slightly
higher than the rates shown here.
How Many Jurisdictions Have Failed the All-Families Standard From FY2002
Through FY2010?
Table 6 shows which states failed the TANF all-families work participation standards from
FY2002 through FY2010. Before FY2007 (the first year policies under the DRA were effective),
only a few jurisdictions failed to meet TANF all-families work participation standards. In
FY2006, three jurisdictions failed the standard, and that was the greatest number that failed the
standards over the FY2002 through FY2006 period.
However, in FY2007 15 jurisdictions failed to meet the all-families standard. This number
declined to 9 in FY2008 and 8 in FY2009. In FY2010 (the most recent year for which data are
available), 8 jurisdictions failed to meet the standard. Of these, 6 (California, Maine, Ohio,
Oregon, Puerto Rico, and Guam) failed the standards in all years since FY2007.
Congressional Research Service
1617
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table 6. States Failing TANF All-Families Work Participation Standard:
FY2002-FY2010
Changes to TANF Work Participation Standard Rules Under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA)
Effective in FY2007
Post-DRA Policies
Pre-DRA Policies
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
X
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
X
X
X
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
X
Louisiana
Maine
X
X
Michigan
X
X
Minnesota
X
Maryland
Massachusetts
X
Mississippi
Missouri
X
X
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
X
X
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
Congressional Research Service
X
1718
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Post-DRA Policies
Pre-DRA Policies
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
X
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
X
X
X
X
X
X
9
8
8
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Guam
X
X
X
X
X
Virgin Islands
Number of Jurisdictions Failing Standard
X
1
2
1
2
3
15
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
As shown in Figure 4 there was little change in the national average all-families work
participation rate from FY2007 through FY2010. However, following a spike in the number of
states failing the standard in FY2007, the number of states failing fell to nine in FY2008 and eight
in both FY2009 and FY2010. Some of the decline in the number of states failing the standard is
attributable to the increased use of “extra” credit states received for spending beyond what is
required by law. A Government Accountability Office (GAO) study found that, in FY2009, 32 of
the 45 states that met their standard claimed this “extra credit.” GAO calculated that 17 of these
states would not have met their participation standards without claiming the “extra” credit for
spending beyond what was required by law.5
56
6
See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Update on Families Serviced
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
1819
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Are States that Recently Failed the All-Family Standard Being Penalized?
States that fail to meet the TANF work participation standard are at risk of being penalized
through a reduction in their block grant. However, penalties can be forgiven if a state claims, and
the Secretary of HHS finds, that it had “reasonable cause” for failing the standard. Penalties can
also be forgiven for states that enter into “corrective compliance plans,” and subsequently meet
the work standard. HHS has not announced the status of penalties for failing to meet the allfamilies standard for FY2007 and subsequent years.
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard?
In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second, 90%
standard for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard too can be
reduced for caseload reduction.
Table 7 shows whether each state met its two-parent work participation standard for FY2002
through FY2012. However, the display on the table is more complex than that for reporting
whether a state failed its “all family” rate. A substantial number of states have reported no twoparent families subject to the work participation standard.67 These states are denoted on the table
with an “NA,” indicating that the two-parent standard was not applicable to the state in that year.
For states with two-parent families in its caseload, the table reports “Yes” for states that met the
two-parent standard, and “No” for states that failed the two-parent standard.
In FY2010, 25 jurisdictions reported that no two-parent families were included in the TANF work
participation standard calculation. Of the 29 jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their
TANF work participation calculation, 23 met the standard and 6 did not.
Table 7. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
FY2002-FY2010
(“Yes” indicates a state met the standard; “No” indicates the state failed to meet the standard; and “NA”
means the standard was not applicable to the state in that year ([no two-parent families in its caseload)].)
Post-DRA Policies
Pre-DRA Policies
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Alabama
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
YES
YES
YES
YES
Alaska
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
Arizona
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
(...continued)
and Work Participation. Statement of Kay E. Brown, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security. Testimony
Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, GAO-11990T, September 8, 2011, p. 12, http://www.gao.gov/assets/130/126892.pdf.
67
Before the changes made by the DRA were effective, a number of states had their two-parent families in separate state
programs that were not included in the work participation calculation. When DRA brought families receiving
assistance in separate state programs into the work participation rate calculations, a number of states moved these
families into solely-state-funded programs. These are state-funded programs with expenditures not countable toward
the TANF maintenance of effort requirement, and hence are outside of TANF’s rules.
Congressional Research Service
1920
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Post-DRA Policies
Pre-DRA Policies
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Arkansas
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
California
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
YES
YES
YES
YES
Colorado
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Connecticut
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
YES
NA
NA
NA
Delaware
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
District of Columbia
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NA
NA
NA
NA
Florida
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
YES
YES
YES
YES
Georgia
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Hawaii
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
YES
NA
YES
Idaho
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
NA
Illinois
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Indiana
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NO
YES
YES
YES
Iowa
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
YES
YES
YES
YES
Kansas
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Kentucky
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
Louisiana
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
NA
Maine
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
YES
NO
NO
NO
Maryland
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Massachusetts
YES
YES
YES
YES
NA
NA
YES
YES
YES
Michigan
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
NA
Minnesota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Mississippi
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Missouri
NO
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Montana
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Nebraska
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Nevada
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NO
NO
NO
NO
New Hampshire
YES
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
New Jersey
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
New Mexico
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
New York
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
NA
North Carolina
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
North Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Ohio
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Oklahoma
NA
YES
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Oregon
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
Congressional Research Service
2021
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Post-DRA Policies
Pre-DRA Policies
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Pennsylvania
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
South Carolina
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NA
NA
NA
South Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Tennessee
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
YES
YES
YES
YES
Texas
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
YES
NA
NA
NA
Utah
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Vermont
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Virginia
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Washington
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
West Virginia
NO
NO
NA
NA
NA
NO
NA
NA
YES
Wisconsin
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Yes
Yes
Wyoming
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Guam
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Virgin Islands
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Number of Jurisdictions without TwoParent Families
24
25
29
29
30
24
26
27
25
Number of Jurisdictions with TwoParent Families
30
29
25
25
24
30
28
27
29
Number of Jurisdictions Meeting the
Two-Parent Standard
25
25
21
23
21
22
22
20
23
Number of States Failing the Two-Parent
Standard
5
4
4
2
3
8
6
7
6
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Failure to meet the two-parent standard alone typically has smaller financial consequences for the
state than failure to meet the all-family standard or failure to meet both the all-family and twoparent standards. Under HHS regulations, if a state fails only the two-parent standard, the penalty
reduction in the block grant is prorated for the share of the overall cash assistance caseload that
represents two-parent families. Two-parent families typically account for a small share of the
overall cash assistance caseload.
Congressional Research Service
2122
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
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
2223
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table A-2.Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2013FY2014
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.
P.L. 112-35
Oct. 1, 2011-Dec. 31, 2011
Free-standing bill to extend TANF for three
months. No funding for TANF supplemental grants.
P.L. 112-78
Jan 1, 2012-February 21, 2012
Extension of TANF for two months, as part of a bill
to provide a two-month extension for the 2011
payroll tax reduction, extended unemployment
compensation, and other expiring provisions.
P.L. 112-96
February 22, 2012-Sept. 30, 2012
Extension of TANF for the remainder of FY2012
included as part of a bill to extend the 2011 payroll
tax reduction, unemployment compensation, and
other expiring provisions.
P.L. 112-175
Oct. 1, 2011-March 27, 2013
Extension of TANF for the first six months of
FY2013 as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-6
March 28, 2013-Sept. 30, 2013
Extension of TANF for the remainder of FY2013 as
part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-646
Oct. 17, 2013-Jan 15, 2014
Extension of TANF as a part of a continuing
resolution. The resolution ended the “government
shutdown,” and a TANF funding gap between Oct
1 and Oct 16, 2013
P.L. 113-73
Jan. 16, 2014-Jan. 18, 2014
Extension of TANF funding as part of a short-term
continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-76
Jan 19, 2014-Sept. 30, 2014
Extension of TANF funding for the remainder of
FY2014 as part of an omnibus appropriation act.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2012
Millions of Dollars
Percent of Total Federal
and MOE Funds
Basic Assistance
$8,982.2
28.6%
Administration
2,254.0
7.2
Work Expenditures
2,163.1
6.9
Child Care
5,022.4
16.0
Other Work Supports
3,004.5
9.6
Other
9,931.9
31.7
Totals
31,358.1
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
Congressional Research Service
2324
Appendix B. State Tables
Table B-1. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
(Dollars in millions)
State
Alabama
Basic
Assistance
Administration
Work Expenditures
Child
Care
Other Work
Supports
Other
Totals
$49.6
$19.7
$22.9
$5.5
$6.8
$66.4
$170.9
Alaska
41.3
5.2
11.1
21.8
1.0
4.9
85.5
Arizona
49.3
39.2
9.6
-1.1
2.0
247.0
345.9
Arkansas
14.6
9.0
32.5
10.7
3.8
104.0
174.6
California
3,285.2
569.0
528.0
793.0
164.7
1,142.7
6,482.7
Colorado
70.7
20.4
3.9
-30.8
8.7
192.8
265.8
Connecticut
81.1
31.4
16.8
35.8
5.0
323.6
493.7
Delaware
19.1
7.8
4.9
45.1
-0.4
11.5
88.1
District of Columbia
35.8
7.6
10.7
56.5
16.6
47.3
174.3
Florida
169.5
32.3
58.7
333.3
4.5
377.6
975.8
Georgia
43.9
23.9
20.7
23.3
10.9
399.9
522.7
Hawaii
69.2
15.7
93.6
25.3
3.5
59.7
267.0
Idaho
7.2
4.8
6.6
11.0
0.3
13.1
43.0
Illinois
127.4
33.1
33.8
624.5
15.7
351.2
1,185.7
Indiana
40.7
23.3
20.7
38.7
32.0
92.3
247.6
Iowa
66.4
15.2
17.8
45.1
17.9
64.1
226.5
Kansas
33.1
12.1
0.7
20.0
63.9
53.2
183.0
112.2
12.8
36.5
98.4
20.3
27.2
307.4
Kentucky
CRS-2425
State
Basic
Assistance
Administration
Work Expenditures
Child
Care
Other Work
Supports
Other
Totals
Louisiana
17.9
20.0
7.9
5.2
22.7
187.4
261.0
Maine
69.6
3.7
12.2
10.8
17.0
1.8
115.0
Maryland
141.7
42.1
48.6
23.6
130.9
182.7
569.6
Massachusetts
360.0
37.5
6.7
301.9
107.4
353.8
1,167.3
Michigan
253.1
165.1
82.3
22.4
239.4
821.7
1,584.0
Minnesota
86.4
42.5
63.6
122.7
142.0
48.0
505.2
Mississippi
19.0
3.8
23.8
19.1
22.7
18.2
106.6
Missouri
91.9
11.1
17.8
69.3
0.0
222.9
413.0
Montana
15.6
9.0
11.4
12.2
0.0
8.3
56.5
Nebraska
25.4
4.6
18.9
23.5
35.4
2.5
110.4
Nevada
43.7
8.8
1.6
0.9
1.3
42.7
99.0
New Hampshire
29.7
13.4
7.2
6.4
1.4
18.6
76.7
New Jersey
209.9
63.3
74.9
78.9
185.7
494.6
1,107.2
New Mexico
63.9
9.3
8.8
30.5
47.2
46.4
206.0
1,470.9
364.2
151.2
468.8
1,423.4
1,520.7
5,399.3
North Carolina
64.2
41.5
46.2
177.2
60.0
233.9
623.0
North Dakota
5.9
4.1
4.4
1.0
1.5
20.5
37.3
366.0
112.3
44.7
443.9
13.6
115.7
1,096.4
21.8
23.6
0.0
58.7
26.9
61.2
192.1
Oregon
152.1
35.7
13.5
9.5
2.2
131.6
344.7
Pennsylvania
293.7
88.5
104.4
430.9
14.4
154.9
1,086.8
Rhode Island
36.9
12.6
8.4
22.7
13.8
67.9
162.3
South Carolina
31.4
13.5
14.3
4.1
2.1
83.1
148.5
South Dakota
14.2
2.5
4.1
0.8
0.1
7.8
29.5
New York
Ohio
Oklahoma
CRS-2526
State
Tennessee
Basic
Assistance
Administration
Work Expenditures
Child
Care
Other Work
Supports
Other
Totals
118.5
34.0
68.9
82.4
0.0
68.9
372.6
Texas
92.6
73.0
83.7
26.9
6.9
631.4
914.5
Utah
26.6
8.8
24.8
7.5
2.0
34.4
104.0
Vermont
18.3
6.2
0.2
24.0
22.4
10.9
82.0
Virginia
104.1
20.8
51.4
42.6
8.4
79.5
306.7
Washington
242.0
55.2
171.5
125.2
1.3
465.9
1,061.1
33.0
13.6
1.9
28.4
27.5
40.3
144.6
Wisconsin
137.2
24.4
52.6
180.6
47.8
160.9
603.4
Wyoming
8.7
3.0
1.8
3.7
0.0
14.3
31.4
8,982.2
2,254.0
2,163.1
5,022.4
3,004.5
9,931.9
31,358.1
West Virginia
Totals
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Table B-2. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
State
Alabama
Basic Assistance
Administration
Work
Expenditures
Child Care
Other Work
Supports
Other
Totals
29.0%
11.5%
13.4%
3.2%
4.0%
38.9%
100.0%
Alaska
48.4
6.1
13.0
25.5
1.2
5.8
100.0
Arizona
14.2
11.3
2.8
-0.3
0.6
71.4
100.0
Arkansas
8.3
5.2
18.6
6.1
2.2
59.6
100.0
California
50.7
8.8
8.1
12.2
2.5
17.6
100.0
Colorado
26.6
7.7
1.5
-11.6
3.3
72.6
100.0
Connecticut
16.4
6.4
3.4
7.3
1.0
65.5
100.0
CRS-2627
State
Basic Assistance
Administration
Work
Expenditures
Child Care
Other Work
Supports
Other
Totals
Delaware
21.7
8.9
5.6
51.2
-0.4
13.0
100.0
District of Columbia
20.5
4.3
6.1
32.4
9.5
27.1
100.0
Florida
17.4
3.3
6.0
34.2
0.5
38.7
100.0
Georgia
8.4
4.6
4.0
4.5
2.1
76.5
100.0
Hawaii
25.9
5.9
35.1
9.5
1.3
22.3
100.0
Idaho
16.8
11.1
15.3
25.6
0.6
30.6
100.0
Illinois
10.7
2.8
2.8
52.7
1.3
29.6
100.0
Indiana
16.4
9.4
8.3
15.6
12.9
37.3
100.0
Iowa
29.3
6.7
7.9
19.9
7.9
28.3
100.0
Kansas
18.1
6.6
0.4
10.9
34.9
29.1
100.0
Kentucky
36.5
4.2
11.9
32.0
6.6
8.9
100.0
Louisiana
6.9
7.6
3.0
2.0
8.7
71.8
100.0
Maine
60.6
3.2
10.6
9.4
14.7
1.6
100.0
Maryland
24.9
7.4
8.5
4.1
23.0
32.1
100.0
Massachusetts
30.8
3.2
0.6
25.9
9.2
30.3
100.0
Michigan
16.0
10.4
5.2
1.4
15.1
51.9
100.0
Minnesota
17.1
8.4
12.6
24.3
28.1
9.5
100.0
Mississippi
17.9
3.6
22.3
17.9
21.3
17.1
100.0
Missouri
22.3
2.7
4.3
16.8
0.0
54.0
100.0
Montana
27.6
15.9
20.2
21.6
0.0
14.7
100.0
Nebraska
23.0
4.2
17.1
21.3
32.1
2.3
100.0
Nevada
44.2
8.9
1.7
0.9
1.3
43.1
100.0
New Hampshire
38.7
17.4
9.4
8.4
1.8
24.3
100.0
New Jersey
19.0
5.7
6.8
7.1
16.8
44.7
100.0
CRS-2728
State
Basic Assistance
Administration
Work
Expenditures
Child Care
Other Work
Supports
Other
Totals
New Mexico
31.0
4.5
4.3
14.8
22.9
22.5
100.0
New York
27.2
6.7
2.8
8.7
26.4
28.2
100.0
North Carolina
10.3
6.7
7.4
28.4
9.6
37.5
100.0
North Dakota
15.7
11.0
11.7
2.7
4.1
54.8
100.0
Ohio
33.4
10.2
4.1
40.5
1.2
10.6
100.0
Oklahoma
11.3
12.3
0.0
30.5
14.0
31.8
100.0
Oregon
44.1
10.4
3.9
2.8
0.6
38.2
100.0
Pennsylvania
27.0
8.1
9.6
39.7
1.3
14.3
100.0
Rhode Island
22.7
7.8
5.2
14.0
8.5
41.8
100.0
South Carolina
21.2
9.1
9.6
2.8
1.4
55.9
100.0
South Dakota
48.1
8.4
13.9
2.7
0.4
26.4
100.0
Tennessee
31.8
9.1
18.5
22.1
0.0
18.5
100.0
Texas
10.1
8.0
9.2
2.9
0.8
69.0
100.0
Utah
25.6
8.4
23.8
7.2
1.9
33.1
100.0
Vermont
22.3
7.6
0.3
29.3
27.3
13.3
100.0
Virginia
33.9
6.8
16.7
13.9
2.7
25.9
100.0
Washington
22.8
5.2
16.2
11.8
0.1
43.9
100.0
West Virginia
22.8
9.4
1.3
19.6
19.0
27.9
100.0
Wisconsin
22.7
4.0
8.7
29.9
7.9
26.7
100.0
Wyoming
27.6
9.7
5.6
11.6
0.0
45.5
100.0
Totals
28.6
7.2
6.9
16.0
9.6
31.7
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
CRS-2829
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2012
(September 30, 2012, in millions of dollars)
State
Alabama
Obligated but Not Expended
Unobligated Funds
Total Unspent Funds
$3.5
$5.7
$9.2
Alaska
0.0
75.5
75.5
Arizona
0.0
24.8
24.8
Arkansas
0.0
42.1
42.1
California
141.1
0.0
141.2
Colorado
0.0
17.6
17.6
Connecticut
0.0
6.3
6.3
Delaware
3.9
5.7
9.6
District of Columbia
9.5
59.7
69.2
Florida
49.1
87.5
136.6
Georgia
35.0
54.1
89.0
Hawaii
13.2
28.8
42.0
Idaho
31.4
0.0
31.4
Illinois
0.0
57.3
57.3
189.0
21.7
210.7
Iowa
3.9
8.7
12.5
Kansas
0.0
39.0
39.0
Kentucky
1.9
7.7
9.6
Louisiana
0.2
0.0
0.2
Maine
0.0
3.4
3.4
Maryland
0.0
0.0
0.0
Massachusetts
0.0
0.0
0.0
Michigan
0.0
119.0
119.0
Minnesota
54.3
79.5
133.8
Mississippi
5.6
12.9
18.5
Missouri
0.0
19.4
19.4
Montana
0.8
44.6
45.5
Nebraska
0.1
55.9
56.1
Nevada
0.0
9.0
9.0
New Hampshire
0.0
4.7
4.7
New Jersey
148.2
23.5
171.7
New Mexico
28.0
0.0
28.0
New York
221.4
300.3
521.6
North Carolina
187.4
3.5
190.9
Indiana
Congressional Research Service
2930
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
Obligated but Not Expended
North Dakota
Unobligated Funds
Total Unspent Funds
0.0
18.7
18.7
Ohio
42.1
47.1
89.2
Oklahoma
46.9
6.7
53.7
0.0
0.2
0.2
Pennsylvania
70.4
208.1
278.5
Rhode Island
13.9
0.0
13.9
South Carolina
0.0
13.6
13.6
South Dakota
0.0
16.0
16.0
Tennessee
0.0
20.5
20.5
Texas
92.4
0.0
92.4
Utah
0.0
86.5
86.5
Vermont
0.0
0.0
0.0
Virginia
1.6
25.1
26.7
Washington
0.0
0.0
0.0
West Virginia
9.5
0.0
9.5
Wisconsin
0.0
0.0
0.0
Wyoming
5.0
24.1
29.1
1,409.1
1,684.2
3,093.3
Oregon
Totals
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 Assistance, March TANF
Cash Assistance by State: September 2013
State
Alabama
Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
19,551
46,976
34,936
12,040
Alaska
3,730
10,027
6,748
3,279
Arizona
16,037
36,395
25,906
10,489
Arkansas
6,848
15,267
10,894
4,373
California
567,593
1,366,728
1,086,982
279,746
Colorado
14,825
38,576
27,511
11,065
Connecticut
14,592
28,828
20,310
8,518
Delaware
4,903
13,784
8,416
5,368
District of Columbia
5,701
13,597
10,496
3,101
Florida
54,608
97,257
79,592
17,665
Georgia
17,806
34,670
30,450
4,220
1,325
3,159
2,383
776
Guam
Congressional Research Service
30015
45,873
34,119
11,754
Alaska
3,421
9,118
6,185
2,933
Arizona
15,497
35,607
25,497
10,110
Arkansas
6,631
14,998
10,780
4,218
California
553,496
1,326,032
1,054,722
271,310
Colorado
17,001
44,639
31,466
13,173
Connecticut
14,665
28,451
20,009
8,442
Delaware
4,938
13,903
8,505
5,398
District of Columbia
6,151
16,053
12,288
3,765
Florida
51,991
90,553
75,121
15,432
Georgia
17,048
33,643
29,571
4,072
Guam
1,332
3,189
2,430
759
Hawaii
8,922
25,833
17,142
8,691
Congressional Research Service
31
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Hawaii
9,206
26,621
17,605
9,016
Idaho
1,823
2,746
2,587
159
Illinois
21,569
47,895
39,315
8,580
Indiana
12,837
26,364
23,128
3,236
Iowa
17,848
45,368
31,451
13,917
8,288
19,940
14,369
5,571
Kentucky
30,300
60,918
48,398
12,520
Louisiana
7,598
17,033
14,703
2,330
Maine
28,368
60,169
33,540
26,629
Maryland
21,704
51,755
37,877
13,878
Massachusetts
67,820
153,450
102,878
50,572
Michigan
36,189
83,689
62,154
21,535
Minnesota
23,535
52,506
39,935
12,571
Mississippi
9,918
20,789
15,235
5,554
Missouri
35,666
85,842
58,362
27,480
Montana
2,994
7,201
5,308
1,893
Nebraska
6,759
16,136
13,134
3,002
10,404
26,588
19,783
6,805
6,221
15,217
10,222
4,995
New Jersey
32,291
78,425
54,528
23,897
New Mexico
14,956
36,779
27,124
9,655
158,864
403,178
288,137
115,041
North Carolina
19,882
38,069
32,296
5,773
North Dakota
1,394
3,477
2,725
752
68,472
136,887
110,858
26,029
7,611
16,823
14,106
2,717
Oregon
43,400
103,269
74,594
28,675
Pennsylvania
71,741
176,064
126,890
49,174
Puerto Rico
13,115
36,080
22,733
13,347
Rhode Island
5,928
14,096
9,668
4,428
South Carolina
12,537
28,587
22,174
6,413
South Dakota
3,122
6,184
5,351
833
Tennessee
51,336
123,991
90,614
33,377
Texas
39,555
88,440
77,575
10,865
Utah
4,477
10,916
7,997
2,919
Vermont
3,427
7,769
5,407
2,362
406
1,193
857
336
Kansas
Nevada
New Hampshire
New York
Ohio
Oklahoma
Virgin Islands
Congressional Research Service
31
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Virginia
31,316
67,310
48,675
18,635
Washington
48,239
112,200
76,282
35,918
8,788
19,241
14,234
5,007
Wisconsin
25,902
61,773
46,024
15,749
Wyoming
343
1,135
687
448
1,753,668
4,097,377
3,094,144
1,003,233Idaho
1,846
2,789
2,631
158
Illinois
20,269
44,529
36,839
7,690
Indiana
11,894
24,326
21,408
2,918
Iowa
16,830
42,849
30,045
12,804
7,784
18,844
13,676
5,168
Kentucky
30,267
61,707
48,936
12,771
Louisiana
6,518
14,636
12,740
1,896
Maine
27,451
57,413
31,826
25,587
Maryland
21,471
52,104
38,234
13,870
Massachusetts
71,964
169,558
114,139
55,419
Michigan
32,046
73,751
55,582
18,169
Minnesota
22,628
50,319
38,351
11,968
Mississippi
9,549
20,127
14,815
5,312
Missouri
33,525
80,800
55,169
25,631
Montana
3,464
7,633
5,622
2,011
Nebraska
6,590
15,720
12,723
2,997
10,950
28,268
20,679
7,589
6,180
15,184
10,285
4,899
New Jersey
30,005
70,601
51,110
19,491
New Mexico
12,589
32,677
24,945
7,732
154,124
392,347
280,938
111,409
North Carolina
19,547
37,818
31,762
6,056
North Dakota
1,390
3,530
2,806
724
65,509
128,328
105,903
22,425
7,315
16,103
13,648
2,455
Oregon
42,868
111,074
73,929
37,145
Pennsylvania
71,288
175,820
126,135
49,685
Puerto Rico
12,311
34,105
21,413
12,692
Rhode Island
6,043
14,651
10,046
4,605
South Carolina
12,399
28,496
22,206
6,290
South Dakota
3,152
6,340
5,508
832
Tennessee
52,083
125,826
91,506
34,320
Texas
39,853
88,690
77,394
11,296
Utah
4,357
10,712
7,804
2,908
Vermont
3,760
8,799
6,091
2,708
434
1,254
901
353
30,045
66,245
48,181
18,064
Kansas
Nevada
New Hampshire
New York
Ohio
Oklahoma
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Congressional Research Service
32
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
Families
Washington
Recipients
Children
Adults
43,689
100,519
68,317
32,202
9,029
19,927
14,722
5,205
Wisconsin
27,966
68,133
50,147
17,986
Wyoming
347
1,127
687
440
1,711,437
4,011,571
3,027,634
983,937
West Virginia
Totals
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data include those families in Separate State Programs with expenditures countable toward the
TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance by
State, September of Selected YearsFamilies Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, March 1994, 2007,
2012, and 2013
Percentage Change to March
Sept 2013
from March.Sept...
1994
2007
2010
2012
2013
1994
2007
2013
Alabama
51,217
18,005
20,740
20,818
19,551
-61.8%
8.6%
-6.1%
Alaska
13,209
3,376
3,296
3,906
3,730
-71.8
10.5
-4.5
Arizona
71,713
35,617
35,227
17,268
16,037
-77.6
-55.0
-7.1
Arkansas
26,355
8,600
8,492
7,440
6,848
-74.0
-20.4
-8.0
California
916,427
471,775
576,355
580,388
567,593
-38.1
20.3
-2.2
Colorado
42,541
11,149
11,785
14,024
14,825
-65.2
33.0
5.7
Connecticut
59,351
20,890
17,261
15,118
14,592
-75.4
-30.1
-3.5
Delaware
11,592
4,027
5,089
5,301
4,903
-57.7
21.8
-7.5
District of
Columbia
27,047
5,748
9,786
5,805
5,701
-78.9
-0.8
-1.8
Florida
248,514
47,337
57,471
53,706
54,608
-78.0
15.4
1.7
Georgia
141,859
24,681
20,464
18,443
17,806
-87.4
-27.9
-3.5
Guam
1,863
931
1,245
1,316
1,325
-28.9
42.3
0.7
Hawaii
20,395
6,410
9,630
9,536
9,206
-54.9
43.6
-3.5
Idaho
9,016
1,661
1,742
1,874
1,823
-79.8
9.8
-2.7
Illinois
241,817
31,397
21,973
33,709
21,569
-91.1
-31.3
-36.0
Indiana
74,843
41,226
35,915
17,004
12,837
-82.8
-68.9
-24.5
Iowa
40,676
20,082
21,345
19,108
17,848
-56.1
-11.1
-6.6
Kansas
30,591
14,550
14,202
11,094
8,288
-72.9
-43.0
-25.3
Kentucky
81,141
29,788
30,028
30,057
30,300
-62.7
1.7
0.8
Congressional Research Service
32
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Percentage Change to March 2013
from March....
1994
2007
2010
2012
2013
1994
2007
2013
Louisiana
88,059
10,730
10,273
9,191
7,598
-91.4
-29.2
-17.3
Maine
23,231
12,736
14,942
15,039
28,368
22.1
122.7
88.6
Maryland
81,253
19,077
24,052
23,753
21,704
-73.3
13.8
-8.6
Massachusetts
112,803
44,579
49,062
64,449
67,820
-39.9
52.1
5.2
Michigan
227,114
75,173
70,633
40,919
36,189
-84.1
-51.9
-11.6
Minnesota
64,055
26,513
24,048
24,499
23,535
-63.3
-11.2
-3.9
Mississippi
56,420
11,210
11,805
11,263
9,918
-82.4
-11.5
-11.9
Missouri
93,735
39,577
38,847
37,723
35,666
-62.0
-9.9
-5.5
Montana
12,278
3,184
3,742
3,174
2,994
-75.6
-6.0
-5.7
Nebraska
16,323
7,426
8,539
7,375
6,759
-58.6
-9.0
-8.4
Nevada
14,011
6,424
10,365
10,590
10,404
-25.7
62.0
-1.8
New Hampshire
11,574
5,183
6,247
6,294
6,221
-46.3
20.0
-1.2
New Jersey
123,025
34,884
33,047
34,162
32,291
-73.8
-7.4
-5.5
New Mexico
33,847
14,017
19,342
18,001
14,956
-55.8
6.7
-16.9
New York
457,660
159,447
156,188
157,885
158,864
-65.3
-0.4
0.6
North Carolina
134,063
25,509
24,382
21,562
19,882
-85.2
-22.1
-7.8
6,079
2,016
2,037
1,648
1,394
-77.1
-30.9
-15.4
254,021
77,624
103,012
153,065
68,472
-73.0
-11.8
-55.3
Oklahoma
47,428
9,283
9,315
8,472
7,611
-84.0
-18.0
-10.2
Oregon
43,617
18,872
30,199
37,927
43,400
-0.5
130.0
14.4
Pennsylvania
211,771
63,637
51,085
77,566
71,741
-66.1
12.7
-7.5
Puerto Rico
58,869
13,809
13,581
14,711
13,115
-77.7
-5.0
-10.8
Rhode Island
22,872
8,296
7,505
6,559
5,928
-74.1
-28.5
-9.6
South Carolina
53,260
15,652
17,934
14,131
12,537
-76.5
-19.9
-11.3
South Dakota
7,129
2,825
3,209
3,184
3,122
-56.2
10.5
-1.9
Tennessee
111,740
62,395
61,685
56,972
51,336
-54.1
-17.7
-9.9
Texas
286,613
61,566
49,871
44,529
39,555
-86.2
-35.8
-11.2
Utah
17,908
5,146
6,724
5,048
4,477
-75.0
-13.0
-11.3
Vermont
9,988
4,463
3,106
3,440
3,427
-65.7
-23.2
-0.4
Virgin Islands
1,078
440
507
427
406
-62.3
-7.7
-4.9
75,854
31,354
36,744
33,391
31,316
-58.7
-0.1
-6.2
104,326
52,292
69,637
53,392
48,239
-53.8
-7.8
-9.7
41,521
9,774
9,690
9,289
8,788
-78.8
-10.1
-5.4
North Dakota
Ohio
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Congressional Research Service
33
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Percentage Change to March 2013
from March....
1994
2007
2010
2012
2013
1994
2007
2013
Wisconsin
78,739
17,211
21,353
26,152
25,902
-67.1
50.5
-1.0
Wyoming
5,857
273
352
317
343
-94.1
25.6
8.2
5,098,288
1,749,847
1,905,106
1,902,014
1,753,668
-65.6
0.2
-7.8
Totals
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data include those families in Separate State Programs with expenditures countable toward the
TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-6. Families Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, by Number of Parents
Receiving Assistance on Their Own Behalf: March 2013
State
Alabama
SingleParent
Families
TwoParent
Families
NoParent
Families
Total
Families
SingleParent
Families
TwoParent
Families
NoParent
Families
11,584
204
7,763
19,551
59.3%
1.0%
39.7%
Alaska
2,315
442
973
3,730
62.1
11.8
26.1
Arizona
9,237
573
6,227
16,037
57.6
3.6
38.8
Arkansas
4,071
173
2,604
6,848
59.4
2.5
38.0
California
248,412
53,505
265,676
567,593
43.8
9.4
46.8
Colorado
8,998
1,159
4,668
14,825
60.7
7.8
31.5
Connecticut
8,441
0
6,151
14,592
57.8
0.0
42.2
Delaware
1,723
22
3,158
4,903
35.1
0.4
64.4
District of
Columbia
3,412
0
2,289
5,701
59.8
0.0
40.2
Florida
13,873
757
39,978
54,608
25.4
1.4
73.2
Georgia
4,155
0
13,651
17,806
23.3
0.0
76.7
Guam
566
209
550
1,325
42.7
15.8
41.5
Hawaii
5,323
2,204
1,679
9,206
57.8
23.9
18.2
Idaho
156
0
1,667
1,823
8.6
0.0
91.4
Illinois
7,605
0
13,964
21,569
35.3
0.0
64.7
Indiana
4,049
195
8,593
12,837
31.5
1.5
66.9
11,338
1,066
5,444
17,848
63.5
6.0
30.5
4,340
530
3,418
8,288
52.4
6.4
41.2
Iowa
Kansas
Congressional Research Service
34
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
SingleParent
Families
TwoParent
Families
NoParent
Families
Total
Families
SingleParent
Families
TwoParent
Families
NoParent
Families
Kentucky
10,867
778
18,655
30,300
35.9
2.6
61.6
Louisiana
2,289
0
5,309
7,598
30.1
0.0
69.9
Maine
24,716
988
2,664
28,368
87.1
3.5
9.4
Maryland
14,002
0
7,702
21,704
64.5
0.0
35.5
Massachusetts
42,984
4,451
20,385
67,820
63.4
6.6
30.1
Michigan
21,485
0
14,704
36,189
59.4
0.0
40.6
Minnesota
12,698
0
10,837
23,535
54.0
0.0
46.0
Mississippi
5,466
0
4,452
9,918
55.1
0.0
44.9
Missouri
27,818
0
7,848
35,666
78.0
0.0
22.0
Montana
1,648
283
1,063
2,994
55.0
9.5
35.5
Nebraska
3,098
0
3,661
6,759
45.8
0.0
54.2
Nevada
4,636
1,063
4,705
10,404
44.6
10.2
45.2
New
Hampshire
4,792
94
1,335
6,221
77.0
1.5
21.5
New Jersey
23,510
0
8,781
32,291
72.8
0.0
27.2
New Mexico
7,807
943
6,206
14,956
52.2
6.3
41.5
99,634
2,888
56,342
158,864
62.7
1.8
35.5
5,333
220
14,329
19,882
26.8
1.1
72.1
749
0
645
1,394
53.7
0.0
46.3
19,548
2,849
46,075
68,472
28.5
4.2
67.3
2,717
0
4,894
7,611
35.7
0.0
64.3
Oregon
37,711
105
5,584
43,400
86.9
0.2
12.9
Pennsylvania
50,564
975
20,202
71,741
70.5
1.4
28.2
Puerto Rico
10,361
0
2,754
13,115
79.0
0.0
21.0
Rhode Island
3,553
489
1,886
5,928
59.9
8.2
31.8
South
Carolina
6,659
0
5,878
12,537
53.1
0.0
46.9
833
0
2,289
3,122
26.7
0.0
73.3
Tennessee
32,404
978
17,954
51,336
63.1
1.9
35.0
Texas
10,861
0
28,694
39,555
27.5
0.0
72.5
Utah
1,872
0
2,605
4,477
41.8
0.0
58.2
Vermont
1,598
377
1,452
3,427
46.6
11.0
42.4
406
0
0
406
100.0
0.0
0.0
19,504
0
11,812
31,316
62.3
0.0
37.7
New York
North
Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Dakota
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Congressional Research Service
35
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
SingleParent
Families
Washington
TwoParent
Families
NoParent
Families
Total
Families
SingleParent
Families
TwoParent
Families
NoParent
Families
25,638
5,008
17,593
48,239
53.1
10.4
36.5
3,982
0
4,806
8,788
45.3
0.0
54.7
Wisconsin
13,375
810
11,717
25,902
51.6
3.1
45.2
Wyoming
120
12
211
343
35.0
3.5
61.5
904,836
84,350
764,482
1,753,668
51.6
4.8
43.6
West Virginia
Totals
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data include those families in Separate State Programs with expenditures countable toward the
Alabama
48,752
18,104
23,052
20,744
19,015
-61.0
-8.3
Alaska
12,450
3,127
3,507
3,628
3,421
-72.5
-5.7
Arizona
72,728
36,934
18,774
17,805
15,497
-78.7
-13.0
Arkansas
25,298
8,472
8,469
7,314
6,631
-73.8
-9.3
California
916,795
470,502
590,121
569,654
553,496
-39.6
-2.8
Colorado
40,544
9,355
11,707
14,287
17,001
-58.1
19.0
Connecticut
60,336
20,322
16,848
15,000
14,665
-75.7
-2.2
Delaware
11,408
4,034
5,508
5,134
4,938
-56.7
-3.8
District of
Columbia
27,320
6,231
8,547
6,061
6,151
-77.5
1.5
Florida
239,702
46,864
57,742
52,689
51,991
-78.3
-1.3
Georgia
141,596
23,600
20,133
18,440
17,048
-88.0
-7.5
Guam
2,089
936
1,276
1,338
1,332
-36.2
-0.4
Hawaii
21,312
6,426
9,953
9,742
8,922
-58.1
-8.4
Idaho
8,635
1,506
1,820
1,870
1,846
-78.6
-1.3
Illinois
241,290
26,222
24,337
34,112
20,269
-91.6
-40.6
Indiana
72,654
42,058
36,062
14,874
11,894
-83.6
-20.0
Iowa
39,137
19,872
21,548
18,087
16,830
-57.0
-6.9
Kansas
29,524
13,892
15,554
9,770
7,784
-73.6
-20.3
Kentucky
78,720
29,492
30,875
30,729
30,267
-61.6
-1.5
Louisiana
84,162
11,023
10,849
8,037
6,518
-92.3
-18.9
Congressional Research Service
1994
2012
33
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Percentage Change to
Sept 2013 from Sept...
1994
2007
2010
2012
2013
Maine
22,322
12,352
15,377
29,599
27,451
23.0
-7.3
Maryland
80,266
19,630
25,110
23,406
21,471
-73.3
-8.3
Massachusetts
108,985
46,483
49,836
64,056
71,964
-34.0
12.3
Michigan
215,873
71,892
67,241
40,987
32,046
-85.2
-21.8
Minnesota
59,987
26,642
24,574
23,893
22,628
-62.3
-5.3
Mississippi
55,232
11,658
11,895
10,909
9,549
-82.7
-12.5
Missouri
91,875
39,544
39,262
37,285
33,525
-63.5
-10.1
Montana
11,416
3,217
3,686
3,056
3,464
-69.7
13.4
Nebraska
15,435
6,913
8,702
6,845
6,590
-57.3
-3.7
Nevada
14,620
7,411
10,612
10,265
10,950
-25.1
6.7
New Hampshire
11,398
4,733
6,175
6,286
6,180
-45.8
-1.7
New Jersey
122,376
34,123
34,516
33,559
30,005
-75.5
-10.6
New Mexico
34,535
12,503
21,223
17,040
12,589
-63.5
-26.1
New York
461,751
156,420
154,936
154,935
154,124
-66.6
-0.5
North Carolina
129,258
24,537
23,705
21,015
19,547
-84.9
-7.0
5,410
2,156
1,996
1,602
1,390
-74.3
-13.2
244,099
78,129
105,140
72,114
65,509
-73.2
-9.2
Oklahoma
46,572
9,002
9,388
8,467
7,315
-84.3
-13.6
Oregon
40,504
18,645
31,751
44,142
42,868
5.8
-2.9
Pennsylvania
212,457
60,167
53,274
75,732
71,288
-66.4
-5.9
Puerto Rico
57,337
12,617
13,371
13,392
12,311
-78.5
-8.1
Rhode Island
22,776
8,107
6,758
6,442
6,043
-73.5
-6.2
South Carolina
50,430
14,936
19,347
13,042
12,399
-75.4
-4.9
South Dakota
6,601
2,842
3,291
3,280
3,152
-52.2
-3.9
Tennessee
109,678
58,244
62,714
54,999
52,083
-52.5
-5.3
Texas
284,973
59,972
51,931
44,870
39,853
-86.0
-11.2
Utah
17,505
5,069
6,646
4,429
4,357
-75.1
-1.6
Vermont
9,761
4,503
3,256
3,714
3,760
-61.5
1.2
Virgin Islands
1,146
395
537
431
434
-62.1
0.7
74,257
31,563
37,448
33,335
30,045
-59.5
-9.9
101,542
49,076
70,200
49,620
43,689
-57.0
-12.0
West Virginia
40,279
9,699
10,496
9,227
9,029
-77.6
-2.1
Wisconsin
75,086
17,824
24,746
25,629
27,966
-62.8
9.1
Wyoming
5,351
255
318
322
347
-93.5
7.8
North Dakota
Ohio
Virginia
Washington
Congressional Research Service
1994
2012
34
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Percentage Change to
Sept 2013 from Sept...
1994
Totals
2007
5,015,545
1,720,231
2010
1,926,140
2012
1,807,240
2013
1994
1,711,437
2012
-65.9
-5.3
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data for 2007 through 2013 include those families in Separate State Programs with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-6. TANF Families by Number of Parents in Assisted Unit by State:
September 2013
As a Percent of Total Families
State
Alabama
Single
Parent
Two
Parent
No
Parent
Total
Families
Single Parent
Two Parent
No Parent
Total Families
59.8%
1.1%
39.1%
100.0%
11,379
203
7,433
19,015
Alaska
2,162
349
910
3,421
63.2
10.2
26.6
100.0
Arizona
8,788
594
6,115
15,497
56.7
3.8
39.5
100.0
Arkansas
3,961
155
2,515
6,631
59.7
2.3
37.9
100.0
California
246,420
49,959
257,117
553,496
44.5
9.0
46.5
100.0
Colorado
10,000
1,213
5,788
17,001
58.8
7.1
34.0
100.0
Connecticut
8,728
0
5,937
14,665
59.5
0.0
40.5
100.0
Delaware
1,778
20
3,140
4,938
36.0
0.4
63.6
100.0
District of Columbia
3,841
0
2,310
6,151
62.4
0.0
37.6
100.0
Florida
11,940
580
39,471
51,991
23.0
1.1
75.9
100.0
Georgia
3,995
0
13,053
17,048
23.4
0.0
76.6
100.0
Guam
400
197
735
1,332
30.0
14.8
55.2
100.0
Hawaii
5,209
2,098
1,615
8,922
58.4
23.5
18.1
100.0
Idaho
156
0
1,690
1,846
8.5
0.0
91.5
100.0
Illinois
6,786
0
13,483
20,269
33.5
0.0
66.5
100.0
Indiana
3,526
168
8,200
11,894
29.6
1.4
68.9
100.0
10,528
955
5,347
16,830
62.6
5.7
31.8
100.0
4,070
475
3,239
7,784
52.3
6.1
41.6
100.0
Kentucky
11,136
770
18,361
30,267
36.8
2.5
60.7
100.0
Louisiana
1,858
0
4,660
6,518
28.5
0.0
71.5
100.0
Maine
24,138
750
2,563
27,451
87.9
2.7
9.3
100.0
Maryland
13,946
0
7,525
21,471
65.0
0.0
35.0
100.0
Massachusetts
47,298
5,049
19,617
71,964
65.7
7.0
27.3
100.0
Iowa
Kansas
Congressional Research Service
35
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
As a Percent of Total Families
State
Single
Parent
Two
Parent
No
Parent
Total
Families
Single Parent
Two Parent
No Parent
Total Families
Michigan
18,132
0
13,914
32,046
56.6
0.0
43.4
100.0
Minnesota
12,102
0
10,526
22,628
53.5
0.0
46.5
100.0
Mississippi
5,237
0
4,312
9,549
54.8
0.0
45.2
100.0
Missouri
26,003
0
7,522
33,525
77.6
0.0
22.4
100.0
Montana
1,755
289
1,420
3,464
50.7
8.3
41.0
100.0
Nebraska
3,094
0
3,496
6,590
46.9
0.0
53.1
100.0
Nevada
5,200
1,174
4,576
10,950
47.5
10.7
41.8
100.0
New Hampshire
4,721
81
1,378
6,180
76.4
1.3
22.3
100.0
New Jersey
21,396
0
8,609
30,005
71.3
0.0
28.7
100.0
New Mexico
6,764
484
5,341
12,589
53.7
3.8
42.4
100.0
96,780
2,802
54,542
154,124
62.8
1.8
35.4
100.0
5,549
253
13,745
19,547
28.4
1.3
70.3
100.0
720
0
670
1,390
51.8
0.0
48.2
100.0
17,411
2,186
45,912
65,509
26.6
3.3
70.1
100.0
2,455
0
4,860
7,315
33.6
0.0
66.4
100.0
Oregon
37,576
0
5,292
42,868
87.7
0.0
12.3
100.0
Pennsylvania
50,585
993
19,710
71,288
71.0
1.4
27.6
100.0
Puerto Rico
9,170
704
2,437
12,311
74.5
5.7
19.8
100.0
Rhode Island
3,720
480
1,843
6,043
61.6
7.9
30.5
100.0
South Carolina
6,480
0
5,919
12,399
52.3
0.0
47.7
100.0
832
0
2,320
3,152
26.4
0.0
73.6
100.0
Tennessee
33,021
289
18,773
52,083
63.4
0.6
36.0
100.0
Texas
11,297
0
28,556
39,853
28.3
0.0
71.7
100.0
Utah
1,915
0
2,442
4,357
44.0
0.0
56.0
100.0
Vermont
1,919
389
1,452
3,760
51.0
10.3
38.6
100.0
434
0
0
434
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
Virginia
18,632
0
11,413
30,045
62.0
0.0
38.0
100.0
Washington
23,546
4,176
15,967
43,689
53.9
9.6
36.5
100.0
4,124
0
4,905
9,029
45.7
0.0
54.3
100.0
Wisconsin
15,348
892
11,726
27,966
54.9
3.2
41.9
100.0
Wyoming
121
7
219
347
34.9
2.0
63.1
100.0
888,082
78,734
744,621
1,711,437
51.9
4.6
43.5
100.0
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Dakota
Virgin Islands
West Virginia
Total
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
36
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Notes: Caseload data for 2007 through 2013 include those families in Separate State Programs with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-7. TANF All-Family Work Participation Rate by State:
FY2002 Through FY2010
State
United States
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
28.9%
27.5%
29.4%
30.3%
30.6%
29.7%
29.4%
29.4%
29.0%
Alabama
37.3
37.1
37.9
38.6
41.6
34.0
37.4
32.4
37.1
Alaska
39.6
41.1
43.6
45.7
45.6
46.8
42.8
37.2
33.3
Arizona
25.9
13.4
25.5
30.3
29.6
30.0
27.8
27.1
29.1
Arkansas
21.4
22.4
27.3
28.3
27.9
35.3
38.8
37.1
34.1
California
27.3
24.0
23.1
25.9
22.2
22.3
25.1
26.8
26.2
Colorado
35.9
32.5
34.7
25.8
30.0
27.3
32.3
37.8
33.6
Connecticut
26.6
30.6
24.3
33.8
30.8
28.8
25.3
34.4
37.2
Delaware
11.7
18.2
22.1
22.6
25.3
32.7
48.8
37.5
38.8
District of Columbia
16.4
23.1
18.2
23.5
17.1
35.0
49.6
23.5
15.0
Florida
30.4
33.1
40.4
38.0
41.0
64.2
42.4
46.1
47.5
Georgia
8.2
10.9
24.8
57.2
64.9
54.2
59.0
57.1
67.5
Hawaii
32.5
34.6
40.3
35.5
37.3
28.7
34.4
40.3
47.6
Idaho
40.7
43.7
41.0
39.9
44.2
53.0
59.5
52.0
49.5
Illinois
58.4
57.8
46.1
43.0
53.0
55.5
42.6
49.3
49.1
Indiana
45.3
40.3
36.3
30.9
26.7
27.5
29.4
17.5
19.2
Iowa
51.2
45.1
50.0
47.8
39.0
40.2
41.1
35.4
34.8
Kansas
37.6
32.4
88.0
86.7
77.2
12.8
19.6
23.9
27.2
Kentucky
32.4
32.8
38.1
39.7
44.6
38.2
38.0
37.3
46.4
Louisiana
38.7
34.6
35.4
34.6
38.4
42.2
40.0
34.4
27.4
Maine
44.5
27.7
32.1
28.3
26.6
21.9
11.4
16.8
19.7
Congressional Research Service
36
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Maryland
8.3
9.1
16.0
20.5
44.5
46.7
36.9
44.0
40.7
Massachusetts
9.2
8.4
10.3
12.6
13.6
17.0
44.7
47.5
22.2
Michigan
28.9
25.3
24.5
22.0
21.6
28.0
33.6
27.9
22.8
Minnesota
31.2
25.0
26.8
28.9
30.3
28.1
29.9
29.8
40.2
Mississippi
18.5
17.2
21.0
22.6
35.5
61.9
63.2
67.5
66.3
Missouri
25.4
28.0
19.5
20.0
18.7
14.0
14.2
13.2
17.5
Montana
37.9
37.4
86.7
83.1
79.2
46.4
44.2
44.2
51.6
Nebraska
22.8
29.4
34.5
31.8
32.0
23.0
51.2
50.3
49.5
Nevada
21.6
22.3
34.5
42.3
47.8
34.0
42.1
39.4
37.6
Congressional Research Service
37
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
New Hampshire
32.6
28.2
30.2
24.6
24.1
42.0
47.4
46.5
46.6
New Jersey
36.4
35.0
34.6
29.0
29.2
33.0
18.9
20.1
19.9
New Mexico
42.7
42.0
46.2
41.6
42.3
36.4
37.5
43.1
42.5
New York
38.5
37.1
37.8
35.2
37.8
38.0
37.3
33.4
35.0
North Carolina
27.4
25.3
31.4
27.5
32.4
32.4
24.5
32.3
37.1
North Dakota
30.4
27.0
25.3
31.4
51.9
58.7
50.2
61.0
68.7
Ohio
56.1
62.2
65.2
58.3
54.9
23.7
24.5
23.3
23.1
Oklahoma
26.7
29.2
33.2
34.0
32.9
38.1
29.2
23.0
24.3
8.0
14.7
32.1
14.9
15.2
14.7
24.1
9.5
8.4
Pennsylvania
10.4
9.9
7.1
15.2
26.1
48.9
38.6
45.8
46.0
Puerto Rico
5.6
6.1
7.5
13.1
13.1
8.2
11.6
8.7
8.6
Rhode Island
24.6
24.3
23.7
24.2
24.9
26.8
17.5
13.8
12.0
South Carolina
30.2
28.6
53.7
54.3
49.5
53.3
51.7
45.1
37.2
South Dakota
42.5
46.1
54.8
57.5
57.9
53.5
62.2
59.4
61.4
Tennessee
14.3
13.4
13.0
14.3
16.8
45.9
25.2
25.5
26.5
Texas
21.1
28.1
34.2
38.9
42.0
34.6
29.3
37.0
36.1
Utah
27.9
28.1
26.2
30.3
42.5
49.8
37.6
32.6
33.8
Vermont
21.4
24.3
24.9
22.4
22.2
22.4
23.2
29.0
34.9
Virginia
22.6
29.9
50.1
46.3
53.9
43.5
45.4
44.3
42.9
Washington
49.8
46.2
35.4
38.6
36.1
25.4
18.3
23.0
24.2
West Virginia
19.2
14.2
11.7
16.3
26.2
15.4
17.6
19.6
25.9
Wisconsin
69.4
67.2
61.3
44.3
36.2
36.7
37.1
39.9
42.5
Wyoming
82.9
83.0
77.8
82.1
77.2
65.4
50.5
61.3
63.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.5
0.0
0.0
1.0
17.7
5.0
10.6
16.9
14.5
17.1
15.5
7.1
9.2
Oregon
Guam
Virgin Islands
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: FY2002 through FY2006 work participation rates are based on federal work participation standard rules.
They exclude the effects of “grandfathered” waivers of pre-1996. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the
Congressional Research Service
37
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
option to continue their pre-reform “waiver” programs and have their work participation rates based on the
rules of the state waivers, not the federal rules. The last of these pre-1996 waivers expired in 2006. The allfamily work participation rates for FY2002 through FY2006 that include the effect of the waivers are slightly
higher than the rates shown here.
Table B-8. TANF Two-Parent Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010
(NA denotes not applicable; state has no two-parent families in the participation rate calculation)
State
United States
Alabama
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
44.2%
41.8%
45.3%
40.8%
45.9%
35.7%
27.6%
28.3%
33.4%
Alabama
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
29.1
28.1
24.7
28.6
Congressional Research Service
38
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Alaska
44.5
44.6
52.8
54.7
54.2
58.6
47.0
40.5
35.3
Arizona
52.2
55.3
65.6
74.2
67.5
72.1
64.3
62.6
72.8
Arkansas
24.4
31.8
34.4
45.9
22.3
19.2
32.0
21.7
21.5
California
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
31.7
26.5
28.6
35.6
Colorado
45.6
40.1
37.5
32.1
35.2
31.4
30.8
33.3
28.6
Connecticut
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
26.8
NA
NA
NA
Delaware
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
District of Columbia
13.4
19.6
20.1
35.9
13.1
NA
NA
NA
NA
Florida
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
59.4
37.5
54.4
56.4
Georgia
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Hawaii
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
70.4
NA
56.3
Idaho
40.2
42.3
37.1
41.4
39.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
Illinois
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Indiana
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
30.7
31.4
17.8
18.7
Iowa
41.6
39.2
NA
NA
NA
39.7
39.8
27.0
28.0
Kansas
38.5
30.3
93.7
92.8
82.3
12.1
15.5
25.6
28.9
Kentucky
43.7
46.2
51.2
48.9
51.3
48.1
38.8
35.1
42.7
Louisiana
57.2
39.0
38.0
37.0
42.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
Maine
58.2
29.2
NA
NA
NA
30.1
8.6
16.6
17.2
Maryland
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Massachusetts
12.9
12.0
15.4
13.5
NA
NA
96.4
92.8
90.1
Michigan
46.5
36.2
35.7
30.4
26.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
Minnesota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Mississippi
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Missouri
27.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Montana
54.8
55.9
90.8
85.4
83.3
55.8
51.6
58.7
57.2
Nebraska
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Nevada
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
45.7
51.4
46.8
45.2
New Hampshire
30.4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
New Jersey
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Congressional Research Service
38
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
New Mexico
57.5
52.0
55.3
57.5
54.5
47.2
50.9
63.0
57.4
New York
56.3
52.2
48.3
43.4
48.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
North Carolina
46.7
49.2
47.2
44.7
54.0
53.6
51.3
46.6
60.9
North Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Ohio
60.0
67.8
68.4
58.1
55.5
29.3
27.9
23.1
25.4
Oklahoma
NA
50.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Oregon
18.9
23.4
35.5
21.1
22.6
12.6
11.1
5.9
7.2
Congressional Research Service
39
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Pennsylvania
11.0
8.8
15.0
17.7
32.5
89.8
79.8
84.2
86.8
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
93.8
94.9
94.9
95.1
94.3
98.5
94.5
13.6
9.2
South Carolina
30.1
25.5
55.9
63.7
64.7
88.0
NA
NA
NA
South Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Tennessee
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
44.1
11.9
0.0
0.0
Texas
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
59.2
NA
NA
NA
Utah
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Vermont
32.7
37.5
38.2
35.8
33.9
31.6
31.8
24.0
38.2
Virginia
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Washington
50.7
44.3
31.1
37.7
43.1
25.2
17.2
18.6
22.3
West Virginia
26.5
25.2
NA
NA
NA
16.4
NA
NA
89.6
Wisconsin
39.3
40.3
33.1
25.5
17.1
20.9
31.6
33.0
31.1
Wyoming
93.8
91.5
87.5
65.2
75.9
74.1
69.4
75.7
48.5
Guam
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.1
0.0
0.0
1.1
Virgin Islands
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: FY2002 through FY2006 work participation rates are based on federal work participation standard rules.
They exclude the effects of “grandfathered” waivers of pre-1996. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the
option to continue their pre-reform “waiver” programs and have their work participation rates based on the
rules of the state waivers, not the federal rules. The last of these pre-1996 waivers expired in 2006. The allfamily work participation rates for FY2002 through FY2006 that include the effect of the waivers are slightly
higher than the rates shown here.
Author Contact Information
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
gfalk@crs.loc.gov, 7-7344
Congressional Research Service
3940