.

The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
December 7, 2011
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL32760
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
c11173008

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Summary
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide range of benefits
and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the 1996 welfare
reform law (P.L. 104-193). This report responds to some frequently asked questions about TANF;
it does not describe TANF rules (see, instead, CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal
Requirements, by Gene Falk).
TANF Funding. TANF provides fixed funding to states, the bulk of which is provided in a $16.5
billion-per-year basic block grant. States are required in total to contribute, from their own funds,
at least $10.4 billion under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement. The basic block grant is
not adjusted for inflation or changes in the cash welfare caseload (see “The Caseload,” below). It
has lost 28% of its value to inflation from FY1997 through FY2011.
State Spending. Though TANF is best known for funding cash welfare payments for needy
families with children, the block grant and MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and
activities. In FY2009, expenditures on basic assistance (cash welfare) totaled $9.3 billion—28%
of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. TANF also contributes funds for child care and services
for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected.
Cash Welfare Caseload. A total of 1.9 million families, composed of 4.6 million recipients,
received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in June 2011. The bulk of the “recipients” were children—
3.4 million in that month. The cash welfare caseload is very heterogeneous. The type of family
historically thought of as the “typical” cash welfare family—one with an unemployed adult
recipient—accounted for less than half of all families on the rolls in FY2008. Additionally, 15%
of cash welfare families had an employed adult, while almost half of all families had no adult
recipient. Child-only families include those with disabled adults receiving Supplemental Security
Income (SSI), adults who are nonparents (e.g., grandparents, aunts, uncles) caring for children,
and families consisting of citizen children and ineligible noncitizen parents.
Cash Welfare Benefits. TANF cash benefits are set by states. In July 2009, the maximum
monthly benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. Benefits
in all states represent a fraction of poverty-level income. In the median state (Kansas), the
maximum monthly benefit of $429 for a family of three represents 28% of poverty-level income.
Cash Welfare Work Requirements. TANF requires states to engage 50% of all families and
90% of two-parent families in work activities. However, these standards are reduced by caseload
reduction from FY2005. Further, states may get an extra credit against these standards by
spending more than required under the TANF MOE. In FY2009, states achieved an all-family
participation rate of 29.4% and a two-parent rate of 28.3%. That year, eight jurisdictions failed
the all-family standard, and seven jurisdictions failed the two-parent standard. States that fail to
meet work standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction in their block grant.

Congressional Research Service

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
Current Topics.................................................................................................................................. 1
What is TANF’s Current Funding Level?.................................................................................. 1
Has the President Proposed Reauthorization Legislation for TANF? ....................................... 2
Is the Cash Welfare Caseload Rising Because of the Current Recession? ................................ 2
How Can States Pay for Any Caseload Increases Caused by the Recession? ........................... 3
May States Require Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients? ........................................................ 3
History ............................................................................................................................................. 3
When was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant
Created?.................................................................................................................................. 3
Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law? ............................................................ 4
Funding and Expenditures ............................................................................................................... 4
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? .............................. 4
How Have States Used TANF Funds?....................................................................................... 5
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?................................................................. 6
The Caseload ................................................................................................................................... 7
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services? ....................... 7
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Cash
Welfare?.................................................................................................................................. 7
How Does the Current Cash Welfare Caseload Level Compare With Historical
Levels? ................................................................................................................................... 7
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Welfare Families?.......................................................... 8
TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month?.......... 10
TANF Work Participation Standards ............................................................................................. 12
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet?....................................... 12
What Actual Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?......................................... 13

Figures
Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2009, by Major Benefit and
Service Category........................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Welfare .................................................................. 8
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Welfare Caseload: FY2008...................................................... 9

Tables
Table 1. TANF Funding: FY2006 through FY2012......................................................................... 1
Table 2. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars .......................................................... 4
Table 3. TANF and MOE-Funded Cash Welfare Rolls, June 2011.................................................. 7
Table 4. Monthly TANF Cash Welfare Maximum Benefit Amount for a Family Sizes of
Two and Three, July 2009........................................................................................................... 10
Congressional Research Service

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006 .................................................... 14
Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2012 ..................................................... 15
Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2009 .................................. 15
Table A-4.Cash Welfare Families by Family Type: FY1988, FY1994, and FY2008 .................... 16
Table B-1. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category.................................................. 17
Table B-2. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Funding ..................................................................................... 20
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2009............................................................... 21
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Cash
Welfare, June 2011..................................................................................................................... 23
Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, June 1994, 2007, 2010, and
2011 ............................................................................................................................................ 25
Table B-6. Families Receiving Cash Assistance, By Number of Parents Receiving
Assistance on Their Own Behalf: June 2011............................................................................. 27
Table B-7. TANF Work Participation Rates: FY2009 ................................................................... 29

Appendixes
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables .............................................................................................. 14
Appendix B. State Tables............................................................................................................... 17

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 30

Congressional Research Service

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Introduction
This report provides responses to frequently asked questions about the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy
access to information and data. This report does not provide information on TANF program rules.
For such information, see CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk.
For a non-technical overview of TANF, see CRS Report R40946, The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families Block Grant: An Introduction, by Gene Falk. For a discussion of current TANF
legislative issues, see CRS Report R41781, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block
Grant: Issues for the 112th Congress, by Gene Falk.
Current Topics
What is TANF’s Current Funding Level?
TANF currently operates under a three-month extension of funding, through December 31, 2011.
P.L. 112-35 extended TANF basic block grants (the state family assistance grant), healthy
marriage and responsible fatherhood grants, and certain other funds at their FY2011 funding level
through the first quarter of FY2012. In addition, legislation enacted in 2010 (P.L. 111-242)
provided an FY2012 appropriation of $612 million for TANF contingency funds. P.L. 112-35
provided no funds for TANF supplemental grants.
Table 1 shows TANF funding for FY2006 through FY2012. The FY2012 figure represents
annualized funding for the first three months of FY2012 as provided under P.L. 112-35.
Table 1. TANF Funding: FY2006 through FY2012
(Dollars in millions)
2012
(first
three
months
under
P.L. 112-
35, at
the
full-year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
rate)
State family assistance
$16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489
grant
Supplemental grants
319
319
319
319
319
211
0
Healthy
150 150 150 150 150 150 150
marriage/responsible
fatherhood grants
Grants to the
78 78 78 78 78 78 78
territories
Congressional Research Service
1

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

2012
(first
three
months
under
P.L. 112-
35, at
the
full-year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
rate)
Grants for tribal
8 8 8 8 8 8 8
work programs
Regular contingency
93 59
428
1,107 212
334
612a
funds
Emergency

617
4,383

contingency funds
Totals
17,137 17,103 17,472 18,768 21,639 17,270 17,337
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS.
a. The FY2012 appropriation for the contingency fund was provided in P.L. 111-242.
In addition to federal TANF funds, states are required in total to contribute, from their own funds,
at least $10.4 billion per year for TANF-related activities for low-income families with children.
This level of state funding, known as maintenance-of-effort (MOE) funding, was also established
in the 1996 welfare law and has not been changed since then.
Has the President Proposed Reauthorization Legislation for TANF?
No. The President’s FY2012 budget proposed funding for TANF in FY2012 at current law levels
plus funding for supplemental grants at the historical level ($319 million per year). While the
budget itself did not propose a long-term reauthorization of TANF, it provided some “general
principles” for reauthorization. The Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) FY2012
Budget in Brief says
When TANF reauthorization is considered, the Administration would be interested in
exploring with Congress a variety of strategies to strengthen the program’s ability to improve
outcomes for families and children, including helping more parents succeed as workers by
building on the recent successes with subsidized employment, using performance indicators
to drive program improvement; and preparing the program to respond more effectively in the
event of a future economic downturn.
Is the Cash Welfare Caseload Rising Because of the
Current Recession?
The TANF cash welfare caseload has been increasing since the summer of 2008. The caseload hit
its lowest level since 1969 in July 2008, but has increased since then. From July 2008 to
December 2010, the TANF cash welfare caseload increased by 16%, adding about 273,000
families to the benefit rolls.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

How Can States Pay for Any Caseload Increases Caused by
the Recession?
There is no additional, recession-related funding provided in the one-year TANF extension
included in P.L. 111-291 for the remainder of FY2011. Absent additional funding, states will have
to reallocate funds from other block grant activities to finance any cash welfare caseload
increases resulting from the lingering effects of 2007-2009 recession.
Over the period FY2007 to the first quarter of FY2011, states drew $7.1 billion in combined
funds from the TANF regular contingency fund created in the 1996 welfare reform law and the
TANF “Emergency Contingency Fund” (ECF) created in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5) to provide extra funding in FY2009 and FY2010. It
expired, as originally scheduled, on September 30, 2010.
Not all these contingency funds financed cash welfare caseload increases. Regular contingency
funds helped pay for increased costs in the wide range of benefits, services, and activities funded
through TANF. The ECF helped pay for increased costs of cash welfare, non-recurrent short-term
aid, and subsidized employment.
May States Require Drug Testing of Welfare Recipients?
Yes. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the option of requiring drug tests for welfare
recipients and penalizing those who fail such tests. (See Section 902 of P.L. 104-193.)
In addition to this option, the 1996 welfare reform law contained two other provisions related to
drug abuse and TANF applicants or recipients. The law established a lifetime ban on eligibility
for TANF and food stamps for those convicted of a drug-related felony. However, states may
either opt out entirely or modify and limit this lifetime ban. (See Section 115 of P.L. 104-193.)
Further, TANF allows states to establish Individual Responsibility Plans (IRPs) for their TANF
families. The IRP may require participation in a substance abuse treatment program. A family
may be sanctioned for failure to comply with its IRP.
History
When was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Block Grant Created?
The TANF block grant was created by the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193). TANF replaced the program of
Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which dated back to the Social Security Act of
1935, and several other related programs.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law?
The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) included provisions establishing “welfare-to-
work” grants for FY1998 and FY1999 and made several other policy and technical changes to
TANF. No new welfare-to-work grants were made after FY1999.
The original funding authority for TANF ended on September 30, 2002. Over the four-year period
from 2002 through 2005, Congress considered, but did not pass, legislation to modify and
reauthorize TANF (see CRS Report RL33418, Welfare Reauthorization in the 109th Congress: An
Overview, by Gene Falk, Melinda Gish, and Carmen Solomon-Fears). Over this four-year period,
Congress passed 12 “temporary extensions” of TANF and related programs as stop-gap measures
until it could reach agreement on a longer-term reauthorization. (See Appendix A, Table A-1 for
a listing of the temporary extensions.)
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171) includes a long-term extension of
funding for TANF through FY2010. It also modified TANF work participation standards;
established $100 million per year in TANF research and technical assistance funds for “healthy
marriage promotion” initiatives; and provided $50 million per year for “responsible fatherhood
initiatives.” (For a discussion of TANF provisions in the DRA, see CRS Report RS22369, TANF,
Child Care, Marriage Promotion, and Responsible Fatherhood Provisions in the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), by Gene Falk.)
Funding and Expenditures
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because
of Inflation?
From FY1997 (the first full year of TANF funding) through FY2011 (ended September 30, 2011),
the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 28%. Table 2 shows the impact of inflation on
the value of the TANF block grant for each year, FY1997 through FY2011.
Table 2. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars
Value of the Block
Cumulative Loss
Grant in Billions of
of Value
Fiscal Year
FY1997 Dollars
in Percent
1997 $16.5
0
1998 16.2 -2%
1999 15.9 -3%
2000 15.4 -6%
2001 14.9 -9%
2002 14.7 -11%
2003 14.4 -13%
2004 14.1 -15%
2005 13.6 -17%
Congressional Research Service
4

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Value of the Block
Cumulative Loss
Grant in Billions of
of Value
Fiscal Year
FY1997 Dollars
in Percent
2006 13.1 -20%
2007 12.8 -22%
2008 12.3 -25%
2009 12.3 -25%
2010 12.1 -26%
2011 11.8 -28%
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Constant dol ars were computed using the
Consumer Price Index for al Urban Consumers (CPI-U) from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
How Have States Used TANF Funds?
TANF is best known as a funding source of cash welfare benefits for needy families with
children. However, states have considerable discretion in using TANF funds, and have used them
for a wide range of benefits and services.
Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2009. In
FY2009, a total of $33.5 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance, the category that most
closely reflects cash welfare, had expenditures of $9.3 billion in FY2009—28% of total TANF
and MOE dollars. All three expenditure categories commonly associated with “welfare” for needy
families with children—basic assistance, administrative costs, and work activities—accounted for
less than half ($14.2 billion or 42%) of all funds.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2009, 18% of all TANF funds used were
either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the Child Care and
Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF is also a major contributor to the child welfare system,
which provides foster care, adoption assistance, and services to families with children who either
have experienced or are at risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect. However, TANF’s
accounting system does a poor job of capturing expenditures associated with spending on the
child welfare system.1 Most TANF funding for these programs is subsumed in the catch-all
“other” expenditure category.

1 For a discussion of the shortcomings of TANF financial data reporting, see the U.S. Government Accountability
Office, Better Information Needed to Understand Trends in States’ Uses of the TANF Block Grant, GAO-06-414,
March 2006. For an estimate of TANF’s contribution to child welfare agencies’ funding, see Scarcella et al, The Cost of
Protecting Vulnerable Children V, Urban Institute, May 2006.
Congressional Research Service
5

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2009,
by Major Benefit and Service Category
(Dollars in billions; total federal and state MOE funds used—$33.5 billion)
Basic Assistance,
$9.3
Other, $10.9
Administration,
$2.5
Other Work
Supports, $2.6
Work Programs,
$2.4
Child Care, $5.9

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
See Appendix A, Table A-3 for percentages of total federal TANF and state MOE funds
associated with each of these categories. For state-specific information on the use of TANF funds,
see Appendix B, Table B-1, and Table B-2.
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?
TANF law permits states to “reserve” unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in
timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to “save” funds for unexpected
occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).
At the end of FY2009 (the most recent data available), a total of $3.7 billion of federal TANF
funding had neither been transferred nor spent. However, some of that $3.7 billion represented
funds that states had already committed to spend later. At the end of FY2009, states had made
such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.6 billion. Generally, obligations
are binding commitments to spend, and they come in the form of contracts and grants to provide
benefits and services. However, the definition of “obligation” varies from program to program,
and because TANF essentially consists of 54 different programs (one for each state, the District of
Columbia, and the territories), what constitutes an obligation may vary.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

The remaining $2.1 billion in unspent funds is called the “unobligated balance.” These funds are
available to states to make new spending commitments. Table B-3 in Appendix B shows unspent
TANF funds by state.
The Caseload
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits
and Services?
This number is not known. Federal TANF reporting requirements focus on families receiving
only ongoing assistance (generally cash welfare), with no complete reporting on families
receiving other TANF benefits and services. As discussed in a previous section of this report, a
little less than half of all TANF funds are used on activities not considered part of a traditional
“welfare” program. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements that pertain to families
receiving “assistance” are very likely to undercount the number of families receiving any TANF-
funded benefit or service.
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-
Funded Cash Welfare?
Table 3 provides cash welfare caseload information. A total of 1.9 million families, composed of
4.6 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in June 2011. The bulk of the
“recipients” were children—3.4 million in that month. For state-by-state cash assistance
caseloads, see Table B-4 in Appendix B.
Table 3. TANF and MOE-Funded Cash Welfare Rolls, June 2011


Families 1,924,449
Recipients 4,606,278
Children 3,437,062
Adults 1,169,216
Source: Congressional Research Service on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
How Does the Current Cash Welfare Caseload Level Compare With
Historical Levels?
The number of families receiving cash welfare peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families. The
cash welfare caseload fell rapidly in the late 1990s (after the 1996 welfare reform law) before
leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace than in
the late 1990s. Nationally, the caseload began to rise beginning in August 2008.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving cash
welfare, from July 1959 to June 2011.
Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash welfare families by state.
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Welfare
(Millions of families, July 1959 to June 2011)
March 1994:
5.1 million
5
4
3
June 2011:
1.9 million
2
July 2008:
1.7 million
1
0
Jul-59 Jul-62 Jul-65 Jul-68 Jul-71 Jul-74 Jul-77 Jul-80 Jul-83 Jul-86 Jul-89 Jul-92 Jul-95 Jul-98 Jul-01 Jul-04 Jul-07 Jul-10

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Welfare Families?
Historically, the “typical” cash welfare family has been headed by a single parent (usually the
mother) with one or two children. The single parent has also typically been unemployed.
However, the cash welfare caseload decline has occurred together with a major shift in the
composition of the rolls. Today, less than half of all cash welfare families are headed by an
unemployed adult recipient. Almost half of all cash welfare families had no adult recipient at all,
with the adults in the family ineligible for aid and the benefits paid only on behalf of the child
(these are known as “child-only” families). This shift occurred because the caseload decline was
concentrated among the families thought of as the “typical” cash welfare families, and welfare-to-
work efforts have been concentrated on this population.
Figure 3 shows the composition of the cash welfare caseload in FY2008. Families with an
unemployed adult recipient represent 36% of all cash welfare families. Families with an
Congressional Research Service
8

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

employed (in a regular job) adult recipient, who receive cash welfare as an earnings supplement,
comprise an additional 15% of the cash welfare rolls. Within the “child-only” portion of the
caseload, families with a parent (usually a disabled parent) receiving SSI and the children
receiving TANF as a supplement to that benefit represent 11% of the cash welfare caseload.
Families that are made up of children living with a non-parent relative (grandparents, aunts,
uncles, etc.) represent 16% of the cash welfare caseload. Families with adults who were either
sanctioned or time-limited off the rolls (and thus had their family’s benefit reduced) represented
about 6% of all cash assistance families. Families of child citizens living with ineligible parents
who are noncitizens or who have not reported their citizenship status make up 9% of the total
cash welfare caseload. The remainder of the cash welfare caseload represents child recipients for
whom data on the adults they live with are not available.
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Welfare Caseload: FY2008
Child-only/other ,
114,250
Child-only/noncitizen
or unknown
citizenship of parent,
159,447
Family with adult
recipients/ Not
employed, 616,240
Child-only/caretaker
relative, 267,486
Child-only/SSI parent,
183,392
Child-only/Adults(s)
Families with adult
time-limited, 55,843
recipients/At least 1
Child-only/Adult(s)
Employed, 254,284
sanctioned, 43,067

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) analysis of the FY2008 TANF National Data Files.
As previously discussed, the composition of the caseload has changed considerably over time.
Table A-4 shows the change in this categorization of families over time.
Congressional Research Service
9

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF
Cash Per Month?
There are no federal rules that help determine the amount of TANF cash benefits paid to a family.
(There are also no federal rules that require states to use TANF to pay cash benefits, though all
states do so.) Benefit amounts are determined solely by the states.
Table 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a family of two and a
family of three in July 2009.2 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-parent family
with children. Some states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent
families or “child-only” cases. States also vary their benefits by other factors such as housing
costs and sub-state geography.
Most states base TANF cash benefit amounts on family size, paying larger cash benefits to larger
families on the presumption that they have greater financial needs. The maximum monthly cash
benefit is usually paid to a family that receives no other income (e.g., no earned or unearned
income) and complies with program rules. Families with income other than TANF often are paid
a reduced benefit. Moreover, some families are financially sanctioned for failure to meet a
program requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit.
The table also shows the benefit amounts relative to poverty-level income. TANF pays a family in
cash only a fraction of poverty level income (as officially determined and published by the
Department of Health and Human Services). For a family of two, the maximum TANF benefit
paid in July 2009 varied from $142 per month in Tennessee (12% of poverty-level income) to
$821 per month in Alaska (54% of poverty-level income). For a family of three, the maximum
TANF benefit paid in July 2009 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi (11% of poverty-level
income) to $923 per month in Alaska (48% of poverty-level income).
Table 4. Monthly TANF Cash Welfare Maximum Benefit Amount
for a Family Sizes of Two and Three, July 2009

Family Size of Two

Family Size of Three
Percent of
Poverty
Percent of Poverty
State Dollars
Threshold
Dollars
Threshold
Alabama $190
15.6%

$215
14.1%
Alaska 821
54.1

923 48.4
Arizona 220
18.1

278
18.2
Arkansas 162
13.3

204
13.4
California 561
46.2
694
45.5
Colorado 364
30.0
462
30.3

2 States are not required to report to the federal government their cash welfare benefit amounts in either the TANF state
plan (under section 402 of the Social Security Act) or in annual program reports (under section 407 of the Social
Security Act). The benefit amounts shown are from the “Welfare Rules Database,” maintained by the Urban Institute
and funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
10

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


Family Size of Two

Family Size of Three
Percent of
Poverty
Percent of Poverty
State Dollars
Threshold
Dollars
Threshold
Connecticut 457 37.6
560
36.7
Delaware 270
22.2
338
22.2
District of
336 27.7
428
28.1
Columbia
Florida 241
19.8

303 19.9
Georgia 235
19.4

280
18.4
Hawai 506
36.2

636 36.2
Idaho 309
25.4

309 20.3
Illinois
318 26.2
432
28.3
Indiana 230
18.9

288 18.9
Iowa 361
29.7

426 27.9
Kansas 352
29.0

429 28.1
Kentucky 225
18.5

262
17.2
Louisiana 188
15.5

240
15.7
Maine 363
29.9

485 31.8
Maryland 453
37.3

574
37.6
Massachusetts 531 43.7

633
41.5
Michigan 403
33.2

492
32.2
Minnesota 437
36.0
532
34.9
Mississippi 146
12.0
170
11.1
Missouri 234
19.3

292
19.1
Montana 401
33.0

504
33.0
Nebraska 293
24.1
364
23.9
Nevada 318
26.2

383
25.1
New Hampshire
606
49.9

675
44.2
New Jersey
322
26.5

424
27.8
New Mexico
357
29.4

447
29.3
New York
524
43.1

721
47.3
North Carolina
236
19.4

272
17.8
North Dakota
378
31.1

477
31.3
Ohio 355
29.2

434 28.4
Oklahoma 225
18.5
292
19.1
Oregon 436
35.9

514
33.7
Pennsylvania 316 26.0
403
26.4
Rhode Island
449
37.0

554
36.3
Congressional Research Service
11

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


Family Size of Two

Family Size of Three
Percent of
Poverty
Percent of Poverty
State Dollars
Threshold
Dollars
Threshold
South Carolina
215
17.7

271
17.7
South Dakota
482
39.7

539
35.3
Tennessee 142
11.7
185
12.1
Texas 211
17.4

244 16.0
Utah 380
31.3

474 31.1
Vermont 536
44.1

640
41.9
Virginia 254
20.9

320
21.0
Washington 453 37.3
562
36.8
West Virginia
301
24.8

340
22.3
Wisconsin 628
51.7
628
41.2
Wyoming 514
42.3
546
35.8






Maximum 821
54
923
48.0
Minimum 142
12

170
11.0
Median 352
29

429
28.0
Source: Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules Database, funded by the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS).
TANF Work Participation Standards
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet?
The TANF statute requires states to have 50% of their caseload meet standards of participation in
work or activities—that is, a family member must be in specified activities for a minimum
number of hours.3 There is a separate participation standard that applies to the two-parent portion
of a state’s caseload, requiring 90% of the state’s two-parent caseload to meet participation
standards. States that fail the TANF work participation standards are at risk of being penalized by
a reduction in their block grant amounts.
However, the statutory work participation standards are reduced by a “caseload reduction credit.”
The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each
percentage point decline in the caseload. Through FY2006, states were given credit for caseload
declines that occurred since FY1995.
Beginning in FY2007, states were only credited with caseload declines that have occurred since
FY2005. The FY2007 effective (after-credit) standard is based on caseload declines from FY2005

3 Some families are excluded from the participation rate calculation.
Congressional Research Service
12

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

to FY2006. However, under a regulatory provision, states may get “extra” credit for caseload
reduction if they spend more than required under the TANF MOE. States can exclude those
families funded by state funds in excess of required state spending.
The ARRA temporarily modifies the caseload reduction credit states receive toward their TANF
work participation. The modification is effective for the FY2009 through FY2010 standards. The
ARRA provides that a state’s credit would not be reduced for any caseload increases that occurred
in FY2008 through FY2010.
What Actual Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
In FY2009, the national average work participation rate achieved by states for all families was
29.4%. The participation rate within TANF achieved nationwide for the two-parent portion of the
caseload was 28.3%. These rates are well below the statutory target of 50% for all families and
90% for two-parent families. They are also well below the targets even when adjusting for actual
caseload reduction between FY2005 and FY2008. However, only eight jurisdictions failed the all-
family standard, and seven jurisdictions failed the two-parent standard. This is because (1) many
states obtained fairly large “extra” credits for spending above the required MOE level; (2) states
were “held harmless” for any caseload increases between FY2007 and FY2008 (based on the
temporary ARRA modification to the caseload reduction credit, noted above); and (3) many states
eliminated two-parent families from their TANF and MOE caseloads. Presumably, many states
aided two-parent families with their own funds.
The jurisdictions that failed to meet the all-family standard were California, the District of
Columbia, Guam, Maine, Missouri, Ohio, Oregon, and Puerto Rico. The jurisdictions that failed
to meet the two-parent standard were Alaska, Guam, Kentucky, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, and
Rhode Island. States that fail to meet work standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction
in their block grant. States can avoid the penalty by entering into a corrective compliance plan
with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). They can also claim reasonable cause
for failing to meet the penalty. Further, penalties are reduced based on the degree of
noncompliance, and may be reduced by the Secretary of HHS for those states that were
economically needy during FY2009.
See Table B-7 for state-by-state FY2009 work participation rates.


Congressional Research Service
13

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Appendix A. Supplementary Tables
Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF,
FY2003-FY2006
Public Law
Time Period
Notes
P.L. 107-229
Oct. 1, 2002-Dec. 31, 2002
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 107-294
Jan. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2003
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 108-7
Apr. 1, 2003-June 30, 2003
Extension as part of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act.
P.L. 108-40
July 1, 2003-Sept. 30, 2003
Free-standing bill that amended the Social Security
Act to extend TANF and related programs.
P.L. 108-89
Oct. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2004
Multipurpose bill that extended programs through
the first half of FY2004.
P.L. 108-210
Apr. 1, 2004-June 30, 2004
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the program through June 30, 2004.
P.L. 108-262
July 1, 2004-Sept. 30, 2004
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the program through Sept. 30, 2004.
P.L. 108-308
Oct. 1, 2004- Mar. 31, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through Mar. 31, 2005.
P.L. 109-4
Apr. 1, 2005-June 30, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through June 30, 2005.
P.L. 109-19
July 1, 2005-Sept. 30, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through Sept. 30, 2005.
P.L. 109-68
Oct. 1, 2005-Dec. 31, 2005
Bill to provide extra funding to help states provide
benefits to families affected by Hurricane Katrina,
suspend certain requirements in states affected by
the hurricane, and extend the funding authority for
the programs through December 31, 2005.
P.L. 109-161
Jan. 1, 2006-Mar. 31, 2006
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through March 31, 2006. It
reduced the bonus for reducing out-of-wedlock
births for FY2006-FY2010 to offset the costs of the
temporary extension.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Congressional Research Service
14

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2012
Public Law
Time Period
Notes
P.L. 111-242
Oct. 1, 2010-Dec. 3, 2010
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 111-290
Dec. 4, 2010-Dec. 7, 2010
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 111-291
Dec. 8, 2010-Sept. 30, 2011
Extension as part of the Claims Resolution Act of
(except supplemental grants,
2010. It funded supplemental grants only through
Dec. 8, 2010-June 30, 2011)
the first three quarters of FY2011 and at a reduced
rate.
P.L. 112-35
Oct. 1, 2011-Dec. 31, 2011
Free-standing bill to extend TANF for three
months. No funding for TANF supplemental grants.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).

Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2009
Dollars
Percent of

(in billions)
Total Dollars
Basic Assistance
$9.3
27.8%
Administration 2.5
7.4
Work Programs
2.4
7.0
Child Care
5.9
17.5
Other Work Supports
2.6
7.9
Other 10.9
32.4
Totals 33.5
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).

Congressional Research Service
15

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table A-4.Cash Welfare Families by Family Type: FY1988, FY1994, and FY2008
1988
1994
2008
Family with adult recipients/ not employed
3,136,566
3,798,997
616,240
Families with adult recipients/at least one
243,573
378,621
254,284
employed
Child-only/adult(s) sanctioned
—
—
43,067
Child-only/adults(s) time-limited


55,843
Child-only/SSI parent
59,988
171,391
183,392
Child-only/caretaker relative
188,598
328,290
267,486
Child-only/noncitizen or unknown
47,565
184,397
159,447
citizenship of parent
Child-only/other
71,660
184,567
114,250
Total
3,747,950
5,046,263
1,694,009
As a Percent of All Cash Welfare Families
Family with adult recipients/ not employed
83.7
75.3
36.4
Families with adult recipients/at least one
6.5 7.5
15.0
employed
Child-only/adult(s) sanctioned
0.0
0.0
2.5
Child-only/adults(s) time-limited
0.0
0.0
3.3
Child-only/SSI parent
1.6
3.4
10.8
Child-only/caretaker relative
5.0
6.5
15.8
Child-only/noncitizen or unknown
1.3 3.7 9.4
citizenship of parent
Child-only/other
1.9
3.7
6.7
Total 100.0
100.0
100.0
Sources: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the 1988 AFDC Quality Control Public Use Data
File; the 1994 AFDC Quality Control Public Use Data File; and the 2008 TANF National Data File.
Note: For FY2008, the cash welfare caseload includes those whose benefits were funded from TANF dol ars as
wel as those whose benefits were funded with MOE dol ars under SSPs. “Family with an adult, unemployed”
includes families reported as “child-only” who are under a sanction.

Congressional Research Service
16

---

.

Appendix B. State Tables
Table B-1. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
(Dollars in millions)
Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures Child
Care Supports Other Total
Alabama
$42.3 $17.0 $21.5 $7.5 $6.4 $65.1 $159.7
Alaska
31.9 6.0 9.6 30.7 1.3 6.0 85.5
Arizona 138.0
43.6
12.6
57.2
0.7
157.3
409.5
Arkansas
16.5 13.5 25.8 15.5 4.4 65.1 140.9
California
3,509.5 611.6 485.4 1,020.2 205.6
1,051.1 6,883.5
Colorado
51.8 14.2 0.9 30.6 9.8
266.4 373.7
Connecticut
89.3 36.9 18.9 27.3 5.7 326.1 504.2
Delaware
18.2 7.3 0.6 30.9 0.3 5.3 62.5
District of Columbia
22.7
12.3
20.5
81.2
3.9
35.7
176.2
Florida
180.0 38.7 65.2 375.5 6.5 375.0
1,040.7
Georgia 55.0
22.1
17.9
22.2
15.7
388.6
521.5
Hawai
70.1 19.4 142.4 33.4 2.8 97.1 365.2
Idaho
5.9 12.0 6.6 8.7 0.1 9.3 42.6
Illinois 61.1
28.2
68.7
490.7 18.7 463.0 1,130.4
Indiana 108.6
30.9
20.3
52.5
31.7
109.0
353.1
Iowa
61.9 10.8 18.5 45.4 18.4 63.8 218.8
Kansas
46.5 11.2 2.1 38.2
46.7 53.3 198.0
Kentucky
117.4 12.8 25.9 83.1 6.4 29.9 275.5
Louisiana
42.8 7.8 9.1 38.2 5.2
148.6 251.7
Maine
74.6 3.9 13.9 18.0
20.1 4.0 134.6
Maryland 107.1
55.5
36.9
31.5
132.9
180.9
544.9
Massachusetts
324.7 44.1 22.8 336.0 87.1 379.3
1,194.0
CRS-17

---

.

Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures Child
Care Supports Other Total
Michigan
336.4 136.2 113.1 174.6 74.6 766.6 1,601.6
Minnesota
90.0 47.5 76.0 119.6
135.6 59.8 528.5
Mississippi
18.9 4.8 28.3 27.2 25.4 24.5 129.1
Missouri 104.5
14.6
23.4
77.6
0.0
139.1
359.2
Montana 16.4
5.9
11.6
9.5
0.0
8.3
51.7
Nebraska
26.4 5.5 21.5 22.5
29.4 0.6 105.7
Nevada
46.7 10.6 5.0 0.0 5.0 62.2 129.5
New
Hampshire
33.9 11.7 9.6 8.0 1.7 23.3 88.1
New Jersey
181.8
73.3
102.2
107.1
227.0
516.6
1,207.9
New
Mexico
60.1 15.2 15.1 39.0 45.1 26.4 200.8
New
York
1,458.0 456.6 181.7 516.0
1,234.4
1,860.2 5,706.9
North
Carolina
89.3 45.0 59.6 237.2 36.0 268.8 735.9
North Dakota
8.5
4.9
3.2
1.0
1.9
16.7
36.3
Ohio
432.0 158.0 46.7 327.2 22.9 385.1 1,372.0
Oklahoma
22.0 20.2 0.2 124.1 22.3 73.2 262.0
Oregon
115.0 27.7 27.4 37.0 8.2 97.8 313.1
Pennsylvania
197.7 77.0 155.5 428.4 36.8 242.4 1,137.9
Rhode
Island
45.2 12.7 7.0 19.8 9.5 31.4 125.7
South
Carolina
40.5 15.7 26.2 4.1 9.9 93.5 189.7
South
Dakota
13.6 3.3 3.8 0.8 0.0 6.2 27.9
Tennessee
127.8 33.1 64.1 95.0 0.0 85.9 405.9
Texas
84.2 92.1 78.3 26.8 1.3 548.3 831.1
Utah
32.8 12.4 32.6 14.0 4.2 39.6 135.5
Vermont
16.9 7.5 0.3 23.9
24.2 13.7 86.5
Virginia
73.8 25.5 54.7 40.2 9.3 78.3 281.8
Washington
318.5 52.0 130.2 216.5 4.0 843.8
1,564.9
CRS-18

---

.

Basic
Administrative
Work Program
Other Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures Child
Care Supports Other Total
West
Virginia
31.8 25.7 1.5 28.2
16.9 54.3 158.4
Wisconsin
113.4 26.4 33.5 254.9 24.6 192.1 644.9
Wyoming 11.3
1.7
0.5
5.8
0.4
11.8
31.5








Totals 9,323.5
2,482.7
2,358.8
5,860.6
2,641.0
10,850.2
33,516.8
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

CRS-19

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-2. Use of FY2009 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
Work
Other
Basic
Administrative
Program
Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures Child Care
Supports
Other Total
Alabama 26.5%
10.7%
13.4%
4.7%
4.0%
40.7%
100.0%
Alaska 37.3
7.1
11.2
35.9
1.5
7.1
100.0
Arizona 33.7
10.7 3.1
14.0
0.2
38.4
100.0
Arkansas 11.7
9.6 18.3
11.0
3.1
46.2
100.0
California 51.0
8.9 7.1
14.8
3.0
15.3
100.0
Colorado 13.9
3.8 0.3 8.2
2.6
71.3
100.0
Connecticut 17.7 7.3
3.8 5.4 1.1
64.7
100.0
Delaware 29.1
11.7 1.0
49.4
0.4
8.4
100.0
District of
12.9 7.0 11.6 46.1
2.2
20.2
100.0
Columbia
Florida 17.3
3.7 6.3
36.1
0.6
36.0
100.0
Georgia 10.5
4.2 3.4
4.3
3.0
74.5
100.0
Hawai 19.2
5.3
39.0
9.2
0.8
26.6
100.0
Idaho 13.8
28.2
15.5
20.5
0.3
21.8
100.0
Illinois 5.4
2.5
6.1
43.4
1.7
41.0
100.0
Indiana 30.8
8.8 5.7
14.9
9.0
30.9
100.0
Iowa 28.3
4.9
8.5
20.7
8.4
29.2
100.0
Kansas 23.5
5.7 1.1
19.3
23.6
26.9
100.0
Kentucky 42.6
4.6 9.4
30.2
2.3
10.9
100.0
Louisiana 17.0
3.1 3.6
15.2
2.1
59.0
100.0
Maine 55.5
2.9
10.3
13.4
15.0
3.0
100.0
Maryland 19.7
10.2 6.8 5.8
24.4
33.2
100.0
Massachusetts 27.2
3.7
1.9
28.1 7.3 31.8 100.0
Michigan 21.0
8.5 7.1
10.9
4.7
47.9
100.0
Minnesota 17.0 9.0 14.4 22.6
25.7
11.3
100.0
Mississippi 14.6 3.8 21.9 21.0
19.7
19.0
100.0
Missouri 29.1
4.1 6.5
21.6
0.0
38.7
100.0
Montana 31.8
11.4 22.4
18.3
0.0
16.1
100.0
Nebraska 25.0
5.2 20.3
21.3
27.8
0.5
100.0
Nevada 36.1
8.2 3.8
0.0
3.9
48.0
100.0
New
38.5 13.2
10.9 9.1 1.9 26.4
100.0
Hampshire
New Jersey
15.0
6.1
8.5
8.9
18.8
42.8
100.0
New Mexico
29.9
7.6
7.5
19.4
22.4
13.2
100.0
Congressional Research Service
20

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Work
Other
Basic
Administrative
Program
Work
State
Assistance
Expenditures
Expenditures Child
Care Supports Other Total
New York
25.5
8.0
3.2
9.0
21.6
32.6
100.0
North
12.1 6.1
8.1 32.2
4.9
36.5
100.0
Carolina
North
23.5 13.5
8.8 2.8 5.3 46.1
100.0
Dakota
Ohio 31.5
11.5
3.4
23.8
1.7
28.1
100.0
Oklahoma 8.4
7.7 0.1
47.4
8.5
28.0
100.0
Oregon 36.7
8.8 8.7
11.8
2.6
31.2
100.0
Pennsylvania 17.4 6.8
13.7 37.6 3.2
21.3
100.0
Rhode Island
36.0
10.1
5.6
15.8
7.6
25.0
100.0
South
21.3 8.3 13.8 2.2
5.2
49.3
100.0
Carolina
South Dakota
48.9
11.9
13.8
2.9
0.1
22.3
100.0
Tennessee 31.5 8.2 15.8 23.4
0.0
21.2
100.0
Texas 10.1
11.1 9.4
3.2
0.2
66.0
100.0
Utah 24.2
9.2
24.0
10.3
3.1
29.2
100.0
Vermont 19.5
8.7 0.3
27.6
28.0
15.9
100.0
Virginia 26.2
9.1 19.4
14.3
3.3
27.8
100.0
Washington 20.3 3.3
8.3 13.8 0.3
53.9
100.0
West Virginia
20.1
16.2
0.9
17.8
10.7
34.3
100.0
Wisconsin 17.6 4.1
5.2 39.5
3.8
29.8
100.0
Wyoming 35.9
5.4 1.6
18.3
1.1
37.6
100.0








Totals 27.8
7.4 7.0
17.5
7.9
32.4
100.0
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2009
(September 30, 2009; dollars in millions)
State
Obligated but Unspent
Unobligated and Unspent
Total Unspent
Alabama $4.8
$26.8
$31.7
Alaska 0.0
58.3
58.3
Arizona 21.5
0.0
21.5
Arkansas 2.6
56.8
59.3
California 370.7 0.0
370.7
Colorado 0.0
76.6
76.6
Connecticut 0.0 0.0 0.0
Congressional Research Service
21

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

State
Obligated but Unspent
Unobligated and Unspent
Total Unspent
Delaware 0.0
4.6
4.6
District of Columbia
3.3
35.4
38.8
Florida 26.3
6.9
33.2
Georgia 59.2
33.4
92.6
Hawai 19.4
48.4
67.8
Idaho 12.3
0.0
12.3
Illinois 0.0
0.0
0.0
Indiana 53.4
0.0
53.4
Iowa 6.4
22.3
28.7
Kansas 0.0
44.7
44.7
Kentucky 0.0
48.8
48.8
Louisiana 23.6 0.0
23.6
Maine 0.0
-0.3
-0.3
Maryland 11.6
79.1
90.8
Massachusetts 3.0 0.0 3.0
Michigan 0.0
244.7
244.7
Minnesota 0.0
103.4
103.4
Mississippi 9.9
18.6
28.5
Missouri 0.0
0.0
0.0
Montana 0.4
44.8
45.1
Nebraska 0.1
43.0
43.1
Nevada 0.0
11.3
11.3
New Hampshire
0.0
17.5
17.5
New Jersey
103.1
12.8
115.9
New Mexico
43.8
0.0
43.8
New York
317.4
311.2
628.7
North Carolina
196.2
3.5
199.7
North Dakota
0.0
16.3
16.3
Ohio 48.2
0.0
48.2
Oklahoma 41.7 0.0
41.7
Oregon 0.0
0.0
0.0
Pennsylvania 61.0 119.9 180.9
Puerto Rico
2.1
20.8
22.9
Rhode Island
0.0
0.0
0.0
South Carolina
0.0
40.0
40.0
South Dakota
0.0
19.9
19.9
Tennessee 0.0
147.6
147.6
Congressional Research Service
22

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

State
Obligated but Unspent
Unobligated and Unspent
Total Unspent
Texas 128.8
0.0
128.8
Utah 0.0
91.9
91.9
Vermont 0.0
0.0
0.0
Virginia 0.8
19.9
20.7
Washington 0.0
131.4
131.4
West Virginia
0.0
63.0
63.0
Wisconsin 11.4 0.0
11.4
Wyoming 2.7
41.8
44.5




Totals 1,585.6
2,065.1
3,650.7
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults
Receiving TANF Cash Welfare, June 2011
State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Alabama 22,541
54,440
40,145
14,295
Alaska 3,803
10,458
7,099
3,359
Arizona 17,962
40,635
29,410
11,225
Arkansas 7,925
17,897
12,759
5,138
California 610,459
1,498,943
1,161,901
337,042
Colorado 12,616
32,336
23,834
8,502
Connecticut 16,177
31,843
22,445
9,398
Delaware 5,332
15,140
9,342
5,798
District of Columbia
7,661
20,873
15,990
4,883
Florida 53,440
94,270
77,518
16,752
Georgia 19,416
36,109
32,507
3,602
Guam 1,288
3,114
2,311
803
Hawai 9,790
29,056
19,566
9,490
Idaho 1,913
2,932
2,697
235
Illinois 29,881
87,096
71,819
15,277
Indiana 24,655
57,404
44,424
12,980
Iowa 20,594
53,116
36,051
17,065
Kansas 14,225
36,702
24,809
11,893
Kentucky 30,704
62,346
49,120
13,226
Louisiana 10,325
23,474
19,816
3,658
Maine 15,519
40,025
26,172
13,853
Congressional Research Service
23

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Maryland 25,228
61,624
44,560
17,064
Massachusetts 50,205
99,378
66,008
33,370
Michigan 64,995
169,565
121,704
47,861
Minnesota 24,652
53,707
40,307
13,400
Mississippi 11,555
24,434
17,809
6,625
Missouri 38,810
93,400
63,560
29,840
Montana 3,412
8,482
6,036
2,446
Nebraska 7,846
19,075
15,005
4,070
Nevada 10,675
27,337
20,399
6,938
New Hampshire
6,013
12,737
9,144
3,593
New Jersey
34,822
83,676
58,361
25,315
New Mexico
19,640
49,556
35,520
14,036
New York
157,876
395,168
285,360
109,808
North Carolina
22,396
42,837
36,205
6,632
North Dakota
1,758
4,426
3,333
1,093
Ohio 96,838
217,153
158,553
58,600
Oklahoma 8,575
19,324
15,863
3,461
Oregon 34,133
89,834
60,551
29,283
Pennsylvania 78,841
199,112
140,695
58,417
Puerto Rico
15,836
42,811
28,404
14,407
Rhode Island
6,462
15,284
10,540
4,744
South Carolina
16,973
39,815
30,040
9,775
South Dakota
3,337
7,031
5,901
1,130
Tennessee 61,531
156,345
112,625
43,720
Texas 47,124
105,825
91,448
14,377
Utah 3,420
7,874
6,113
1,761
Vermont 3,326
7,710
5,351
2,359
Virgin Islands
427
1,197
872
325
Virginia 35,135
76,718
54,931
21,787
Washington 58,863
137,344
96,046
41,298
West Virginia
10,085
23,023
16,332
6,691
Wisconsin 27,105
65,638
49,226
16,412
Wyoming 329
629
525
104





Totals 1,924,449
4,606,278
3,437,062
1,169,216
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
24

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance,
June 1994, 2007, 2010, and 2011
Percentage Changes to June 2011





from June …
1994
2007
2010
2011
1994 2007
2010
Alabama 49,482
17,554
21,288
22,541
-54.4
28.4
5.9
Alaska 12,977
3,284
3,475
3,803
-70.7
15.8
9.4
Arizona 71,530
35,232
31,919
17,962
-74.9
-49.0
-43.7
Arkansas 25,892
8,447
8,268
7,925
-69.4 -6.2
-4.1
California 919,535
470,099
578,950
610,459 -33.6 29.9 5.4
Colorado 41,378
10,230
11,675
12,616
-69.5 23.3
8.1
Connecticut 59,701
20,632
16,957
16,177 -72.9 -21.6 -4.6
Delaware 11,239
3,916
5,322
5,332
-52.6 36.2
0.2
District of
27,443 5,975 7,373 7,661
-72.1
28.2
3.9
Columbia
Florida 239,232
46,710
56,706
53,440
-77.7
14.4
-5.8
Georgia 139,566
24,005
20,134
19,416
-86.1
-19.1
-3.6
Guam 1,973
874
1,296
1,288
-34.7
47.4
-0.6
Hawai 20,844
6,398
9,663
9,790
-53.0
53.0
1.3
Idaho 8,739
1,560
1,744
1,913
-78.1
22.6
9.7
Illinois
242,740 28,723 22,087 29,881
-87.7
4.0
35.3
Indiana 72,881
40,403
34,409
24,655
-66.2
-39.0
-28.3
Iowa 39,813
19,752
21,345
20,594
-48.3
4.3
-3.5
Kansas 30,020
14,096
14,183
14,225
-52.6
0.9
0.3
Kentucky 79,225
29,173
30,130
30,704
-61.2 5.2
1.9
Louisiana 85,741
10,787
10,256
10,325
-88.0 -4.3
0.7
Maine 22,641
12,628
14,675
15,519
-31.5
22.9
5.8
Maryland 79,706
19,341
24,153
25,228
-68.3
30.4
4.5
Massachusetts 110,108
44,619
48,975
50,205
-54.4
12.5
2.5
Michigan 222,472
73,283
66,433
64,995 -70.8
-11.3
-2.2
Minnesota 63,043
26,646
24,146
24,652 -60.9 -7.5
2.1
Mississippi 55,183
11,366
11,931
11,555 -79.1 1.7
-3.2
Missouri 92,265
38,762
38,308
38,810
-57.9 0.1
1.3
Montana 12,004
3,230
3,665
3,412
-71.6 5.6
-6.9
Nebraska 15,649
6,819
8,486
7,846
-49.9 15.1
-7.5
Nevada 14,207
7,043
10,499
10,675
-24.9
51.6
1.7
New Hampshire
11,591
4,992
6,202
6,013
-48.1
20.5
-3.0
New Jersey
122,536
34,177
33,540
34,822
-71.6
1.9
3.8
Congressional Research Service
25

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Percentage Changes to June 2011





from June …
1994
2007
2010
2011
1994 2007
2010
New Mexico
33,732
13,716
19,737
19,640
-41.8
43.2
-0.5
New York
460,590
155,495
155,302
157,876
-65.7
1.5
1.7
North Carolina
131,065
24,857
23,384
22,396
-82.9
-9.9
-4.2
North Dakota
5,725
2,068
1,958
1,758
-69.3
-15.0
-10.2
Ohio 247,886
77,005
103,198
96,838
-60.9
25.8
-6.2
Oklahoma 46,864
8,921
9,021
8,575 -81.7 -3.9
-4.9
Oregon 41,982
18,741
30,811
34,133
-18.7
82.1
10.8
Pennsylvania 211,431
61,948
51,683
78,841 -62.7 27.3 52.5
Puerto Rico
58,484
13,122
13,257
15,836
-72.9
20.7
19.5
Rhode Island
22,737
8,381
7,404
6,462
-71.6
-22.9
-12.7
South Carolina
51,590
14,479
17,843
16,973
-67.1
17.2
-4.9
South Dakota
6,868
2,871
3,247
3,337
-51.4
16.2
2.8
Tennessee 109,339
60,777
61,851
61,531 -43.7 1.2 -0.5
Texas 282,902
59,794
50,171
47,124
-83.3
-21.2
-6.1
Utah 17,536
5,123
6,641
3,420
-80.5
-33.2
-48.5
Vermont 10,006
4,500
3,131
3,326
-66.8
-26.1
6.2
Virgin Islands
1,106
418
513
427
-61.4
2.2
-16.8
Virginia 75,020
31,576
37,276
35,135
-53.2
11.3
-5.7
Washington 104,243
49,519
70,099
58,863 -43.5 18.9 -16.0
West Virginia
40,379
9,335
9,619
10,085
-75.0
8.0
4.8
Wisconsin 76,458
17,266
23,435
27,105 -64.5 57.0
15.7
Wyoming 5,751
252
337
329
-94.3
30.6
-2.4








Totals 5,043,050
1,720,920
1,898,111
1,924,449
-61.8
11.8
1.4
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data includes those aided under TANF and under separate state programs (SSPs) funded by
TANF maintenance-of-effort (MOE) dollars.

Congressional Research Service
26

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-6. Families Receiving Cash Assistance, By Number of Parents Receiving
Assistance on Their Own Behalf: June 2011





As a percent of total families
No
Single
Two-
Single
Two-
Parent
Parent
Parent
Total
No Parent
Parent
Parent
State
Families
Families Families Families
Families
Families
Families
Alabama 8,440
13,936
165
22,541
37.4%
61.8%
0.7%
Alaska 1,016
2,298
489
3,803
26.7
60.4
12.9
Arizona 7,605
9,800
557
17,962
42.3
54.6 3.1
Arkansas 2,981
4,723
221
7,925
37.6 59.6 2.8
California 261,484
287,083
61,892
610,459 42.8 47.0 10.1
Colorado 5,035
6,584
997
12,616
39.9 52.2 7.9
Connecticut 6,901 9,276 0
16,177 42.7 57.3
0.0
Delaware 3,100
2,205
27
5,332
58.1 41.4 0.5
District of
2,165 5,496 0
7,661 28.3 71.7
0.0
Columbia
Florida 39,426
13,123
891
53,440
73.8
24.6 1.7
Georgia 15,930
3,486 0
19,416
82.0 18.0 0.0
Guam 688
424
176
1,288
53.4
32.9
13.7
Hawai 1,835
5,832
2,123
9,790
18.7
59.6
21.7
Idaho 1,736
177
0
1,913
90.7
9.3
0.0
Illinois 14,642
15,239
0
29,881
49.0
51.0 0.0
Indiana 9,386
13,943
1,326
24,655
38.1
56.6
5.4
Iowa 5,221
14,420
953
20,594
25.4
70.0
4.6
Kansas 3,946
9,003
1,276
14,225
27.7
63.3
9.0
Kentucky 18,251
11,776
677
30,704 59.4 38.4 2.2
Louisiana 6,733
3,592
0
10,325
65.2 34.8 0.0
Maine 2,569
10,920
2,030
15,519
16.6
70.4
13.1
Maryland 8,111
17,117
0
25,228
32.2 67.8 0.0
Massachusetts 16,985 30,560 2,660 50,205
33.8
60.9
5.3
Michigan 17,226
47,769 0
64,995
26.5 73.5 0.0
Minnesota 11,039
13,613 0
24,652 44.8 55.2 0.0
Mississippi 5,013
6,542 0
11,555
43.4 56.6 0.0
Missouri 8,654
30,156
0
38,810
22.3
77.7 0.0
Montana 1,396
1,696
320
3,412
40.9
49.7 9.4
Nebraska 3,685
4,161 0
7,846
47.0 53.0 0.0
Nevada 4,849
4,771
1,055
10,675
45.4
44.7 9.9
New
2,578 3,286 149
6,013 42.9 54.6
2.5
Hampshire
Congressional Research Service
27

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ






As a percent of total families
No
Single
Two-
Single
Two-
Parent
Parent
Parent
Total
No Parent
Parent
Parent
State
Families
Families Families Families
Families
Families
Families
New Jersey
9,512
25,310
0
34,822
27.3
72.7
0.0
New Mexico
6,976
11,295
1,369
19,640
35.5
57.5
7.0
New
York 59,583
95,503
2,790
157,876 37.7 60.5
1.8
North
15,999 6,164 233
22,396 71.4 27.5
1.0
Carolina
North Dakota
665
1,093
0
1,758
37.8
62.2
0.0
Ohio 46,682
42,903
7,253
96,838
48.2
44.3
7.5
Oklahoma 5,114
3,461 0
8,575
59.6 40.4 0.0
Oregon 10,082
20,752
3,299
34,133
29.5 60.8 9.7
Pennsylvania 22,605 53,818 2,418
78,841 28.7
68.3
3.1
Puerto Rico
3,326
12,510
0
15,836
21.0
79.0
0.0
Rhode Island
2,135
3,831
496
6,462
33.0
59.3
7.7
South
6,907 10,066
0
16,973 40.7
59.3
0.0
Carolina
South Dakota
2,207
1,130
0
3,337
66.1
33.9
0.0
Tennessee 12,669
47,252
1,610
61,531 20.6 76.8
2.6
Texas 33,213
13,911
0
47,124
70.5
29.5
0.0
Utah 2,081
1,339
0
3,420
60.8
39.2
0.0
Vermont 1,383
1,531
412
3,326
41.6 46.0 12.4
Virgin
Islands 0
427
0
427
0.0
100.0 0.0
Virginia 12,559
22,576
0
35,135
35.7
64.3 0.0
Washington 23,709 29,297
5,857
58,863 40.3
49.8
10.0
West Virginia
4,877
5,208
0
10,085
48.4
51.6
0.0
Wisconsin 12,357
14,013 735
27,105 45.6 51.7 2.7
Wyoming 232
91
6
329
70.5
27.7 1.8








Totals 793,499
1,026,488
104,462
1,924,449
41.2
53.3 5.4
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data includes those aided under TANF and under separate state programs (SSPs) funded by
TANF maintenance-of-effort (MOE) dollars.
Congressional Research Service
28

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ

Table B-7. TANF Work Participation Rates: FY2009

All Family Standard

Two-Parent Standard
Participation
Met
Participation
Met
State
Rate
Standard?
Rate
Standard?
United States
29.4


28.3







Alabama 32.4
YES

24.7
YES
Alaska 37.2
YES

40.5
NO
Arizona 27.1
YES

62.6
YES
Arkansas 37.1
YES

21.7
YES
California 26.8
NO

28.6
YES
Colorado 37.8
YES

33.3
YES
Connecticut 34.4
YES

NA
NA
Delaware 37.5
YES

NA
NA
Dist. Of Col.
23.5
NO

NA
NA
Florida 46.1
YES

54.4
YES
Georgia 57.1
YES

NA
NA
Guam 0.0
NO

0.0
NO
Hawai 40.3
YES

NA
NA
Idaho 52.0
YES

NA
NA
Illinois 49.3
YES

NA
NA
Indiana 17.5
YES

17.8
YES
Iowa 35.4
YES

27.0
YES
Kansas 23.9
YES

25.6
YES
Kentucky 37.3
YES

35.1
NO
Louisiana 34.4
YES

NA
NA
Maine 16.8
NO

16.6
NO
Maryland 44.0
YES

NA
NA
Massachusetts 47.5
YES

92.8
YES
Michigan 27.9
YES

NA
NA
Minnesota 29.8
YES

NA
NA
Mississippi 67.5
YES

NA
NA
Missouri 13.2
NO

NA
NA
Montana 44.2
YES

58.7
YES
Nebraska 50.3
YES

NA
NA
Nevada 39.4
YES

46.8
NO
New Hampshire
46.5
YES

NA
NA
Congressional Research Service
29

---

.
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQ


All Family Standard

Two-Parent Standard
Participation
Met
Participation
Met
State
Rate
Standard?

Rate
Standard?
New Jersey
20.1
YES

NA
NA
New Mexico
43.1
YES

63.0
YES
New York
33.4
YES

NA
NA
North Carolina
32.3
YES

46.6
YES
North Dakota
61.0
YES

NA
NA
Ohio 23.3
NO

23.1
YES
Oklahoma 23.0
YES

NA
NA
Oregon 9.5
NO

5.9
NO
Pennsylvania 45.8
YES

84.2
YES
Puerto Rico
8.7
NO

NA
NA
Rhode Island
13.8
YES

13.6
NO
South Carolina
45.1
YES

NA
NA
South Dakota
59.4
YES

NA
NA
Tennessee 25.5
YES

0.0
YES
Texas 37.0
YES

NA
NA
Utah 32.6
YES

NA
NA
Vermont
29.0
YES

24.0
YES
Virgin Islands
7.1
YES

NA
NA
Virginia 44.3
YES

NA
NA
Washington 23.0
YES

18.6
YES
West Virginia
19.6
YES

NA
NA
Wisconsin 39.9
YES

33.0
YES
Wyoming 61.3
YES

75.7
YES
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the basis of data from the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Note: NA denotes not applicable. State did not service two-parent families in its TANF or MOE-funded
programs. NR denotes not reported.

Author Contact Information

Gene Falk

Specialist in Social Policy
gfalk@crs.loc.gov, 7-7344


Congressional Research Service
30

---