Temporary Assistance for Needy Families:
Welfare Waivers
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
September 21, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R42627
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Summary
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it is willing to waive
certain federal work participation standards under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) block grant to permit states to experiment with “alternative and innovative strategies,
policies, and procedures that are designed to improve employment outcomes for needy families.”
The major provision that HHS would waive is the numerical performance standards that states
must meet or risk being penalized through a reduction in their TANF block grant. HHS
announced this initiative on July 12, 2012.
The TANF statute provides that 50% of all families and 90% of two-parent families included in a
participation rate are required to be engaged in work, though few states have ever faced the full
standard because this percentage is reduced for certain credits. For all years from FY2002
through FY2006 and in FY2008 and FY2009, the majority of states had an effective (after-credit)
TANF work participation standard of 25% or less. In FY2009, 22 states had their 50% all family
standard reduced to 0% because of these credits. Additionally, many states have avoided the two-
parent standard altogether by assisting that portion of their caseload with state funds not subject
to TANF work standards.
To be considered engaged in work under the TANF standard, a family must either be working or
in specified welfare-to-work activities for a minimum number of hours per week. Pre-
employment activities such as job search, rehabilitative activities, and education count for a
limited period of time or under limited circumstances. Though these counting rules do not apply
directly to individual recipients, they may influence how a state designs its welfare-to-work
program. States that allow participation in activities that cannot be counted (e.g., job search or
education in excess of their limits) do not receive credit for that participation and potentially risk
failing the work standard.
The new waivers would permit states to have welfare-to-work initiatives assessed using different
measures than the TANF work participation rate. Thus, states could test alternative welfare-to-
work approaches by engaging recipients in activities currently not countable without risk of
losing block grant funds. States would have to apply for waivers, which must be approved by
HHS and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). States would also be required to monitor
performance measures and evaluate the alternative welfare-to-work program. HHS also indicated
it might waive some requirements that apply to states for verifying work activities.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has determined that the waiver initiative
constitutes a “rule,” subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Under the CRA, if a
“resolution of disapproval” is passed by Congress and signed by the President (or the President’s
veto is overridden), the waiver initiative could not take effect. On September 20, 2012, the House
passed such a “resolution of disapproval” (H.J.Res. 118) of the waiver initiative.
The legislative authority cited by HHS to grant waivers in public assistance programs dates back
to 1962, although the new initiative would allow the first new waivers to test welfare-to-work
strategies in more than 15 years. “Waivers” have historically been important in welfare reform,
and TANF let states continue their pre-1996 waivers until their expiration. The last such waiver
expired in 2007.
Congressional Research Service
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
TANF and Its Work Participation Standards.................................................................................... 1
The TANF Work Participation Standards .................................................................................. 2
Rules for Being “Engaged in Work” ................................................................................... 3
Rules for Being “Engaged in Work” and Work Requirements that Apply to
Individual Recipients ....................................................................................................... 3
The Caseload Reduction and “Excess MOE” Credits......................................................... 3
Trends in “Effective” Work Standards....................................................................................... 4
Trends in Work Participation Rates ........................................................................................... 5
Two-Parent Families.................................................................................................................. 6
Secretary’s Flexibility in Assessing Penalties for Failure to Meet Work Standards.................. 7
Legislative Status of TANF.............................................................................................................. 7
The Obama Administration’s Waiver Initiative ............................................................................... 7
Goals of the Waiver ................................................................................................................... 8
Application and Approval Process ............................................................................................ 8
Ongoing Performance Monitoring and Evaluation.................................................................... 8
What Will Not be Waived.......................................................................................................... 9
Implications for Welfare-to-Work Programs ............................................................................. 9
Pre-1996 Welfare Waivers ............................................................................................................... 9
Grandfathering of Pre-1996 Welfare Waivers Under TANF.......................................................... 10
The “Superwaiver” Proposal ......................................................................................................... 12
Legislation ..................................................................................................................................... 13
Figures
Figure 1. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2009 .............................. 6
Figure 2. Number of States Operating TANF Under “Grandfathered” Pre-1996 Welfare
Reform Waivers : FY2000-FY2007............................................................................................ 11
Tables
Table 1. Effective TANF Work Participation Standards for All Families: FY2002-FY2009 .......... 5
Table 2. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for FY2000 through FY2009:
With and Without the Effect of “Grandfathered” Waivers ......................................................... 12
Table A-1. Effective TANF Work Participation Standards by State: FY2002-FY2009................. 14
Table A-2. TANF Work Participation Rates by State: Official Rates
(Including Grandfathered Waivers): FY2002-FY2009............................................................... 16
Table A-3. TANF Work Participation Rates Excluding the Effect of
“Grandfathered Waivers” by State: FY2002-FY2009 ................................................................ 18
Table A-4. Grandfathered Pre-1996 Welfare Waivers Under TANF.............................................. 20
Congressional Research Service
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Table A-5. Effect of Waivers on TANF Work Participation Rates: for States with
Grandfathered Waivers: FY2000-FY2003.................................................................................. 27
Table A-6. Effect of Waivers on TANF Work Participation Rates: for States with
Grandfathered Waivers: FY2004-FY2006.................................................................................. 28
Appendixes
Appendix........................................................................................................................................ 14
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 29
Congressional Research Service
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Introduction
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it is willing to waive
certain federal work participation standards under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) block grant to permit states to experiment with “alternative and innovative strategies,
policies, and procedures that are designed to improve employment outcomes for needy families.”
The work participation standards are numerical performance standards that each state must meet
or risk being penalized through a reduction in its block grant. These are standards that apply to
the states, not directly to individuals, though they may influence how states design their welfare-
to-work programs.
Such waivers will be the first “new” waivers to test welfare-to-work strategies in more than 15
years. The waiver initiative would permit states that undertake an alternative welfare-to-work
strategy to assess their programs using measures different from those in the current standards.
HHS announced this policy through the release of an Information Memorandum on July 12,
2012.1 State requests for waivers will have to be approved by HHS and the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), and meet specified criteria.
Under the 1996 law that created TANF, states had the authority to operate programs created under
waivers of pre-1996 welfare law until their scheduled expiration. The last such waiver expired in
2007. Additionally, the Administration of President George W. Bush made a legislative proposal
to create new “superwaiver” authority that would, among other things, have allowed for the
waiver of the federal TANF work participation standards. That proposal passed the House three
times between 2002 and 2005. A scaled-back version of this proposal was reported from the
Senate Finance Committee, but not approved by the full Senate, twice during that period.
This report discusses
• the current TANF work participation standards;
• the HHS initiative to waive TANF work participation standards;
• pre-1996 welfare waivers, including how they were treated under TANF; and
• the “superwaiver” proposal.
This report is not a legal analysis of the Secretary’s authority to waive TANF work participation
standards. Rather, it describes and provides context for this HHS initiative.
TANF and Its Work Participation Standards
TANF is a broad-based block grant that provides funds to states, the territories, and Indian tribes
to help them finance cash welfare programs for needy families with children as well as provide a
wide range of other benefits and services to either ameliorate the effects of, or address the root
1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family
Assistance, Guidance Concerning Waiver and Expenditure Authority Under Section 1115, Information Memorandum,
TANF-ACF-IM-2012-03, July 12, 2012, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/policy/im-ofa/2012/im201203/
im201203.html.
Congressional Research Service
1
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
causes of, child poverty. The basic federal block grant for the 50 states and the District of
Columbia is funded at a total of $16.5 billion per year. States are required, under a provision
known as the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement, to expend from their own funds a
minimum total of $10.4 billion per year in addition to federal funds on TANF or TANF-related
programs.
The statutory purpose of TANF is increasing state flexibility to achieve goals to
1. provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their
own homes or in the homes of relatives;
2. end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job
preparation, work, and marriage;
3. prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish
annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these
pregnancies; and
4. encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
States may use TANF funds to finance any activity “reasonably calculated” to achieve these four
TANF goals. This gives states broad leeway in spending TANF funds. In general, state MOE
funds can be used for these same activities (there are some technical differences in the use of
federal and state funds). Cash welfare itself accounted for less than 30% of all TANF and MOE
funds in FY2011.
TANF provides states with a great deal of flexibility in designing their cash assistance programs.
However, there are federal standards and requirements that apply to states with respect to
providing cash assistance, including time limits and work participation standards.
The TANF Work Participation Standards
TANF sets minimum work participation standards that a state must meet. The standards are
performance measures computed in the aggregate for each state, which require that a specified
percentage of families be considered engaged in specified activities for a minimum number of
hours.2 A state that fails to meet its work standard is at risk of being penalized through a reduction
in its block grant.
The TANF statute provides that 50% of all families and 90% of two-parent families included in
the participation rate are required to be engaged in work. However, as discussed in detail below,
few states have ever faced this standard because the percentage is reduced for caseload reduction
or state spending in excess of what is required under the TANF MOE. Additionally, not all
families receiving cash assistance are included in the participation rate calculation, as some
families do not have a “work-eligible” individual or are otherwise disregarded from the rate.3
2 CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF
Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk.
3 For details on the computation of the participation rate, see CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk.
Congressional Research Service
2
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Rules for Being “Engaged in Work”
Work-eligible individuals must participate in specific activities during a month to be considered
“engaged in work” and have the activities count toward the work participation standard. Most
welfare-to-work activities are on the list of activities that count toward the participation standards,
including educational and rehabilitative activities. However, there are limits on the ability of
states to count participation in pre-employment activities such as education, rehabilitative
activities, and job search toward the work standards. For example, teen parents (under the age of
20) may be deemed “engaged in work” through completing high school or obtaining a General
Educational Development (GED) diploma. However, for parents age 20 and older, participation in
a GED program counts only if the recipient also participates in activities more closely related to
work for at least 20 hours per week. Vocational educational training may be counted only for 12
months in a recipient’s lifetime. The combination of job search and rehabilitative activities (e.g.,
rehabilitation from a disability, substance abuse treatment) is limited to a maximum of 12 weeks
in a fiscal year.
Work-eligible individuals must also participate in activities for a minimum number of hours per
week in a month to be considered “engaged in work.” In general, single parents with a pre-school
aged child (under the age of six) must participate for at least 20 hours per week in a month; other
single parents must participate at least 30 hours per week in a month. Two-parent families face
higher hours standards.
Rules for Being “Engaged in Work” and Work Requirements that Apply to
Individual Recipients
The work participation standards described above apply to states, not individual recipients. Work
requirements applicable to individuals, and the financial sanctions on families with individuals
who fail to comply with them, are determined by the states. States may engage recipients in
activities that do not count toward the participation standards, require fewer hours than the federal
standard, and exempt categories of recipients from work or participation in activities altogether.
States that allow participation in activities that cannot be counted (e.g., job search or education in
excess of their time limits) do not receive credit for that participation. Depending on the
circumstances in the state, lack of credit for certain types of participation or exemptions from
requirements might put the state at risk of failing the work standard. Thus, though the work
participation standard’s counting rules do not apply directly to individual recipients, they may
influence how a state designs its welfare-to-work program.
The Caseload Reduction and “Excess MOE” Credits
As discussed above, few jurisdictions have faced the full TANF 50% or 90% work participation
standards. This is because of a provision in TANF law known as the caseload reduction credit.
The caseload reduction credit reduces a state’s 50% and 90% standards by one percentage point
for each percent reduction in its caseload since FY2005. Before FY2007, caseload reduction was
measured from FY1995. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) made the change in
the credit, measuring caseload reduction from FY2005.
Congressional Research Service
3
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Additionally, under HHS regulations promulgated in 1999, states also may receive credits for
spending in excess of what they are required to spend under the MOE requirement.4 States may
consider families assisted by excess MOE as “caseload reduction,” and hence receive extra
caseload reduction credits for such families.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5) allowed states that
experienced caseload increases during the recent recession to freeze their caseload reduction
credits at pre-recession levels. This freeze applied only to reductions in work participation
standards through FY2011. Additionally, HHS also issued regulations to standardize the
calculation of the excess MOE credit.5 This regulation also might affect future caseload reduction
credits.
Trends in “Effective” Work Standards
Since FY2002, the states and territories have faced a statutory work participation standard of 50%
for all families.6 However, in all years but one (FY2007) from FY2002 to FY2009, caseload
reduction and/or excess MOE permitted a majority of jurisdictions to face an effective (after-
credit) work participation standard of less than 25%. (FY2009 is the latest work participation data
available as of July 23, 2012.)
Table 1 shows the number of jurisdictions with effective participation standards of 0%; from 1%
to 9.9%; from 10% to 24.9%; from 25% to 49.9%; and 50%. A state-by-state breakdown of TANF
effective standards is shown in Table A-1. In FY2008 and FY2009, 22 jurisdictions faced a 0%
work participation standard. In FY2009, only Guam and South Dakota faced the full
50% standard.
4 These regulations are at 45 C.F.R. §261.43.
5 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) Program; Final Rules ,” 73 Federal Register 67721-6828, February 5, 2008.
6 Tribes, tribal organizations, and tribal consortia are authorized to receive and administer their own Tribal Family
Assistance Grant for the support of activities that meet the same purposes as state TANF programs. However, tribes are
not subject to all of the same work requirements that states are. Though there are hourly minimums and annual targeted
participation rates that they must meet, each of these requirements is set by the tribe, in cooperation with the
Department of Health and Human Services. At the recipient level, Tribal TANF work activities are not subject to the
same restrictions on vocational training as are placed on State TANF programs. Further, tribes may define their own
individual work activities that count for the purposes of calculating their work participation rate, so recipients may have
a different range of activities that may count toward their own hourly requirements.
Congressional Research Service
4
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Table 1. Effective TANF Work Participation Standards for All Families:
FY2002-FY2009
(number of jurisdictions by category of effective work participation standards)
Effective (After
Caseload
Reduction and
Excess MOE
Credit)
Participation
Standards
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Zero
21 20 18 17 19 4 22 22
0%-9.9%
21 15 17 16 14 5 0 1
10%-24.9%
9 15 13 16 15 11 13 16
25%-49.9%
2 3 5 4 5 32 16 13
50%
1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Note: The 54 jurisdictions operating TANF programs are the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
Guam, and the Virgin Islands.
Before FY2006, most of the reduction of the work participation standard came from caseload
reduction. Nationally, caseloads declined by 57% from FY1995 through FY2005. Caseload
reduction credits were much reduced in FY2007, when credits were based on caseload change
only from FY2005 to FY2006. In that year, only four jurisdictions faced a zero participation
standard. However, beginning in FY2008 states began to rely on the “excess MOE” portion of the
caseload reduction credit, and effective standards were substantially reduced again. The
Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that in FY2009, 16 states would not have met
their TANF work participation standards had they not claimed excess MOE credits.7
As discussed above, the ARRA caseload reduction credit freeze expires beginning with the
FY2012 work participation standards. HHS rules standardizing the calculation of the excess MOE
portion of that credit could also affect the size of future credits and effective rates.
Trends in Work Participation Rates
Figure 1 shows the national average work participation rate based on the federal rules for
FY2002 through FY2009. This participation rate measures the extent to which families are
considered “engaged in work” under the TANF statute. The rate shown on the figure excludes the
effect of “grandfathered” pre-1996 welfare law waivers. These waivers are discussed below. The
figure shows that the participation rate has fluctuated around 30% since FY2002, remaining well
below 50% for the entire period. However, most states met their participation standards with rates
below 50% because of caseload reduction and excess MOE credits.
7 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. State Maintenance of Effort and
Trends. Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee On Ways and Means, House of
Representatives, GAO-12-713T, May 17, 2012, p. 13.
Congressional Research Service
5
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Figure 1. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2009
(based on federal rules; excludes “grandfathered” pre-1996 welfare waivers for FY2002-FY2007)
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Two-Parent Families
Historically, most families receiving cash assistance have been single-parent families, usually
headed by a single mother. However, some two-parent families receive assistance. Under TANF’s
work participation standards, these families are subject to a higher standard: 90% of these
families must be engaged in work, though the two-parent standard can also be reduced for
caseload reduction. Additionally, more hours of participation are required of two-parent families.
The work-eligible adults in two-parent families must participate in activities for at least 35 hours
per week in a month; if the family receives federally funded child care, at least 55 hours per week
in a month are required. (The hours requirement applies to the total hours of engagement by
both parents.)
Many states have avoided the need to meet the two-parent family standard. Before FY2007, many
states aided two-parent families in “separate state programs.” Separate state programs are state
programs with expenditures counted toward the TANF MOE but not considered TANF programs.
Before FY2007, cash assistance families in separate state programs were not included in the work
participation rate and thus not subject to TANF’s work participation standards. The Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) brought families in separate state programs into the
calculation of TANF participation rates, thus subjecting them to the standards effective in
FY2007. However, many states then moved these families to “solely state funded programs,”
with expenditures that are not countable toward TANF’s MOE and thus totally outside of TANF’s
rules including work participation. In FY2009, 28 jurisdictions had two-parent families included
in their TANF or MOE caseloads.
Congressional Research Service
6
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Secretary’s Flexibility in Assessing Penalties for Failure to Meet
Work Standards
The TANF statute gives the Secretary of HHS flexibility in assessing the financial penalty
(reduction in the block grant) for failure to meet work participation standards. The Secretary may
reduce the penalty based on the degree of noncompliance, waive the penalty if a state
demonstrates “good cause,” and enter into corrective compliance plans with states and
subsequently forgive them if they come into compliance with the work standards.
Legislative Status of TANF
The five-year extension of TANF funding enacted in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-
171) expired at the end of FY2010. President Obama’s Administration has not made a legislative
proposal to reauthorize TANF. However, in its FY2013 budget submission, the Administration did
set forth some general principles for TANF reauthorization:
When Congress takes up reauthorization, we want to work with lawmakers to strengthen the
program’s effectiveness in accomplishing its goals. This should include using performance
indicators to drive program improvement and ensuring that states have the flexibility to
engage recipients in the most effective activities to promote success in the workforce –
including families with serious barriers to employment. We also want to work with Congress
to revise the Contingency Fund to make it more effective during economic downturns.8
Since the end of FY2010, Congress has enacted several short-term extensions of TANF. The
latest, included in the legislation that extended the payroll tax reduction and unemployment
benefits (P.L. 112-96), expires on September 30, 2012. That is, Congress must act if it is to
continue TANF beyond the end of the current fiscal year.
The Obama Administration’s Waiver Initiative
HHS has indicated a willingness to grant certain waivers of the federal TANF work participation
standards. It says these waivers would be granted under Section 1115 of the Social Security Act.9
This initiative was announced on July 12, 2012. HHS said in its announcement that this initiative
is a response to President Obama’s February 28, 2011, Presidential memorandum that asked
agencies to work with state, local, and tribal grantees of federal funds to identify barriers “that
8 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FY2013 Budget in Brief, February 2012, p. 5.
9 Section 1115 of the Social Security Act permits the Secretary of HHS to waive TANF state plan requirements
specified in Section 402 of the Social Security Act to conduct an “experimental, pilot, or demonstration project which,
in the judgment of the Secretary, is likely to assist in promoting the objectives” of the federal law. The TANF state plan
is a document states must submit as a condition of receiving its block grant. The Secretary must find that a state plan is
complete in order for block grant funds to be awarded to a state. Part of the state plan is an outline of the family
assistance program the state intends to operate, which includes a requirement that it ensure “that parents and caretakers
receiving assistance under the program engage in work activities” in accordance with the TANF work participation
standards in Section 407 of the Social Security Act.
Congressional Research Service
7
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
currently prevent states, localities, and tribes from efficiently using tax dollars to achieve the best
results for their constituents.”10
The waiver programs would allow states that undertake alternative welfare-to-work strategies to
substitute other performance measures (e.g., outcome measures) for the TANF statutory work
participation standards. Waiver programs would also have to be formally evaluated. Waivers
could be granted for state-wide initiatives, or demonstrations and pilots conducted in a portion of
the state. These initiatives could also be either for a state’s entire caseload, or a specific
population within its caseload (e.g., individuals with disabilities). HHS envisions the typical
waiver as having a five-year duration. The HHS announcement also says states may receive
waivers of the existing procedures to verify participation put into place through the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005.
Goals of the Waiver
HHS says a goal of its waiver initiative is to allow states to operate experimental, pilot, or
demonstration projects to test “alternative and innovative strategies, policies, and procedures that
are designed to improve employment outcomes for needy families.” The department says it is
“encouraging states to consider new, more effective ways to meet the goals of TANF, particularly
helping parents successfully prepare for, find, and retain employment.” In its announcement,
HHS noted that waivers of TANF work participation standards could address the following goals:
improving coordination with other programs, such as programs operated under the Workforce
Investment Act (WIA); testing multiyear career pathways models that combine work and
learning; strengthening strategies for individuals with disabilities; testing the effectiveness of
subsidized employment programs; and testing the effectiveness of extending the period of time
allowed for participation in pre-employment activities such as vocational educational training and
job search and readiness.
The department says that another goal of the waiver initiative is to develop a new body of
research evidence that could improve state programs’ abilities to achieve TANF’s goals.
Application and Approval Process
In order for TANF work standards to be waived, states would have to apply for a waiver and have
that waiver approved by HHS and OMB. HHS has specified some elements that will be required
of waiver requests: they must include a set of performance measures; an evaluation plan; the
proposed duration of the waiver; and a budget that includes the cost of evaluation.
Ongoing Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
HHS has said that states will be required to track ongoing performance and outcomes during the
period of the demonstration projects. States applying for waivers must set interim performance
targets. States that fail to meet interim targets would be required to develop improvement plans.
HHS asserts that repeated failure to meet performance targets will lead to an end of the waiver
10 This memorandum can be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/28/presidential-
memorandum-administrative-flexibility.
Congressional Research Service
8
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
demonstration. In a correspondence to Members of Congress, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius
stated that states would be required to increase the number of people moving from welfare-to-
work by at least 20%.11
HHS says that its “preferred” approach to evaluating programs is a random assignment
experiment.12 However, HHS notes it will consider alternative methods for evaluating the waiver
demonstration program.
What Will Not be Waived
HHS has said that it will not waive requirements that would reduce access to assistance or
employment. Moreover, a number of TANF provisions are outside the scope of the requirements
to be waived (e.g., TANF time limits and child support enforcement requirements).
Implications for Welfare-to-Work Programs
As discussed above, TANF work participation standards do not apply directly to individuals,
though they may influence the design of a state’s welfare-to-work strategy. Allowing states
alternative ways of assessing state welfare-to-work efforts might also influence a state’s strategy.
If performance is tracked using an outcome measure (e.g., rate of entry into employment of
TANF recipients), states would no longer risk failing a standard solely by having recipients
engaged in activities that do not count toward a participation rate. Such additional participation
might include allowing recipients to engage in pre-employment activities (job search,
rehabilitative activities, education) beyond the TANF work standard’s limits and restrictions.
However, if that participation is ineffective in helping the state achieve a good score on the new
outcome measure, the state would risk failing the new performance standards.
Pre-1996 Welfare Waivers
Waivers issued under the Obama Administration’s initiative would be the first waivers to test
alternative welfare-to-work approaches in over 15 years. The Public Welfare Amendments of
1962 (P.L. 87-543) established waiver authority within Section 1115 of the Social Security Act for
public assistance programs, including the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)
program that preceded TANF in helping fund cash assistance for needy families with children.
Though waivers under Section 1115 were allowed as early as 1962, they were not sought with
much frequency until the late 1980s. Until that point, waivers were primarily related to program
administration and service delivery.13 Between 1987 and 1989, during the Reagan Administration,
11 Letter from Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of HHS, to Dave Camp, Chairman, House Committee on Ways and Means,
(July 18, 2012) available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/Chairman-Camp-TANF-7-
18-.pdf A similar letter was sent to Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee,
available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/files/2012/07/Sen-Hatch-TANF-7-18-.pdf
12 These types of studies assign potential participations to two or more groups: one, a control group that is subject to
existing policies (e.g., no change in the program); the others would be an experimental group or groups that are subject
to new policies. The difference in outcomes between the experimental group(s) and the control group measures the
impact of the policy change.
13 See Shelly Arsneault, Welfare Policy Innovation and Diffusion: Section 1115 Waivers and the Federal System, State
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
9
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
15 waiver applications for welfare reform were approved for 14 states; during the Administration
of George H.W. Bush, another 15 applications from 12 states were approved. Until the enactment
of the 1996 welfare law, the Clinton Administration continued to approve waivers of AFDC law.
Between January 1993 and August 1996, a total of 83 waiver applications from 43 states and the
District of Columbia were approved.
In order to receive and implement a waiver, a state was required to conduct a structured
evaluation of its proposed program, which featured an “impact analysis” that assessed the success
of the program in meeting its goals. “Impacts” included employment and earnings as well as
indicators of child well-being, like school attendance and health. Evaluations often combined
both qualitative and quantitative methods, utilizing sources such as surveys, program data, and in-
depth interviews.14 The waiver process sometimes also required approval by the state legislature
of proposed program changes, usually before the proposal was submitted to HHS.15
Waivers ranged in scope from small demonstrations that were carried out in a select number of
counties to greater statewide changes in the state’s AFDC program. In many cases, a state’s
AFDC waiver program became the basis for its TANF program following the enactment of
federal welfare reform in 1996. They tested program features such as requiring mothers of young
children to participate in work or activities, stronger sanctions for failure to comply with
participation requirements, the impact of providing earnings supplements to families, and
time limits.
Grandfathering of Pre-1996 Welfare Waivers
Under TANF
The 1996 welfare reform law allowed states to delay implementation of certain TANF provisions
to the extent that they were inconsistent with requirements of the state’s approved waiver
demonstration project (if the state chose to continue its waiver). States that continued their work-
related waivers were permitted to have their programs assessed based on the rules of their
waivers, rather than those of the federal work participation standard.16 In general, states that
operated under waivers still had to achieve the numerical participation standards required under
the new law.17 However, they were able to count certain participation that otherwise would not
meet the federal definition of “engaged in work.”18 This included activities not countable toward
(...continued)
and Local Government Review, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Winter 2000), pp. 49-60. (Hereinafter cited as Shelly Arsneault, 2000).
14 See Carol Harvey, Michael J. Camasso, and Radha Jagannathan, Evaluating Welfare Reform Waivers Under Section
1115, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Volume 14, Number 4, Fall 2000, pp. 165-188.
15 See Shelly Arsneault, 2000.
16 As described in the preamble to the TANF Final Rule, a “work-related waiver” included both the explicitly granted
technical waiver and the cluster of related work policies that were in effect under prior law and continued as part of the
state’s demonstration. These could include provisions regarding allowable activities, hours, or exemptions. See U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, “Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families Program (TANF); Final Rule,” 64 Federal Register 17731-17739, April 12, 1999.
17 Vermont claimed that its waiver exempted all families from the participation rate calculation. HHS did not publish a
participation rate for Vermont for FY2000 or FY2001.
18 See 6th Annual Report to Congress, November 2004. Accessible at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/data-
reports/annualreport6/ar6index.htm.
Congressional Research Service
10
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
the participation standard, such as extended job search and education. It also included families
participating for fewer hours than required under that federal definition. Further, states were also
permitted to exclude from the participation rate calculation families that were exempted from the
welfare-to-work program under their waiver.19
TANF regulations required states to certify by October 1, 1999, whether or not they intended to
continue their waiver policies until the scheduled expiration of the waiver. A total of 20 states
continued their waiver policies with respect to work requirements.20 Figure 2 shows the number
of states operating under these “grandfathered” waivers in FY2000 through FY2007. The number
gradually declined from FY2000 through FY2007 as these waivers expired. Table A-4 describes
the specific waiver inconsistencies claimed by each state under the grandfathered waiver.
Figure 2. Number of States Operating TANF Under “Grandfathered”
Pre-1996 Welfare Reform Waivers : FY2000-FY2007.
(includes states operating waivers for part of the fiscal year)
20
20
19
18
16
16
14
12
10
10
8
6
4
4
2
2
1
1
0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
As described above, states with waivers had their welfare-to-work programs assessed using the
rules of the waiver rather than the rules of the federal work participation standard. For FY2000
through FY2006, HHS calculated two sets of work participation rates: the official rate (using the
19 See Federal Register, April 12, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 69), p. 17734.
20 For a full list of states claiming work requirement waiver inconsistencies, see pp. 201-203 of the 3rd Annual Report to
Congress, available at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/data-reports/annual3/annual3.pdf. For a full list of states
claiming time limit waiver inconsistencies, see pp. 233-234 of the same report.
Congressional Research Service
11
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
waiver rules for those states with grandfathered waivers) and a rate based on the federal rules for
the work standard (shown on Figure 1).
Table 2 shows the effect “grandfathered” waivers had on the national average TANF work
participation rate. In FY2001 and FY2002, waivers added 4.5 percentage points to the national
average participation rate. In other words, a greater proportion of TANF families was counted as
engaged in work under the waivers than under the statutory TANF work participation standards.
This declined in subsequent years, as the number of states operating their programs under these
waivers declined. Table A-5 and Table A-6 show the work participation rates with and without
the effect of the “grandfathered” waivers for the 20 states that continued them under TANF.
Table 2. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for FY2000 through
FY2009: With and Without the Effect of “Grandfathered” Waivers
Year
With Waivers
Without Waivers
Difference
2000 34.0% 29.7% 4.3
2001 34.4% 29.9% 4.5
2002 33.4% 28.9% 4.5
2003 31.3% 27.5% 3.8
2004 32.2% 29.4% 2.8
2005 33.0% 30.3% 2.7
2006 32.5% 30.6% 1.9
2007 29.7%
2008 29.4%
2009 29.4%
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
In its 2002 TANF reauthorization proposal, the Administration of George W. Bush proposed to
immediately end the “grandfathered waivers.” According to the Administration’s proposal:
Flexibility under current law allows states to accomplish all the purposes of TANF without
waivers. Furthermore, the requirements of TANF no longer represent an experiment.
Abolishing the remaining waivers will put all states on an equal footing.21
The Administration’s proposal was not adopted. The last of the waivers (Tennessee’s) expired
in 2007.
The “Superwaiver” Proposal
Though the Bush Administration’s 2002 TANF reauthorization proposal sought to end the
“grandfathered waivers,” it concurrently proposed new waiver authority that would have applied
21 See Working Toward Independence: Maximize Self Sufficiency Through Work and Additional Constructive Activities,
February 2002, http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/02/welfare-book-04.html.
Congressional Research Service
12
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
to TANF. The “superwaiver” proposal would have allowed states to seek “new waivers for
integrating funding and program rules across a broad range of public assistance and workforce
development programs.”22 States that received waivers would have been required to develop
integrated performance objectives and outcomes, which could have altered reporting and
performance requirements in affected programs. An evaluation of the demonstration would have
been required.
The superwaiver proposal passed the House three times: in 2002, 2003, and 2005.23 The
legislation would have had the effect of allowing TANF work participation standards to be
waived. A scaled back version of the superwaiver was also included in bills reported by the
Senate Finance Committee in 2003 and 2005.24
Legislation
Legislation has been introduced to halt the Obama Administration’s current waiver initiative.
H.R. 6140 (Representative Camp) and S. 3397 (Senator Hatch) would prohibit HHS from
granting a waiver of the work participation standards. Additionally, it would rescind any waiver
issued before the bill’s enactment. As introduced, the bills’ findings sections question the
secretary’s legal authority to grant waivers of TANF work requirements.
In a decision released on September 4, 2012, the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
determined that the waiver initiative constitutes a “rule,” subject to the Congressional Review Act
(CRA).25 The CRA sets procedures for Congress to consider a resolution of disapproval of new
rules.26 Under the CRA, if a “resolution of disapproval” is passed by Congress and signed by the
President (or the President’s veto is overridden), the waiver initiative could not take effect. On
September 20, 2012, the House passed such a “resolution of disapproval” (H.J.Res. 118) of the
waiver initiative. A “resolution of disapproval” of the waiver initiative (S.J.Res. 50) has also been
introduced in the Senate by Senator Hatch.
22 For a discussion of the superwaiver, CRS Report RS21219, "Superwaiver" Proposals in the Welfare Reform Debate,
by Karen Spar.
23 The bills that passed the House are H.R. 4737 (107th Congress), passed the House on May 16, 2002; H.R. 4 (108th
Congress), passed the House on February 13, 2003; and S. 1932 (109th Congress), passed the House on November 18,
2005.
24 The bills approved by the Senate Finance Committee are H.R. 4 (108th Congress), as amended, reported on October
3, 2003; and S. 667 (109th Congress), ordered reported on March 9, 2005.
25 See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Temporary Assistance For Needy Families: Information Memorandum
Constitutes Rule for the Purposes of the Congressional Review Act, B-3237772, September 4, 2012,
http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/647778.pdf.
26 A discussion of the Congressional Review Act can be found in CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulemaking
Process: An Overview, by Maeve P. Carey.
Congressional Research Service
13
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Appendix.
Table A-1. Effective TANF Work Participation Standards by State: FY2002-FY2009
(effective standards are after caseload reduction credits, including excess MOE credits)
State 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Alabama
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Alaska
8.7 11.1 6.9 4.8 6.8 32.5 25.8 21.4
Arizona
4.8 13.1 19.6 24.0 11.6 7.3 0.0 0.0
Arkansas
0.0 3.3 4.3 3.9 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0
California
6.7 5.8 3.9 4.5 5.1 32.3 29.0 29.0
Colorado
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.1 0.0 0.0
Connecticut 21.0 20.3 20.2 23.4 23.4 12.7 0.0 0.0
Delaware
6.7 10.2 12.5 17.6 18.2 26.1 0.0 0.0
District of
11.2 11.5 13.3 15.3 14.4 32.5 31.9 31.9
Columbia
Florida
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0
Georgia
0.0 0.0 4.3 5.9 0.0 26.0 13.8 12.3
Hawai
26.6 20.0 16.4 12.1 0.0 20.8 0.0 0.0
Idaho
15.9 20.0 34.5 27.9 28.5 43.1 38.1 30.6
Illinois
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.7 0.0 0.0
Indiana
15.4 28.9 35.4 33.4 27.1 46.5 11.3 11.3
Iowa
6.4 7.3 8.8 11.0 17.3 25.7 24.0 24.0
Kansas
38.4 41.7 37.6 38.8 38.8 11.5 0.0 0.0
Kentucky
2.9 4.5 6.2 10.1 11.9 41.7 36.6 31.9
Louisiana
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 17.4 15.2
Maine
1.9 2.5 0.0 1.1 2.9 31.4 47.5 47.5
Maryland
6.2 6.5 6.6 6.5 5.2 34.1 31.7 31.7
Massachusetts
0.8 4.9 6.3 8.4 8.5 14.3 0.0 0.0
Michigan
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.5 50.0 27.8
Minnesota 12.9 14.8 18.6 18.8 14.9 44.6 0.0 0.0
Mississippi 12.5 12.6 17.1 5.4 4.1 33.5 22.2 20.2
Missouri
5.7 5.0 3.7 4.5 2.8 7.4 14.9 14.9
Montana
0.0 2.0 10.8 13.2 16.3 26.1 26.0 25.8
Nebraska
17.6 24.2 28.7 28.6 31.1 23.0 0.0 0.0
Nevada
4.1 26.2 31.8 10.3 10.7 38.6 34.5 31.2
New
2.4 6.1 7.8 7.4 8.4 9.5 0.0 0.0
Hampshire
New
Jersey 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Congressional Research Service
14
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
State 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
New
Mexico 8.3 8.4 8.2 12.0 13.2 46.2 15.2 15.2
New
York 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.8 11.5 11.5
North
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.1 0.0 0.0
Carolina
North
7.5 12.0 14.7 8.8 4.8 44.0 23.1 20.8
Dakota
Ohio
0.0 0.0 9.7 15.7 19.1 46.2 42.0 42.0
Oklahoma 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.6 28.8 20.6
Oregon
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 45.1 45.4 45.4
Pennsylvania 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.0 19.7 15.8
Puerto
Rico 0.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 44.6 40.3 23.5
Rhode
Island 22.9 19.2 15.4 13.1 10.7 8.0 0.0 0.0
South
0.7 2.4 3.0 3.0 3.3 29.0 0.0 0.0
Carolina
South
Dakota 9.3 12.4 11.7 10.9 13.7 50.0 50.0 50.0
Tennessee
7.8 11.6 11.6 19.6 19.1 35.5 0.0 0.0
Texas
0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 31.2 19.9 10.8
Utah
11.7 17.0 24.6 17.8 27.3 32.6 10.1 5.4
Vermont
8.8 7.1 5.7 5.5 2.4 23.0 11.1 11.1
Virginia
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.8 36.0 38.5 37.8
Washington 7.0 8.2 8.8 6.9 10.7 11.1 0.0 0.0
West
Virginia 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 39.2 26.3 17.4
Wisconsin 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.3 0.0 30.9 0.0 0.0
Wyoming 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.3 35.3 34.2
Guam
50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0
Virgin
Islands 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Number of States with Effective (After-Credit) TANF Work Participation Standards Equal to:
Zero
21 20 18 17 19 4 22 22
0%-9.9% 21 15 17 16 14 5 0 1
10%-24.9% 9 15 13 16 15 11 13 16
25%-49.9% 2 3 5 4 5 32 16 13
50% 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
15
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Table A-2. TANF Work Participation Rates by State: Official Rates
(Including Grandfathered Waivers): FY2002-FY2009
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Alabama
37.3% 37.1% 37.9% 38.6% 41.6% 34.0% 37.4% 32.4%
Alaska
39.6 41.1 43.6 45.7 45.6 46.8 42.8 37.2
Arizona
25.9 13.4 25.5 30.3 29.6 30.0 27.8 27.1
Arkansas
21.4 22.4 27.3 28.3 27.9 35.3 38.8 37.1
California
27.3 24.0 23.1 25.9 22.2 22.3 25.1 26.8
Colorado
35.9 32.5 34.7 25.8 30.0 27.3 32.3 37.8
Connecticut 26.6 30.6 24.3 33.8 30.8 28.8 25.3 34.4
Delaware
25.8 18.2 22.1 22.6 25.3 32.7 48.8 37.5
District of
16.4 23.1 18.2 23.5 17.1 35.0 49.6 23.5
Columbia
Florida
30.4 33.1 40.4 38.0 41.0 64.2 42.4 46.1
Georgia
8.2 10.9 24.8 57.2 64.9 54.2 59.0 57.1
Hawai
58.8 65.8 70.5 35.5 37.3 28.7 34.4 40.3
Idaho
40.7 43.7 41.0 39.9 44.2 53.0 59.5 52.0
Illinois
58.4 57.8 46.1 43.0 53.0 55.5 42.6 49.3
Indiana
62.6 40.3 36.3 30.9 26.7 27.5 29.4 17.5
Iowa
51.2 45.1 50.0 47.8 39.0 40.2 41.1 35.4
Kansas
84.8 87.9 88.0 86.7 77.2 12.8 19.6 23.9
Kentucky
32.4 32.8 38.1 39.7 44.6 38.2 38.0 37.3
Louisiana
38.7 34.6 35.4 34.6 38.4 42.2 40.0 34.4
Maine
44.5 27.7 32.1 28.3 26.6 21.9 11.4 16.8
Maryland
8.3 9.1 16.0 20.5 44.5 46.7 36.9 44.0
Massachusetts
60.9 61.0 60.0 59.9 13.6 17.0 44.7 47.5
Michigan
28.9 25.3 24.5 22.0 21.6 28.0 33.6 27.9
Minnesota 40.4 25.0 26.8 28.9 30.3 28.1 29.9 29.8
Mississippi 18.5 17.2 21.0 22.6 35.5 61.9 63.2 67.5
Missouri
25.4 28.0 19.5 20.0 18.7 14.0 14.2 13.2
Montana
84.2 85.9 92.7 83.1 79.2 46.4 44.2 44.2
Nebraska
28.1 33.4 34.5 31.8 32.0 23.0 51.2 50.3
Nevada
21.6 22.3 34.5 42.3 47.8 34.0 42.1 39.4
New
41.8 28.2 30.2 24.6 24.1 42.0 47.4 46.5
Hampshire
New
Jersey 36.4 35.0 34.6 29.0 29.2 33.0 18.9 20.1
New
Mexico 42.7 42.0 46.2 41.6 42.3 36.4 37.5 43.1
New
York 38.5 37.1 37.8 35.2 37.8 38.0 37.3 33.4
Congressional Research Service
16
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
North
27.4 25.3 31.4 27.5 32.4 32.4 24.5 32.3
Carolina
North
30.4 27.0 25.3 31.4 51.9 58.7 50.2 61.0
Dakota
Ohio
56.3 62.3 65.2 58.3 54.9 23.7 24.5 23.3
Oklahoma 26.7 29.2 33.2 34.0 32.9 38.1 29.2 23.0
Oregon
61.1 60.0 32.1 14.9 15.2 14.7 24.1 9.5
Pennsylvania 10.4 9.9 7.1 15.2 26.1 48.9 38.6 45.8
Puerto
Rico 5.6 6.1 7.5 13.1 13.1 8.2 11.6 8.7
Rhode
Island 24.6 24.3 23.7 24.2 24.9 26.8 17.5 13.8
South
52.4 54.3 53.7 54.3 49.5 53.3 51.7 45.1
Carolina
South
Dakota 42.5 46.1 54.8 57.5 57.9 53.5 62.2 59.4
Tennessee 41.2 42.7 50.6 52.1 57.2 45.9 25.2 25.5
Texas
30.8 28.1 34.2 38.9 42.0 34.6 29.3 37.0
Utah
27.9 28.1 26.2 30.3 42.5 49.8 37.6 32.6
Vermont
21.4 24.3 24.9 22.4 22.2 22.4 23.2 29.0
Virginia
42.9 44.6 50.1 46.3 53.9 43.5 45.4 44.3
Washington 49.8 46.2 35.4 38.6 36.1 25.4 18.3 23.0
West
Virginia 19.2 14.2 11.7 16.3 26.2 15.4 17.6 19.6
Wisconsin 69.4 67.2 61.3 44.3 36.2 36.7 37.1 39.9
Wyoming 82.9 83.0 77.8 82.1 77.2 65.4 50.5 61.3
Guam
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0
Virgin
Islands 17.7 5.0 10.6 16.9 14.5 17.1 15.5 7.1
Number of States with Participation Rates Equal to:
0%
-
9.9% 4 5 3 1 1 2 1 4
10%-24.9% 9 11 13 14 11 11 13 11
25%-34% 14 16 15 15 14 15 11 12
35%-49.9% 15 12 11 15 18 17 21 20
50%
or
more
12 10 12 9 10 9 8 7
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
17
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Table A-3. TANF Work Participation Rates Excluding the Effect of
“Grandfathered Waivers” by State: FY2002-FY2009
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Alabama
37.3% 37.1% 37.9% 38.6% 41.6% 34.0% 37.4% 32.4%
Alaska
39.6 41.1 43.6 45.7 45.6 46.8 42.8 37.2
Arizona
25.9 13.4 25.5 30.3 29.6 30.0 27.8 27.1
Arkansas
21.4 22.4 27.3 28.3 27.9 35.3 38.8 37.1
California
27.3 24.0 23.1 25.9 22.2 22.3 25.1 26.8
Colorado
35.9 32.5 34.7 25.8 30.0 27.3 32.3 37.8
Connecticut 26.6 30.6 24.3 33.8 30.8 28.8 25.3 34.4
Delaware
11.7 18.2 22.1 22.6 25.3 32.7 48.8 37.5
District of
16.4 23.1 18.2 23.5 17.1 35.0 49.6 23.5
Columbia
Florida
30.4 33.1 40.4 38.0 41.0 64.2 42.4 46.1
Georgia
8.2 10.9 24.8 57.2 64.9 54.2 59.0 57.1
Hawai
32.5 34.6 40.3 35.5 37.3 28.7 34.4 40.3
Idaho
40.7 43.7 41.0 39.9 44.2 53.0 59.5 52.0
Illinois
58.4 57.8 46.1 43.0 53.0 55.5 42.6 49.3
Indiana
45.3 40.3 36.3 30.9 26.7 27.5 29.4 17.5
Iowa
51.2 45.1 50.0 47.8 39.0 40.2 41.1 35.4
Kansas
37.6 32.4 88.0 86.7 77.2 12.8 19.6 23.9
Kentucky
32.4 32.8 38.1 39.7 44.6 38.2 38.0 37.3
Louisiana
38.7 34.6 35.4 34.6 38.4 42.2 40.0 34.4
Maine
44.5 27.7 32.1 28.3 26.6 21.9 11.4 16.8
Maryland
8.3 9.1 16.0 20.5 44.5 46.7 36.9 44.0
Massachusetts 9.2 8.4 10.3 12.6 13.6 17.0 44.7 47.5
Michigan
28.9 25.3 24.5 22.0 21.6 28.0 33.6 27.9
Minnesota 31.2 25.0 26.8 28.9 30.3 28.1 29.9 29.8
Mississippi 18.5 17.2 21.0 22.6 35.5 61.9 63.2 67.5
Missouri
25.4 28.0 19.5 20.0 18.7 14.0 14.2 13.2
Montana
37.9 37.4 86.7 83.1 79.2 46.4 44.2 44.2
Nebraska
22.8 29.4 34.5 31.8 32.0 23.0 51.2 50.3
Nevada
21.6 22.3 34.5 42.3 47.8 34.0 42.1 39.4
New
32.6 28.2 30.2 24.6 24.1 42.0 47.4 46.5
Hampshire
New
Jersey 36.4 35.0 34.6 29.0 29.2 33.0 18.9 20.1
New
Mexico 42.7 42.0 46.2 41.6 42.3 36.4 37.5 43.1
New
York 38.5 37.1 37.8 35.2 37.8 38.0 37.3 33.4
Congressional Research Service
18
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
North
27.4 25.3 31.4 27.5 32.4 32.4 24.5 32.3
Carolina
North
30.4 27.0 25.3 31.4 51.9 58.7 50.2 61.0
Dakota
Ohio
56.1 62.2 65.2 58.3 54.9 23.7 24.5 23.3
Oklahoma 26.7 29.2 33.2 34.0 32.9 38.1 29.2 23.0
Oregon
8.0 14.7 32.1 14.9 15.2 14.7 24.1 9.5
Pennsylvania 10.4 9.9 7.1 15.2 26.1 48.9 38.6 45.8
Puerto
Rico 5.6 6.1 7.5 13.1 13.1 8.2 11.6 8.7
Rhode
Island 24.6 24.3 23.7 24.2 24.9 26.8 17.5 13.8
South
30.2 28.6 53.7 54.3 49.5 53.3 51.7 45.1
Carolina
South
Dakota 42.5 46.1 54.8 57.5 57.9 53.5 62.2 59.4
Tennessee 14.3 13.4 13.0 14.3 16.8 45.9 25.2 25.5
Texas
21.1 28.1 34.2 38.9 42.0 34.6 29.3 37.0
Utah
27.9 28.1 26.2 30.3 42.5 49.8 37.6 32.6
Vermont
21.4 24.3 24.9 22.4 22.2 22.4 23.2 29.0
Virginia
22.6 29.9 50.1 46.3 53.9 43.5 45.4 44.3
Washington 49.8 46.2 35.4 38.6 36.1 25.4 18.3 23.0
West
Virginia 19.2 14.2 11.7 16.3 26.2 15.4 17.6 19.6
Wisconsin 69.4 67.2 61.3 44.3 36.2 36.7 37.1 39.9
Wyoming 82.9 83.0 77.8 82.1 77.2 65.4 50.5 61.3
Guam
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0
Virgin
Islands 17.7 5.0 10.6 16.9 14.5 17.1 15.5 7.1
Number of States with Participation Rates Equal to:
0%
-
9.9% 6 6 3 1 1 2 1 4
10%-24.9% 14 13 15 16 12 11 13 11
25%-34% 15 20 15 15 14 15 11 12
35%-49.9% 14 11 12 15 18 17 21 20
50%
or
more
5 4 9 7 9 9 8 7
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
19
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Table A-4. Grandfathered Pre-1996 Welfare Waivers Under TANF
Waiver
Expiration
State
Date Exemptions
Activities/Hours Other
Arizona
9/30/02
No additional exemptions.
No waiver provision.
Sanctions are for
failure (rather
than refusal) to
participate in
required
activities.
Connecticut
9/30/01
Exempts individuals who are
Allows any of the 12 federally
Any two-parent
incapacitated, of advanced age,
approved activities (without
family that
needed in the home to care
priority/secondary distinction)
contains a parent
for an incapacitated household
to count toward the work
exempt under
member, certain pregnant or
participation rate. Hours
the waiver will
postpartum women, and an
required depends on the
not be counted
individual otherwise deemed
activity and the individual.
as a two-parent
unemployable.
Maximum number of required
case for work
hours per week is 35 (even
participation
for two-parent cases). No
purposes (not
time limit on job search and
just in cases of
job readiness (can count as
disability, as in
long as the recipient is
current law).
satisfactorily participating).
Delaware
9/30/02
Exempts a parent of a child
If medically able to participate,
under 13 weeks or if an adult
adults may be required to
is medically unable to
participate part-time in
participate. Individuals
parenting activities or other
employed at least 30 hours
non-employment related
per week are considered
activities regardless of the age
exempt.
of the youngest child. Allows
unlimited job search. After
two years of assistance, adult
must participate in work
experience for up to the
number of hours equal to the
cash welfare grant divided by
the minimum wage. In
addition, up to 10 additional
hours of job search may be
required.
Hawaii
9/30/04
Exempts individuals who are ill
Job search, education, and
or incapacitated for at least 30
vocational education are not
days; providing in-home care
time-limited. Recipients who
for an ill or incapacitated
are not job ready are assigned
assistance unit member; caring
to remediation to remove
for an infant under six months; barriers. Recipients awaiting
over age 60; or a VISTA
assignment to education or
volunteer.
training activities may be
assigned to up to 18 hours
per week in temporary
employment placements
developed by employment
specialists.
Congressional Research Service
20
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Waiver
Expiration
State
Date Exemptions
Activities/Hours Other
Indiana
3/31/02
No waiver provision.
No minimum work hours.
Individual is considered
engaged in work if meeting
the hours and activities in
their individualized self-
sufficiency plans. Allows
education and training to
count more than al owable
under federal law.
Kansas
9/30/03
No waiver provision.
Job search is not time-limited.
Parents with a child under age
six may be required to work
more than 20 hours per week.
Massachusetts 9/30/05
Exempts individuals who are
Requires 20 hours of work for
single parents caring for a child each non-exempt adult
under full-time school age
(including each parent in a
(under three months if child is
two-parent family). All work-
subject to family cap); disabled; related activities allowable
needed in the home to care
under pre-1996 program
for a disabled family member; a count. No limits on number of
pregnant woman beginning in
hours in activities, and no time
her sixth month of pregnancy;
limit on job search.
ineligible persons unless they
can legally work for pay; or
aged 60 or over.
Minnesota
9/30/02
Exempts individuals who are
Any activity in individualized
If one parent in a
age 60 or older; pregnant;
case plan counts (no preset
two-parent case
providing care for a child
list of activities; may include
is exempt, the
under age one; experiencing a
barrier removal or education). family will only
personal or family crisis;
No limit on vocational
be included
exempt under a domestic
education participation or on
when calculating
violence service plan; seriously
time in vocational education.
the all-family
ill, injured, or disabled; or
Job search counts longer than
work
needed in the home to care
allowed by federal law. Uses
participation
for another member of the
TANF hours rules.
rate.
household who is ill or
disabled.
Congressional Research Service
21
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Waiver
Expiration
State
Date Exemptions
Activities/Hours Other
Missouri
6/30/00
No waiver provision.
Al ows more educational
activities: post-secondary
education; General
Educational Development
Diploma (GED) testing; junior
high school; high school;
English as a Second Language
(ESL); and Adult Basic
Education (ABE), High School
Equivalency, and/or Remedial
Education. Uses TANF hours
rules for single-parent cases.
All two-parent families must
participate 55 hours per week.
Individuals in two-parent
families may not count
participation in post-
secondary education, GED
testing, high school, ESL, or
ABE toward the first
30 hours.
Montana
12/31/03
No exemptions from work
Al Demonstration pre-1996
participation.
welfare law activity hours
count in participation totals.
No time limit on job search.
No limit on number of
participants or time in
educational activities (all hours
count).
Nebraska
6/30/03
Exempts caretaker relatives
No time limit on counting job
with a child under 12 weeks
search. All caretaker relative
old.
recipients are required to
participate in some activity
(education, job skills training,
work experience, intensive
job search, or employment
activities). When a parent has
a child between 12 weeks and
six months old, only part-time
participation in activities such
as family nurturing is required.
Family nurturing is counted as
a JOBS activity. (However,
participation in family
nurturing will not count
toward the calculation of the
TANF participation rate.)
Congressional Research Service
22
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Waiver
Expiration
State
Date Exemptions
Activities/Hours Other
New
3/31/02
Retains al exemptions in effect Allows unlimited job search.
Hampshire
9/30/96. Also exempts parents
Requires 20 hours of work
when a child who would
per week (in unsubsidized
otherwise be subject to the
employment, subsidized job,
family cap is born as a result of On-the-Job Training (OJT),
rape or incest (for children
community service, work
subject to family cap, 13
experience, work
weeks); parents providing care
supplementation, or other
for a child under age five
approved work activity) for 26
(reduced to age three on
weeks after 26 weeks of job
7/1/98); and individuals who
search. Work activities may
have significant employment-
include post-secondary
related barriers (as defined in
education, self-initiated
state policy manuals,
education and training, and
individuals determined
barrier resolution. Parents
permanently incapable of self-
with children under age six
sufficiency).
may be required to participate
more than 20 hours per week.
Imposes time limits on
education activities (time limit
to be related to the average
time it takes to complete a
particular activity and to
participant characteristics);
after time limit, activity must
be combined with work.
Individuals without a high
school diploma under age 21
required to participate in
education. Noncustodial
parents may be required to
participate for up to 40 hours
per week.
Ohio
6/30/03
No waiver provision.
Recipients over age 21
Requires up-
without a high school diploma
front job search
must be in education activities
while application
in order to remain eligible for
is being
benefits. General y, recipients
processed.
assigned to education
activities have two years to
complete high school, adult
education, or GED, or they
become ineligible for benefits.
Congressional Research Service
23
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Waiver
Expiration
State
Date Exemptions
Activities/Hours Other
Oregon
6/30/03
Oregon does not apply
Case managers determine
exemptions from work
participation activities and
program participation. The
hours for al recipients based
fol owing groups are exempt
on individual circumstances
from sanction for failure to
(may include ESL, substance
participate, but are counted in
abuse/mental health
the numerator for Oregon’s
treatment).
work participation calculation:
VISTA volunteers; clients with
unreasonable travel distance;
clients in months seven and
eight of pregnancy must only
participate 10 hours per week;
clients in their last month of
pregnancy are deferred from
participation through the first
three months after birth;
pregnant teens must
participate in education or
employment just like non-
pregnant teens.
South
9/30/03
Exempts a pregnant adult from Job club/job search may last
Carolina
seventh month of pregnancy
for up to 60 days; al ows any
until birth; single-parent caring
educational activity below the
for a child under age one,
post-secondary level that the
unless the parent is under 25
state determines to be
and has not completed
appropriate to the
secondary school;
employment goal;
incapacitated adults; an adult
participation in Family Life
needed to care for an
Skills can count. State does
incapacitated individual; or an
not apply TANF core activity
individual unable to participate
requirements or restrictions
because child care and/or
on counting education.
reasonable transportation
cannot be provided.
Tennessee
6/30/07
Exempts individuals who are
No time limit on countable
disabled; caring for a disabled
job search. Counts self-
person; aged 60 or older; full-
employment and life skills
time VISTA volunteer, parent
training. Persons testing at
unable to obtain child care or
grade levels 8.9 or below on a
transportation; parent with
literacy test count by
infant under 16 weeks of age;
participation in adult basic
or determined to be severely
education for at least 20
limited due to physical, mental, hours per week. Uses federal
or learning disability.
hours requirement.
Texas
3/31/02
Exempts caretakers with
Broader definition of work,
children under the age of five,
including post-secondary
as of 9/1/96; under the age of
education, no minimum hours
four, as of 9/1/97; under the
in “core” activities; does not
age of three, as of 1/1/00;
time limit job search.
under the age of two, as of
9/1/00; and under the age of
one, as of 9/1/01.
Congressional Research Service
24
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Waiver
Expiration
State
Date Exemptions
Activities/Hours Other
Utah
12/31/00
Requires participation of al
Broader definition of work
AFDC parents and eligible
may include life skills
children age 16 or older (if not components such as mental
in school)
health treatment or
addressing transportation
issues; individual job search
usually limited to 30 days;
educational activities including
ESL (not subject to the Family
Employment Plan general 24-
month educational limit); or
post-secondary education. No
minimum hours of
participation; required hours
are determined individually.
Vermont
6/30/01
Requires pregnant and
No time limit on job search.
Non-exempt
parenting minors to participate Requires participation in
parents will be
in education or training
community service jobs if
required to
activities or parenting classes,
unsubsidized employment is
participate in job
even if they are in school ful -
not found after 15 months for
search in the two
time, working 30 hours per
two-parent cases (40 hours
months before
week, or needed in the home
per week) or after 30 months
they are required
to care for an ill or
(20 hours per week or grant
to participate in
incapacitated family member.
divided by minimum wage,
the community
Exempts needy non-parent
whichever is less) for one-
jobs component.
caretakers.
worker families with a child
under age 13. If a family is
working in unsubsidized
employment, they can meet
the work requirement with
75% of the hours required for
community service. Parents
with temporary disabilities
who are deferred from
participation in work activities
must participate in
rehabilitation and training
programs. Requires a pregnant
woman in second or third
trimester of pregnancy to
participate unless determined
medical y unable. Requires
two-parent participants
working more than 30 hours
per week to participate in
JOBS.
Congressional Research Service
25
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Waiver
Expiration
State
Date Exemptions
Activities/Hours Other
Virginia
6/30/03
The fol owing caretakers are
Job search is required without
exempt: minor caretakers
time limits. Usual y for 90
under age 16; teen parents 16-
days, then assigned to work
19 who are in school or
activity (subsidized
vocational or technical training
employment or community
full-time; individuals with a
service). Participants between
temporary medical condition,
19 and 24 may be immediately
aged 60 or older, or needed in
assigned to work experience
the home to care for an
or education. Recipients who
incapacitated family member;
do not find unsubsidized
incapacitated individuals;
employment may be required
parent caring for a child under
to participate in six-month
18 months of age; caretakers
subsidized employment
who are not the parents of the placements.
child; a woman in her fourth-
ninth months of pregnancy.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS,) based on information from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services and TANF state plans.
Congressional Research Service
26
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Table A-5. Effect of Waivers on TANF Work Participation Rates: for States with Grandfathered Waivers: FY2000-FY2003
2000
2001
2002
2003
With
Without
Differ-
With
Without
Differ-
With
Without
Differ-
With
Without
Differ-
Waivers
Waivers
ence
Waivers
Waivers
ence
Waivers
Waivers
ence
Waivers
Waivers
ence
Arizona 39.7% 39.% 0.0 32.9% 32.9% 0.0 25.9% 25.9% 0.0 NA 13.4% NA
CT
43.0 33.2 9.8
40.6 27.6 13.0
NA 26.6 NA NA 30.6 NA
Delaware 27.6 16.8 10.8
24.6 11.8 12.8
25.8 11.7 14.1
NA 18.2 NA
Hawai 29.7 24.5 5.2
35.0 27.9 7.1
58.8 32.5 26.3
65.8
34.6 31.2
Indiana 72.3 40.8 31.5
76.0 43.3 32.7
62.6 45.3 17.3
NA 40.3 NA
Kansas 77.4 49.0 28.4
80.7 45.0 35.7
84.8 37.6 47.2
87.9
32.4 55.5
MA
69.2 7.1 62.1
76.5 10.9 65.6
60.9 9.2 51.7
61.0 8.4 52.6
Minnesota
34.7 29.3 5.4
35.2 28.3 6.9
40.4 31.2 9.2
NA 25.0 NA
Missouri 34.0 30.4 3.6
NA 33.1 NA NA 25.4 NA NA 28.0 NA
Montana 68.2 36.2 32.0
44.4 26.9 17.5
84.2 37.9 46.3
85.9
37.4 48.5
Nebraska 22.6 15.8 6.8
18.1 13.9 4.2
28.1 22.8 5.3
33.4
29.4 4.0
NH
53.1 30.0 23.1
50.2 29.9 20.3
41.8 32.6 9.2
NA 28.2 NA
Ohio
52.9 52.8 0.1
53.2 53.0 0.2
56.3 56.1 0.2
62.3
62.2 0.1
Oregon 64.0 10.6 53.4
72.0 11.1 60.9
61.1 8.0 53.1
60 14.7 45.3
South
54.0 25.0 29.0
58.7 32.0 26.7
52.4 30.2 22.2
54.3
28.6 25.7
Carolina
Tennessee
35.4 24.9 10.5
32.3 20.8 11.5
41.2 14.3 26.9
42.7
13.4 29.3
Texas
25.6 7.8 17.8
41.5 15.6 25.9
30.8 21.1 9.7
NA 28.1 NA
Utah
31.1 27.9 3.2
25.9 25.0 0.9
NA 27.9 NA NA 28.1 NA
Vermont —
11.6 —
NA 12.9
NA
NA 21.4
NA
NA
24.3
NA
Virginia 44.9 24.6 20.3
44.3 22.7 21.6
42.9 22.6 20.3
44.6
29.9 14.7
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: NA denotes “not applicable” because the grandfathered waiver expired. HHS did not compute a participation rate for Vermont in FY2000 based on its waiver.
CRS-27
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Table A-6. Effect of Waivers on TANF Work Participation Rates: for States with Grandfathered Waivers: FY2004-FY2006
2004
2005
2006
With
Without
With
Without
With
Without
Waivers
Waivers Difference Waivers
Waivers Difference Waivers
Waivers Difference
Arizona NA 25.5%
NA NA 30.3%
NA NA 29.6%
NA
Connecticut
NA 24.3
NA NA 33.8
NA NA 30.8
NA
Delaware NA 22.1
NA NA 22.6
NA NA 25.3
NA
Hawai
70.5 40.3 30.2 NA
35.5 NA NA
37.3 NA
Indiana NA 36.3
NA NA 30.9
NA NA 26.7
NA
Kansas NA 88.0
NA NA 86.7
NA NA 77.2
NA
Massachusetts
60.0 10.3 49.7 59.9 12.6 47.3 NA 13.6 NA
Minnesota
NA 26.8
NA NA 28.9
NA NA 30.3
NA
Missouri NA 19.5
NA NA 20.0
NA NA 18.7
NA
Montana
92.7 86.7 6.0 NA
83.1 NA NA
79.2 NA
Nebraska NA 34.5
NA NA 31.8
NA NA 32.0
NA
New
NA 30.2
NA NA 24.6
NA NA 24.1
NA
Hampshire
Ohio
NA 65.2
NA NA 58.3
NA NA 54.9
NA
Oregon NA 32.1
NA NA 14.9
NA NA 15.2
NA
South
NA 53.7
NA NA 54.3
NA NA 49.5
NA
Carolina
Tennessee 50.6 13.0 37.6 52.1 14.3 37.8 57.2 16.8 40.4
Texas
NA 34.2
NA NA 38.9
NA NA 42.0
NA
Utah
NA 26.2
NA NA 30.3
NA NA 42.5
NA
Vermont NA 24.9
NA NA 22.4
NA NA 22.2
NA
Virginia NA 50.1
NA NA 46.3
NA NA 53.9
NA
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: NA denotes not applicable because the grandfathered waiver expired.
CRS-28
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Welfare Waivers
Author Contact Information
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
gfalk@crs.loc.gov, 7-7344
Congressional Research Service
29