The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Changes from January 15, 2019 to January 16, 2019
This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.
The Temporary Assistance for
January 15, 2019
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Gene Falk
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Specialist in Social Policy
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Updated January 16, 2019
(RL32760)
Jump to Main Text of Report
of benefits and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the 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 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, 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 , by
Gene Falk).
[author name scrubbed]).
TANF Funding and Expenditures. TANF provides fixed funding for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the TANF provides fixed funding for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the
territories, and American Indian tribes. The basic block grant totals $16.5 billion per year. States are also required territories, and American Indian tribes. The basic block grant totals $16.5 billion per year. States are also required
in total to contribute, from their own funds, at least $10.3 billion annually under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) in total to contribute, from their own funds, at least $10.3 billion annually under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE)
requirement.requirement.
Though TANF is best known for funding cash assistance payments for needy families with children, the block 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 FY2017, expenditures on basic grant and MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2017, expenditures on basic
assistance totaled $7.1 billion—23% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. Basic assistance is often—but not assistance totaled $7.1 billion—23% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. Basic assistance is often—but not
exclusively—paid as cash. In addition to funding basic assistance, TANF also contributes funds for child care and exclusively—paid as cash. In addition to funding basic assistance, TANF also contributes funds for child care and
services for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected. Some states also count services for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected. Some states also count
expenditures in prekindergarten programs toward the MOE requirement.expenditures in prekindergarten programs toward the MOE requirement.
The TANF Assistance Caseload. A total of 1.4 million families, composed of 3.4 million recipients, received A total of 1.4 million families, composed of 3.4 million recipients, received
TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of the TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of the“recipients”"recipients" were children—2.5 million in were children—2.5 million in
that month. The assistance caseload is heterogeneous. The type of family once thought of as the that month. The assistance caseload is heterogeneous. The type of family once thought of as the“typical”
"typical" assistance family—one with an unemployed adult recipient—accounted for 32% of all families on the rolls in assistance family—one with an unemployed adult recipient—accounted for 32% of all families on the rolls in
FY2016. Additionally, 31% of cash assistance families had an employed adult, while 38% of all TANF families FY2016. Additionally, 31% of cash assistance families had an employed adult, while 38% of all TANF families
were were“"child-onlychild-only”" and had no adult recipient. Child-only families include those with disabled adults receiving and 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 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.children, and families consisting of citizen children and ineligible noncitizen parents.
Cash Assistance Benefits. TANF cash benefit amounts are set by states. In July 2016, the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit amounts are set by states. In July 2016, the maximum monthly
benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. In all states, the maximum TANF benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. In all states, the maximum TANF
cash assistance amount for this sized family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.cash assistance amount for this sized family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.
Work Requirements. TANF TANF’'s main federal work requirement is actually a performance measure that applies to s main federal work requirement is actually a performance measure that applies to
the states. States determine the work rules that apply to individual recipients. TANF law requires states to engage the states. States determine the work rules that apply to individual recipients. TANF law requires states to engage
50% of all families and 90% of two-parent families with work-eligible individuals in work activities, though these 50% of all families and 90% of two-parent families with work-eligible individuals in work activities, though these
standards can be reduced by standards can be reduced by“"credits.credits.”" Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% or Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% or
90% targets, and vary by state. In FY2017, states achieved, on average, an all-family participation rate of 53.0% 90% targets, and vary by state. In FY2017, states achieved, on average, an all-family participation rate of 53.0%
and a two-parent rate of 69.5%. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation standard: and a two-parent rate of 69.5%. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation standard:
Nevada and Guam. This is a reduction from FY2012, when 16 states did not meet that standard. In FY2017, nine Nevada and Guam. This is a reduction from FY2012, when 16 states did not meet that standard. In FY2017, nine
jurisdictions did not meet the two-parent standard. States that do not meet work standards are jurisdictions did not meet the two-parent standard. States that do not meet work standards are at risk of being of being
penalized by a reduction in their block grant.
Congressional Research Service
link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 15 link to page 18 link to page 8 link to page 10 link to page 12 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 15 link to page 15 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 6 link to page 9 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Funding and Expenditures ............................................................................................................... 1
What is TANF’s Funding Status? .............................................................................................. 1
Is Legislation Before Congress to Fund TANF for FY2019? ................................................... 1
How Are State TANF Programs Funded? ................................................................................. 1
How Much Has the Value of the TANF Basic Block Grant Changed Over Time? ................... 2
How Have States Used TANF Funds? ...................................................................................... 3
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? ................................................................ 4
The Caseload ................................................................................................................................... 4
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services? ....................... 4
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded
“Assistance”? ......................................................................................................................... 5
How Does the Current Assistance Caseload Level Compare with Historical Levels? ............. 5
What Are the Characteristics of Families Receiving TANF Assistance? .................................. 7
TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month? .................. 8
TANF Work Participation Standards ............................................................................................... 9
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? ........................................ 9
Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted Since the 1996
Welfare Reform Law? .......................................................................................................... 10
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved? .................................................... 10
How Many Jurisdictions Did Not Meet the All-Families Standard? ........................................ 11
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard? ............................................. 14
Figures
Figure 1. Uses of TANF Funds by Spending Category, FY2017 .................................................... 4
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-September 2017 ................. 6
Figure 3. Characteristics of Assistance Families, Selected Years FY1988 to FY2016 .................. 8
Figure 4. TANF Cash Assistance Maximum Monthly Benefit Amounts for a Single Parent
Family with Two Children, 50 States and the District of Columbia, July 2016 ........................... 9
Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families,
FY2002-FY2017 ......................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 6. States that Met or Did Not Meet the TANF All-Families Work Participation
Standard: FY2006-FY2017 ........................................................................................................ 13
Figure 7. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
FY2006-FY2017 ........................................................................................................................ 15
Tables
Table 1. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Nominal and Constant Dollars ............................... 2
Table 2. TANF Assistance Caseload: September 2017 .................................................................... 5
Congressional Research Service
link to page 20 link to page 22 link to page 22 link to page 23 link to page 26 link to page 26 link to page 29 link to page 30 link to page 30 link to page 32 link to page 32 link to page 34 link to page 20 link to page 23 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table A-1. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961 to 2016 ............................................... 16
Table A-2. Families Receiving AFDC/TANF Assistance by Family Category, Selected
Years, FY1988 to FY2016 .......................................................................................................... 18
Table B-1. Use of FY2017 TANF and MOE Funds by Category .................................................. 19
Table B-2. Use of FY2017 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percentage of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Funding ..................................................................................... 22
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2017 ............................................................... 25
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF
Assistance by State, September 2017 ......................................................................................... 26
Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Assistance by State,
September of Selected Years ...................................................................................................... 28
Table B-6. TANF Assistance Families by Number of Parents by State: September 2017 ............ 30
Appendixes
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables .............................................................................................. 16
Appendix B. State Tables .............................................................................................................. 19
Contacts
Author Information ....................................................................................................................... 32
Congressional Research Service
link to page 23 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Introduction
penalized by a reduction in their block grant.
Needy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy Needy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy
access to information and dataaccess to information and data. Appendix B presents a series of tables with state-level data. This presents a series of tables with state-level data. This
report does not provide information on TANF program rules (for a discussion of TANF rules, seereport does not provide information on TANF program rules (for a discussion of TANF rules, see
CRS Report RL32748, CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A
Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by , byGene Falk).
[author name scrubbed]).
Funding and Expenditures
What is TANF’'s Funding Status?
TANF is a mandatory spending program administered by the Department of Health and Human TANF is a mandatory spending program administered by the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS). Funding for TANF is not provided through the regular annual appropriations bill Services (HHS). Funding for TANF is not provided through the regular annual appropriations bill
for HHS. Rather, TANF funding is directly appropriated in Section 403(a) of the Social Security for HHS. Rather, TANF funding is directly appropriated in Section 403(a) of the Social Security
Act. Most recently, provisions extending TANF funding through December 21, 2018, were Act. Most recently, provisions extending TANF funding through December 21, 2018, were
contained in the FY2019 continuing resolution (P.L. 115-245, as amended by P.L. 115-298). As of contained in the FY2019 continuing resolution (P.L. 115-245, as amended by P.L. 115-298). As of
the date of this report, no further extension of TANF appropriations has been enacted, resulting in the date of this report, no further extension of TANF appropriations has been enacted, resulting in
a gap in TANF funding.a gap in TANF funding.
States received their first quarter of FY2019 TANF grants under the funding extension provisions States received their first quarter of FY2019 TANF grants under the funding extension provisions
contained in the continuing resolution. However, absent the enactment of law, the federal contained in the continuing resolution. However, absent the enactment of law, the federal
government cannot make its second quarter (beginning on January 1, 2019) or subsequent government cannot make its second quarter (beginning on January 1, 2019) or subsequent
quarterly TANF grant awards to the states. HHS has issued guidance to the states clarifying that quarterly TANF grant awards to the states. HHS has issued guidance to the states clarifying that
they may use unspent, previously awarded federal funds to continue their state TANF programs they may use unspent, previously awarded federal funds to continue their state TANF programs
during the funding lapse. Additionally, a state may spend its own funds within the state TANF during the funding lapse. Additionally, a state may spend its own funds within the state TANF
program, which, absent subsequent enactment of law to the contrary, may be counted toward the program, which, absent subsequent enactment of law to the contrary, may be counted toward the
FY2019 TANF state spending requirement (the maintenance of effort, or MOE, requirement).FY2019 TANF state spending requirement (the maintenance of effort, or MOE, requirement).
Is Legislation Before Congress to Fund TANF for FY2019?
On January 14, 2019, the House passed legislation (H.R. 430) that would fund TANF through On January 14, 2019, the House passed legislation (H.R. 430) that would fund TANF through
June 30, 2019. H.R. 430 is a stand-alone bill that only would extend funding for TANF and June 30, 2019. H.R. 430 is a stand-alone bill that only would extend funding for TANF and
certain related programs, such as mandatory child care. The bill would permit states to receive certain related programs, such as mandatory child care. The bill would permit states to receive
their quarterly TANF grants for the their quarterly TANF grants for the2nd2nd quarter (January through March) and quarter (January through March) and 3rd3rd quarter (April quarter (April
through June) of FY2019.through June) of FY2019. Additional legislation would be required to pay TANF grants in the Additional legislation would be required to pay TANF grants in the
final quarter (July through September) of FY2019.final quarter (July through September) of FY2019.
Earlier, on January 3, 2019, the House passed legislation (H.R. 21) that would fund
In addition, broader legislation to address federal federal
government activities that had their funding lapse in December 2018government activities that had their funding lapse in December 2018, including TANF. H.R. 21
would also fund TANF. On January 3, 2019, the House passed legislation (H.R. 21) that would fund TANF for the remainder of FY2019, as well as for FY2020. It would also require would fund TANF for the remainder of FY2019, as well as for FY2020. It would also require
states to report on employment outcomes of TANF assistance recipients.states to report on employment outcomes of TANF assistance recipients.
How Are State TANF Programs Funded?
Legislation expected to be considered by the House (H.R. 268, H.J.Res 28) would provide a short-term extension of TANF, permitting the federal government to provide states with TANF grants for the 2nd quarter (January through March) of FY2019. How Are State TANF Programs Funded? TANF programs are funded through a combination of federal and state funds. In FY2018, TANF TANF programs are funded through a combination of federal and state funds. In FY2018, TANF
has two federal grants to states. The bulk of the TANF funding is in a basic block grant to the has two federal grants to states. The bulk of the TANF funding is in a basic block grant to the
states, totaling $16.5 billion for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the states, totaling $16.5 billion for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
1
link to page 6 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Virgin Islands, and American Indian tribes. There is also a contingency fund available that Virgin Islands, and American Indian tribes. There is also a contingency fund available that
provides extra federal funds to states that meet certain conditions.provides extra federal funds to states that meet certain conditions.
Additionally, states are required to expend a minimum amount of their own funds for TANF and Additionally, states are required to expend a minimum amount of their own funds for TANF and
TANF-related activities under what is known as the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. TANF-related activities under what is known as the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
States are required to spend at least 75% of what they spent in FY1994 on TANFStates are required to spend at least 75% of what they spent in FY1994 on TANF’'s predecessor s predecessor
programs. The minimum MOE amount, in total, is $10.3 billion per year for the 50 states, the programs. The minimum MOE amount, in total, is $10.3 billion per year for the 50 states, the
District of Columbia, and the territories.District of Columbia, and the territories.
How Much Has the Value of the TANF Basic Block Grant Changed
Over Time?
TANF was created in the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work TANF was created in the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). A TANF basic block grant Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). A TANF basic block grant
amount—both nationally and for each state—was established in the 1996 welfare reform law. The amount—both nationally and for each state—was established in the 1996 welfare reform law. The
amount established in that law for the 50 states, District of Columbia, territories, and tribes was amount established in that law for the 50 states, District of Columbia, territories, and tribes was
$16.6 billion in total. From FY1997 through FY2016, that amount remained the same. It was not $16.6 billion in total. From FY1997 through FY2016, that amount remained the same. It was not
adjusted for changes that occur over time, such as inflation, the size of the TANF assistance adjusted for changes that occur over time, such as inflation, the size of the TANF assistance
caseload, or changes in the poverty population. During this period, the real (inflation-adjusted) caseload, or changes in the poverty population. During this period, the real (inflation-adjusted)
value of the block grant declined by one-third (33.1%). Beginning with FY2017, the state family value of the block grant declined by one-third (33.1%). Beginning with FY2017, the state family
assistance grant was reduced by 0.33% from its historical levels to finance TANF-related research assistance grant was reduced by 0.33% from its historical levels to finance TANF-related research
and technical assistance. The reduced block grant amount is $16.5 billion.and technical assistance. The reduced block grant amount is $16.5 billion.
Table 1 shows the state family assistance grant, in both nominal (actual) and real (inflation-shows the state family assistance grant, in both nominal (actual) and real (inflation-
adjusted) dollars for each year, FY1997 through FY2018. In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the adjusted) dollars for each year, FY1997 through FY2018. In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the
FY2018 block grant was 36% below its value in FY1997.FY2018 block grant was 36% below its value in FY1997.
Table 1. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Nominal and Constant Dollars
(In billions of $)(In billions of $)
State Family State Family
Assistance Grant: 50
State Family
States, DC, Tribes, and
Assistance Grant
Cumulative Percentage
Fiscal Year
Territories
Constant 1997 Dollars
Change
1997
$16.567
$16.567
1998
16.567
16.306
-1.6%
1999
16.567
15.991
-3.5
2000
16.567
15.498
-6.5
2001
16.567
15.020
-9.3
2002
16.567
14.792
-10.7
2003
16.567
14.456
-12.7
2004
16.567
14.124
-14.7
2005
16.567
13.680
-17.4
2006
16.567
13.190
-20.4
2007
16.567
12.893
-22.2
2008
16.567
12.345
-25.5
2009
16.567
12.382
-25.3
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
2
link to page 8 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
State Family
Assistance Grant: 50
State Family
States, DC, Tribes, and
Assistance Grant
Cumulative Percentage
Fiscal Year
Territories
Constant 1997 Dollars
Change
2010
16.567
12.182
-26.5
2011
16.567
11.859
-28.4
2012
16.567
11.585
-30.1
2013
16.567
11.394
-31.2
2014
16.567
11.217
-32.3
2015
16.567
11.179
-32.5
2016
16.567
11.082
-33.1
2017
16.512
10.820
-34.7
2018
16.512
10.564
-36.2
States, DC, Tribes, and Territories
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), and the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).Services (HHS), and the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Notes: Constant dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U).Constant dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U).
How Have States Used TANF Funds?
Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2017. In shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2017. In
FY2017, a total of $31.1 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either FY2017, a total of $31.1 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance—ongoing benefits to expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance—ongoing benefits to
families to meet basic needs—represented 23% ($7.1 billion) of total FY2017 TANF and MOE families to meet basic needs—represented 23% ($7.1 billion) of total FY2017 TANF and MOE
dollars.dollars.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2017, $5 billion (16% of all TANF and TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2017, $5 billion (16% of all TANF and
MOE funds) were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the MOE funds) were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the
Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF work-related activities (including education Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF work-related activities (including education
and training) were the third-largest TANF and MOE spending category at $3.3 billion, or 11% of and training) were the third-largest TANF and MOE spending category at $3.3 billion, or 11% of
total TANF and MOE funds. TANF also helps low-wage parents by helping to finance state total TANF and MOE funds. TANF also helps low-wage parents by helping to finance state
refundable tax credits, such as state add-ons to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). TANF and refundable tax credits, such as state add-ons to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). TANF and
MOE expenditures on refundable tax credits in FY2017 totaled $2.8 billion, or 9% of total TANF MOE expenditures on refundable tax credits in FY2017 totaled $2.8 billion, or 9% of total TANF
and MOE spending.and MOE spending.
TANF is also a major contributor to the child welfare system, which provides foster care, 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 adoption assistance, and services to families with children who either have experienced or are at
risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect, spending about $2.2 billion on such activities. TANF risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect, spending about $2.2 billion on such activities. TANF
and MOE funds also help fund state prekindergarten (pre-K) programs, with total FY2017 and MOE funds also help fund state prekindergarten (pre-K) programs, with total FY2017
expenditures for that category also at $2.5 billion. TANF and MOE funds are also used for short-expenditures for that category also at $2.5 billion. TANF and MOE funds are also used for short-
term and emergency benefits and a wide range of other social services.term and emergency benefits and a wide range of other social services.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
3
link to page 23 link to page 26 link to page 29 
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
(Dollars in billions)(Dollars in billions)
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.
For state-specific information on the use of TANF funds, seeFor state-specific information on the use of TANF funds, see Table B-1 andand Table B-2.
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?
TANF law permits states to TANF law permits states to“reserve”"reserve" unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in
timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to“save”"save" funds for unexpected funds for unexpected
occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).
At the end of FY2017 (September 30, 2017, the most recent data currently available), a total of At the end of FY2017 (September 30, 2017, the most recent data currently available), a total of
$5.1 billion of federal TANF funding remained neither transferred nor spent. However, some of $5.1 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 these unspent funds represent monies that states had already committed to spend later. At the end
of FY2017, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.8 of FY2017, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.8
billion. At the end of FY2017, states had $3.3 billion of billion. At the end of FY2017, states had $3.3 billion of“"unobligated balances.unobligated balances.”" These funds are These funds are
available to states to make available to states to make new spending commitments spending commitments. Table B-3 shows unspent TANF funds shows unspent TANF funds
by state.
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 This number is not known. Federal TANF reporting requirements focus on families receiving
only ongoing only ongoing assistance. There is no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF . There is no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF
benefits and services.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
4
link to page 9 link to page 30 link to page 10 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
benefits and services.
Assistance is defined as benefits provided to families to meet ongoing, basic needs.Assistance is defined as benefits provided to families to meet ongoing, basic needs.11 It is most It is most
often paid in cash. However, some states use TANF or MOE funds to provide an often paid in cash. However, some states use TANF or MOE funds to provide an“"earnings earnings
supplement”supplement" to working parents added to monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to working parents added to monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP) allotments. These (SNAP) allotments. These“"earnings supplementsearnings supplements”" are paid separately from the regular TANF are paid separately from the regular TANF
cash assistance program. Additionally, TANF MOE dollars are used to fund food assistance for cash assistance program. Additionally, TANF MOE dollars are used to fund food assistance for
immigrants barred from regular SNAP benefits in certain states. These forms of nutrition aid meet immigrants barred from regular SNAP benefits in certain states. These forms of nutrition aid meet
an ongoing need, and thus are considered TANF assistance.an ongoing need, and thus are considered TANF assistance.
As discussed in a previous section of this report, TANF basic assistance accounts for about 24% As discussed in a previous section of this report, TANF basic assistance accounts for about 24%
of all TANF expenditures. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements that pertain to families of all TANF expenditures. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements that pertain to families
receiving receiving“assistance”"assistance" are likely to undercount the number of families receiving any TANF- are likely to undercount the number of families receiving any TANF-
funded benefit or service.funded benefit or service.
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-
Funded “Assistance”?
Funded "Assistance"? Table 2 provides assistance caseload information. A total of 1.4 million families, composed of 3.4 provides assistance caseload information. A total of 1.4 million families, composed of 3.4
million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of
the “recipients”the "recipients" were children—2.5 million in that month. (The September 2017 data exclude were children—2.5 million in that month. (The September 2017 data exclude
Puerto Rico.) For state-by-state assistance caseloads, Puerto Rico.) For state-by-state assistance caseloads,seesee Table B-4.
Table 2. TANF Assistance Caseload: September 2017
Families
1,354,901
Recipients
3,410,086
Child Recipients
2,481,584
Adult Recipients
928,502
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
How Does the Current Assistance Caseload Level Compare with
Historical Levels?
Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving
assistance from TANF or its predecessor program, from July 1959 to September 2017. The assistance from TANF or its predecessor program, from July 1959 to September 2017. The
shaded areas of the figure represent months when the national economy was in recession. Though shaded areas of the figure represent months when the national economy was in recession. Though
the health of the national economy has affected the trend in the cash assistance caseload, the long-the health of the national economy has affected the trend in the cash assistance caseload, the long-
term trend in receipt of cash assistance does not follow a classic countercyclical pattern. Such a term trend in receipt of cash assistance does not follow a classic countercyclical pattern. Such a
pattern would have the caseload rise during economic slumps, and then fall again during periods pattern would have the caseload rise during economic slumps, and then fall again during periods
of economic growth. Factors other than the health of the economy (demographic trends, policy of economic growth. Factors other than the health of the economy (demographic trends, policy
changes) also have influenced the caseload trend.changes) also have influenced the caseload trend.
The figure shows two periods of sustained caseload increases: the period from the mid-1960s to The figure shows two periods of sustained caseload increases: the period from the mid-1960s to
the mid-1970s and a second period from 1988 to 1994. The number of families receiving the mid-1970s and a second period from 1988 to 1994. The number of families receiving
1 The definition of TANF assistance is not in statute. However, because the statutory language has most TANF
requirements triggered by a family receiving “assistance,” the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
regulations define assistance at 45 C.F.R. §260.31.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
5
link to page 20 link to page 32 
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
assistance peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families. The assistance caseload fell rapidly in assistance peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families. The assistance caseload fell rapidly in
the late 1990s (after the 1996 welfare reform law) before leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the 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. During the recent caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace than in the late 1990s. During the recent
2007-2009 recession and its aftermath, the caseload began to rise from 1.7 million families in 2007-2009 recession and its aftermath, the caseload began to rise from 1.7 million families in
August 2008, peaking in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families. By September 2017, the August 2008, peaking in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families. By September 2017, the
assistance caseload had declined to 1.4 million families.assistance caseload had declined to 1.4 million families.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Shaded areas denote months when the national economy was in recession. Information represents Shaded areas denote months when the national economy was in recession. Information represents
families receiving cash assistance from Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), Aid to Families with Dependent families receiving cash assistance from Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC), and TANF. For October 1999 through September 2017, includes families receiving assistance Children (AFDC), and TANF. For October 1999 through September 2017, includes families receiving assistance
from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort
requirement. requirement.SeeSee Table A-1 for average annual data on families, recipients, adult recipients, and child recipients for average annual data on families, recipients, adult recipients, and child recipients
of ADC, AFDC, and TANF cash assistance for 1961 to 2016.of ADC, AFDC, and TANF cash assistance for 1961 to 2016.
Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash assistance families by state.shows recent trends in the number of cash assistance families by state.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
6
link to page 12 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
What Are the Characteristics of Families Receiving TANF
Assistance?
Before PRWORA, the Before PRWORA, the“typical”"typical" family receiving assistance has been headed by a single parent family receiving assistance has been headed by a single parent
(usually the mother) with one or two children. That single parent has also typically been (usually the mother) with one or two children. That single parent has also typically been
unemployed. However, over the past 20 years the assistance caseload decline has occurred unemployed. However, over the past 20 years the assistance caseload decline has occurred
together with a major shift in the composition of together with a major shift in the composition ofthethe rolls. Figure 3 shows the change in the size shows the change in the size
and composition of the assistance caseload under both AFDC (1988 and 1994) and TANF. In and composition of the assistance caseload under both AFDC (1988 and 1994) and TANF. In
FY1988, an estimated 84% of AFDC families were headed by an unemployed adult recipient. In FY1988, an estimated 84% of AFDC families were headed by an unemployed adult recipient. In
FY2016, families with an unemployed adult recipient represented 32% of all cash assistance FY2016, families with an unemployed adult recipient represented 32% of all cash assistance
families. This decline occurred, in large part, as the number of families headed by unemployed families. This decline occurred, in large part, as the number of families headed by unemployed
adult recipients declined more rapidly than other components of the assistance caseload. In adult recipients declined more rapidly than other components of the assistance caseload. In
FY1994, a monthly average of 3.8 million families per month who received AFDC cash FY1994, a monthly average of 3.8 million families per month who received AFDC cash
assistance had adult recipients who were not working. In FY2016, a monthly average of 485,000 assistance had adult recipients who were not working. In FY2016, a monthly average of 485,000
families per month had adult recipients or work-eligible individuals, with no adult recipient or families per month had adult recipients or work-eligible individuals, with no adult recipient or
work-eligible individual working.work-eligible individual working.
With the decline in families headed by unemployed adults, the share of the caseload represented With the decline in families headed by unemployed adults, the share of the caseload represented
by families with employed adults and by families with employed adults and“"child onlychild only”" families has increased. In FY2016, families families has increased. In FY2016, families
with employed adult recipients represented 31% of all assistance families. This category includes with employed adult recipients represented 31% of all assistance families. This category includes
families in families in“"earnings supplementearnings supplement”" programs separate from the regular TANF cash assistance programs separate from the regular TANF cash assistance
program. program.“"Child-onlyChild-only”" families are those where no adult recipient receives benefits in their own families are those where no adult recipient receives benefits in their own
right; the family receives benefits on behalf of its children. The share of the caseload that was right; the family receives benefits on behalf of its children. The share of the caseload that was
child-only in FY2016 was 38%. In FY2016, families with a nonrecipient, nonparent relative child-only in FY2016 was 38%. In FY2016, families with a nonrecipient, nonparent relative
(grandparents, aunts, uncles) represented 14% of all assistance families. Families with ineligible, (grandparents, aunts, uncles) represented 14% of all assistance families. Families with ineligible,
noncitizen adults or adults who have not reported their citizenship status made up 11% of the noncitizen adults or adults who have not reported their citizenship status made up 11% of the
assistance caseload in that year. Families where the parent received Supplemental Security assistance caseload in that year. Families where the parent received Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) and the children received TANF made up 9% of all assistance families in FY2016.Income (SSI) and the children received TANF made up 9% of all assistance families in FY2016.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
7
link to page 13 
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Selected Years FY1988 to FY2016
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the TANF national data files.Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the TANF national data files.
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family
Receive in TANF Cash Per Month?
There are There are no federal rules that help determine the amount of TANF cash benefits paid to a family. 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 (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.states do so.) Benefit amounts are determined solely by the states.
Most states base TANF cash benefit amounts on family size, paying larger cash benefits to larger 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 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 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 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 not meeting a program a reduced benefit. Moreover, some families are financially sanctioned for not meeting a program
requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit.requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit.
Figure 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a single mother caring for shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a single mother caring for
two children (family of three) in July 2016.two children (family of three) in July 2016.22 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single- The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-
parent family with two children.parent family with two children.33 For a family of three, the maximum TANF benefit paid in July For a family of three, the maximum TANF benefit paid in July
2016 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi to $923 per month in Alaska. The map shows a 2016 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi to $923 per month in Alaska. The map shows a
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).
3 Some states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent families or “child-only” cases. States
also vary their benefits by other factors such as housing costs and substate geography.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
8
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
regional pattern to the maximum monthly benefit paid, with lower benefit amounts in the South regional pattern to the maximum monthly benefit paid, with lower benefit amounts in the South
than in other regions. In all states, the maximum TANF cash assistance amount for this sized than in other regions. In all states, the maximum TANF cash assistance amount for this sized
family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.4
4
Parent Family with Two Children, 50 States and the District of Columbia, July 2016
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the Urban InstituteCongressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the Urban Institute’'s s Welfare Rules
Database. The welfare rules database has information for the 50 states and District of Columbia. It does not have . The welfare rules database has information for the 50 states and District of Columbia. It does not have
information on TANF assistance programs in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands or tribal TANF information on TANF assistance programs in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands or tribal TANF
programs.programs.
TANF Work Participation Standards
TANFTANF’'s main federal work requirement is actually a performance measure that applies to the s main federal work requirement is actually a performance measure that applies to the
states, rather than individual recipients. States determine the work rules that apply to individual states, rather than individual recipients. States determine the work rules that apply to individual
recipients.recipients.
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 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 work or activities—that is, a family member must be in specified activities for a minimum
4 In 2016, the HHS poverty guidelines for the contiguous 48 states and the District of Columbia for a family of three
was $1,680 per month. Higher poverty lines applied in Alaska ($2,100 per month for a family of three) and Hawaii
($1,933 per month for a family of three).
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
9
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
number of hours.5number of hours.5 There is a separate participation standard that applies to the two-parent portion There is a separate participation standard that applies to the two-parent portion
of a stateof a state’'s caseload, requiring 90% of the states caseload, requiring 90% of the state’'s two-parent caseload to meet participation s two-parent caseload to meet participation
standards.standards.
However, the statutory work participation standards are reduced by a However, the statutory work participation standards are reduced by a “"caseload reduction credit.caseload reduction credit.”
" The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each
percentage point decline in a statepercentage point decline in a state’'s caseload. Additionally, under a regulatory provision, a state s caseload. Additionally, under a regulatory provision, a state
may get may get“extra”"extra" credit for caseload reduction if it spends more than required under the TANF 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, MOE. Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% and 90% targets,
and vary by state and by year.and vary by state and by year.
States that do not meet the TANF work participation standard are at States that do not meet the TANF work participation standard are at risk of being penalized of being penalized
through a reduction in their block grant. However, penalties can be forgiven if a state claims, and 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 the Secretary of HHS finds, that it had“"reasonable causereasonable cause”" for not meeting the standard. Penalties for not meeting the standard. Penalties
can also be forgiven for states that enter into can also be forgiven for states that enter into“"corrective compliance plans,corrective compliance plans,”" and subsequently and subsequently
meet the work standard.meet the work standard.
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 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 (DRA,back to the 1996 welfare reform law. However, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L.
109-171) made) made several changes to the work participation rules effective in FY2007: several changes to the work participation rules effective in FY2007:
The caseload reduction credit was changed to measure caseload reduction from The caseload reduction credit was changed to measure caseload reduction from
FY2005, rather than the original lawFY2005, rather than the original law’'s FY1995.s FY1995.
The work participation standards were broadened to include families receiving The work participation standards were broadened to include families receiving
cash aid in cash aid in “"separate state programs.separate state programs.”" Separate state programs are programs run Separate state programs are programs run
with state funds, distinct from a statewith state funds, distinct from a state’s “'s "TANF program,TANF program,”" but with expenditures but with expenditures
countable toward the TANF MOE.countable toward the TANF MOE.
HHS was instructed to provide definition to the allowable TANF work activities 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 listed in law. HHS was also required to define what is meant by a “"work-eligiblework-eligible”
" individual, expanding the number of families that are included in the work individual, expanding the number of families that are included in the work
participation calculation.participation calculation.
States were required to develop plans and procedures to verify work activities.States were required to develop plans and procedures to verify work activities.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA,The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5),), a law enacted in a law enacted in
response to the sharp economic downturn of 2007-2009, held states response to the sharp economic downturn of 2007-2009, held states“harmless”"harmless" for caseload for caseload
increases affecting the work participation standards for FY2009 through FY2011. It did so by increases affecting the work participation standards for FY2009 through FY2011. It did so by
allowing states to allowing states to“freeze”"freeze" caseload reduction credits at pre-recession levels through the FY2011 caseload reduction credits at pre-recession levels through the FY2011
standards.standards.
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
HHS computes two work participation rates for each state that are then compared with the 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 effective (after-credit) standard to determine if it has met the TANF work standard. An“"all-families"all-
5 Families without a work-eligible individual are excluded from the participation rate calculation. It excludes families
where the parent is a nonrecipient (for example, disabled receiving Supplemental Security Income or an ineligible
noncitizen) or the children in the family are being cared for by a nonparent relative (e.g., grandparent, aunt, uncle) who
does not receive assistance on his or her behalf.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
10
link to page 15 link to page 17 
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
families” work participation rate is computed and compared with the all-families effective work participation rate is computed and compared with the all-families effective
standard (50% minus the statestandard (50% minus the state’'s caseload reduction credit). HHS also computes a two-parent 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 work participation rate that is compared with the two-parent effective standard (90% minus the
state’state's caseload reduction credit).s caseload reduction credit).
Figure 5 shows the national average all-families work participation rate for FY2002 through shows the national average all-families work participation rate for FY2002 through
FY2017. For the period FY2002 through FY2011, states achieved an average all-families work FY2017. For the period FY2002 through FY2011, states achieved an average all-families work
participation rate hovering around 30%. The work participation rate increased since then. In participation rate hovering around 30%. The work participation rate increased since then. In
FY2016, it exceeded 50% for the first time since TANF was established. However, it is important FY2016, it exceeded 50% for the first time since TANF was established. However, it is important
to note that the increase in the work participation rate has not come from an increase in the to note that the increase in the work participation rate has not come from an increase in the
number of recipients in regular TANF assistance programs who are either working or in job number of recipients in regular TANF assistance programs who are either working or in job
preparation activities. This increase stems mostly from states creating new preparation activities. This increase stems mostly from states creating new“"earnings supplementearnings supplement”
" programs that use TANF funds to aid working parents in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance programs that use TANF funds to aid working parents in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps) or who have left the regular TANF assistance programs Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps) or who have left the regular TANF assistance programs
for work.for work.6
6
FY2002-FY2017
FY2002-FY2017
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
How Many Jurisdictions Did Not Meet the All-Families Standard?
Figure 6 shows which states did not meet the TANF all-families work participation standards shows which states did not meet the TANF all-families work participation standards
from FY2006 through FY2017. Before FY2007, the first year that DRA was effective, only a few from FY2006 through FY2017. Before FY2007, the first year that DRA was effective, only a few
jurisdictions did not meet TANF all-families work participation standards. However, in FY2007, jurisdictions did not meet TANF all-families work participation standards. However, in FY2007,
15 jurisdictions did not meet the all-families standard. This number declined to 9 in FY2008 and 15 jurisdictions did not meet the all-families standard. This number declined to 9 in FY2008 and
8 in FY2009.
6 See CRS In Focus IF10856, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Work Requirements.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
11
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
8 in FY2009.
In FY2012, despite the uptick in the national average work participation rate, 16 states did not In FY2012, despite the uptick in the national average work participation rate, 16 states did not
meet the all-family standard, the largest number of states that did not meet their participation meet the all-family standard, the largest number of states that did not meet their participation
standards in any one year since the enactment of TANF. FY2012 was the year that ARRAstandards in any one year since the enactment of TANF. FY2012 was the year that ARRA’s
“freeze”'s "freeze" of the caseload reduction credit expired, and states were generally required to meet of the caseload reduction credit expired, and states were generally required to meet
higher standards than in previous years.higher standards than in previous years.
The number of jurisdictions that did not meet the all-families standard declined over the FY2012 The number of jurisdictions that did not meet the all-families standard declined over the FY2012
to FY2017 period. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation to FY2017 period. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation
standard: Nevada and Guam.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
12
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
standard: Nevada and Guam.
Standard: FY2006-FY2017
(Changes to TANF work participation standard rules under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [DRA], (Changes to TANF work participation standard rules under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [DRA],
effective in FY2007)effective in FY2007)
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
13
link to page 19 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Services (HHS).
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard?
In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second standard—In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second standard—
90%—for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard can also be 90%—for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard can also be
lowered by caseload reduction.lowered by caseload reduction.
Figure 7 shows whether each state met its two-parent work participation standard for FY2006 shows whether each state met its two-parent work participation standard for FY2006
through FY2017. However, the display on the table is more complex than that for reporting through FY2017. However, the display on the table is more complex than that for reporting
whether a state met or did not meet its whether a state met or did not meet its“"all familyall family”" rate. rate.
A substantial number of states have reported A substantial number of states have reported no two-parent families subject to the work two-parent families subject to the work
participation standard. These states are denoted on the table with an participation standard. These states are denoted on the table with an“"NA,NA,”" indicating that the indicating that the
two-parent standard was not applicable to the state in that year. Before the changes made by the two-parent standard was not applicable to the state in that year. Before the changes made by the
DRA were effective, a number of states had their two-parent families in separate state programs 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 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 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 number of states moved these families into solely state-funded programs. These are state-funded
programs with expenditures programs with expenditures not countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort requirement, countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort requirement,
and hence are outside of TANFand hence are outside of TANF’'s rules.s rules.
For states with two-parent families in their caseloads, the table reports For states with two-parent families in their caseloads, the table reports “Yes”"Yes" for states that met for states that met
the two-parent standard, and the two-parent standard, and“No”"No" for states that did not meet the two-parent standard. Of the 28 for states that did not meet the two-parent standard. Of the 28
jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their FY2017 TANF work participation calculation, jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their FY2017 TANF work participation calculation,
19 met the standard and 9 did not.19 met the standard and 9 did not.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
14
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
FY2006-FY2017
(“Yes”FY2006-FY2017
("Yes" indicates a state met the standard; indicates a state met the standard; “No”"No" indicates the state did not meet the standard; and indicates the state did not meet the standard; and “NA”
"NA" means the standard was not applicable to the state in that year [no two-parent families in its caseload].)means the standard was not applicable to the state in that year [no two-parent families in its caseload].)
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
15
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables
Services (HHS).
Appendix A.
Supplementary Tables
Table A-1. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961 to 2016
Table A-1. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961 to 2016
TANF Child Recipients
As a
As a
Percentage Percentage
Families
Recipients
Adults
Children
of All
of All Poor
Year
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
Children
Children
1961
0.873
3.363
0.765
2.598
3.7%
14.3%
1962
0.939
3.704
0.860
2.844
4.0
15.7
1963
0.963
3.945
0.988
2.957
4.1
17.4
1964
1.010
4.195
1.050
3.145
4.3
18.6
1965
1.060
4.422
1.101
3.321
4.5
21.5
1966
1.096
4.546
1.112
3.434
4.7
26.5
1967
1.220
5.014
1.243
3.771
5.2
31.2
1968
1.410
5.702
1.429
4.274
5.9
37.8
1969
1.696
6.689
1.716
4.973
6.9
49.7
1970
2.207
8.462
2.250
6.212
8.6
57.7
1971
2.763
10.242
2.808
7.435
10.4
68.5
1972
3.048
10.944
3.039
7.905
11.1
74.9
1973
3.148
10.949
3.046
7.903
11.2
79.9
1974
3.219
10.847
3.041
7.805
11.2
75.0
1975
3.481
11.319
3.248
8.071
11.8
71.2
1976
3.565
11.284
3.302
7.982
11.8
76.2
1977
3.568
11.015
3.273
7.743
11.6
73.9
1978
3.517
10.551
3.188
7.363
11.2
72.8
1979
3.509
10.312
3.130
7.181
11.0
68.0
1980
3.712
10.774
3.355
7.419
11.5
63.2
1981
3.835
11.079
3.552
7.527
11.7
59.2
1982
3.542
10.358
3.455
6.903
10.8
49.6
1983
3.686
10.761
3.663
7.098
11.1
50.1
1984
3.714
10.831
3.687
7.144
11.2
52.3
1985
3.701
10.855
3.658
7.198
11.3
54.4
1986
3.763
11.038
3.704
7.334
11.5
56.0
1987
3.776
11.027
3.661
7.366
11.5
56.4
1988
3.749
10.915
3.586
7.329
11.4
57.8
1989
3.798
10.992
3.573
7.419
11.5
57.9
1990
4.057
11.695
3.784
7.911
12.1
57.9
1991
4.497
12.930
4.216
8.715
13.2
59.8
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
16
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
TANF Child Recipients
As a
As a
Percentage Percentage
Families
Recipients
Adults
Children
of All
of All Poor
Year
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
Children
Children
1992
4.829
13.773
4.470
9.303
13.9
59.9
1993
5.012
14.205
4.631
9.574
14.1
60.0
1994
5.033
14.161
4.593
9.568
13.9
61.7
1995
4.791
13.418
4.284
9.135
13.1
61.5
1996
4.434
12.321
3.928
8.600
12.3
58.7
1997
3.740
10.376
NA
NA
10.0
50.1
1998
3.050
8.347
NA
NA
8.1
42.9
1999
2.578
6.924
NA
NA
6.7
39.4
2000
2.303
6.143
1.655
4.479
6.1
38.1
2001
2.192
5.717
1.514
4.195
5.7
35.3
2002
2.187
5.609
1.479
4.119
5.6
33.6
2003
2.180
5.490
1.416
4.063
5.5
31.3
2004
2.153
5.342
1.362
3.969
5.4
30.2
2005
2.061
5.028
1.261
3.756
5.1
28.9
2006
1.906
4.582
1.120
3.453
4.6
26.7
2007
1.730
4.075
0.956
3.119
4.2
23.2
2008
1.701
4.005
0.946
3.059
4.1
21.6
2009
1.838
4.371
1.074
3.296
4.4
21.2
2010
1.919
4.598
1.163
3.435
4.6
20.9
2011
1.907
4.557
1.149
3.408
4.6
20.9
2012
1.852
4.402
1.104
3.298
4.4
20.3
2013
1.726
4.042
0.993
3.050
4.1
19.1
2014
1.650
3.957
1.007
2.950
4.0
18.9
2015
1.609
4.126
1.155
2.971
4.0
20.4
2016
1.488
3.785
1.044
2.741
3.7
20.6
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) and the U.S. Census Bureau.Services (HHS) and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Notes: NA denotes not available. During transition reporting from AFDC to TANF, caseload statistics on adult NA denotes not available. During transition reporting from AFDC to TANF, caseload statistics on adult
and child recipients were not collected. For those years, TANF children as a percent of all children and percent and child recipients were not collected. For those years, TANF children as a percent of all children and percent
of all poor children were estimated by HHS and published in of all poor children were estimated by HHS and published in Welfare Indicators and Risk Factors, Annual Report to
Congress, Table TANF 2, p. A-7. See, Table TANF 2, p. A-7. See http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/14/indicators/rpt_indicators.pdf.
rpt_indicators.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
17
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table A-2. Families Receiving AFDC/TANF Assistance by Family Category, Selected
Years, FY1988 to FY2016
AFDC
TANF
1988
1994
2001
2006
2016
Number of Families Receiving Assistance
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working
3,136,566
3,798,997
992,445
825,490
484,959
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working
243,573
378,620
420,794
259,001
465,199
Child-Only/SSI Parent
59,988
171,391
171,951
176,670
132,338
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent
47,566
184,397
125,900
153,445
153,717
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent
51,764
146,227
91,447
158,113
4,775
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative
188,598
328,290
255,984
261,944
208,202
Child-Only/Unknown
19,897
38,341
143,834
122,738
74,410
Totals
3,747,952
5,046,263
2,202,356
1,957,402
1,523,600
Percentage of All Families Receiving Assistance
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working
83.7%
75.3%
45.1%
42.2%
31.8%
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working
6.5
7.5
19.1
13.2
30.5
Child-Only/SSI Parent
1.6
3.4
7.8
9.0
8.7
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent
1.3
3.7
5.7
7.8
10.1
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent
1.4
2.9
4.2
8.1
0.3
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative
5.0
6.5
11.6
13.4
13.7
Child-Only/Unknown
0.5
0.8
6.5
6.3
4.9
Totals
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Years, FY1988 to FY2016
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the FY1988 and FY1994 AFDC Quality Control Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the FY1988 and FY1994 AFDC Quality Control
(QC) data files and the FY2001, FY2006, and FY2016 TANF National Data Files.(QC) data files and the FY2001, FY2006, and FY2016 TANF National Data Files.
Notes: FY2001 through FY2016 data include families receiving assistance from separate state programs (SSPs) FY2001 through FY2016 data include families receiving assistance from separate state programs (SSPs)
with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. For FY2016, TANF with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. For FY2016, TANF
families with an adult recipient include those families with families with an adult recipient include those families with “"work-eligiblework-eligible”" nonrecipient parents. These include nonrecipient parents. These include
nonrecipient parents who have been time-limited or sanctioned off the rolls, but the family continues to receive nonrecipient parents who have been time-limited or sanctioned off the rolls, but the family continues to receive
a reduced benefit. For FY2001 and FY2006, such families cannot be identified and are classified as a reduced benefit. For FY2001 and FY2006, such families cannot be identified and are classified as“"child-only" families.
Appendix B.
State Tables
child-only”
families.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
18
Appendix B. State Tables
Table B-1. Use of FY2017 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
Table B-2. Use of FY2017 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percentage of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
State
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2017
(Dollars in millions)
Work,
Education,
Emergency and
Pre-
Basic
Administrative
and
Refundable
Short-Term
Child
K/Head
State
Assistance
Costs
Training
Child Care Tax Credit
Benefits
Welfare
Start
Other
Totals
Alabama
$22.318
$26.710
$5.349
$5.679
$0.000
$36.833
$32.240
$41.648
$40.208
$210.984
Alaska
58.114
6.024
8.397
8.879
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
4.985
86.399
Arizona
37.732
43.656
1.443
0.000
0.000
10.369
147.105
0.000
119.624
359.929
Arkansas
5.948
18.829
13.920
8.032
0.000
5.368
0.231
105.196
4.811
162.335
California
2539.250
573.786
1620.135
615.700
0.000
237.887
0.000
0.000
1010.169
6596.928
Colorado
89.927
23.474
10.687
11.929
77.489
31.389
46.532
74.851
43.716
409.995
Connecticut
52.352
46.885
12.037
41.764
0.000
18.646
61.273
83.561
171.132
487.651
Delaware
17.421
4.736
7.063
67.490
0.000
2.724
0.000
0.000
15.160
114.595
District of
121.650
8.398
37.991
59.532
28.928
51.110
0.000
0.000
9.299
316.909
Columbia
Florida
163.180
83.371
46.314
318.206
0.000
0.934
242.113
0.000
80.542
934.661
Georgia
86.540
20.570
11.265
22.183
0.000
0.085
257.554
0.000
90.828
489.024
Hawaii
39.957
16.540
52.170
4.972
0.000
0.425
1.294
0.000
84.876
200.233
Idaho
7.871
7.519
2.549
15.025
0.000
11.750
1.327
1.475
1.713
49.229
Illinois
43.419
0.184
18.685
596.459
47.254
0.916
221.080
58.586
79.217
1065.801
Indiana
16.714
23.452
182.300
112.404
28.904
0.546
15.520
0.000
131.405
511.244
Iowa
37.166
8.206
11.799
58.254
26.505
0.253
62.264
0.000
22.299
226.746
Kansas
13.920
14.568
1.594
6.673
48.347
0.071
22.980
14.437
50.495
173.086
Kentucky
170.762
14.601
29.380
38.815
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
15.474
269.032
CRS-19
Work,
Education,
Emergency and
Pre-
Basic
Administrative
and
Refundable
Short-Term
Child
K/Head
State
Assistance
Costs
Training
Child Care Tax Credit
Benefits
Welfare
Start
Other
Totals
Louisiana
19.191
18.079
26.153
10.214
14.671
9.471
33.144
45.991
35.029
211.945
Maine
25.693
3.138
0.310
14.888
7.561
4.162
7.683
0.415
28.130
91.980
Maryland
115.787
31.019
31.450
8.397
152.582
26.370
20.035
55.962
55.808
497.410
Massachusetts
207.063
36.557
174.674
327.404
174.125
103.873
8.311
0.000
66.263
1,098.270
Michigan
133.132
53.908
5.417
26.586
45.440
66.929
81.665
186.193
649.995
1,249.266
Minnesota
98.144
46.341
57.751
173.904
160.076
27.478
0.000
5.700
19.524
588.918
Mississippi
8.585
4.572
33.655
27.660
0.000
0.000
12.859
0.000
43.971
131.302
Missouri
42.341
7.317
19.813
64.380
0.000
59.191
102.816
0.000
60.586
356.444
Montana
26.080
7.451
6.282
10.495
0.000
2.195
3.187
0.000
9.708
65.397
Nebraska
26.603
5.383
14.079
23.489
35.062
0.000
2.836
0.000
0.290
107.742
Nevada
39.108
9.559
1.362
17.887
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
34.465
102.382
New
18.987
11.041
5.403
15.118
0.000
2.213
3.662
0.000
17.081
73.505
Hampshire
New Jersey
99.529
52.403
77.142
159.671
354.819
16.630
0.000
560.009
58.912
1,379.114
New Mexico
55.422
5.073
18.259
30.528
74.623
0.000
0.895
17.600
84.412
286.811
New York
1,455.625
389.219
147.068
355.940
1,410.980
219.797
290.559
467.685
361.475
5,098.348
North Carolina
41.570
43.356
4.785
194.900
0.000
5.077
125.782
115.709
44.926
576.104
North Dakota
4.070
4.422
4.070
1.102
0.000
0.019
17.270
0.000
1.274
32.226
Ohio
246.989
117.873
87.008
424.009
0.000
53.852
11.099
0.000
191.421
1,132.250
Oklahoma
42.603
11.274
10.776
48.668
0.000
3.536
15.999
12.079
29.282
174.217
Oregon
89.263
39.235
16.558
12.911
1.467
32.130
12.811
12.001
87.605
303.981
Pennsylvania
186.912
79.850
98.385
488.909
0.000
15.459
0.000
154.677
169.790
1,193.982
Rhode Island
24.435
5.434
10.869
41.679
19.129
26.237
27.334
0.800
10.171
166.088
CRS-20
Work,
Education,
Emergency and
Pre-
Basic
Administrative
and
Refundable
Short-Term
Child
K/Head
State
Assistance
Costs
Training
Child Care Tax Credit
Benefits
Welfare
Start
Other
Totals
South Carolina
38.231
24.983
14.782
4.085
0.000
0.000
0.000
26.794
54.010
162.886
South Dakota
13.813
2.581
3.866
0.803
0.000
3.174
1.958
0.000
3.057
29.254
Tennessee
62.597
22.152
9.618
18.976
0.000
0.000
0.000
61.668
1.377
176.387
Texas
50.837
77.601
82.284
0.000
0.000
32.166
284.108
342.674
59.966
929.636
Utah
25.289
8.863
26.555
21.438
0.000
4.419
3.676
5.501
33.702
129.443
Vermont
15.230
6.631
2.696
30.996
19.013
1.360
5.508
0.000
15.842
97.276
Virginia
68.485
31.387
38.944
32.558
0.371
5.269
0.000
0.000
84.885
261.900
Washington
143.608
88.021
145.004
222.086
0.000
56.731
0.000
61.125
315.382
1,031.957
West Virginia
26.753
15.010
0.461
15.321
0.000
19.584
35.656
0.000
26.644
139.428
Wisconsin
85.911
24.187
27.486
208.262
69.700
38.553
4.484
0.000
122.860
581.443
Wyoming
6.706
6.481
3.508
1.554
0.000
3.399
0.000
1.016
4.952
27.615
Totals
7,068.836
2,231.910
3,279.551
5,026.817
2,797.046
1,248.578 2,224.848
2,513.354 4,758.747
31,149.686
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
CRS-21
Table B-2. Use of FY2017 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percentage of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
Emergency
and Short-
Pre-
Basic
Administrative
Work, Education, Child
Refundable
Term
Child
K/Head
State
Assistance
Costs
and Training
Care
Tax Credit
Benefits
Welfare
Start
Other
Totals
Alabama
10.6%
12.7%
2.5%
2.7%
0.0%
17.5%
15.3%
19.7%
19.1%
100.0%
Alaska
67.3
7.0
9.7
10.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
100.0
Arizona
10.5
12.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
2.9
40.9
0.0
33.2
100.0
Arkansas
3.7
11.6
8.6
4.9
0.0
3.3
0.1
64.8
3.0
100.0
California
38.5
8.7
24.6
9.3
0.0
3.6
0.0
0.0
15.3
100.0
Colorado
21.9
5.7
2.6
2.9
18.9
7.7
11.3
18.3
10.7
100.0
Connecticut
10.7
9.6
2.5
8.6
0.0
3.8
12.6
17.1
35.1
100.0
Delaware
15.2
4.1
6.2
58.9
0.0
2.4
0.0
0.0
13.2
100.0
District of
38.4
2.6
12.0
18.8
9.1
16.1
0.0
0.0
2.9
100.0
Columbia
Florida
17.5
8.9
5.0
34.0
0.0
0.1
25.9
0.0
8.6
100.0
Georgia
17.7
4.2
2.3
4.5
0.0
0.0
52.7
0.0
18.6
100.0
Hawaii
20.0
8.3
26.1
2.5
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.0
42.4
100.0
Idaho
16.0
15.3
5.2
30.5
0.0
23.9
2.7
3.0
3.5
100.0
Illinois
4.1
0.0
1.8
56.0
4.4
0.1
20.7
5.5
7.4
100.0
Indiana
3.3
4.6
35.7
22.0
5.7
0.1
3.0
0.0
25.7
100.0
Iowa
16.4
3.6
5.2
25.7
11.7
0.1
27.5
0.0
9.8
100.0
Kansas
8.0
8.4
0.9
3.9
27.9
0.0
13.3
8.3
29.2
100.0
Kentucky
63.5
5.4
10.9
14.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
100.0
Louisiana
9.1
8.5
12.3
4.8
6.9
4.5
15.6
21.7
16.5
100.0
Maine
27.9
3.4
0.3
16.2
8.2
4.5
8.4
0.5
30.6
100.0
Maryland
23.3
6.2
6.3
1.7
30.7
5.3
4.0
11.3
11.2
100.0
CRS-22
Emergency
and Short-
Pre-
Basic
Administrative
Work, Education, Child
Refundable
Term
Child
K/Head
State
Assistance
Costs
and Training
Care
Tax Credit
Benefits
Welfare
Start
Other
Totals
Massachusetts
18.9
3.3
15.9
29.8
15.9
9.5
0.8
0.0
6.0
100.0
Michigan
10.7
4.3
0.4
2.1
3.6
5.4
6.5
14.9
52.0
100.0
Minnesota
16.7
7.9
9.8
29.5
27.2
4.7
0.0
1.0
3.3
100.0
Mississippi
6.5
3.5
25.6
21.1
0.0
0.0
9.8
0.0
33.5
100.0
Missouri
11.9
2.1
5.6
18.1
0.0
16.6
28.8
0.0
17.0
100.0
Montana
39.9
11.4
9.6
16.0
0.0
3.4
4.9
0.0
14.8
100.0
Nebraska
24.7
5.0
13.1
21.8
32.5
0.0
2.6
0.0
0.3
100.0
Nevada
38.2
9.3
1.3
17.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.7
100.0
New Hampshire
25.8
15.0
7.4
20.6
0.0
3.0
5.0
0.0
23.2
100.0
New Jersey
7.2
3.8
5.6
11.6
25.7
1.2
0.0
40.6
4.3
100.0
New Mexico
19.3
1.8
6.4
10.6
26.0
0.0
0.3
6.1
29.4
100.0
New York
28.6
7.6
2.9
7.0
27.7
4.3
5.7
9.2
7.1
100.0
North Carolina
7.2
7.5
0.8
33.8
0.0
0.9
21.8
20.1
7.8
100.0
North Dakota
12.6
13.7
12.6
3.4
0.0
0.1
53.6
0.0
4.0
100.0
Ohio
21.8
10.4
7.7
37.4
0.0
4.8
1.0
0.0
16.9
100.0
Oklahoma
24.5
6.5
6.2
27.9
0.0
2.0
9.2
6.9
16.8
100.0
Oregon
29.4
12.9
5.4
4.2
0.5
10.6
4.2
3.9
28.8
100.0
Pennsylvania
15.7
6.7
8.2
40.9
0.0
1.3
0.0
13.0
14.2
100.0
Rhode Island
14.7
3.3
6.5
25.1
11.5
15.8
16.5
0.5
6.1
100.0
South Carolina
23.5
15.3
9.1
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.4
33.2
100.0
South Dakota
47.2
8.8
13.2
2.7
0.0
10.9
6.7
0.0
10.5
100.0
Tennessee
35.5
12.6
5.5
10.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
35.0
0.8
100.0
Texas
5.5
8.3
8.9
0.0
0.0
3.5
30.6
36.9
6.5
100.0
CRS-23
Emergency
and Short-
Pre-
Basic
Administrative
Work, Education, Child
Refundable
Term
Child
K/Head
State
Assistance
Costs
and Training
Care
Tax Credit
Benefits
Welfare
Start
Other
Totals
Utah
19.5
6.8
20.5
16.6
0.0
3.4
2.8
4.3
26.0
100.0
Vermont
15.7
6.8
2.8
31.9
19.5
1.4
5.7
0.0
16.3
100.0
Virginia
26.1
12.0
14.9
12.4
0.1
2.0
0.0
0.0
32.4
100.0
Washington
13.9
8.5
14.1
21.5
0.0
5.5
0.0
5.9
30.6
100.0
West Virginia
19.2
10.8
0.3
11.0
0.0
14.0
25.6
0.0
19.1
100.0
Wisconsin
14.8
4.2
4.7
35.8
12.0
6.6
0.8
0.0
21.1
100.0
Wyoming
24.3
23.5
12.7
5.6
0.0
12.3
0.0
3.7
17.9
100.0
Totals
22.7
7.2
10.5
16.1
9.0
4.0
7.1
8.1
15.3
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.
CRS-24
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2017
(September 30, 2017, in millions of dollars)
Obligated
but Not
Unobligated
State
Spent
Balances
Alabama
$19.0
$55.2
Alaska
48.1
0.0
Arizona
0.0
30.7
Arkansas
32.7
31.0
California
307.2
0.0
Colorado
0.0
96.4
Connecticut
0.0
0.8
Delaware
0.6
7.8
District of
0.2
32.8
Columbia
Florida
17.1
0.0
Georgia
23.8
40.9
Hawaii
15.6
225.8
Idaho
0.0
20.0
Illinois
0.0
0.0
Indiana
46.3
109.5
Iowa
3.8
0.5
Kansas
0.4
67.9
Kentucky
0.0
66.5
Louisiana
7.9
0.0
Maine
5.6
141.1
Maryland
0.0
0.0
Massachusetts
0.0
0.0
Michigan
0.0
116.8
Minnesota
0.0
59.3
Mississippi
0.0
23.6
Missouri
0.0
0.3
Montana
10.3
13.1
Nebraska
0.0
64.2
Nevada
23.7
0.0
New
0.0
57.5
Hampshire
New Jersey
22.7
35.0
New Mexico
52.9
38.3
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
25
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Obligated
but Not
Unobligated
State
Spent
Balances
New York
121.4
519.5
North
41.7
0.0
Carolina
North
0.0
9.7
Dakota
Ohio
462.7
29.4
Oklahoma
76.3
0.0
Oregon
0.0
50.3
Pennsylvania
63.3
427.0
Rhode Island
0.0
11.1
South
0.0
0.0
Carolina
South Dakota
0.0
22.5
Tennessee
0.0
517.8
Texas
190.0
1.3
Utah
0.0
79.2
Vermont
0.0
0.0
Virginia
8.0
122.0
Washington
0.0
65.1
West Virginia
0.0
57.4
Wisconsin
167.1
33.2
Wyoming
2.6
22.8
Total
1,771.0
3,303.1
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF
Assistance by State, September 2017
Recipients
State
Families
Total Recipients
Children
Adults
Alabama
9,326
21,188
17,042
4,146
Alaska
3,093
8,388
5,726
2,662
Arizona
8,222
17,255
13,693
3,562
Arkansas
3,072
6,879
5,215
1,664
California
511,311
1,485,521
1,046,866
438,655
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
26
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Recipients
State
Families
Total Recipients
Children
Adults
Colorado
16,646
43,906
31,116
12,790
Connecticut
9,798
19,315
14,062
5,253
Delaware
3,873
10,760
6,486
4,274
District of Columbia
3,124
7,678
5,965
1,713
Florida
45,027
72,840
61,895
10,945
Georgia
12,245
14,818
11,840
2,978
Guam
541
1,161
967
194
Hawaii
4,937
13,577
9,549
4,028
Idaho
1,928
2,833
2,783
50
Illinois
12,613
27,018
23,723
3,295
Indiana
6,963
14,008
12,684
1,324
Iowa
10,694
26,261
19,568
6,693
Kansas
4,134
9,420
7,185
2,235
Kentucky
20,785
55,729
34,218
21,511
Louisiana
5,521
13,515
11,243
2,272
Maine
18,452
60,391
36,750
23,641
Maryland
18,611
46,232
34,308
11,924
Massachusetts
51,196
125,310
86,051
39,259
Michigan
13,846
33,706
27,370
6,336
Minnesota
18,519
44,087
34,171
9,916
Mississippi
4,891
10,210
8,037
2,173
Missouri
12,452
28,598
21,698
6,900
Montana
4,517
11,421
8,342
3,079
Nebraska
5,262
12,984
10,682
2,302
Nevada
9,828
25,330
18,852
6,478
New Hampshire
4,884
11,811
8,440
3,371
New Jersey
12,640
28,603
21,970
6,633
New Mexico
11,066
28,047
21,081
6,966
New York
132,675
339,719
239,780
99,939
North Carolina
11,144
18,122
17,040
1,082
North Dakota
1,105
2,777
2,333
444
Ohio
54,161
99,843
89,070
10,773
Oklahoma
6,797
15,246
13,089
2,157
Oregon
43,754
130,642
83,570
47,072
Pennsylvania
50,615
125,892
92,886
33,006
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
27
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Recipients
State
Families
Total Recipients
Children
Adults
Rhode Island
4,468
10,517
7,760
2,757
South Carolina
8,672
18,924
15,929
2,995
South Dakota
3,030
6,011
5,515
496
Tennessee
24,562
54,192
42,509
11,683
Texas
28,839
63,920
55,448
8,472
Utah
4,013
9,760
7,177
2,583
Vermont
3,371
7,858
5,528
2,330
Virgin Islands
197
603
404
199
Virginia
38,253
37,157
28,283
8,874
Washington
35,284
79,332
54,059
25,273
West Virginia
7,113
14,353
11,580
2,773
Wisconsin
16,318
35,263
29,160
6,103
Wyoming
513
1,155
886
269
Totals
1,354,901
3,410,086
2,481,584
928,502
Assistance by State, September 2017
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes
families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE)
requirement.requirement.
Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Assistance by State,
September of Selected Years
% Change to 2017 from ...
State
1994
2007
2010
2016
2017
1994
2010
2016
Alabama
48,752
18,104
23,052
10,564
9,326
-80.9
-59.5
-11.7
Alaska
12,450
3,127
3,507
3,097
3,093
-75.2
-11.8
-0.1
Arizona
72,728
36,934
18,774
9,107
8,222
-88.7
-56.2
-9.7
Arkansas
25,298
8,472
8,469
3,478
3,072
-87.9
-63.7
-11.7
California
916,795
470,502
590,121
564,179
511,311
-44.2
-13.4
-9.4
Colorado
40,544
9,355
11,707
16,814
16,646
-58.9
42.2
-1.0
Connecticut
60,336
20,322
16,848
10,683
9,798
-83.8
-41.8
-8.3
Delaware
11,408
4,034
5,508
4,216
3,873
-66.1
-29.7
-8.1
District of Columbia
27,320
6,231
8,547
4,432
3,124
-88.6
-63.4
-29.5
Florida
239,702
46,864
57,742
47,034
45,027
-81.2
-22.0
-4.3
Georgia
141,596
23,600
20,133
12,570
12,245
-91.4
-39.2
-2.6
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
28
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
% Change to 2017 from ...
State
1994
2007
2010
2016
2017
1994
2010
2016
Guam
2,089
936
1,276
764
541
-74.1
-57.6
-29.2
Hawaii
21,312
6,426
9,953
5,901
4,937
-76.8
-50.4
-16.3
Idaho
8,635
1,506
1,820
1,957
1,928
-77.7
5.9
-1.5
Illinois
241,290
26,222
24,337
14,205
12,613
-94.8
-48.2
-11.2
Indiana
72,654
42,058
36,062
7,836
6,963
-90.4
-80.7
-11.1
Iowa
39,137
19,872
21,548
11,777
10,694
-72.7
-50.4
-9.2
Kansas
29,524
13,892
15,554
5,262
4,134
-86.0
-73.4
-21.4
Kentucky
78,720
29,492
30,875
23,242
20,785
-73.6
-32.7
-10.6
Louisiana
84,162
11,023
10,849
5,772
5,521
-93.4
-49.1
-4.3
Maine
22,322
12,352
15,377
19,951
18,452
-17.3
20.0
-7.5
Maryland
80,266
19,630
25,110
20,592
18,611
-76.8
-25.9
-9.6
Massachusetts
108,985
46,483
49,836
53,453
51,196
-53.0
2.7
-4.2
Michigan
215,873
71,892
67,241
15,417
13,846
-93.6
-79.4
-10.2
Minnesota
59,987
26,642
24,574
19,256
18,519
-69.1
-24.6
-3.8
Mississippi
55,232
11,658
11,895
5,759
4,891
-91.1
-58.9
-15.1
Missouri
91,875
39,544
39,262
14,904
12,452
-86.4
-68.3
-16.5
Montana
11,416
3,217
3,686
3,388
4,517
-60.4
22.5
33.3
Nebraska
15,435
6,913
8,702
5,366
5,262
-65.9
-39.5
-1.9
Nevada
14,620
7,411
10,612
9,525
9,828
-32.8
-7.4
3.2
New Hampshire
11,398
4,733
6,175
4,826
4,884
-57.2
-20.9
1.2
New Jersey
122,376
34,123
34,516
15,941
12,640
-89.7
-63.4
-20.7
New Mexico
34,535
12,503
21,223
11,821
11,066
-68.0
-47.9
-6.4
New York
461,751
156,420
154,936
141,428
132,675
-71.3
-14.4
-6.2
North Carolina
129,258
24,537
23,705
16,859
11,144
-91.4
-53.0
-33.9
North Dakota
5,410
2,156
1,996
1,124
1,105
-79.6
-44.6
-1.7
Ohio
244,099
78,129
105,140
57,184
54,161
-77.8
-48.5
-5.3
Oklahoma
46,572
9,002
9,388
7,147
6,797
-85.4
-27.6
-4.9
Oregon
40,504
18,645
31,751
49,132
43,754
8.0
37.8
-10.9
Pennsylvania
212,457
60,167
53,274
53,678
50,615
-76.2
-5.0
-5.7
Puerto Rico
57,337
12,617
13,371
8,051
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
22,776
8,107
6,758
3,794
4,468
-80.4
-33.9
17.8
South Carolina
50,430
14,936
19,347
9,396
8,672
-82.8
-55.2
-7.7
South Dakota
6,601
2,842
3,291
3,100
3,030
-54.1
-7.9
-2.3
Tennessee
109,678
58,244
62,714
29,123
24,562
-77.6
-60.8
-15.7
Texas
284,973
59,972
51,931
30,074
28,839
-89.9
-44.5
-4.1
Utah
17,505
5,069
6,646
3,961
4,013
-77.1
-39.6
1.3
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
29
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
% Change to 2017 from ...
State
1994
2007
2010
2016
2017
1994
2010
2016
Vermont
9,761
4,503
3,256
3,359
3,371
-65.5
3.5
0.4
Virgin Islands
1,146
395
537
251
197
-82.8
-63.3
-21.5
Virginia
74,257
31,563
37,448
22,345
38,253
-48.5
2.1
71.2
Washington
101,542
49,076
70,200
39,709
35,284
-65.3
-49.7
-11.1
West Virginia
40,279
9,699
10,496
7,362
7,113
-82.3
-32.2
-3.4
Wisconsin
75,086
17,824
24,746
17,520
16,318
-78.3
-34.1
-6.9
Wyoming
5,351
255
318
485
513
-90.4
61.3
5.8
Totals
5,015,545 1,720,231 1,926,140 1,468,171 1,354,901
-72.7
-29.2
-7.20619
September of Selected Years
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017.Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. Total change excludes data for Puerto Rico Total change excludes data for Puerto Rico
for all years.for all years. Caseload data for 2000 through 2017 include those families in Separate State Programs with Caseload data for 2000 through 2017 include those families in Separate State Programs with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-6. TANF Assistance Families by Number of Parents by State: September 2017
Table B-6. TANF Assistance Families by Number of Parents by State:
September 2017
Percentage of All Families Receiving
Assistance
Single
Two
No
Single
Two
No
State
Parent
Parent
Parent
Totals
Parent
Parent
Parent
Totals
Alabama
4,013
51
5,262
9,326
43.0
0.5
56.4
100.0
Alaska
1,891
347
855
3,093
61.1
11.2
27.6
100.0
Arizona
3,104
183
4,935
8,222
37.8
2.2
60.0
100.0
Arkansas
1,543
65
1,464
3,072
50.2
2.1
47.7
100.0
California
276,833
93,664
140,814
511,311
54.1
18.3
27.5
100.0
Colorado
9,702
1,132
5,812
16,646
58.3
6.8
34.9
100.0
Connecticut
3,308
2
6,488
9,798
33.8
0.0
66.2
100.0
Delaware
1,031
12
2,830
3,873
26.6
0.3
73.1
100.0
District of
1,713
0
1,411
3,124
54.8
0.0
45.2
100.0
Columbia
Florida
6,694
374
37,959
45,027
14.9
0.8
84.3
100.0
Georgia
3,504
93
8,648
12,245
28.6
0.8
70.6
100.0
Guam
119
27
395
541
22.0
5.0
73.0
100.0
Hawaii
2,958
779
1,200
4,937
59.9
15.8
24.3
100.0
Idaho
50
0
1,878
1,928
2.6
0.0
97.4
100.0
Illinois
2,688
0
9,925
12,613
21.3
0.0
78.7
100.0
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
30
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Percentage of All Families Receiving
Assistance
Single
Two
No
Single
Two
No
State
Parent
Parent
Parent
Totals
Parent
Parent
Parent
Totals
Indiana
1,621
61
5,281
6,963
23.3
0.9
75.8
100.0
Iowa
5,456
562
4,676
10,694
51.0
5.3
43.7
100.0
Kansas
1,666
262
2,206
4,134
40.3
6.3
53.4
100.0
Kentucky
5,140
504
15,141
20,785
24.7
2.4
72.8
100.0
Louisiana
2,257
0
3,264
5,521
40.9
0.0
59.1
100.0
Maine
9,841
6,929
1,682
18,452
53.3
37.6
9.1
100.0
Maryland
11,504
368
6,739
18,611
61.8
2.0
36.2
100.0
Massachusetts
34,382
3,282
13,532
51,196
67.2
6.4
26.4
100.0
Michigan
5,417
0
8,429
13,846
39.1
0.0
60.9
100.0
Minnesota
10,006
0
8,513
18,519
54.0
0.0
46.0
100.0
Mississippi
1,930
0
2,961
4,891
39.5
0.0
60.5
100.0
Missouri
7,508
0
4,944
12,452
60.3
0.0
39.7
100.0
Montana
2,386
506
1,625
4,517
52.8
11.2
36.0
100.0
Nebraska
2,422
0
2,840
5,262
46.0
0.0
54.0
100.0
Nevada
4,620
852
4,356
9,828
47.0
8.7
44.3
100.0
New
3,262
25
1,597
4,884
66.8
0.5
32.7
100.0
Hampshire
New Jersey
7,352
0
5,288
12,640
58.2
0.0
41.8
100.0
New Mexico
5,308
829
4,929
11,066
48.0
7.5
44.5
100.0
New York
85,882
2,815
43,978
132,675
64.7
2.1
33.1
100.0
North
1,001
38
10,105
11,144
9.0
0.3
90.7
100.0
Carolina
North
444
0
661
1,105
40.2
0.0
59.8
100.0
Dakota
Ohio
8,976
695
44,490
54,161
16.6
1.3
82.1
100.0
Oklahoma
2,157
0
4,640
6,797
31.7
0.0
68.3
100.0
Oregon
29,730
7,414
6,610
43,754
67.9
16.9
15.1
100.0
Pennsylvania
32,023
618
17,974
50,615
63.3
1.2
35.5
100.0
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
3,113
222
1,133
4,468
69.7
5.0
25.4
100.0
South
2,995
0
5,677
8,672
34.5
0.0
65.5
100.0
Carolina
South Dakota
496
0
2,534
3,030
16.4
0.0
83.6
100.0
Tennessee
10,441
316
13,805
24,562
42.5
1.3
56.2
100.0
Texas
8,473
0
20,366
28,839
29.4
0.0
70.6
100.0
Utah
1,911
0
2,102
4,013
47.6
0.0
52.4
100.0
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
31
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs
Percentage of All Families Receiving
Assistance
Single
Two
No
Single
Two
No
State
Parent
Parent
Parent
Totals
Parent
Parent
Parent
Totals
Vermont
1,671
318
1,382
3,371
49.6
9.4
41.0
100.0
Virgin Islands
167
0
30
197
84.8
0.0
15.2
100.0
Virginia
14,185
0
24,068
38,253
37.1
0.0
62.9
100.0
Washington
16,314
6,046
12,924
35,284
46.2
17.1
36.6
100.0
West Virginia
2,054
0
5,059
7,113
28.9
0.0
71.1
100.0
Wisconsin
5,091
229
10,998
16,318
31.2
1.4
67.4
100.0
Wyoming
229
20
264
513
44.6
3.9
51.5
100.0
Totals
668,582
129,640
556,679 1,354,901
49.3
9.6
41.1
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes
families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE)
requirement.
Author Information
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
Acknowledgments
requirement.
this reportthis report’'s data visualizations.
s data visualizations.
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 164 · UPDATED
32
Contents
- Introduction
- Funding and Expenditures
- What is TANF's Funding Status?
- Is Legislation Before Congress to Fund TANF for FY2019?
- How Are State TANF Programs Funded?
- How Much Has the Value of the TANF Basic Block Grant Changed Over Time?
- How Have States Used TANF Funds?
- How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?
- The Caseload
- How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services?
- How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded "Assistance"?
- How Does the Current Assistance Caseload Level Compare with Historical Levels?
- What Are the Characteristics of Families Receiving TANF Assistance?
- TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month?
- TANF Work Participation Standards
- What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet?
- Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted Since the 1996 Welfare Reform Law?
- What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
- How Many Jurisdictions Did Not Meet the All-Families Standard?
- Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard?
Figures
- Figure 1. Uses of TANF Funds by Spending Category, FY2017
- Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-September 2017
- Figure 3. Characteristics of Assistance Families, Selected Years FY1988 to FY2016
- Figure 4. TANF Cash Assistance Maximum Monthly Benefit Amounts for a Single Parent Family with Two Children, 50 States and the District of Columbia, July 2016
- Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families, FY2002-FY2017
- Figure 6. States that Met or Did Not Meet the TANF All-Families Work Participation Standard: FY2006-FY2017
- Figure 7. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State: FY2006-FY2017
Tables
- Table 1. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Nominal and Constant Dollars
- Table 2. TANF Assistance Caseload: September 2017
- Table A-1. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961 to 2016
- Table A-2. Families Receiving AFDC/TANF Assistance by Family Category, Selected Years, FY1988 to FY2016
- Table B-1. Use of FY2017 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
- Table B-2. Use of FY2017 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percentage of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
- Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2017
- Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Assistance by State, September 2017
- Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Assistance by State, September of Selected Years
- Table B-6. TANF Assistance Families by Number of Parents by State: September 2017
Summary
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide range The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide rangeof benefits and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the of benefits and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the
questions about TANF; it does not describe TANF rules (see, instead, CRS Report RL32748, 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 , by
territories, and American Indian tribes. The basic block grant totals $16.5 billion per year. States are also required territories, and American Indian tribes. The basic block grant totals $16.5 billion per year. States are also required
in total to contribute, from their own funds, at least $10.3 billion annually under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) in total to contribute, from their own funds, at least $10.3 billion annually under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE)
requirement.requirement.
grant and MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2017, expenditures on basic grant and MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2017, expenditures on basic
assistance totaled $7.1 billion—23% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. Basic assistance is often—but not assistance totaled $7.1 billion—23% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. Basic assistance is often—but not
exclusively—paid as cash. In addition to funding basic assistance, TANF also contributes funds for child care and exclusively—paid as cash. In addition to funding basic assistance, TANF also contributes funds for child care and
services for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected. Some states also count services for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected. Some states also count
expenditures in prekindergarten programs toward the MOE requirement.expenditures in prekindergarten programs toward the MOE requirement.
TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of the TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of the
that month. The assistance caseload is heterogeneous. The type of family once thought of as the that month. The assistance caseload is heterogeneous. The type of family once thought of as the
"typical" assistance family—one with an unemployed adult recipient—accounted for 32% of all families on the rolls in assistance family—one with an unemployed adult recipient—accounted for 32% of all families on the rolls in
FY2016. Additionally, 31% of cash assistance families had an employed adult, while 38% of all TANF families FY2016. Additionally, 31% of cash assistance families had an employed adult, while 38% of all TANF families
were were
Supplemental Security Income (SSI), adults who are nonparents (e.g., grandparents, aunts, uncles) caring for 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.children, and families consisting of citizen children and ineligible noncitizen parents.
benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. In all states, the maximum TANF benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. In all states, the maximum TANF
cash assistance amount for this sized family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.cash assistance amount for this sized family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.
the states. States determine the work rules that apply to individual recipients. TANF law requires states to engage the states. States determine the work rules that apply to individual recipients. TANF law requires states to engage
50% of all families and 90% of two-parent families with work-eligible individuals in work activities, though these 50% of all families and 90% of two-parent families with work-eligible individuals in work activities, though these
standards can be reduced by standards can be reduced by
90% targets, and vary by state. In FY2017, states achieved, on average, an all-family participation rate of 53.0% 90% targets, and vary by state. In FY2017, states achieved, on average, an all-family participation rate of 53.0%
and a two-parent rate of 69.5%. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation standard: and a two-parent rate of 69.5%. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation standard:
Nevada and Guam. This is a reduction from FY2012, when 16 states did not meet that standard. In FY2017, nine Nevada and Guam. This is a reduction from FY2012, when 16 states did not meet that standard. In FY2017, nine
jurisdictions did not meet the two-parent standard. States that do not meet work standards are jurisdictions did not meet the two-parent standard. States that do not meet work standards are at risk of being of being
penalized by a reduction in their block grant.
Introduction
This report provides responses to frequently asked questions about the Temporary Assistance for This report provides responses to frequently asked questions about the Temporary Assistance forNeedy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy Needy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy
access to information and dataaccess to information and data. Appendix B presents a series of tables with state-level data. This presents a series of tables with state-level data. This
report does not provide information on TANF program rules (for a discussion of TANF rules, seereport does not provide information on TANF program rules (for a discussion of TANF rules, see
CRS Report RL32748, CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A
Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by , by
TANF is a mandatory spending program administered by the Department of Health and Human TANF is a mandatory spending program administered by the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS). Funding for TANF is not provided through the regular annual appropriations bill Services (HHS). Funding for TANF is not provided through the regular annual appropriations bill
for HHS. Rather, TANF funding is directly appropriated in Section 403(a) of the Social Security for HHS. Rather, TANF funding is directly appropriated in Section 403(a) of the Social Security
Act. Most recently, provisions extending TANF funding through December 21, 2018, were Act. Most recently, provisions extending TANF funding through December 21, 2018, were
contained in the FY2019 continuing resolution (P.L. 115-245, as amended by P.L. 115-298). As of contained in the FY2019 continuing resolution (P.L. 115-245, as amended by P.L. 115-298). As of
the date of this report, no further extension of TANF appropriations has been enacted, resulting in the date of this report, no further extension of TANF appropriations has been enacted, resulting in
a gap in TANF funding.a gap in TANF funding.
contained in the continuing resolution. However, absent the enactment of law, the federal contained in the continuing resolution. However, absent the enactment of law, the federal
government cannot make its second quarter (beginning on January 1, 2019) or subsequent government cannot make its second quarter (beginning on January 1, 2019) or subsequent
quarterly TANF grant awards to the states. HHS has issued guidance to the states clarifying that quarterly TANF grant awards to the states. HHS has issued guidance to the states clarifying that
they may use unspent, previously awarded federal funds to continue their state TANF programs they may use unspent, previously awarded federal funds to continue their state TANF programs
during the funding lapse. Additionally, a state may spend its own funds within the state TANF during the funding lapse. Additionally, a state may spend its own funds within the state TANF
program, which, absent subsequent enactment of law to the contrary, may be counted toward the program, which, absent subsequent enactment of law to the contrary, may be counted toward the
FY2019 TANF state spending requirement (the maintenance of effort, or MOE, requirement).FY2019 TANF state spending requirement (the maintenance of effort, or MOE, requirement).
On January 14, 2019, the House passed legislation (H.R. 430) that would fund TANF through On January 14, 2019, the House passed legislation (H.R. 430) that would fund TANF through
June 30, 2019. H.R. 430 is a stand-alone bill that only would extend funding for TANF and June 30, 2019. H.R. 430 is a stand-alone bill that only would extend funding for TANF and
certain related programs, such as mandatory child care. The bill would permit states to receive certain related programs, such as mandatory child care. The bill would permit states to receive
their quarterly TANF grants for the their quarterly TANF grants for the
through June) of FY2019.through June) of FY2019.
final quarter (July through September) of FY2019.final quarter (July through September) of FY2019.
government activities that had their funding lapse in December 2018government activities that had their funding lapse in December 2018
would also fund TANF. On January 3, 2019, the House passed legislation (H.R. 21) that would fund TANF for the remainder of FY2019, as well as for FY2020. It would also require would fund TANF for the remainder of FY2019, as well as for FY2020. It would also require
states to report on employment outcomes of TANF assistance recipients.states to report on employment outcomes of TANF assistance recipients.
Legislation expected to be considered by the House (H.R. 268, H.J.Res 28) would provide a short-term extension of TANF, permitting the federal government to provide states with TANF grants for the 2nd quarter (January through March) of FY2019. How Are State TANF Programs Funded? TANF programs are funded through a combination of federal and state funds. In FY2018, TANF TANF programs are funded through a combination of federal and state funds. In FY2018, TANF
has two federal grants to states. The bulk of the TANF funding is in a basic block grant to the has two federal grants to states. The bulk of the TANF funding is in a basic block grant to the
states, totaling $16.5 billion for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the states, totaling $16.5 billion for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the
provides extra federal funds to states that meet certain conditions.provides extra federal funds to states that meet certain conditions.
TANF-related activities under what is known as the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. TANF-related activities under what is known as the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
States are required to spend at least 75% of what they spent in FY1994 on TANFStates are required to spend at least 75% of what they spent in FY1994 on TANF
programs. The minimum MOE amount, in total, is $10.3 billion per year for the 50 states, the programs. The minimum MOE amount, in total, is $10.3 billion per year for the 50 states, the
District of Columbia, and the territories.District of Columbia, and the territories.
Over Time?
TANF was created in the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work TANF was created in the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). A TANF basic block grant Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). A TANF basic block grant
amount—both nationally and for each state—was established in the 1996 welfare reform law. The amount—both nationally and for each state—was established in the 1996 welfare reform law. The
amount established in that law for the 50 states, District of Columbia, territories, and tribes was amount established in that law for the 50 states, District of Columbia, territories, and tribes was
$16.6 billion in total. From FY1997 through FY2016, that amount remained the same. It was not $16.6 billion in total. From FY1997 through FY2016, that amount remained the same. It was not
adjusted for changes that occur over time, such as inflation, the size of the TANF assistance adjusted for changes that occur over time, such as inflation, the size of the TANF assistance
caseload, or changes in the poverty population. During this period, the real (inflation-adjusted) caseload, or changes in the poverty population. During this period, the real (inflation-adjusted)
value of the block grant declined by one-third (33.1%). Beginning with FY2017, the state family value of the block grant declined by one-third (33.1%). Beginning with FY2017, the state family
assistance grant was reduced by 0.33% from its historical levels to finance TANF-related research assistance grant was reduced by 0.33% from its historical levels to finance TANF-related research
and technical assistance. The reduced block grant amount is $16.5 billion.and technical assistance. The reduced block grant amount is $16.5 billion.
adjusted) dollars for each year, FY1997 through FY2018. In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the adjusted) dollars for each year, FY1997 through FY2018. In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the
FY2018 block grant was 36% below its value in FY1997.FY2018 block grant was 36% below its value in FY1997.
Fiscal Year
State Family Assistance Grant Constant 1997 Dollars
Cumulative Percentage Change
1997
$16.567
$16.567
1998
16.567
16.306
-1.6%
1999
16.567
15.991
-3.5
2000
16.567
15.498
-6.5
2001
16.567
15.020
-9.3
2002
16.567
14.792
-10.7
2003
16.567
14.456
-12.7
2004
16.567
14.124
-14.7
2005
16.567
13.680
-17.4
2006
16.567
13.190
-20.4
2007
16.567
12.893
-22.2
2008
16.567
12.345
-25.5
2009
16.567
12.382
-25.3
2010
16.567
12.182
-26.5
2011
16.567
11.859
-28.4
2012
16.567
11.585
-30.1
2013
16.567
11.394
-31.2
2014
16.567
11.217
-32.3
2015
16.567
11.179
-32.5
2016
16.567
11.082
-33.1
2017
16.512
10.820
-34.7
2018
16.512
10.564
-36.2
Services (HHS), and the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).Services (HHS), and the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Notes: Constant dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U).Constant dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U).
Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2017. In shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2017. In
FY2017, a total of $31.1 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either FY2017, a total of $31.1 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance—ongoing benefits to expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance—ongoing benefits to
families to meet basic needs—represented 23% ($7.1 billion) of total FY2017 TANF and MOE families to meet basic needs—represented 23% ($7.1 billion) of total FY2017 TANF and MOE
dollars.dollars.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2017, $5 billion (16% of all TANF and TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2017, $5 billion (16% of all TANF and
MOE funds) were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the MOE funds) were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the
Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF work-related activities (including education Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF work-related activities (including education
and training) were the third-largest TANF and MOE spending category at $3.3 billion, or 11% of and training) were the third-largest TANF and MOE spending category at $3.3 billion, or 11% of
total TANF and MOE funds. TANF also helps low-wage parents by helping to finance state total TANF and MOE funds. TANF also helps low-wage parents by helping to finance state
refundable tax credits, such as state add-ons to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). TANF and refundable tax credits, such as state add-ons to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). TANF and
MOE expenditures on refundable tax credits in FY2017 totaled $2.8 billion, or 9% of total TANF MOE expenditures on refundable tax credits in FY2017 totaled $2.8 billion, or 9% of total TANF
and MOE spending.and MOE spending.
TANF is also a major contributor to the child welfare system, which provides foster care, 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 adoption assistance, and services to families with children who either have experienced or are at
risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect, spending about $2.2 billion on such activities. TANF risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect, spending about $2.2 billion on such activities. TANF
and MOE funds also help fund state prekindergarten (pre-K) programs, with total FY2017 and MOE funds also help fund state prekindergarten (pre-K) programs, with total FY2017
expenditures for that category also at $2.5 billion. TANF and MOE funds are also used for short-expenditures for that category also at $2.5 billion. TANF and MOE funds are also used for short-
term and emergency benefits and a wide range of other social services.term and emergency benefits and a wide range of other social services.
Figure 1. Uses of TANF Funds by Spending Category, FY2017
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.
TANF law permits states to TANF law permits states to
timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to
occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).
$5.1 billion of federal TANF funding remained neither transferred nor spent. However, some of $5.1 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 these unspent funds represent monies that states had already committed to spend later. At the end
of FY2017, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.8 of FY2017, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.8
billion. At the end of FY2017, states had $3.3 billion of billion. At the end of FY2017, states had $3.3 billion of
available to states to make available to states to make new spending commitments spending commitments. Table B-3 shows unspent TANF funds shows unspent TANF funds
Services?
This number is not known. Federal TANF reporting requirements focus on families receiving This number is not known. Federal TANF reporting requirements focus on families receiving
only ongoing only ongoing assistance. There is no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF . There is no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF
often paid in cash. However, some states use TANF or MOE funds to provide an often paid in cash. However, some states use TANF or MOE funds to provide an
(SNAP) allotments. These (SNAP) allotments. These
cash assistance program. Additionally, TANF MOE dollars are used to fund food assistance for cash assistance program. Additionally, TANF MOE dollars are used to fund food assistance for
immigrants barred from regular SNAP benefits in certain states. These forms of nutrition aid meet immigrants barred from regular SNAP benefits in certain states. These forms of nutrition aid meet
an ongoing need, and thus are considered TANF assistance.an ongoing need, and thus are considered TANF assistance.
of all TANF expenditures. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements that pertain to families of all TANF expenditures. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements that pertain to families
receiving receiving
funded benefit or service.funded benefit or service.
Funded "Assistance"? Table 2 provides assistance caseload information. A total of 1.4 million families, composed of 3.4 provides assistance caseload information. A total of 1.4 million families, composed of 3.4
million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2017. The bulk of
Puerto Rico.) For state-by-state assistance caseloads, Puerto Rico.) For state-by-state assistance caseloads,
|
Families |
1,354,901 |
|
Recipients |
3,410,086 |
|
Child Recipients |
2,481,584 |
|
Adult Recipients |
928,502 |
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Historical Levels?
Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving
assistance from TANF or its predecessor program, from July 1959 to September 2017. The assistance from TANF or its predecessor program, from July 1959 to September 2017. The
shaded areas of the figure represent months when the national economy was in recession. Though shaded areas of the figure represent months when the national economy was in recession. Though
the health of the national economy has affected the trend in the cash assistance caseload, the long-the health of the national economy has affected the trend in the cash assistance caseload, the long-
term trend in receipt of cash assistance does not follow a classic countercyclical pattern. Such a term trend in receipt of cash assistance does not follow a classic countercyclical pattern. Such a
pattern would have the caseload rise during economic slumps, and then fall again during periods pattern would have the caseload rise during economic slumps, and then fall again during periods
of economic growth. Factors other than the health of the economy (demographic trends, policy of economic growth. Factors other than the health of the economy (demographic trends, policy
changes) also have influenced the caseload trend.changes) also have influenced the caseload trend.
the mid-1970s and a second period from 1988 to 1994. The number of families receiving the mid-1970s and a second period from 1988 to 1994. The number of families receiving
the late 1990s (after the 1996 welfare reform law) before leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the 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. During the recent caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace than in the late 1990s. During the recent
2007-2009 recession and its aftermath, the caseload began to rise from 1.7 million families in 2007-2009 recession and its aftermath, the caseload began to rise from 1.7 million families in
August 2008, peaking in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families. By September 2017, the August 2008, peaking in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families. By September 2017, the
assistance caseload had declined to 1.4 million families.assistance caseload had declined to 1.4 million families.
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-September 2017
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Shaded areas denote months when the national economy was in recession. Information represents Shaded areas denote months when the national economy was in recession. Information represents
families receiving cash assistance from Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), Aid to Families with Dependent families receiving cash assistance from Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC), and TANF. For October 1999 through September 2017, includes families receiving assistance Children (AFDC), and TANF. For October 1999 through September 2017, includes families receiving assistance
from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort
requirement. requirement.
of ADC, AFDC, and TANF cash assistance for 1961 to 2016.of ADC, AFDC, and TANF cash assistance for 1961 to 2016.
Assistance?
Before PRWORA, the Before PRWORA, the
(usually the mother) with one or two children. That single parent has also typically been (usually the mother) with one or two children. That single parent has also typically been
unemployed. However, over the past 20 years the assistance caseload decline has occurred unemployed. However, over the past 20 years the assistance caseload decline has occurred
together with a major shift in the composition of together with a major shift in the composition of
and composition of the assistance caseload under both AFDC (1988 and 1994) and TANF. In and composition of the assistance caseload under both AFDC (1988 and 1994) and TANF. In
FY1988, an estimated 84% of AFDC families were headed by an unemployed adult recipient. In FY1988, an estimated 84% of AFDC families were headed by an unemployed adult recipient. In
FY2016, families with an unemployed adult recipient represented 32% of all cash assistance FY2016, families with an unemployed adult recipient represented 32% of all cash assistance
families. This decline occurred, in large part, as the number of families headed by unemployed families. This decline occurred, in large part, as the number of families headed by unemployed
adult recipients declined more rapidly than other components of the assistance caseload. In adult recipients declined more rapidly than other components of the assistance caseload. In
FY1994, a monthly average of 3.8 million families per month who received AFDC cash FY1994, a monthly average of 3.8 million families per month who received AFDC cash
assistance had adult recipients who were not working. In FY2016, a monthly average of 485,000 assistance had adult recipients who were not working. In FY2016, a monthly average of 485,000
families per month had adult recipients or work-eligible individuals, with no adult recipient or families per month had adult recipients or work-eligible individuals, with no adult recipient or
work-eligible individual working.work-eligible individual working.
by families with employed adults and by families with employed adults and
with employed adult recipients represented 31% of all assistance families. This category includes with employed adult recipients represented 31% of all assistance families. This category includes
families in families in
program. program.
right; the family receives benefits on behalf of its children. The share of the caseload that was right; the family receives benefits on behalf of its children. The share of the caseload that was
child-only in FY2016 was 38%. In FY2016, families with a nonrecipient, nonparent relative child-only in FY2016 was 38%. In FY2016, families with a nonrecipient, nonparent relative
(grandparents, aunts, uncles) represented 14% of all assistance families. Families with ineligible, (grandparents, aunts, uncles) represented 14% of all assistance families. Families with ineligible,
noncitizen adults or adults who have not reported their citizenship status made up 11% of the noncitizen adults or adults who have not reported their citizenship status made up 11% of the
assistance caseload in that year. Families where the parent received Supplemental Security assistance caseload in that year. Families where the parent received Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) and the children received TANF made up 9% of all assistance families in FY2016.Income (SSI) and the children received TANF made up 9% of all assistance families in FY2016.
Figure 3. Characteristics of Assistance Families,
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Receive in TANF Cash Per Month?
There are There are no federal rules that help determine the amount of TANF cash benefits paid to a family. 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 (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.states do so.) Benefit amounts are determined solely by the states.
Most states base TANF cash benefit amounts on family size, paying larger cash benefits to larger 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 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 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 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 not meeting a program a reduced benefit. Moreover, some families are financially sanctioned for not meeting a program
requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit.requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit.
Figure 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a single mother caring for shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a single mother caring for
two children (family of three) in July 2016.two children (family of three) in July 2016.
parent family with two children.parent family with two children.
2016 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi to $923 per month in Alaska. The map shows a 2016 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi to $923 per month in Alaska. The map shows a
than in other regions. In all states, the maximum TANF cash assistance amount for this sized than in other regions. In all states, the maximum TANF cash assistance amount for this sized
family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.family was less than 50% of poverty-level income.
Figure 4. TANF Cash Assistance Maximum Monthly Benefit Amounts for a Single
Database. The welfare rules database has information for the 50 states and District of Columbia. It does not have . The welfare rules database has information for the 50 states and District of Columbia. It does not have
information on TANF assistance programs in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands or tribal TANF information on TANF assistance programs in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands or tribal TANF
programs.programs.
TANFTANF
states, rather than individual recipients. States determine the work rules that apply to individual states, rather than individual recipients. States determine the work rules that apply to individual
recipients.recipients.
The TANF statute requires states to have 50% of their caseload meet standards of participation in 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 work or activities—that is, a family member must be in specified activities for a minimum
of a stateof a state
standards.standards.
" The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each
percentage point decline in a statepercentage point decline in a state
may get may get
MOE. Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% and 90% targets, MOE. Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% and 90% targets,
and vary by state and by year.and vary by state and by year.
through a reduction in their block grant. However, penalties can be forgiven if a state claims, and 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 the Secretary of HHS finds, that it had
can also be forgiven for states that enter into can also be forgiven for states that enter into
meet the work standard.meet the work standard.
Since the 1996 Welfare Reform Law?
The 50% and 90% target standards that states face, as well as the caseload reduction credit, date 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 (DRA,back to the 1996 welfare reform law. However, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA,
109-171) made
with state funds, distinct from a statewith state funds, distinct from a state
countable toward the TANF MOE.countable toward the TANF MOE.
" individual, expanding the number of families that are included in the work individual, expanding the number of families that are included in the work
participation calculation.participation calculation.
response to the sharp economic downturn of 2007-2009, held states response to the sharp economic downturn of 2007-2009, held states
increases affecting the work participation standards for FY2009 through FY2011. It did so by increases affecting the work participation standards for FY2009 through FY2011. It did so by
allowing states to allowing states to
standards.standards.
HHS computes two work participation rates for each state that are then compared with the 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 effective (after-credit) standard to determine if it has met the TANF work standard. An
standard (50% minus the statestandard (50% minus the state
work participation rate that is compared with the two-parent effective standard (90% minus the work participation rate that is compared with the two-parent effective standard (90% minus the
FY2017. For the period FY2002 through FY2011, states achieved an average all-families work FY2017. For the period FY2002 through FY2011, states achieved an average all-families work
participation rate hovering around 30%. The work participation rate increased since then. In participation rate hovering around 30%. The work participation rate increased since then. In
FY2016, it exceeded 50% for the first time since TANF was established. However, it is important FY2016, it exceeded 50% for the first time since TANF was established. However, it is important
to note that the increase in the work participation rate has not come from an increase in the to note that the increase in the work participation rate has not come from an increase in the
number of recipients in regular TANF assistance programs who are either working or in job number of recipients in regular TANF assistance programs who are either working or in job
preparation activities. This increase stems mostly from states creating new preparation activities. This increase stems mostly from states creating new
" programs that use TANF funds to aid working parents in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance programs that use TANF funds to aid working parents in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps) or who have left the regular TANF assistance programs Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps) or who have left the regular TANF assistance programs
for work.for work.
Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families,
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Figure 6 shows which states did not meet the TANF all-families work participation standards shows which states did not meet the TANF all-families work participation standards
from FY2006 through FY2017. Before FY2007, the first year that DRA was effective, only a few from FY2006 through FY2017. Before FY2007, the first year that DRA was effective, only a few
jurisdictions did not meet TANF all-families work participation standards. However, in FY2007, jurisdictions did not meet TANF all-families work participation standards. However, in FY2007,
15 jurisdictions did not meet the all-families standard. This number declined to 9 in FY2008 and 15 jurisdictions did not meet the all-families standard. This number declined to 9 in FY2008 and
meet the all-family standard, the largest number of states that did not meet their participation meet the all-family standard, the largest number of states that did not meet their participation
standards in any one year since the enactment of TANF. FY2012 was the year that ARRAstandards in any one year since the enactment of TANF. FY2012 was the year that ARRA
higher standards than in previous years.higher standards than in previous years.
to FY2017 period. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation to FY2017 period. In FY2017, two jurisdictions did not meet the all-family participation
Figure 6. States that Met or Did Not Meet the TANF All-Families Work Participation
In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second standard—In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second standard—
90%—for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard can also be 90%—for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard can also be
lowered by caseload reduction.lowered by caseload reduction.
through FY2017. However, the display on the table is more complex than that for reporting through FY2017. However, the display on the table is more complex than that for reporting
whether a state met or did not meet its whether a state met or did not meet its
participation standard. These states are denoted on the table with an participation standard. These states are denoted on the table with an
two-parent standard was not applicable to the state in that year. Before the changes made by the two-parent standard was not applicable to the state in that year. Before the changes made by the
DRA were effective, a number of states had their two-parent families in separate state programs 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 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 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 number of states moved these families into solely state-funded programs. These are state-funded
programs with expenditures programs with expenditures not countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort requirement, countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort requirement,
and hence are outside of TANFand hence are outside of TANF
the two-parent standard, and the two-parent standard, and
jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their FY2017 TANF work participation calculation, jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their FY2017 TANF work participation calculation,
19 met the standard and 9 did not.19 met the standard and 9 did not.
Figure 7. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
TANF Child Recipients
Year
Families (millions)
Recipients (millions)
Adults (millions)
Children (millions)
As a Percentage of All Children
As a Percentage of All Poor Children
1961
0.873
3.363
0.765
2.598
3.7%
14.3%
1962
0.939
3.704
0.860
2.844
4.0
15.7
1963
0.963
3.945
0.988
2.957
4.1
17.4
1964
1.010
4.195
1.050
3.145
4.3
18.6
1965
1.060
4.422
1.101
3.321
4.5
21.5
1966
1.096
4.546
1.112
3.434
4.7
26.5
1967
1.220
5.014
1.243
3.771
5.2
31.2
1968
1.410
5.702
1.429
4.274
5.9
37.8
1969
1.696
6.689
1.716
4.973
6.9
49.7
1970
2.207
8.462
2.250
6.212
8.6
57.7
1971
2.763
10.242
2.808
7.435
10.4
68.5
1972
3.048
10.944
3.039
7.905
11.1
74.9
1973
3.148
10.949
3.046
7.903
11.2
79.9
1974
3.219
10.847
3.041
7.805
11.2
75.0
1975
3.481
11.319
3.248
8.071
11.8
71.2
1976
3.565
11.284
3.302
7.982
11.8
76.2
1977
3.568
11.015
3.273
7.743
11.6
73.9
1978
3.517
10.551
3.188
7.363
11.2
72.8
1979
3.509
10.312
3.130
7.181
11.0
68.0
1980
3.712
10.774
3.355
7.419
11.5
63.2
1981
3.835
11.079
3.552
7.527
11.7
59.2
1982
3.542
10.358
3.455
6.903
10.8
49.6
1983
3.686
10.761
3.663
7.098
11.1
50.1
1984
3.714
10.831
3.687
7.144
11.2
52.3
1985
3.701
10.855
3.658
7.198
11.3
54.4
1986
3.763
11.038
3.704
7.334
11.5
56.0
1987
3.776
11.027
3.661
7.366
11.5
56.4
1988
3.749
10.915
3.586
7.329
11.4
57.8
1989
3.798
10.992
3.573
7.419
11.5
57.9
1990
4.057
11.695
3.784
7.911
12.1
57.9
1991
4.497
12.930
4.216
8.715
13.2
59.8
1992
4.829
13.773
4.470
9.303
13.9
59.9
1993
5.012
14.205
4.631
9.574
14.1
60.0
1994
5.033
14.161
4.593
9.568
13.9
61.7
1995
4.791
13.418
4.284
9.135
13.1
61.5
1996
4.434
12.321
3.928
8.600
12.3
58.7
1997
3.740
10.376
NA
NA
10.0
50.1
1998
3.050
8.347
NA
NA
8.1
42.9
1999
2.578
6.924
NA
NA
6.7
39.4
2000
2.303
6.143
1.655
4.479
6.1
38.1
2001
2.192
5.717
1.514
4.195
5.7
35.3
2002
2.187
5.609
1.479
4.119
5.6
33.6
2003
2.180
5.490
1.416
4.063
5.5
31.3
2004
2.153
5.342
1.362
3.969
5.4
30.2
2005
2.061
5.028
1.261
3.756
5.1
28.9
2006
1.906
4.582
1.120
3.453
4.6
26.7
2007
1.730
4.075
0.956
3.119
4.2
23.2
2008
1.701
4.005
0.946
3.059
4.1
21.6
2009
1.838
4.371
1.074
3.296
4.4
21.2
2010
1.919
4.598
1.163
3.435
4.6
20.9
2011
1.907
4.557
1.149
3.408
4.6
20.9
2012
1.852
4.402
1.104
3.298
4.4
20.3
2013
1.726
4.042
0.993
3.050
4.1
19.1
2014
1.650
3.957
1.007
2.950
4.0
18.9
2015
1.609
4.126
1.155
2.971
4.0
20.4
2016
1.488
3.785
1.044
2.741
3.7
20.6
Services (HHS) and the U.S. Census Bureau.Services (HHS) and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Notes: NA denotes not available. During transition reporting from AFDC to TANF, caseload statistics on adult NA denotes not available. During transition reporting from AFDC to TANF, caseload statistics on adult
and child recipients were not collected. For those years, TANF children as a percent of all children and percent and child recipients were not collected. For those years, TANF children as a percent of all children and percent
of all poor children were estimated by HHS and published in of all poor children were estimated by HHS and published in Welfare Indicators and Risk Factors, Annual Report to
Congress, Table TANF 2, p. A-7. See, Table TANF 2, p. A-7. See
AFDC
TANF
1988
1994
2001
2006
2016
Number of Families Receiving Assistance
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working
3,136,566
3,798,997
992,445
825,490
484,959
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working
243,573
378,620
420,794
259,001
465,199
Child-Only/SSI Parent
59,988
171,391
171,951
176,670
132,338
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent
47,566
184,397
125,900
153,445
153,717
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent
51,764
146,227
91,447
158,113
4,775
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative
188,598
328,290
255,984
261,944
208,202
Child-Only/Unknown
19,897
38,341
143,834
122,738
74,410
Totals
3,747,952
5,046,263
2,202,356
1,957,402
1,523,600
Percentage of All Families Receiving Assistance
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working
83.7%
75.3%
45.1%
42.2%
31.8%
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working
6.5
7.5
19.1
13.2
30.5
Child-Only/SSI Parent
1.6
3.4
7.8
9.0
8.7
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent
1.3
3.7
5.7
7.8
10.1
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent
1.4
2.9
4.2
8.1
0.3
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative
5.0
6.5
11.6
13.4
13.7
Child-Only/Unknown
0.5
0.8
6.5
6.3
4.9
Totals
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
(QC) data files and the FY2001, FY2006, and FY2016 TANF National Data Files.(QC) data files and the FY2001, FY2006, and FY2016 TANF National Data Files.
Notes: FY2001 through FY2016 data include families receiving assistance from separate state programs (SSPs) FY2001 through FY2016 data include families receiving assistance from separate state programs (SSPs)
with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. For FY2016, TANF with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. For FY2016, TANF
nonrecipient parents who have been time-limited or sanctioned off the rolls, but the family continues to receive nonrecipient parents who have been time-limited or sanctioned off the rolls, but the family continues to receive
a reduced benefit. For FY2001 and FY2006, such families cannot be identified and are classified as a reduced benefit. For FY2001 and FY2006, such families cannot be identified and are classified as
(Dollars in millions)
|
State |
Basic Assistance |
Administrative Costs |
Work, Education, and Training |
Child Care |
Refundable Tax Credit |
Emergency and Short-Term Benefits |
Child Welfare |
Pre-K/Head Start |
Other |
Totals |
|
Alabama |
$22.318 |
$26.710 |
$5.349 |
$5.679 |
$0.000 |
$36.833 |
$32.240 |
$41.648 |
$40.208 |
$210.984 |
|
Alaska |
58.114 |
6.024 |
8.397 |
8.879 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
4.985 |
86.399 |
|
Arizona |
37.732 |
43.656 |
1.443 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
10.369 |
147.105 |
0.000 |
119.624 |
359.929 |
|
Arkansas |
5.948 |
18.829 |
13.920 |
8.032 |
0.000 |
5.368 |
0.231 |
105.196 |
4.811 |
162.335 |
|
California |
2539.250 |
573.786 |
1620.135 |
615.700 |
0.000 |
237.887 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
1010.169 |
6596.928 |
|
Colorado |
89.927 |
23.474 |
10.687 |
11.929 |
77.489 |
31.389 |
46.532 |
74.851 |
43.716 |
409.995 |
|
Connecticut |
52.352 |
46.885 |
12.037 |
41.764 |
0.000 |
18.646 |
61.273 |
83.561 |
171.132 |
487.651 |
|
Delaware |
17.421 |
4.736 |
7.063 |
67.490 |
0.000 |
2.724 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
15.160 |
114.595 |
|
District of Columbia |
121.650 |
8.398 |
37.991 |
59.532 |
28.928 |
51.110 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
9.299 |
316.909 |
|
Florida |
163.180 |
83.371 |
46.314 |
318.206 |
0.000 |
0.934 |
242.113 |
0.000 |
80.542 |
934.661 |
|
Georgia |
86.540 |
20.570 |
11.265 |
22.183 |
0.000 |
0.085 |
257.554 |
0.000 |
90.828 |
489.024 |
|
Hawaii |
39.957 |
16.540 |
52.170 |
4.972 |
0.000 |
0.425 |
1.294 |
0.000 |
84.876 |
200.233 |
|
Idaho |
7.871 |
7.519 |
2.549 |
15.025 |
0.000 |
11.750 |
1.327 |
1.475 |
1.713 |
49.229 |
|
Illinois |
43.419 |
0.184 |
18.685 |
596.459 |
47.254 |
0.916 |
221.080 |
58.586 |
79.217 |
1065.801 |
|
Indiana |
16.714 |
23.452 |
182.300 |
112.404 |
28.904 |
0.546 |
15.520 |
0.000 |
131.405 |
511.244 |
|
Iowa |
37.166 |
8.206 |
11.799 |
58.254 |
26.505 |
0.253 |
62.264 |
0.000 |
22.299 |
226.746 |
|
Kansas |
13.920 |
14.568 |
1.594 |
6.673 |
48.347 |
0.071 |
22.980 |
14.437 |
50.495 |
173.086 |
|
Kentucky |
170.762 |
14.601 |
29.380 |
38.815 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
15.474 |
269.032 |
|
Louisiana |
19.191 |
18.079 |
26.153 |
10.214 |
14.671 |
9.471 |
33.144 |
45.991 |
35.029 |
211.945 |
|
Maine |
25.693 |
3.138 |
0.310 |
14.888 |
7.561 |
4.162 |
7.683 |
0.415 |
28.130 |
91.980 |
|
Maryland |
115.787 |
31.019 |
31.450 |
8.397 |
152.582 |
26.370 |
20.035 |
55.962 |
55.808 |
497.410 |
|
Massachusetts |
207.063 |
36.557 |
174.674 |
327.404 |
174.125 |
103.873 |
8.311 |
0.000 |
66.263 |
1,098.270 |
|
Michigan |
133.132 |
53.908 |
5.417 |
26.586 |
45.440 |
66.929 |
81.665 |
186.193 |
649.995 |
1,249.266 |
|
Minnesota |
98.144 |
46.341 |
57.751 |
173.904 |
160.076 |
27.478 |
0.000 |
5.700 |
19.524 |
588.918 |
|
Mississippi |
8.585 |
4.572 |
33.655 |
27.660 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
12.859 |
0.000 |
43.971 |
131.302 |
|
Missouri |
42.341 |
7.317 |
19.813 |
64.380 |
0.000 |
59.191 |
102.816 |
0.000 |
60.586 |
356.444 |
|
Montana |
26.080 |
7.451 |
6.282 |
10.495 |
0.000 |
2.195 |
3.187 |
0.000 |
9.708 |
65.397 |
|
Nebraska |
26.603 |
5.383 |
14.079 |
23.489 |
35.062 |
0.000 |
2.836 |
0.000 |
0.290 |
107.742 |
|
Nevada |
39.108 |
9.559 |
1.362 |
17.887 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
34.465 |
102.382 |
|
New Hampshire |
18.987 |
11.041 |
5.403 |
15.118 |
0.000 |
2.213 |
3.662 |
0.000 |
17.081 |
73.505 |
|
New Jersey |
99.529 |
52.403 |
77.142 |
159.671 |
354.819 |
16.630 |
0.000 |
560.009 |
58.912 |
1,379.114 |
|
New Mexico |
55.422 |
5.073 |
18.259 |
30.528 |
74.623 |
0.000 |
0.895 |
17.600 |
84.412 |
286.811 |
|
New York |
1,455.625 |
389.219 |
147.068 |
355.940 |
1,410.980 |
219.797 |
290.559 |
467.685 |
361.475 |
5,098.348 |
|
North Carolina |
41.570 |
43.356 |
4.785 |
194.900 |
0.000 |
5.077 |
125.782 |
115.709 |
44.926 |
576.104 |
|
North Dakota |
4.070 |
4.422 |
4.070 |
1.102 |
0.000 |
0.019 |
17.270 |
0.000 |
1.274 |
32.226 |
|
Ohio |
246.989 |
117.873 |
87.008 |
424.009 |
0.000 |
53.852 |
11.099 |
0.000 |
191.421 |
1,132.250 |
|
Oklahoma |
42.603 |
11.274 |
10.776 |
48.668 |
0.000 |
3.536 |
15.999 |
12.079 |
29.282 |
174.217 |
|
Oregon |
89.263 |
39.235 |
16.558 |
12.911 |
1.467 |
32.130 |
12.811 |
12.001 |
87.605 |
303.981 |
|
Pennsylvania |
186.912 |
79.850 |
98.385 |
488.909 |
0.000 |
15.459 |
0.000 |
154.677 |
169.790 |
1,193.982 |
|
Rhode Island |
24.435 |
5.434 |
10.869 |
41.679 |
19.129 |
26.237 |
27.334 |
0.800 |
10.171 |
166.088 |
|
South Carolina |
38.231 |
24.983 |
14.782 |
4.085 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
26.794 |
54.010 |
162.886 |
|
South Dakota |
13.813 |
2.581 |
3.866 |
0.803 |
0.000 |
3.174 |
1.958 |
0.000 |
3.057 |
29.254 |
|
Tennessee |
62.597 |
22.152 |
9.618 |
18.976 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
61.668 |
1.377 |
176.387 |
|
Texas |
50.837 |
77.601 |
82.284 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
32.166 |
284.108 |
342.674 |
59.966 |
929.636 |
|
Utah |
25.289 |
8.863 |
26.555 |
21.438 |
0.000 |
4.419 |
3.676 |
5.501 |
33.702 |
129.443 |
|
Vermont |
15.230 |
6.631 |
2.696 |
30.996 |
19.013 |
1.360 |
5.508 |
0.000 |
15.842 |
97.276 |
|
Virginia |
68.485 |
31.387 |
38.944 |
32.558 |
0.371 |
5.269 |
0.000 |
0.000 |
84.885 |
261.900 |
|
Washington |
143.608 |
88.021 |
145.004 |
222.086 |
0.000 |
56.731 |
0.000 |
61.125 |
315.382 |
1,031.957 |
|
West Virginia |
26.753 |
15.010 |
0.461 |
15.321 |
0.000 |
19.584 |
35.656 |
0.000 |
26.644 |
139.428 |
|
Wisconsin |
85.911 |
24.187 |
27.486 |
208.262 |
69.700 |
38.553 |
4.484 |
0.000 |
122.860 |
581.443 |
|
Wyoming |
6.706 |
6.481 |
3.508 |
1.554 |
0.000 |
3.399 |
0.000 |
1.016 |
4.952 |
27.615 |
|
Totals |
7,068.836 |
2,231.910 |
3,279.551 |
5,026.817 |
2,797.046 |
1,248.578 |
2,224.848 |
2,513.354 |
4,758.747 |
31,149.686 |
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Basic Assistance
Administrative Costs
Work, Education, and Training
Child Care
Refundable Tax Credit
Emergency and Short-Term Benefits
Child Welfare
Pre-K/Head Start
Other
Totals
Alabama
10.6%
12.7%
2.5%
2.7%
0.0%
17.5%
15.3%
19.7%
19.1%
100.0%
Alaska
67.3
7.0
9.7
10.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
100.0
Arizona
10.5
12.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
2.9
40.9
0.0
33.2
100.0
Arkansas
3.7
11.6
8.6
4.9
0.0
3.3
0.1
64.8
3.0
100.0
California
38.5
8.7
24.6
9.3
0.0
3.6
0.0
0.0
15.3
100.0
Colorado
21.9
5.7
2.6
2.9
18.9
7.7
11.3
18.3
10.7
100.0
Connecticut
10.7
9.6
2.5
8.6
0.0
3.8
12.6
17.1
35.1
100.0
Delaware
15.2
4.1
6.2
58.9
0.0
2.4
0.0
0.0
13.2
100.0
District of Columbia
38.4
2.6
12.0
18.8
9.1
16.1
0.0
0.0
2.9
100.0
Florida
17.5
8.9
5.0
34.0
0.0
0.1
25.9
0.0
8.6
100.0
Georgia
17.7
4.2
2.3
4.5
0.0
0.0
52.7
0.0
18.6
100.0
Hawaii
20.0
8.3
26.1
2.5
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.0
42.4
100.0
Idaho
16.0
15.3
5.2
30.5
0.0
23.9
2.7
3.0
3.5
100.0
Illinois
4.1
0.0
1.8
56.0
4.4
0.1
20.7
5.5
7.4
100.0
Indiana
3.3
4.6
35.7
22.0
5.7
0.1
3.0
0.0
25.7
100.0
Iowa
16.4
3.6
5.2
25.7
11.7
0.1
27.5
0.0
9.8
100.0
Kansas
8.0
8.4
0.9
3.9
27.9
0.0
13.3
8.3
29.2
100.0
Kentucky
63.5
5.4
10.9
14.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.8
100.0
Louisiana
9.1
8.5
12.3
4.8
6.9
4.5
15.6
21.7
16.5
100.0
Maine
27.9
3.4
0.3
16.2
8.2
4.5
8.4
0.5
30.6
100.0
Maryland
23.3
6.2
6.3
1.7
30.7
5.3
4.0
11.3
11.2
100.0
Massachusetts
18.9
3.3
15.9
29.8
15.9
9.5
0.8
0.0
6.0
100.0
Michigan
10.7
4.3
0.4
2.1
3.6
5.4
6.5
14.9
52.0
100.0
Minnesota
16.7
7.9
9.8
29.5
27.2
4.7
0.0
1.0
3.3
100.0
Mississippi
6.5
3.5
25.6
21.1
0.0
0.0
9.8
0.0
33.5
100.0
Missouri
11.9
2.1
5.6
18.1
0.0
16.6
28.8
0.0
17.0
100.0
Montana
39.9
11.4
9.6
16.0
0.0
3.4
4.9
0.0
14.8
100.0
Nebraska
24.7
5.0
13.1
21.8
32.5
0.0
2.6
0.0
0.3
100.0
Nevada
38.2
9.3
1.3
17.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
33.7
100.0
New Hampshire
25.8
15.0
7.4
20.6
0.0
3.0
5.0
0.0
23.2
100.0
New Jersey
7.2
3.8
5.6
11.6
25.7
1.2
0.0
40.6
4.3
100.0
New Mexico
19.3
1.8
6.4
10.6
26.0
0.0
0.3
6.1
29.4
100.0
New York
28.6
7.6
2.9
7.0
27.7
4.3
5.7
9.2
7.1
100.0
North Carolina
7.2
7.5
0.8
33.8
0.0
0.9
21.8
20.1
7.8
100.0
North Dakota
12.6
13.7
12.6
3.4
0.0
0.1
53.6
0.0
4.0
100.0
Ohio
21.8
10.4
7.7
37.4
0.0
4.8
1.0
0.0
16.9
100.0
Oklahoma
24.5
6.5
6.2
27.9
0.0
2.0
9.2
6.9
16.8
100.0
Oregon
29.4
12.9
5.4
4.2
0.5
10.6
4.2
3.9
28.8
100.0
Pennsylvania
15.7
6.7
8.2
40.9
0.0
1.3
0.0
13.0
14.2
100.0
Rhode Island
14.7
3.3
6.5
25.1
11.5
15.8
16.5
0.5
6.1
100.0
South Carolina
23.5
15.3
9.1
2.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.4
33.2
100.0
South Dakota
47.2
8.8
13.2
2.7
0.0
10.9
6.7
0.0
10.5
100.0
Tennessee
35.5
12.6
5.5
10.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
35.0
0.8
100.0
Texas
5.5
8.3
8.9
0.0
0.0
3.5
30.6
36.9
6.5
100.0
Utah
19.5
6.8
20.5
16.6
0.0
3.4
2.8
4.3
26.0
100.0
Vermont
15.7
6.8
2.8
31.9
19.5
1.4
5.7
0.0
16.3
100.0
Virginia
26.1
12.0
14.9
12.4
0.1
2.0
0.0
0.0
32.4
100.0
Washington
13.9
8.5
14.1
21.5
0.0
5.5
0.0
5.9
30.6
100.0
West Virginia
19.2
10.8
0.3
11.0
0.0
14.0
25.6
0.0
19.1
100.0
Wisconsin
14.8
4.2
4.7
35.8
12.0
6.6
0.8
0.0
21.1
100.0
Wyoming
24.3
23.5
12.7
5.6
0.0
12.3
0.0
3.7
17.9
100.0
Totals
22.7
7.2
10.5
16.1
9.0
4.0
7.1
8.1
15.3
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding.
(September 30, 2017, in millions of dollars)
|
State |
Obligated but Not Spent |
Unobligated Balances |
|
Alabama |
$19.0 |
$55.2 |
|
Alaska |
48.1 |
0.0 |
|
Arizona |
0.0 |
30.7 |
|
Arkansas |
32.7 |
31.0 |
|
California |
307.2 |
0.0 |
|
Colorado |
0.0 |
96.4 |
|
Connecticut |
0.0 |
0.8 |
|
Delaware |
0.6 |
7.8 |
|
District of Columbia |
0.2 |
32.8 |
|
Florida |
17.1 |
0.0 |
|
Georgia |
23.8 |
40.9 |
|
Hawaii |
15.6 |
225.8 |
|
Idaho |
0.0 |
20.0 |
|
Illinois |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
Indiana |
46.3 |
109.5 |
|
Iowa |
3.8 |
0.5 |
|
Kansas |
0.4 |
67.9 |
|
Kentucky |
0.0 |
66.5 |
|
Louisiana |
7.9 |
0.0 |
|
Maine |
5.6 |
141.1 |
|
Maryland |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
Massachusetts |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
Michigan |
0.0 |
116.8 |
|
Minnesota |
0.0 |
59.3 |
|
Mississippi |
0.0 |
23.6 |
|
Missouri |
0.0 |
0.3 |
|
Montana |
10.3 |
13.1 |
|
Nebraska |
0.0 |
64.2 |
|
Nevada |
23.7 |
0.0 |
|
New Hampshire |
0.0 |
57.5 |
|
New Jersey |
22.7 |
35.0 |
|
New Mexico |
52.9 |
38.3 |
|
New York |
121.4 |
519.5 |
|
North Carolina |
41.7 |
0.0 |
|
North Dakota |
0.0 |
9.7 |
|
Ohio |
462.7 |
29.4 |
|
Oklahoma |
76.3 |
0.0 |
|
Oregon |
0.0 |
50.3 |
|
Pennsylvania |
63.3 |
427.0 |
|
Rhode Island |
0.0 |
11.1 |
|
South Carolina |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
South Dakota |
0.0 |
22.5 |
|
Tennessee |
0.0 |
517.8 |
|
Texas |
190.0 |
1.3 |
|
Utah |
0.0 |
79.2 |
|
Vermont |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
Virginia |
8.0 |
122.0 |
|
Washington |
0.0 |
65.1 |
|
West Virginia |
0.0 |
57.4 |
|
Wisconsin |
167.1 |
33.2 |
|
Wyoming |
2.6 |
22.8 |
|
Total |
1,771.0 |
3,303.1 |
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Recipients
State
Families
Total Recipients
Children
Adults
Alabama
9,326
21,188
17,042
4,146
Alaska
3,093
8,388
5,726
2,662
Arizona
8,222
17,255
13,693
3,562
Arkansas
3,072
6,879
5,215
1,664
California
511,311
1,485,521
1,046,866
438,655
Colorado
16,646
43,906
31,116
12,790
Connecticut
9,798
19,315
14,062
5,253
Delaware
3,873
10,760
6,486
4,274
District of Columbia
3,124
7,678
5,965
1,713
Florida
45,027
72,840
61,895
10,945
Georgia
12,245
14,818
11,840
2,978
Guam
541
1,161
967
194
Hawaii
4,937
13,577
9,549
4,028
Idaho
1,928
2,833
2,783
50
Illinois
12,613
27,018
23,723
3,295
Indiana
6,963
14,008
12,684
1,324
Iowa
10,694
26,261
19,568
6,693
Kansas
4,134
9,420
7,185
2,235
Kentucky
20,785
55,729
34,218
21,511
Louisiana
5,521
13,515
11,243
2,272
Maine
18,452
60,391
36,750
23,641
Maryland
18,611
46,232
34,308
11,924
Massachusetts
51,196
125,310
86,051
39,259
Michigan
13,846
33,706
27,370
6,336
Minnesota
18,519
44,087
34,171
9,916
Mississippi
4,891
10,210
8,037
2,173
Missouri
12,452
28,598
21,698
6,900
Montana
4,517
11,421
8,342
3,079
Nebraska
5,262
12,984
10,682
2,302
Nevada
9,828
25,330
18,852
6,478
New Hampshire
4,884
11,811
8,440
3,371
New Jersey
12,640
28,603
21,970
6,633
New Mexico
11,066
28,047
21,081
6,966
New York
132,675
339,719
239,780
99,939
North Carolina
11,144
18,122
17,040
1,082
North Dakota
1,105
2,777
2,333
444
Ohio
54,161
99,843
89,070
10,773
Oklahoma
6,797
15,246
13,089
2,157
Oregon
43,754
130,642
83,570
47,072
Pennsylvania
50,615
125,892
92,886
33,006
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
4,468
10,517
7,760
2,757
South Carolina
8,672
18,924
15,929
2,995
South Dakota
3,030
6,011
5,515
496
Tennessee
24,562
54,192
42,509
11,683
Texas
28,839
63,920
55,448
8,472
Utah
4,013
9,760
7,177
2,583
Vermont
3,371
7,858
5,528
2,330
Virgin Islands
197
603
404
199
Virginia
38,253
37,157
28,283
8,874
Washington
35,284
79,332
54,059
25,273
West Virginia
7,113
14,353
11,580
2,773
Wisconsin
16,318
35,263
29,160
6,103
Wyoming
513
1,155
886
269
Totals
1,354,901
3,410,086
2,481,584
928,502
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes
families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE)
requirement.requirement.
% Change to 2017 from ...
State
1994
2007
2010
2016
2017
1994
2010
2016
Alabama
48,752
18,104
23,052
10,564
9,326
-80.9
-59.5
-11.7
Alaska
12,450
3,127
3,507
3,097
3,093
-75.2
-11.8
-0.1
Arizona
72,728
36,934
18,774
9,107
8,222
-88.7
-56.2
-9.7
Arkansas
25,298
8,472
8,469
3,478
3,072
-87.9
-63.7
-11.7
California
916,795
470,502
590,121
564,179
511,311
-44.2
-13.4
-9.4
Colorado
40,544
9,355
11,707
16,814
16,646
-58.9
42.2
-1.0
Connecticut
60,336
20,322
16,848
10,683
9,798
-83.8
-41.8
-8.3
Delaware
11,408
4,034
5,508
4,216
3,873
-66.1
-29.7
-8.1
District of Columbia
27,320
6,231
8,547
4,432
3,124
-88.6
-63.4
-29.5
Florida
239,702
46,864
57,742
47,034
45,027
-81.2
-22.0
-4.3
Georgia
141,596
23,600
20,133
12,570
12,245
-91.4
-39.2
-2.6
Guam
2,089
936
1,276
764
541
-74.1
-57.6
-29.2
Hawaii
21,312
6,426
9,953
5,901
4,937
-76.8
-50.4
-16.3
Idaho
8,635
1,506
1,820
1,957
1,928
-77.7
5.9
-1.5
Illinois
241,290
26,222
24,337
14,205
12,613
-94.8
-48.2
-11.2
Indiana
72,654
42,058
36,062
7,836
6,963
-90.4
-80.7
-11.1
Iowa
39,137
19,872
21,548
11,777
10,694
-72.7
-50.4
-9.2
Kansas
29,524
13,892
15,554
5,262
4,134
-86.0
-73.4
-21.4
Kentucky
78,720
29,492
30,875
23,242
20,785
-73.6
-32.7
-10.6
Louisiana
84,162
11,023
10,849
5,772
5,521
-93.4
-49.1
-4.3
Maine
22,322
12,352
15,377
19,951
18,452
-17.3
20.0
-7.5
Maryland
80,266
19,630
25,110
20,592
18,611
-76.8
-25.9
-9.6
Massachusetts
108,985
46,483
49,836
53,453
51,196
-53.0
2.7
-4.2
Michigan
215,873
71,892
67,241
15,417
13,846
-93.6
-79.4
-10.2
Minnesota
59,987
26,642
24,574
19,256
18,519
-69.1
-24.6
-3.8
Mississippi
55,232
11,658
11,895
5,759
4,891
-91.1
-58.9
-15.1
Missouri
91,875
39,544
39,262
14,904
12,452
-86.4
-68.3
-16.5
Montana
11,416
3,217
3,686
3,388
4,517
-60.4
22.5
33.3
Nebraska
15,435
6,913
8,702
5,366
5,262
-65.9
-39.5
-1.9
Nevada
14,620
7,411
10,612
9,525
9,828
-32.8
-7.4
3.2
New Hampshire
11,398
4,733
6,175
4,826
4,884
-57.2
-20.9
1.2
New Jersey
122,376
34,123
34,516
15,941
12,640
-89.7
-63.4
-20.7
New Mexico
34,535
12,503
21,223
11,821
11,066
-68.0
-47.9
-6.4
New York
461,751
156,420
154,936
141,428
132,675
-71.3
-14.4
-6.2
North Carolina
129,258
24,537
23,705
16,859
11,144
-91.4
-53.0
-33.9
North Dakota
5,410
2,156
1,996
1,124
1,105
-79.6
-44.6
-1.7
Ohio
244,099
78,129
105,140
57,184
54,161
-77.8
-48.5
-5.3
Oklahoma
46,572
9,002
9,388
7,147
6,797
-85.4
-27.6
-4.9
Oregon
40,504
18,645
31,751
49,132
43,754
8.0
37.8
-10.9
Pennsylvania
212,457
60,167
53,274
53,678
50,615
-76.2
-5.0
-5.7
Puerto Rico
57,337
12,617
13,371
8,051
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
22,776
8,107
6,758
3,794
4,468
-80.4
-33.9
17.8
South Carolina
50,430
14,936
19,347
9,396
8,672
-82.8
-55.2
-7.7
South Dakota
6,601
2,842
3,291
3,100
3,030
-54.1
-7.9
-2.3
Tennessee
109,678
58,244
62,714
29,123
24,562
-77.6
-60.8
-15.7
Texas
284,973
59,972
51,931
30,074
28,839
-89.9
-44.5
-4.1
Utah
17,505
5,069
6,646
3,961
4,013
-77.1
-39.6
1.3
Vermont
9,761
4,503
3,256
3,359
3,371
-65.5
3.5
0.4
Virgin Islands
1,146
395
537
251
197
-82.8
-63.3
-21.5
Virginia
74,257
31,563
37,448
22,345
38,253
-48.5
2.1
71.2
Washington
101,542
49,076
70,200
39,709
35,284
-65.3
-49.7
-11.1
West Virginia
40,279
9,699
10,496
7,362
7,113
-82.3
-32.2
-3.4
Wisconsin
75,086
17,824
24,746
17,520
16,318
-78.3
-34.1
-6.9
Wyoming
5,351
255
318
485
513
-90.4
61.3
5.8
Totals
5,015,545
1,720,231
1,926,140
1,468,171
1,354,901
-72.7
-29.2
-7.20619
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017.Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. Total change excludes data for Puerto Rico Total change excludes data for Puerto Rico
for all years.for all years. Caseload data for 2000 through 2017 include those families in Separate State Programs with Caseload data for 2000 through 2017 include those families in Separate State Programs with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Percentage of All Families Receiving Assistance
State
Single Parent
Two Parent
No Parent
Totals
Single Parent
Two Parent
No Parent
Totals
Alabama
4,013
51
5,262
9,326
43.0
0.5
56.4
100.0
Alaska
1,891
347
855
3,093
61.1
11.2
27.6
100.0
Arizona
3,104
183
4,935
8,222
37.8
2.2
60.0
100.0
Arkansas
1,543
65
1,464
3,072
50.2
2.1
47.7
100.0
California
276,833
93,664
140,814
511,311
54.1
18.3
27.5
100.0
Colorado
9,702
1,132
5,812
16,646
58.3
6.8
34.9
100.0
Connecticut
3,308
2
6,488
9,798
33.8
0.0
66.2
100.0
Delaware
1,031
12
2,830
3,873
26.6
0.3
73.1
100.0
District of Columbia
1,713
0
1,411
3,124
54.8
0.0
45.2
100.0
Florida
6,694
374
37,959
45,027
14.9
0.8
84.3
100.0
Georgia
3,504
93
8,648
12,245
28.6
0.8
70.6
100.0
Guam
119
27
395
541
22.0
5.0
73.0
100.0
Hawaii
2,958
779
1,200
4,937
59.9
15.8
24.3
100.0
Idaho
50
0
1,878
1,928
2.6
0.0
97.4
100.0
Illinois
2,688
0
9,925
12,613
21.3
0.0
78.7
100.0
Indiana
1,621
61
5,281
6,963
23.3
0.9
75.8
100.0
Iowa
5,456
562
4,676
10,694
51.0
5.3
43.7
100.0
Kansas
1,666
262
2,206
4,134
40.3
6.3
53.4
100.0
Kentucky
5,140
504
15,141
20,785
24.7
2.4
72.8
100.0
Louisiana
2,257
0
3,264
5,521
40.9
0.0
59.1
100.0
Maine
9,841
6,929
1,682
18,452
53.3
37.6
9.1
100.0
Maryland
11,504
368
6,739
18,611
61.8
2.0
36.2
100.0
Massachusetts
34,382
3,282
13,532
51,196
67.2
6.4
26.4
100.0
Michigan
5,417
0
8,429
13,846
39.1
0.0
60.9
100.0
Minnesota
10,006
0
8,513
18,519
54.0
0.0
46.0
100.0
Mississippi
1,930
0
2,961
4,891
39.5
0.0
60.5
100.0
Missouri
7,508
0
4,944
12,452
60.3
0.0
39.7
100.0
Montana
2,386
506
1,625
4,517
52.8
11.2
36.0
100.0
Nebraska
2,422
0
2,840
5,262
46.0
0.0
54.0
100.0
Nevada
4,620
852
4,356
9,828
47.0
8.7
44.3
100.0
New Hampshire
3,262
25
1,597
4,884
66.8
0.5
32.7
100.0
New Jersey
7,352
0
5,288
12,640
58.2
0.0
41.8
100.0
New Mexico
5,308
829
4,929
11,066
48.0
7.5
44.5
100.0
New York
85,882
2,815
43,978
132,675
64.7
2.1
33.1
100.0
North Carolina
1,001
38
10,105
11,144
9.0
0.3
90.7
100.0
North Dakota
444
0
661
1,105
40.2
0.0
59.8
100.0
Ohio
8,976
695
44,490
54,161
16.6
1.3
82.1
100.0
Oklahoma
2,157
0
4,640
6,797
31.7
0.0
68.3
100.0
Oregon
29,730
7,414
6,610
43,754
67.9
16.9
15.1
100.0
Pennsylvania
32,023
618
17,974
50,615
63.3
1.2
35.5
100.0
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
3,113
222
1,133
4,468
69.7
5.0
25.4
100.0
South Carolina
2,995
0
5,677
8,672
34.5
0.0
65.5
100.0
South Dakota
496
0
2,534
3,030
16.4
0.0
83.6
100.0
Tennessee
10,441
316
13,805
24,562
42.5
1.3
56.2
100.0
Texas
8,473
0
20,366
28,839
29.4
0.0
70.6
100.0
Utah
1,911
0
2,102
4,013
47.6
0.0
52.4
100.0
Vermont
1,671
318
1,382
3,371
49.6
9.4
41.0
100.0
Virgin Islands
167
0
30
197
84.8
0.0
15.2
100.0
Virginia
14,185
0
24,068
38,253
37.1
0.0
62.9
100.0
Washington
16,314
6,046
12,924
35,284
46.2
17.1
36.6
100.0
West Virginia
2,054
0
5,059
7,113
28.9
0.0
71.1
100.0
Wisconsin
5,091
229
10,998
16,318
31.2
1.4
67.4
100.0
Wyoming
229
20
264
513
44.6
3.9
51.5
100.0
Totals
668,582
129,640
556,679
1,354,901
49.3
9.6
41.1
100.0
Services (HHS).Services (HHS).
Notes: Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. TANF cash assistance caseload includes
families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE)
Author Contact Information
[author name scrubbed], Specialist in Social Policy
([email address scrubbed], [phone number scrubbed])
Acknowledgments
Jameson Carter and Mariam Ghavalyan updated the information in this report. Amber Wilhelm produced Jameson Carter and Mariam Ghavalyan updated the information in this report. Amber Wilhelm producedthis reportthis report
Footnotes
| 1. |
The definition of TANF assistance is not in statute. However, because the statutory language has most TANF requirements triggered by a family receiving "assistance," the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regulations define assistance at 45 C.F.R. §260.31. |
| 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). |
| 3. |
Some states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent families or "child-only" cases. States also vary their benefits by other factors such as housing costs and substate geography. |
| 4. |
In 2016, the HHS poverty guidelines for the contiguous 48 states and the District of Columbia for a family of three was $1,680 per month. Higher poverty lines applied in Alaska ($2,100 per month for a family of three) and Hawaii ($1,933 per month for a family of three). |
| 5. |
Families without a work-eligible individual are excluded from the participation rate calculation. It excludes families where the parent is a nonrecipient (for example, disabled receiving Supplemental Security Income or an ineligible noncitizen) or the children in the family are being cared for by a nonparent relative (e.g., grandparent, aunt, uncle) who does not receive assistance on his or her behalf. |
| 6. |
See CRS In Focus IF10856, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Work Requirements. |