The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
October 2, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL32760

---

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

Summary
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide range of benefits
and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the 1996 welfare
reform law (P.L. 104-193). This report responds to some frequently asked questions about TANF;
it does not describe TANF rules (see, instead, CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal
Requirements, by Gene Falk).
TANF Funding. TANF provides fixed funding to states, the bulk of which is provided in a $16.5
billion-per-year basic federal block grant. States are required in total to contribute, from their own
funds, at least $10.4 billion under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement. The bulk of
federal TANF funding lapsed at the end of September 30, 2013. The pending continuing
resolution (H.J.Res. 59) would fund TANF into FY2014.
State Spending. Though TANF is best known for funding cash assistance payments for needy
families with children, the block grant and MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and
activities. In FY2012, expenditures on basic assistance (cash assistance) totaled $9.0 billion—
28.6% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. TANF also contributes funds for child care and
services for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected.
Cash Assistance Caseload. A total of 1.8 million families, composed of 4.1 million recipients,
received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in March 2013. The bulk of the “recipients” were
children—3.1 million in that month. The cash assistance caseload is very heterogeneous. The type
of family historically thought of as the “typical” cash assistance family—one with an unemployed
adult recipient—accounted for less than half of all families on the rolls in FY2010. Additionally,
15% of cash assistance families had an employed adult, while almost half of all families had no
adult recipient. Child-only families include those with disabled adults receiving Supplemental
Security Income (SSI), adults who are nonparents (e.g., grandparents, aunts, uncles) caring for
children, and families consisting of citizen children and ineligible noncitizen parents.
Cash Assistance Benefits. TANF cash benefits are set by states. In July 2011, the maximum
monthly benefit for a family of three ranged from $923 in Alaska to $170 in Mississippi. Benefits
in all states represent a fraction of poverty-level income. In the median jurisdiction (North
Dakota), the maximum monthly benefit of $427 for a family of three represents 28% of poverty-
level income.
Cash Assistance Work Requirements. TANF requires states to engage 50% of all families and
90% of two-parent families in work activities. However, these standards are reduced by caseload
reduction from FY2005. Further, states may get an extra credit against these standards by
spending more than required under the TANF MOE. Therefore, the effective standards states face
are often less than the 50% or 90% targets, and vary by state. In FY2010, states achieved an all-
family participation rate of 29.0% and a two-parent rate of 33.4%. That year, eight jurisdictions
failed the all-family standard, and six jurisdictions failed the two-parent standard. States that fail
to meet work standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction in their block grant.


Congressional Research Service

---

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

Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Current Topics .................................................................................................................................. 1
What Is TANF’s Current Funding Status? ................................................................................. 1
Is Legislation Pending That Would Extend TANF Beyond September 30? .............................. 1
What Is TANF’s Current Funding Level?.................................................................................. 2
Did the Cash Assistance Caseload Rise During the Recent Recession? .................................... 3
What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative? .................................................................... 3
Has Any State Formally Applied for a “Waiver” of TANF Work Participation
Standards? .............................................................................................................................. 3
May States Require Drug Testing of Assistance Recipients? .................................................... 3
History ............................................................................................................................................. 4
When Was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant
Created? .................................................................................................................................. 4
Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law? ............................................................ 4
Funding and Expenditures ............................................................................................................... 5
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? .............................. 5
How Have States Used TANF Funds? ....................................................................................... 6
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? ................................................................. 7
The Caseload ................................................................................................................................... 7
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services? ....................... 7
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Cash
Assistance? ............................................................................................................................. 7
How Does the Current Cash Assistance Caseload Level Compare with Historical
Levels? ................................................................................................................................... 8
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families? ..................................................... 9
TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month? ................ 11
TANF Work Participation Standards ............................................................................................. 15
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? ....................................... 15
Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted Since the 1996
Welfare Reform Law? .......................................................................................................... 15
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved? .................................................... 16
What Has Been the National Average All-Family Work Participation Rate? .................... 16
How Many Jurisdictions Have Failed the All-Families Standard From FY2002
Through FY2010? .......................................................................................................... 17
Are States that Recently Failed the All-Family Standard Being Penalized? ..................... 20
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard? ....................................... 20

Figures
Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2012, by Major Benefit and
Service Category ........................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance: July 1959-March 2013 ....................... 9
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Assistance Caseload: FY2010................................................ 10
Congressional Research Service

---

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

Figure 4. National Average All-Families Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010 .................. 17

Tables
Table 1. Federal TANF Funding: FY2006 Through FY2013 .......................................................... 2
Table 2. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars .......................................................... 5
Table 3. TANF Cash Assistance Caseload: March 2013 .................................................................. 8
Table 4. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Benefit for a Family of Three: July 2011 ..................... 11
Table 5. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits by Family Size: July 2011 ........... 13
Table 6. States Failing TANF All-Families Work Participation Standard: FY2002-FY2010 ........ 18
Table 7. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
FY2002-FY2010 ......................................................................................................................... 20
Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006 ..................................................... 23
Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2013 ..................................................... 24
Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2012 .................................. 24
Table B-1. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category .................................................. 25
Table B-2. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Funding ..................................................................................... 27
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2012 ............................................................... 30
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Cash
Assistance, March 2013 .............................................................................................................. 31
Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, March 1994, 2007,
2012, and 2013 ........................................................................................................................... 33
Table B-6. Families Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, by Number of Parents Receiving
Assistance on Their Own Behalf: March 2013 ........................................................................... 36
Table B-7. TANF All-Family Work Participation Rate by State: FY2002 Through FY2010 ........ 38
Table B-8. TANF Two-Parent Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010 ................................... 40

Appendixes
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables .............................................................................................. 23
Appendix B. State Tables ............................................................................................................... 25

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 42

Congressional Research Service

---

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

Introduction
This report provides responses to frequently asked questions about the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) block grant. It is intended to serve as a quick reference to provide easy
access to information and data. This report does not provide information on TANF program rules.
For such information, see CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk.
For a non-technical overview of TANF, see CRS Report R40946, The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families Block Grant: An Introduction, by Gene Falk.
Current Topics
What Is TANF’s Current Funding Status?
TANF is funded through a combination of federal and state funds. The bulk of federal funding for
TANF lapsed on September 30, 2013. 1 There is no authority for making the quarterly grants that
would usually be made at the beginning of FY2014.
According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), states may use funds from
prior years’ grants to continue their TANF benefits, services, and activities. TANF, unlike many
other federal grant programs, allows states to “reserve,” without fiscal year limit, unused grant
funds for later use. States may draw on these reserve funds during this funding lapse.
States may also expend from their own funds monies to continue TANF benefits, services, and
activities. HHS says that any state funds expended during the federal funding lapse may count
toward TANF’s requirement that states spend a certain amount each year (the “maintenance of
effort requirement.”)
TANF also has a contingency fund, which was designed to provide extra funding during
recessions. That fund has an FY2014 appropriation ($612 million) that qualifying states may
draw upon.
For HHS guidance during the funding lapse, see http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/resource/
acf-issues-letter-on-tanf-in-event-of-government-shutdown.
Is Legislation Pending That Would Extend TANF Beyond
September 30?
The pending continuing resolution (H.J.Res. 59) would continue TANF funding into FY2014. The
resolution would continue funding at FY2013 levels for TANF grants, mandatory child care, and
certain grants to Puerto Rico and the territories.2 It would continue current policies. The House-

1 Funding through September 30, 2013, was provided in P.L. 113-6, Division F, title IV, Section 1522.
2 The original House-passed resolution would not have funded certain HHS research activities that historically have
received $15 million per year. The Senate amendment to the resolution restored funding for these research activities.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

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

passed versions of the resolution would continue funding through December 15, 2013; the
Senate-passed version of the resolution would continue funding through November 15, 2013.
A bill that was passed earlier in the year by the House (H.R. 890) would extend TANF through
December 31, 2013. That bill would also prohibit waivers of TANF work participation standards
(see “What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative?”). The Senate has not acted on H.R. 890.
What Is TANF’s Current Funding Level?
Table 1 shows TANF funding for FY2006 through FY2013. The bulk of TANF funding is in a
basic block grant (the state family assistance grant), which provides annual funding totaling $16.5
billion for the 50 states and District of Columbia. This grant and amount was established in the
1996 welfare reform law and has not been changed since then.
Table 1. Federal TANF Funding: FY2006 Through FY2013
(Dollars in millions)

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
State family
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
$16,489
assistance grant
Supplemental
grants 319 319 319 319 319 211
0
0
Healthy
150 150 150 150 150 150
150 150
marriage/responsible
fatherhood grants
Grants to the
78 78 78 78 78 78
78 78
territories
Grants for tribal
8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8
work programs
Regular contingency
93 59 428
1,107 212 334 612 610a
funds
Emergency contingency
617
4,383



funds
Totals
17,137 17,103 17,472 18,768 21,639 17,270
17,337 17,335
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from HHS.
a. P.L. 112-275 appropriated $612 mil ion to the TANF contingency fund for FY2013 and reserved $2 million
of these funds for a commission on child abuse and neglect fatalities. Thus, $610 million is available for
FY2013 TANF contingency fund grants to states.
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.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

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

Did the Cash Assistance Caseload Rise During the
Recent Recession?
The TANF cash assistance caseload rose from August 2008 through December 2010, increasing
17% from 1,675,297 families in July 2008 to a peak of 1,952,451 families in December 2010.
The caseload has declined since then, standing at 1,753,668 in March 2013.
What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative?
On July 12, 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it would
accept applications for “waivers” of the TANF work participation standards. In general, these are
waivers of the way the performance of state welfare-to-work programs are assessed. (The
requirements that apply to individuals are determined by the states, but the federal TANF work
participation standards influenced the design of state programs and requirements.) For a
discussion, see CRS Report R42627, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): Welfare
Waivers, by Gene Falk.
Has Any State Formally Applied for a “Waiver” of TANF Work
Participation Standards?
As of September 27, 2013, no states had formally applied for a waiver of TANF work
participation standards under the Administration’s waiver initiative.
May States Require Drug Testing of Assistance Recipients?
Yes. The 1996 assistance reform law gave states the option of requiring drug tests for assistance
recipients and penalizing those who fail such tests. (See Section 902 of P.L. 104-193.) However,
specific state policies regarding drug testing raise constitutional issues. See CRS Report R42326,
Constitutional Analysis of Suspicionless Drug Testing Requirements for the Receipt of
Governmental Benefits, by David H. Carpenter.
The 1996 welfare reform law contained two other provisions related to drug abuse and TANF
applicants or recipients. The law established a lifetime ban on eligibility for TANF and food
stamps for those convicted of a drug-related felony. However, states may either opt out entirely or
modify and limit this lifetime ban. (See Section 115 of P.L. 104-193.)
Further, TANF allows states to establish Individual Responsibility Plans (IRPs) for their TANF
families. The IRP may require participation in a substance abuse treatment program. A family
may be sanctioned for failure to comply with its IRP.
For a discussion of states that require drug testing in TANF and related programs, see CRS Report
R42394, Drug Testing and Crime-Related Restrictions in TANF, SNAP, and Housing Assistance,
by Maggie McCarty et al.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

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

History
When Was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Block Grant Created?
The TANF block grant was created by the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). PRWORA is also
referred to in this report as the 1996 welfare reform law. TANF replaced the program of Aid to
Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which dated back to the Social Security Act of 1935,
and several other related programs.
Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law?
The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) included provisions establishing “welfare-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) included a long-term extension of
funding for TANF through FY2010. It also modified TANF work participation standards;
established $100 million per year in TANF research and technical assistance funds for “healthy
marriage promotion” initiatives; and provided $50 million per year for “responsible fatherhood
initiatives.” (For a discussion of TANF provisions in the DRA, see CRS Report RS22369, TANF,
Child Care, Marriage Promotion, and Responsible Fatherhood Provisions in the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), by Gene Falk.) The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (P.L.
111-291) provided that healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood initiatives would be funded
at $75 million each for FY2011. Temporary extension legislation continued these activities for
FY2012 and FY2013 at $75 million for responsible fatherhood and $75 million for healthy
marriage initiatives.
P.L. 112-96 (the law that extended the payroll tax cut through 2012) provided TANF funding
through the end of FY2012. It provided FY2012 funding for the basic TANF block grant, healthy
marriage and responsible fatherhood competitive grants, and certain other funds at their FY2011
levels. It did not provide FY2012 funding for TANF supplemental grants.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

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

In addition, P.L. 112-96
• prevents electronic benefit transaction access to TANF cash at liquor stores,
casinos, and strip clubs; states are required to prohibit access to TANF cash at
Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) at such establishments; and
• requires states to report TANF data in a manner that facilitates the exchange of
that data with other programs’ data systems.
Legislation that extended TANF funding for FY2013 did not include policy changes.
Funding and Expenditures
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because
of Inflation?
From FY1997 (the first full year of TANF funding) through FY2012 (ended September 30, 2012),
the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 30.1%. Table 2 shows the impact of inflation
on the value of the TANF block grant for each year, FY1997 through FY2012.
Table 2. Basic TANF Block Grant in Constant 1997 Dollars
Value of the Block
Percentage
Grant in Millions of
Change from
Fiscal Year
FY1997 Dollars
FY1997 Value
1997 $16.5
1998 16.2 -1.6%
1999 15.9 -3.5
2000 15.4 -6.4
2001 14.9 -9.4
2002 14.7 -10.7
2003 14.4 -12.7
2004 14.1 -14.7
2005 13.6 -17.4
2006 13.1 -20.4
2007 12.8 -22.2
2008 12.3 -25.5
2009 12.3 -25.3
2010 12.1 -26.5
2011 11.8 -28.4
2012 11.5 -30.1
Source: Congressional Research Service. Constant dol ars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for
Al Urban Consumers (CPI-U).
Congressional Research Service
5

---

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

How Have States Used TANF Funds?
TANF is best known as a funding source of cash assistance benefits for needy families with
children. However, states have considerable discretion in using TANF funds, and have used them
for a wide range of benefits and services.
Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2012. In
FY2012, a total of $31.4 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance, the category that most
closely reflects cash assistance, represented 28.6% ($9.0 billion) of total FY2012 TANF and
MOE dollars.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2012, 16.0% of all TANF funds used
were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the Child Care and
Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF is also a major contributor to the child welfare system,
which provides foster care, adoption assistance, and services to families with children who either
have experienced or are at risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect. However, TANF’s
accounting system does a poor job of capturing expenditures associated with spending on the
child welfare system. Most TANF funding for these programs is subsumed in the catch-all “other”
expenditure category.
Figure 1. Federal TANF and State MOE Funds Used in FY2012, by Major Benefit and
Service Category
Total = $31.4 billion
Other
31.7%
Basic Assistance
28.6%
Administration
7.2%
Other Work
Child Care
Supports
16.0%
Work
9.6%
Expenditures
6.9%

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
6

---

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

See Appendix A, Table A-3 for dollar amounts of total federal TANF and state MOE funds
associated with each of these categories. For state-specific information on the use of TANF funds,
see Table B-1 and Table B-2.
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?
TANF law permits states to “reserve” unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in
timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to “save” funds for unexpected
occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).
At the end of FY2012 (September 30, 2012, the latest data currently available), a total of $3.1
billion of federal TANF funding remained neither transferred nor spent. However, some of these
unspent funds represent monies that states had already committed to spend later. At the end of
FY2012, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.4
billion. Generally, obligations are binding commitments to spend, and they come in the form of
contracts and grants to provide benefits and services. However, the definition of “obligation”
varies from program to program, and because TANF essentially consists of 54 different programs
(one for each state, the District of Columbia, and the territories), what constitutes an obligation
may vary.
At the end of FY2012, states also had $1.7 billion of “unobligated balances.” These funds are
available to states to make new spending commitments. Table B-3 shows unspent TANF funds
by state.
The Caseload
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits
and Services?
This number is not known. Federal TANF reporting requirements focus on families receiving
only ongoing cash assistance, with no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF
benefits and services. As discussed in a previous section of this report, TANF basic assistance
accounts for about 28.6% of all TANF expenditures. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements
that pertain to families receiving “assistance” are very likely to undercount the number of families
receiving any TANF-funded benefit or service.
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-
Funded Cash Assistance?
Table 3 provides cash assistance caseload information. A total of 1.8 million families, composed
of 4.1 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in March 2013. The bulk of the
“recipients” were children—3.1 million in that month. For state-by-state cash assistance
caseloads, see Appendix B.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

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

Table 3. TANF Cash Assistance Caseload: March 2013
Families 1,753,668
Total Recipients
4,097,377
Children 3,094,144
Adults 1,003,233
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
How Does the Current Cash Assistance Caseload Level Compare
with Historical Levels?
The number of families receiving cash assistance peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families.
The cash assistance caseload fell rapidly in the late 1990s (after the 1996 welfare reform law)
before leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace
than in the late 1990s. Nationally, the caseload began to rise beginning in August 2008, peaking
in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families.
Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving cash
assistance, from July 1959 to March 2013.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

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

Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance: July 1959-March 2013
Families in Millions
6
March 1994: 5.1 million
5
4
3
Dec. 2010:
1.95 million
2
Mar. 2013:
1.8 million
1
July 2008:
1.7 million
0
-59
-61
-63
-65
-67
-69
-71
-73
-75
-77
-79
-81
-83
-85
-87
-89
-91
-93
-95
-97
-99
-01
-03
-05
-07
-09
-11
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul
Jul

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: Represents families receiving cash assistance from Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), Aid to Families
with Dependent Children (AFDC), and TANF. For October 1999 through March 2013, includes families
receiving assistance from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF
maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash assistance families by state.
What Are the Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families?
Historically, the “typical” cash assistance family has been headed by a single parent (usually the
mother) with one or two children. The single parent has also typically been unemployed.
However, the cash assistance caseload decline has occurred together with a major shift in the
composition of the rolls. Today, less than half of all cash assistance families are headed by an
unemployed adult recipient. Almost 4 in 10 of all cash assistance families had no adult recipient
or work-eligible individual at all, with the adults in the family ineligible for aid and the benefits
paid only on behalf of the child (these are known as “child-only” families). This shift occurred
because the caseload decline was concentrated among the families thought of as the “typical”
cash assistance families, and welfare-to-work efforts have been concentrated on this population.
Congressional Research Service
9

---

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

Figure 3 shows the composition of the cash assistance caseload in FY2010. Families with an
unemployed adult recipient represent 46% of all cash assistance families. Families with an
employed (in a regular job) adult recipient, who receive cash assistance as an earnings
supplement, comprise an additional 15% of the cash assistance rolls. Within the “child-only”
portion of the caseload, families with a parent (usually a disabled parent) receiving SSI and the
children receiving TANF as a supplement to that benefit represent 10% of the cash assistance
caseload. Families that are made up of children living with a non-parent relative (grandparents,
aunts, uncles, etc.) represent 13% of the cash assistance caseload. Families of child citizens living
with ineligible parents who are noncitizens or who have not reported their citizenship status make
up 11% of the total cash assistance caseload. The remainder of the cash assistance caseload
represents child recipients for whom data on the adults they live with are not available.
Figure 3. Composition of the Cash Assistance Caseload: FY2010

Child-Only/Other
5%
Child-Only/SSI
Parent
10%
Child-
Only/Ineligible
Immigrant Parent
11%
Family with an
Adult/Not
Employed
46%
Child-
Only/Caretaker
Relative
13%
Family with an
Adult/Employed
15%

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the FY2010 TANF National Data Files.
Notes: Includes families receiving assistance from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. Families with an adult include families with
nonrecipient parents who are “work-eligible.” Most non-recipient parents who are “work-eligible” are those
who have reached time limits or have been sanctioned off the rol s in states that permit continuation of aid to
children of such parents.
For more information on the characteristics and the changes in the composition of the cash
assistance caseload, see CRS Report R43187, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF):
Characteristics of the Cash Assistance Caseload, by Gene Falk.
Congressional Research Service
10

---

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

TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family
Receive in TANF Cash Per Month?
There are no federal rules that help determine the amount of TANF cash benefits paid to a family.
(There are also no federal rules that require states to use TANF to pay cash benefits, though all
states do so.) Benefit amounts are determined solely by the states.
Table 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a family of three in July
2011.3 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-parent family with two children. Some
states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent families or “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 three, the maximum TANF benefit
paid in July 2011 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi (11.0% of poverty-level income) to
$923 per month in Alaska (47.8% of poverty-level income).4
Table 4. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Benefit for a Family of Three: July 2011
Maximum Monthly
Benefit as a Percent
Maximum Monthly
of the 2011 Federal
State
Benefit for a Family of 3
Poverty Guidelines
Alabama $215
13.9%
Alaska 923
47.8
Arizona 278
18.0
Arkansas 204
13.2
California 638
41.3
Colorado 462
29.9

3 States are not required to report to the federal government their cash assistance benefit amounts in either the TANF
state plan (under Section 402 of the Social Security Act) or in annual program reports (under Section 411 of the Social
Security Act). The benefit amounts shown are from the “Welfare Rules Database,” maintained by the Urban Institute
and funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
4 Different poverty thresholds, with greater dollar amounts, apply in Alaska than in the 48 contiguous states and the
District of Columbia. New York’s benefit of $753 per month represents 48.8% of the poverty guidelines that apply in
the 48 contiguous states and District of Columbia.
Congressional Research Service
11

---

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

Maximum Monthly
Benefit as a Percent
Maximum Monthly
of the 2011 Federal
State
Benefit for a Family of 3
Poverty Guidelines
Connecticut 674
43.6
Delaware 338
21.9
District of Columbia
428
27.7
Florida 303
19.6
Georgia 280
18.1
Hawai 610
34.3
Idaho 309
20.0
Illinois 432
28.0
Indiana 288
18.7
Iowa 426
27.6
Kansas 429
27.8
Kentucky 262
17.0
Louisiana 240
15.5
Maine 485
31.4
Maryland 574
37.2
Massachusetts 633
41.0
Michigan 492
31.9
Minnesota 532
34.5
Mississippi 170
11.0
Missouri 292
18.9
Montana 504
32.6
Nebraska 364
23.6
Nevada 383
24.8
New Hampshire
675
43.7
New Jersey
424
27.5
New Mexico
380
24.6
New York
753
48.8
North Carolina
272
17.6
North Dakota
427
27.7
Ohio 434
28.1
Oklahoma 292
18.9
Oregon 506
32.8
Pennsylvania 421
27.3
Rhode Island
554
35.9
South Carolina
221
14.3
Congressional Research Service
12

---

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

Maximum Monthly
Benefit as a Percent
Maximum Monthly
of the 2011 Federal
State
Benefit for a Family of 3
Poverty Guidelines
South Dakota
555
35.9
Tennessee 185
12.0
Texas 260
16.8
Utah 498
32.3
Vermont 665
43.1
Virginia 389
25.2
Washington 478
31.0
West Virginia
340
22.0
Wisconsin 628
40.7
Wyoming 577
37.4


Median State
427
27.7
Maximum 923
48.8
Minimum 170
11.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the Urban Institute’s “Welfare Rules Database.”
As discussed above, most states vary maximum benefits by family size, paying larger benefits for
larger families. The exceptions are Idaho and Wisconsin, which pay a flat maximum benefit.
Additionally, some states do not increase benefits—or provide a smaller than usual increase in
benefits—for a family already on the rolls when a new baby is born. This is known as the “family
cap” policy, which 17 states had in July 2011.5
Table 5. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits by Family Size: July 2011
Benefits for a Single Parent and Children
State Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Alabama
$190 $215 $245 $275 $305
Alaska
821 923 1,025 1,127 1,229
Arizona
220 278 334 392 449
Arkansas
162 204 247 286 331
California
516 638 762 866 972
Colorado
364 462 561 665 767
Connecticut
544 674 786 886 992

5 States that had a family cap policy as of July 2011 are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida,
Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina,
Tennessee, and Virginia.
Congressional Research Service
13

---

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

State Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Delaware
270 338 407 475 544
District
of
Columbia
336 428 523 602 708
Florida
241 303 364 426 487
Georgia
235 280 330 378 410
Hawai
486 610 736 861 986
Idaho
309 309 309 309 309
Illinois
318 432 474 555 623
Indiana
230 288 347 405 464
Iowa
361 426 495 548 610
Kansas
352 429 497 558 619
Kentucky
225 262 328 383 432
Louisiana
188 240 284 327 366
Maine
363 485 611 733 856
Maryland
453 574 695 805 885
Massachusetts
531 633 731 832 936
Michigan
403 492 597 694 828
Minnesota
437 532 621 697 773
Mississippi
146 170 194 218 242
Missouri
234 292 342 388 431
Montana
401 504 606 709 812
Nebraska
293 364 435 506 577
Nevada
318 383 448 513 578
New
Hampshire
606 675 738 798 879
New
Jersey
322 424 488 552 616
New
Mexico
304 380 459 536 613
New
York
548 753 905
1,063
1,172
North
Carolina
236 272 297 324 349
North
Dakota
328 427 523 620 717
Ohio
355 434 536 627 698
Oklahoma
225 292 361 422 483
Oregon
432 506 621 721 833
Pennsylvania
330 421 514 607 687
Rhode
Island
449 554 634 714 794
South
Carolina
175 221 266 311 355
South
Dakota
496 555 613 671 730
Tennessee
142 185 226 264 305
Congressional Research Service
14

---

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

State Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Texas
225 260 312 347 399
Utah
399 498 583 663 731
Vermont
560 665 751 842 904
Virginia
323 389 451 537 570
Washington
385 478 562 648 736
West
Virginia
301 340 384 420 460
Wisconsin
628 628 628 628 628
Wyoming
543 577 577 611 611
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the Urban Institute’s “Welfare Rules Database.”
TANF Work Participation Standards
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet?
The TANF statute requires states to have 50% of their caseload meet standards of participation in
work or activities—that is, a family member must be in specified activities for a minimum
number of hours.6 There is a separate participation standard that applies to the two-parent portion
of a state’s caseload, requiring 90% of the state’s two-parent caseload to meet participation
standards. States that fail the TANF work participation standards are at risk of being penalized by
a reduction in their block grant amounts.
However, the statutory work participation standards are reduced by a “caseload reduction credit.”
The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each
percentage point decline in a state’s caseload. Additionally, under a regulatory provision, a state
may get “extra” credit for caseload reduction if it spends more than required under the TANF
MOE. Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% and 90% targets,
and vary by state.
Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted
Since the 1996 Welfare Reform Law?
The 50% and 90% target standards that states face, as well as the caseload reduction credit, date
back to the 1996 welfare reform law. However, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171)
made several changes to the work participation rules effective in FY2007:
• The caseload reduction credit was changed to measure caseload reduction from
FY2005, rather than the original law’s FY1995.

6 Some families are excluded from the participation rate calculation.
Congressional Research Service
15

---

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

• The work participation standards were broadened to include families receiving
cash aid in “separate state programs.” Separate state programs are programs run
with state funds, distinct from a state’s “TANF program,” but with expenditures
countable toward the TANF MOE.
• HHS was instructed to provide definition to the allowable TANF work activities
listed in law. HHS was also required to define what is meant by a “work-eligible”
individual, expanding the number of families that are included in the work
participation calculation.
• States were required to develop plans and procedures to verify work activities.
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
HHS computes two work participation rates for each state that are then compared with the
effective (after-credit) standard to determine if it has met the TANF work standard. An “all-
families” work participation rate is computed and compared with the all-families effective
standard (50% minus the state’s caseload reduction credit). HHS also computes a two-parent
work participation rate that is compared with the two-parent effective standard (90% minus the
state’s caseload reduction credit).
What Has Been the National Average All-Family Work Participation Rate?
Figure 4 shows the national average all-families work participation rate for FY2002 through
FY2010. For the period FY2002 through FY2010, states have achieved an all-families work
participation rate hovering around 30%. In FY2010, the all-families work participation rate was
29.0%. This is well below the statutory target of 50% for all families, but most (not all) states met
the standard because of credits against the 50% standard.
Congressional Research Service
16

---

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

Figure 4. National Average All-Families Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010
50%
45%
40%
35%
28.9%
29.4%
30.3%
30.6%
29.7%
29.4%
29.4%
29.0%
30%
27.5%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: FY2002 through FY2006 work participation rates are based on federal work participation standard rules.
They exclude the effects of “grandfathered” waivers of pre-1996. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the
option to continue their pre-reform “waiver” programs and have their work participation rates based on the
rules of the state waivers, not the federal rules. The last of these pre-1996 waivers expired in 2006. The all
family work participation rates for FY2002 through FY2006 that include the effect of the waivers are slightly
higher than the rates shown here.
How Many Jurisdictions Have Failed the All-Families Standard From FY2002
Through FY2010?
Table 6 shows which states failed the TANF all-families work participation standards from
FY2002 through FY2010. Before FY2007 (the first year policies under the DRA were effective),
only a few jurisdictions failed to meet TANF all-families work participation standards. In
FY2006, three jurisdictions failed the standard, and that was the greatest number that failed the
standards over the FY2002 through FY2006 period.
However, in FY2007 15 jurisdictions failed to meet the all-families standard. This number
declined to 9 in FY2008 and 8 in FY2009. In FY2010 (the most recent year for which data are
available), 8 jurisdictions failed to meet the standard. Of these, 6 (California, Maine, Ohio,
Oregon, Puerto Rico, and Guam) failed the standards in all years since FY2007.
Congressional Research Service
17

---

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

Table 6. States Failing TANF All-Families Work Participation Standard:
FY2002-FY2010
Changes to TANF Work Participation Standard Rules Under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA)
Effective in FY2007

Pre-DRA Policies
Post-DRA Policies
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Alabama

Alaska









Arizona









Arkansas









California
X
X
X
X
Colorado









Connecticut
X
Delaware









District
of
Columbia
X
X
Florida









Georgia









Hawai









Idaho









Illinois

Indiana
X
X
X
Iowa









Kansas









Kentucky





X



Louisiana









Maine
X
X
X
X
Maryland









Massachusetts









Michigan
X
X X
Minnesota





X



Mississippi

Missouri






X
X

Montana









Nebraska









Nevada
X X
New Hampshire









New Jersey









New Mexico





X



Congressional Research Service
18

---

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


Pre-DRA Policies
Post-DRA Policies
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
New York









North Carolina









North Dakota









Ohio
X
X
X
X
Oklahoma









Oregon
X
X
X
X
Pennsylvania









Puerto
Rico
X
X
X
X
Rhode Island









South Carolina









South Dakota









Tennessee









Texas









Utah









Vermont





X



Virginia









Washington









West
Virginia
X
X
Wisconsin









Wyoming









Guam
X X X X X X X X X
Virgin Islands





X













Number
of
Jurisdictions
Failing
Standard
1 2 1 2 3 15 9 8 8
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
As shown in Figure 4 there was little change in the national average all-families work
participation rate from FY2007 through FY2010. However, following a spike in the number of
states failing the standard in FY2007, the number of states failing fell to nine in FY2008 and eight
in both FY2009 and FY2010. Some of the decline in the number of states failing the standard is
attributable to the increased use of “extra” credit states received for spending beyond what is
required by law. A Government Accountability Office (GAO) study found that, in FY2009, 32 of
the 45 states that met their standard claimed this “extra credit.” GAO calculated that 17 of these
states would not have met their participation standards without claiming the “extra” credit for
spending beyond what was required by law.7

7 See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Update on Families Serviced
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
19

---

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

Are States that Recently Failed the All-Family Standard Being Penalized?
States that fail to meet the TANF work participation standard are at risk of being penalized
through a reduction in their block grant. However, penalties can be forgiven if a state claims, and
the Secretary of HHS finds, that it had “reasonable cause” for failing the standard. Penalties can
also be forgiven for states that enter into “corrective compliance plans,” and subsequently meet
the work standard. HHS has not announced the status of penalties for failing to meet the all-
families standard for FY2007 and subsequent years.
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard?
In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second, 90%
standard for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard too can be
reduced for caseload reduction.
Table 7 shows whether each state met its two-parent work participation standard for FY2002
through FY2012. However, the display on the table is more complex than that for reporting
whether a state failed its “all family” rate. A substantial number of states have reported no two-
parent families subject to the work participation standard.8 These states are denoted on the table
with an “NA,” indicating that the two-parent standard was not applicable to the state in that year.
For states with two-parent families in its caseload, the table reports “Yes” for states that met the
two-parent standard, and “No” for states that failed the two-parent standard.
In FY2010, 25 jurisdictions reported that no two-parent families were included in the TANF work
participation standard calculation. Of the 29 jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their
TANF work participation calculation, 23 met the standard and 6 did not.
Table 7. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
FY2002-FY2010
(“Yes” indicates a state met the standard; “No” indicates the state failed to meet the standard; and “NA”
means the standard was not applicable to the state in that year (no two-parent families in its caseload).)

Pre-DRA Policies
Post-DRA Policies
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Alabama
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES
Alaska
YES YES YES YES YES NO NO NO NO
Arizona
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

(...continued)
and Work Participation. Statement of Kay E. Brown, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security. Testimony
Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, GAO-11-
990T, September 8, 2011, p. 12, http://www.gao.gov/assets/130/126892.pdf.
8 Before the changes made by the DRA were effective, a number of states had their two-parent families in separate state
programs that were not included in the work participation calculation. When DRA brought families receiving
assistance in separate state programs into the work participation rate calculations, a number of states moved these
families into solely-state-funded programs. These are state-funded programs with expenditures not countable toward
the TANF maintenance of effort requirement, and hence are outside of TANF’s rules.
Congressional Research Service
20

---

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


Pre-DRA Policies
Post-DRA Policies
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Arkansas
NO NO NO YES NO YES YES YES YES
California
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES
Colorado
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Connecticut
NA NA NA NA NA YES NA NA NA
Delaware
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
District
of
Columbia
NO NO NO NO NO NA NA NA NA
Florida
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES
Georgia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Hawai
NA NA NA NA NA NA YES NA YES
Idaho
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA
Illinois
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Indiana
NA NA NA NA NA NO YES YES YES
Iowa
YES YES NA NA NA YES YES YES YES
Kansas
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Kentucky
YES YES YES YES YES YES NO NO YES
Louisiana
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA
Maine
YES YES NA NA NA YES NO NO NO
Maryland
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Massachusetts
YES YES YES YES NA NA YES YES YES
Michigan
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA
Minnesota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Mississippi
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Missouri
NO NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Montana
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Nebraska
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Nevada
NA NA NA NA NA NO NO NO NO
New
Hampshire
YES NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
New
Jersey
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
New
Mexico
YES YES YES YES YES NO YES YES YES
New
York
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA
North
Carolina
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
North
Dakota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Ohio
YES YES YES YES YES NO YES YES YES
Oklahoma
NA YES NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Oregon
YES YES YES YES YES NO NO NO NO
Congressional Research Service
21

---

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


Pre-DRA Policies
Post-DRA Policies
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Pennsylvania
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Puerto
Rico
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rhode
Island
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO NO
South
Carolina
YES YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA
South
Dakota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Tennessee
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES
Texas
NA NA NA NA NA YES NA NA NA
Utah
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Vermont
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Virginia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Washington
YES YES NO YES YES YES YES YES YES
West
Virginia
NO NO NA NA NA NO NA NA YES
Wisconsin
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Yes Yes
Wyoming
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Guam
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Virgin
Islands
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA










Number of Jurisdictions without Two-
24 25 29 29 30 24 26 27 25
Parent Families
Number of Jurisdictions with Two-
30 29 25 25 24 30 28 27 29
Parent Families
Number of Jurisdictions Meeting the
25 25 21 23 21 22 22 20 23
Two-Parent Standard
Number of States Failing the Two-Parent
5 4 4 2 3 8 6 7 6
Standard
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Failure to meet the two-parent standard alone typically has smaller financial consequences for the
state than failure to meet the all-family standard or failure to meet both the all-family and two-
parent standards. Under HHS regulations, if a state fails only the two-parent standard, the penalty
reduction in the block grant is prorated for the share of the overall cash assistance caseload that
represents two-parent families. Two-parent families typically account for a small share of the
overall cash assistance caseload.
Congressional Research Service
22

---

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

Appendix A. Supplementary Tables
Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006
Public Law
Time Period
Notes
P.L. 107-229
Oct. 1, 2002-Dec. 31, 2002
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 107-294
Jan. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2003
Extension as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 108-7
Apr. 1, 2003-June 30, 2003
Extension as part of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act.
P.L. 108-40
July 1, 2003-Sept. 30, 2003
Free-standing bill that amended the Social Security
Act to extend TANF and related programs.
P.L. 108-89
Oct. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2004
Multipurpose bill that extended programs through
the first half of FY2004.
P.L. 108-210
Apr. 1, 2004-June 30, 2004
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the program through June 30, 2004.
P.L. 108-262
July 1, 2004-Sept. 30, 2004
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the program through Sept. 30, 2004.
P.L. 108-308
Oct. 1, 2004- Mar. 31, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through Mar. 31, 2005.
P.L. 109-4
Apr. 1, 2005-June 30, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through June 30, 2005.
P.L. 109-19
July 1, 2005-Sept. 30, 2005
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through Sept. 30, 2005.
P.L. 109-68
Oct. 1, 2005-Dec. 31, 2005
Bill to provide extra funding to help states provide
benefits to families affected by Hurricane Katrina,
suspend certain requirements in states affected by
the hurricane, and extend the funding authority for
the programs through December 31, 2005.
P.L. 109-161
Jan. 1, 2006-Mar. 31, 2006
Freestanding bill that extended funding authority
for the programs through March 31, 2006. It
reduced the bonus for reducing out-of-wedlock
births for FY2006-FY2010 to offset the costs of the
temporary extension.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Congressional Research Service
23

---

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

Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2013
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.
P.L. 112-78
Jan 1, 2012-February 21, 2012
Extension of TANF for two months, as part of a bill
to provide a two-month extension for the 2011
payrol tax reduction, extended unemployment
compensation, and other expiring provisions.
P.L. 112-96
February 22, 2012-Sept. 30, 2012
Extension of TANF for the remainder of FY2012
included as part of a bill to extend the 2011 payroll
tax reduction, unemployment compensation, and
other expiring provisions.
P.L. 112-175
Oct. 1, 2011-March 27, 2013
Extension of TANF for the first six months of
FY2013 as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-6
March 28, 2013-Sept. 30, 2013
Extension of TANF for the remainder of FY2013 as
part of a continuing resolution.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).

Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2012
Percent of Total Federal
Millions of Dollars
and MOE Funds
Basic Assistance
$8,982.2
28.6%
Administration 2,254.0
7.2
Work Expenditures
2,163.1
6.9
Child Care
5,022.4
16.0
Other Work Supports
3,004.5
9.6
Other 9,931.9
31.7
Totals 31,358.1
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.

Congressional Research Service
24

---

Appendix B. State Tables

Table B-1. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
(Dollars in millions)
Basic
Child
Other Work
State
Assistance Administration
Work
Expenditures Care
Supports Other
Totals
Alabama $49.6
$19.7
$22.9
$5.5
$6.8
$66.4
$170.9
Alaska 41.3
5.2
11.1
21.8
1.0
4.9
85.5
Arizona 49.3
39.2
9.6
-1.1
2.0
247.0
345.9
Arkansas 14.6
9.0
32.5
10.7
3.8
104.0
174.6
California 3,285.2
569.0
528.0
793.0
164.7
1,142.7
6,482.7
Colorado 70.7
20.4
3.9
-30.8
8.7
192.8
265.8
Connecticut 81.1
31.4
16.8
35.8
5.0
323.6
493.7
Delaware 19.1
7.8
4.9
45.1
-0.4
11.5
88.1
District of Columbia
35.8
7.6
10.7
56.5
16.6
47.3
174.3
Florida 169.5
32.3
58.7
333.3
4.5
377.6
975.8
Georgia 43.9
23.9
20.7
23.3
10.9
399.9
522.7
Hawai 69.2
15.7
93.6
25.3
3.5
59.7
267.0
Idaho 7.2
4.8
6.6
11.0
0.3
13.1
43.0
Illinois 127.4
33.1
33.8
624.5 15.7 351.2
1,185.7
Indiana 40.7
23.3
20.7
38.7
32.0
92.3
247.6
Iowa 66.4
15.2
17.8
45.1
17.9
64.1
226.5
Kansas 33.1
12.1
0.7
20.0
63.9
53.2
183.0
Kentucky 112.2
12.8
36.5
98.4
20.3
27.2
307.4
CRS-25

---

Basic
Child
Other Work
State
Assistance Administration
Work
Expenditures Care
Supports Other
Totals
Louisiana 17.9
20.0
7.9
5.2
22.7
187.4
261.0
Maine 69.6
3.7
12.2
10.8
17.0
1.8
115.0
Maryland 141.7
42.1
48.6
23.6
130.9
182.7
569.6
Massachusetts 360.0
37.5 6.7
301.9
107.4
353.8
1,167.3
Michigan 253.1
165.1
82.3
22.4
239.4
821.7
1,584.0
Minnesota 86.4
42.5
63.6
122.7
142.0
48.0
505.2
Mississippi 19.0
3.8
23.8
19.1
22.7
18.2
106.6
Missouri 91.9
11.1
17.8
69.3
0.0
222.9
413.0
Montana 15.6
9.0
11.4
12.2
0.0
8.3
56.5
Nebraska 25.4
4.6
18.9
23.5
35.4
2.5
110.4
Nevada 43.7
8.8
1.6
0.9
1.3
42.7
99.0
New Hampshire
29.7
13.4
7.2
6.4
1.4
18.6
76.7
New Jersey
209.9
63.3
74.9
78.9
185.7
494.6
1,107.2
New Mexico
63.9
9.3
8.8
30.5
47.2
46.4
206.0
New York
1,470.9
364.2
151.2
468.8
1,423.4
1,520.7
5,399.3
North Carolina
64.2
41.5
46.2
177.2
60.0
233.9
623.0
North Dakota
5.9
4.1
4.4
1.0
1.5
20.5
37.3
Ohio 366.0
112.3
44.7
443.9
13.6
115.7
1,096.4
Oklahoma 21.8
23.6
0.0
58.7
26.9
61.2
192.1
Oregon 152.1
35.7
13.5
9.5
2.2
131.6
344.7
Pennsylvania 293.7
88.5
104.4
430.9
14.4
154.9
1,086.8
Rhode Island
36.9
12.6
8.4
22.7
13.8
67.9
162.3
South Carolina
31.4
13.5
14.3
4.1
2.1
83.1
148.5
South Dakota
14.2
2.5
4.1
0.8
0.1
7.8
29.5
CRS-26

---

Basic
Child
Other Work
State
Assistance Administration
Work
Expenditures Care
Supports Other
Totals
Tennessee 118.5
34.0
68.9
82.4
0.0
68.9
372.6
Texas 92.6
73.0
83.7
26.9
6.9
631.4
914.5
Utah 26.6
8.8
24.8
7.5
2.0
34.4
104.0
Vermont 18.3
6.2
0.2
24.0
22.4
10.9
82.0
Virginia 104.1
20.8
51.4
42.6
8.4
79.5
306.7
Washington 242.0
55.2
171.5
125.2
1.3
465.9
1,061.1
West Virginia
33.0
13.6
1.9
28.4
27.5
40.3
144.6
Wisconsin 137.2
24.4
52.6
180.6
47.8
160.9
603.4
Wyoming 8.7
3.0
1.8
3.7
0.0
14.3
31.4








Totals 8,982.2
2,254.0
2,163.1
5,022.4
3,004.5
9,931.9
31,358.1
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Table B-2. Use of FY2012 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
Work
Other Work
State Basic
Assistance
Administration
Expenditures Child
Care Supports Other Totals
Alabama 29.0%
11.5%
13.4%
3.2%
4.0%
38.9%
100.0%
Alaska 48.4
6.1
13.0
25.5
1.2
5.8
100.0
Arizona 14.2
11.3
2.8
-0.3
0.6
71.4
100.0
Arkansas 8.3
5.2
18.6
6.1
2.2
59.6
100.0
California 50.7
8.8
8.1
12.2
2.5
17.6
100.0
Colorado 26.6
7.7
1.5
-11.6
3.3
72.6
100.0
Connecticut 16.4
6.4
3.4
7.3
1.0
65.5
100.0
CRS-27

---

Work
Other Work
State Basic
Assistance
Administration
Expenditures Child
Care Supports Other Totals
Delaware 21.7
8.9
5.6
51.2
-0.4
13.0
100.0
District of Columbia
20.5
4.3
6.1
32.4
9.5
27.1
100.0
Florida 17.4
3.3
6.0
34.2
0.5
38.7
100.0
Georgia 8.4
4.6
4.0
4.5
2.1
76.5
100.0
Hawai 25.9
5.9
35.1
9.5
1.3
22.3
100.0
Idaho 16.8
11.1
15.3
25.6
0.6
30.6
100.0
Illinois 10.7
2.8
2.8
52.7
1.3
29.6
100.0
Indiana 16.4
9.4
8.3
15.6
12.9
37.3
100.0
Iowa 29.3
6.7
7.9
19.9
7.9
28.3
100.0
Kansas 18.1
6.6
0.4
10.9
34.9
29.1
100.0
Kentucky 36.5
4.2
11.9
32.0
6.6
8.9
100.0
Louisiana 6.9
7.6
3.0
2.0
8.7
71.8
100.0
Maine 60.6
3.2
10.6
9.4
14.7
1.6
100.0
Maryland 24.9
7.4
8.5
4.1
23.0
32.1
100.0
Massachusetts 30.8
3.2
0.6
25.9
9.2
30.3
100.0
Michigan 16.0
10.4
5.2
1.4
15.1
51.9
100.0
Minnesota 17.1
8.4
12.6
24.3
28.1
9.5
100.0
Mississippi 17.9
3.6
22.3
17.9
21.3
17.1
100.0
Missouri 22.3
2.7
4.3
16.8
0.0
54.0
100.0
Montana 27.6
15.9
20.2
21.6
0.0
14.7
100.0
Nebraska 23.0
4.2
17.1
21.3
32.1
2.3
100.0
Nevada 44.2
8.9
1.7
0.9
1.3
43.1
100.0
New Hampshire
38.7
17.4
9.4
8.4
1.8
24.3
100.0
New Jersey
19.0
5.7
6.8
7.1
16.8
44.7
100.0
CRS-28

---

Work
Other Work
State Basic
Assistance
Administration
Expenditures Child
Care Supports Other Totals
New Mexico
31.0
4.5
4.3
14.8
22.9
22.5
100.0
New York
27.2
6.7
2.8
8.7
26.4
28.2
100.0
North Carolina
10.3
6.7
7.4
28.4
9.6
37.5
100.0
North Dakota
15.7
11.0
11.7
2.7
4.1
54.8
100.0
Ohio 33.4
10.2
4.1
40.5
1.2
10.6
100.0
Oklahoma 11.3
12.3
0.0
30.5
14.0
31.8
100.0
Oregon 44.1
10.4
3.9
2.8
0.6
38.2
100.0
Pennsylvania 27.0
8.1
9.6
39.7
1.3
14.3
100.0
Rhode Island
22.7
7.8
5.2
14.0
8.5
41.8
100.0
South Carolina
21.2
9.1
9.6
2.8
1.4
55.9
100.0
South Dakota
48.1
8.4
13.9
2.7
0.4
26.4
100.0
Tennessee 31.8
9.1
18.5
22.1
0.0
18.5
100.0
Texas 10.1
8.0
9.2
2.9
0.8
69.0
100.0
Utah 25.6
8.4
23.8
7.2
1.9
33.1
100.0
Vermont 22.3
7.6
0.3
29.3
27.3
13.3
100.0
Virginia 33.9
6.8
16.7
13.9
2.7
25.9
100.0
Washington 22.8
5.2
16.2
11.8
0.1
43.9
100.0
West Virginia
22.8
9.4
1.3
19.6
19.0
27.9
100.0
Wisconsin 22.7
4.0
8.7
29.9
7.9
26.7
100.0
Wyoming 27.6
9.7
5.6
11.6
0.0
45.5
100.0








Totals 28.6
7.2
6.9
16.0
9.6
31.7
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
CRS-29

---

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

Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2012
(September 30, 2012, in millions of dollars)
State
Obligated but Not Expended Unobligated Funds Total Unspent Funds
Alabama $3.5
$5.7
$9.2
Alaska 0.0
75.5
75.5
Arizona 0.0
24.8
24.8
Arkansas 0.0
42.1
42.1
California 141.1
0.0
141.2
Colorado 0.0
17.6
17.6
Connecticut 0.0
6.3
6.3
Delaware 3.9
5.7
9.6
District of Columbia
9.5
59.7
69.2
Florida 49.1
87.5
136.6
Georgia 35.0
54.1
89.0
Hawai 13.2
28.8
42.0
Idaho 31.4
0.0
31.4
Illinois 0.0
57.3
57.3
Indiana 189.0
21.7
210.7
Iowa 3.9
8.7
12.5
Kansas 0.0
39.0
39.0
Kentucky 1.9
7.7
9.6
Louisiana 0.2
0.0
0.2
Maine 0.0
3.4
3.4
Maryland 0.0
0.0
0.0
Massachusetts 0.0
0.0
0.0
Michigan 0.0
119.0
119.0
Minnesota 54.3
79.5
133.8
Mississippi 5.6
12.9
18.5
Missouri 0.0
19.4
19.4
Montana 0.8
44.6
45.5
Nebraska 0.1
55.9
56.1
Nevada 0.0
9.0
9.0
New Hampshire
0.0
4.7
4.7
New Jersey
148.2
23.5
171.7
New Mexico
28.0
0.0
28.0
New York
221.4
300.3
521.6
North Carolina
187.4
3.5
190.9
Congressional Research Service
30

---

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

State
Obligated but Not Expended Unobligated Funds Total Unspent Funds
North Dakota
0.0
18.7
18.7
Ohio 42.1
47.1
89.2
Oklahoma 46.9
6.7
53.7
Oregon 0.0
0.2
0.2
Pennsylvania 70.4
208.1
278.5
Rhode Island
13.9
0.0
13.9
South Carolina
0.0
13.6
13.6
South Dakota
0.0
16.0
16.0
Tennessee 0.0
20.5
20.5
Texas 92.4
0.0
92.4
Utah 0.0
86.5
86.5
Vermont 0.0
0.0
0.0
Virginia 1.6
25.1
26.7
Washington 0.0
0.0
0.0
West Virginia
9.5
0.0
9.5
Wisconsin 0.0
0.0
0.0
Wyoming 5.0
24.1
29.1




Totals 1,409.1
1,684.2
3,093.3
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS, based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving
TANF Cash Assistance, March 2013
State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Alabama 19,551
46,976
34,936
12,040
Alaska 3,730
10,027
6,748
3,279
Arizona 16,037
36,395
25,906
10,489
Arkansas 6,848
15,267
10,894
4,373
California 567,593
1,366,728
1,086,982
279,746
Colorado 14,825
38,576
27,511
11,065
Connecticut 14,592
28,828
20,310
8,518
Delaware 4,903
13,784
8,416
5,368
District of Columbia
5,701
13,597
10,496
3,101
Florida 54,608
97,257
79,592
17,665
Georgia 17,806
34,670
30,450
4,220
Guam 1,325
3,159
2,383
776
Congressional Research Service
31

---

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

State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Hawaii 9,206
26,621
17,605
9,016
Idaho 1,823
2,746
2,587
159
Illinois 21,569
47,895
39,315
8,580
Indiana 12,837
26,364
23,128
3,236
Iowa 17,848
45,368
31,451
13,917
Kansas 8,288
19,940
14,369
5,571
Kentucky 30,300
60,918
48,398
12,520
Louisiana 7,598
17,033
14,703
2,330
Maine 28,368
60,169
33,540
26,629
Maryland 21,704
51,755
37,877
13,878
Massachusetts 67,820
153,450
102,878
50,572
Michigan 36,189
83,689
62,154
21,535
Minnesota 23,535
52,506
39,935
12,571
Mississippi 9,918
20,789
15,235
5,554
Missouri 35,666
85,842
58,362
27,480
Montana 2,994
7,201
5,308
1,893
Nebraska 6,759
16,136
13,134
3,002
Nevada 10,404
26,588
19,783
6,805
New Hampshire
6,221
15,217
10,222
4,995
New Jersey
32,291
78,425
54,528
23,897
New Mexico
14,956
36,779
27,124
9,655
New York
158,864
403,178
288,137
115,041
North Carolina
19,882
38,069
32,296
5,773
North Dakota
1,394
3,477
2,725
752
Ohio 68,472
136,887
110,858
26,029
Oklahoma 7,611
16,823
14,106
2,717
Oregon 43,400
103,269
74,594
28,675
Pennsylvania 71,741
176,064
126,890
49,174
Puerto Rico
13,115
36,080
22,733
13,347
Rhode Island
5,928
14,096
9,668
4,428
South Carolina
12,537
28,587
22,174
6,413
South Dakota
3,122
6,184
5,351
833
Tennessee 51,336
123,991
90,614
33,377
Texas 39,555
88,440
77,575
10,865
Utah 4,477
10,916
7,997
2,919
Vermont 3,427
7,769
5,407
2,362
Virgin Islands
406
1,193
857
336
Congressional Research Service
32

---

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

State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Virginia 31,316
67,310
48,675
18,635
Washington 48,239
112,200
76,282
35,918
West Virginia
8,788
19,241
14,234
5,007
Wisconsin 25,902
61,773
46,024
15,749
Wyoming 343
1,135
687
448





Totals 1,753,668
4,097,377
3,094,144
1,003,233
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data include those families in Separate State Programs with expenditures countable toward the
TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
Table B-5. Number of Families Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, March 1994, 2007,
2012, and 2013
Percentage Change to March






2013 from March....
1994 2007 2010 2012 2013 1994 2007 2013
Alabama 51,217
18,005
20,740
20,818
19,551
-61.8%
8.6%
-6.1%
Alaska 13,209
3,376
3,296
3,906
3,730
-71.8
10.5
-4.5
Arizona 71,713
35,617
35,227
17,268
16,037
-77.6
-55.0
-7.1
Arkansas 26,355
8,600
8,492
7,440
6,848
-74.0
-20.4
-8.0
California
916,427 471,775 576,355 580,388 567,593 -38.1
20.3
-2.2
Colorado 42,541
11,149
11,785
14,024
14,825
-65.2
33.0 5.7
Connecticut 59,351
20,890
17,261
15,118
14,592 -75.4 -30.1 -3.5
Delaware 11,592
4,027
5,089
5,301
4,903
-57.7
21.8
-7.5
District of
27,047 5,748 9,786 5,805 5,701 -78.9 -0.8 -1.8
Columbia
Florida 248,514
47,337
57,471
53,706
54,608
-78.0
15.4
1.7
Georgia 141,859
24,681
20,464
18,443
17,806
-87.4
-27.9
-3.5
Guam 1,863
931
1,245
1,316
1,325
-28.9
42.3
0.7
Hawai 20,395
6,410
9,630
9,536
9,206
-54.9
43.6
-3.5
Idaho 9,016
1,661
1,742
1,874
1,823
-79.8
9.8
-2.7
Illinois
241,817 31,397 21,973 33,709 21,569 -91.1
-31.3 -36.0
Indiana 74,843
41,226
35,915
17,004
12,837
-82.8
-68.9
-24.5
Congressional Research Service
33

---

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

Percentage Change to March






2013 from March....
1994 2007 2010 2012 2013 1994 2007 2013
Iowa 40,676
20,082
21,345
19,108
17,848
-56.1
-11.1
-6.6
Kansas 30,591
14,550
14,202
11,094
8,288
-72.9
-43.0
-25.3
Kentucky 81,141
29,788
30,028
30,057
30,300
-62.7 1.7 0.8
Louisiana 88,059
10,730
10,273
9,191
7,598
-91.4
-29.2
-17.3
Maine 23,231
12,736
14,942
15,039
28,368
22.1
122.7
88.6
Maryland 81,253
19,077
24,052
23,753
21,704
-73.3
13.8
-8.6
Massachusetts 112,803 44,579 49,062 64,449 67,820 -39.9
52.1
5.2
Michigan 227,114
75,173
70,633
40,919
36,189
-84.1
-51.9
-11.6
Minnesota 64,055
26,513
24,048
24,499
23,535
-63.3 -11.2 -3.9
Mississippi 56,420
11,210
11,805
11,263
9,918
-82.4 -11.5
-11.9
Missouri 93,735
39,577
38,847
37,723
35,666
-62.0
-9.9
-5.5
Montana 12,278
3,184
3,742
3,174
2,994
-75.6
-6.0
-5.7
Nebraska 16,323
7,426
8,539
7,375
6,759
-58.6
-9.0 -8.4
Nevada 14,011
6,424
10,365
10,590
10,404
-25.7
62.0
-1.8
New
11,574 5,183 6,247 6,294 6,221 -46.3 20.0 -1.2
Hampshire
New Jersey
123,025
34,884
33,047
34,162
32,291
-73.8
-7.4
-5.5
New Mexico
33,847
14,017
19,342
18,001
14,956
-55.8
6.7
-16.9
New
York
457,660 159,447 156,188 157,885 158,864 -65.3
-0.4
0.6
North Carolina
134,063
25,509
24,382
21,562
19,882
-85.2
-22.1
-7.8
North Dakota
6,079
2,016
2,037
1,648
1,394
-77.1
-30.9
-15.4
Ohio 254,021
77,624
103,012
153,065
68,472
-73.0
-11.8
-55.3
Oklahoma 47,428
9,283
9,315
8,472
7,611
-84.0 -18.0
-10.2
Oregon 43,617
18,872
30,199
37,927
43,400
-0.5
130.0
14.4
Congressional Research Service
34

---

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

Percentage Change to March






2013 from March....
1994 2007 2010 2012 2013 1994 2007 2013
Pennsylvania 211,771
63,637 51,085
77,566
71,741 -66.1 12.7 -7.5
Puerto Rico
58,869
13,809
13,581
14,711
13,115
-77.7
-5.0
-10.8
Rhode Island
22,872
8,296
7,505
6,559
5,928
-74.1
-28.5
-9.6
South Carolina
53,260
15,652
17,934
14,131
12,537
-76.5
-19.9
-11.3
South Dakota
7,129
2,825
3,209
3,184
3,122
-56.2
10.5
-1.9
Tennessee 111,740
62,395
61,685
56,972
51,336
-54.1 -17.7 -9.9
Texas 286,613
61,566
49,871
44,529
39,555
-86.2
-35.8
-11.2
Utah 17,908
5,146
6,724
5,048
4,477
-75.0
-13.0
-11.3
Vermont 9,988
4,463
3,106
3,440
3,427
-65.7
-23.2
-0.4
Virgin
Islands 1,078 440 507 427 406 -62.3 -7.7 -4.9
Virginia 75,854
31,354
36,744
33,391
31,316
-58.7
-0.1
-6.2
Washington 104,326
52,292 69,637
53,392
48,239 -53.8 -7.8 -9.7
West Virginia
41,521
9,774
9,690
9,289
8,788
-78.8
-10.1
-5.4
Wisconsin 78,739
17,211
21,353
26,152
25,902
-67.1 50.5 -1.0
Wyoming 5,857 273 352 317 343 -94.1 25.6 8.2









Totals 5,098,28
1,749,847 1,905,10
1,902,01
1,753,66
-65.6 0.2 -7.8
8
6
4
8
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data include those families in Separate State Programs with expenditures countable toward the
TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.


Congressional Research Service
35

---

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

Table B-6. Families Receiving TANF Cash Assistance, by Number of Parents
Receiving Assistance on Their Own Behalf: March 2013
Single-
Two-
No-
Single-
Two-
No-
Parent
Parent
Parent
Total
Parent
Parent
Parent
State
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Alabama 11,584 204 7,763 19,551 59.3% 1.0% 39.7%
Alaska 2,315 442 973
3,730
62.1 11.8 26.1
Arizona 9,237 573 6,227
16,037
57.6 3.6 38.8
Arkansas 4,071 173 2,604 6,848 59.4 2.5 38.0
California 248,412 53,505 265,676 567,593 43.8
9.4
46.8
Colorado 8,998 1,159 4,668 14,825 60.7
7.8
31.5
Connectic
8,441 0 6,151
14,592
57.8 0.0 42.2
ut
Delaware 1,723
22 3,158 4,903 35.1
0.4
64.4
District of
3,412 0 2,289
5,701
59.8 0.0 40.2
Columbia
Florida 13,873 757 39,978
54,608
25.4 1.4 73.2
Georgia 4,155 0 13,651
17,806 23.3 0.0 76.7
Guam 566 209 550
1,325
42.7
15.8
41.5
Hawai 5,323 2,204
1,679
9,206
57.8 23.9 18.2
Idaho 156 0
1,667
1,823
8.6 0.0
91.4
Illinois 7,605 0 13,964
21,569
35.3 0.0 64.7
Indiana 4,049 195 8,593
12,837
31.5 1.5 66.9
Iowa 11,338
1,066
5,444
17,848
63.5 6.0 30.5
Kansas 4,340 530 3,418
8,288
52.4 6.4 41.2
Kentucky 10,867
778 18,655 30,300 35.9
2.6
61.6
Louisiana 2,289
0
5,309 7,598 30.1 0.0 69.9
Maine 24,716 988 2,664
28,368
87.1 3.5 9.4
Maryland 14,002
0
7,702 21,704 64.5
0.0
35.5
Massachus
42,984 4,451 20,385
67,820 63.4 6.6 30.1
etts
Michigan 21,485
0 14,704 36,189 59.4
0.0 40.6
Minnesota 12,698
0
10,837 23,535 54.0
0.0
46.0
Congressional Research Service
36

---

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

Single-
Two-
No-
Single-
Two-
No-
Parent
Parent
Parent
Total
Parent
Parent
Parent
State
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Mississippi 5,466
0
4,452 9,918 55.1
0.0
44.9
Missouri 27,818
0
7,848 35,666 78.0 0.0 22.0
Montana 1,648 283 1,063 2,994 55.0 9.5 35.5
Nebraska 3,098
0
3,661 6,759 45.8
0.0
54.2
Nevada 4,636 1,063 4,705
10,404
44.6 10.2 45.2
New
4,792 94 1,335
6,221
77.0 1.5 21.5
Hampshire
New
23,510 0 8,781
32,291
72.8 0.0 27.2
Jersey
New
7,807 943 6,206
14,956
52.2 6.3 41.5
Mexico
New
York 99,634
2,888 56,342 158,864 62.7
1.8
35.5
North
5,333 220
14,329
19,882
26.8 1.1 72.1
Carolina
North
749 0 645
1,394
53.7
0.0
46.3
Dakota
Ohio 19,548
2,849
46,075
68,472
28.5 4.2 67.3
Oklahoma 2,717
0
4,894 7,611 35.7
0.0
64.3
Oregon 37,711 105 5,584
43,400 86.9 0.2 12.9
Pennsylvan
50,564 975 20,202
71,741
70.5 1.4 28.2
ia
Puerto
10,361 0 2,754
13,115
79.0 0.0 21.0
Rico
Rhode
3,553 489 1,886
5,928
59.9 8.2 31.8
Island
South
6,659 0 5,878
12,537
53.1 0.0 46.9
Carolina
South
833 0
2,289
3,122
26.7
0.0
73.3
Dakota
Tennessee 32,404
978
17,954 51,336 63.1
1.9
35.0
Texas 10,861 0 28,694
39,555
27.5 0.0 72.5
Utah 1,872 0 2,605
4,477
41.8
0.0
58.2
Congressional Research Service
37

---

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

Single-
Two-
No-
Single-
Two-
No-
Parent
Parent
Parent
Total
Parent
Parent
Parent
State
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Families
Vermont 1,598 377 1,452 3,427 46.6 11.0 42.4
Virgin
406 0 0
406
100.0
0.0
0.0
Islands
Virginia 19,504 0 11,812
31,316 62.3 0.0 37.7
Washingto
25,638 5,008 17,593
48,239 53.1 10.4 36.5
n
West
3,982 0 4,806
8,788
45.3 0.0 54.7
Virginia
Wisconsin 13,375
810
11,717 25,902 51.6
3.1
45.2
Wyoming 120
12
211 343 35.0 3.5 61.5








Totals 904,836
84,350
764,482
1,753,668
51.6 4.8 43.6
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data include those families in Separate State Programs with expenditures countable toward the
TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.

Table B-7. TANF All-Family Work Participation Rate by State:
FY2002 Through FY2010
State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
United
States
28.9% 27.5% 29.4% 30.3% 30.6% 29.7% 29.4% 29.4% 29.0%
Alabama
37.3 37.1 37.9 38.6 41.6 34.0 37.4 32.4 37.1
Alaska
39.6 41.1 43.6 45.7 45.6 46.8 42.8 37.2 33.3
Arizona
25.9 13.4 25.5 30.3 29.6 30.0 27.8 27.1 29.1
Arkansas
21.4 22.4 27.3 28.3 27.9 35.3 38.8 37.1 34.1
California
27.3 24.0 23.1 25.9 22.2 22.3 25.1 26.8 26.2
Colorado
35.9 32.5 34.7 25.8 30.0 27.3 32.3 37.8 33.6
Connecticut
26.6 30.6 24.3 33.8 30.8 28.8 25.3 34.4 37.2
Delaware
11.7 18.2 22.1 22.6 25.3 32.7 48.8 37.5 38.8
District
of
Columbia 16.4 23.1 18.2 23.5 17.1 35.0 49.6 23.5 15.0
Florida
30.4 33.1 40.4 38.0 41.0 64.2 42.4 46.1 47.5
Georgia
8.2 10.9 24.8 57.2 64.9 54.2 59.0 57.1 67.5
Hawai
32.5 34.6 40.3 35.5 37.3 28.7 34.4 40.3 47.6
Idaho
40.7 43.7 41.0 39.9 44.2 53.0 59.5 52.0 49.5
Congressional Research Service
38

---

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

State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Illinois
58.4 57.8 46.1 43.0 53.0 55.5 42.6 49.3 49.1
Indiana
45.3 40.3 36.3 30.9 26.7 27.5 29.4 17.5 19.2
Iowa
51.2 45.1 50.0 47.8 39.0 40.2 41.1 35.4 34.8
Kansas
37.6 32.4 88.0 86.7 77.2 12.8 19.6 23.9 27.2
Kentucky
32.4 32.8 38.1 39.7 44.6 38.2 38.0 37.3 46.4
Louisiana
38.7 34.6 35.4 34.6 38.4 42.2 40.0 34.4 27.4
Maine
44.5 27.7 32.1 28.3 26.6 21.9 11.4 16.8 19.7
Maryland
8.3 9.1 16.0 20.5 44.5 46.7 36.9 44.0 40.7
Massachusetts
9.2 8.4 10.3 12.6 13.6 17.0 44.7 47.5 22.2
Michigan
28.9 25.3 24.5 22.0 21.6 28.0 33.6 27.9 22.8
Minnesota
31.2 25.0 26.8 28.9 30.3 28.1 29.9 29.8 40.2
Mississippi
18.5 17.2 21.0 22.6 35.5 61.9 63.2 67.5 66.3
Missouri
25.4 28.0 19.5 20.0 18.7 14.0 14.2 13.2 17.5
Montana
37.9 37.4 86.7 83.1 79.2 46.4 44.2 44.2 51.6
Nebraska
22.8 29.4 34.5 31.8 32.0 23.0 51.2 50.3 49.5
Nevada
21.6 22.3 34.5 42.3 47.8 34.0 42.1 39.4 37.6
New
Hampshire
32.6 28.2 30.2 24.6 24.1 42.0 47.4 46.5 46.6
New
Jersey
36.4 35.0 34.6 29.0 29.2 33.0 18.9 20.1 19.9
New
Mexico
42.7 42.0 46.2 41.6 42.3 36.4 37.5 43.1 42.5
New
York
38.5 37.1 37.8 35.2 37.8 38.0 37.3 33.4 35.0
North
Carolina
27.4 25.3 31.4 27.5 32.4 32.4 24.5 32.3 37.1
North
Dakota
30.4 27.0 25.3 31.4 51.9 58.7 50.2 61.0 68.7
Ohio
56.1 62.2 65.2 58.3 54.9 23.7 24.5 23.3 23.1
Oklahoma
26.7 29.2 33.2 34.0 32.9 38.1 29.2 23.0 24.3
Oregon
8.0 14.7 32.1 14.9 15.2 14.7 24.1 9.5 8.4
Pennsylvania
10.4 9.9 7.1 15.2 26.1 48.9 38.6 45.8 46.0
Puerto
Rico
5.6 6.1 7.5 13.1 13.1 8.2 11.6 8.7 8.6
Rhode
Island
24.6 24.3 23.7 24.2 24.9 26.8 17.5 13.8 12.0
South
Carolina
30.2 28.6 53.7 54.3 49.5 53.3 51.7 45.1 37.2
South
Dakota
42.5 46.1 54.8 57.5 57.9 53.5 62.2 59.4 61.4
Tennessee
14.3 13.4 13.0 14.3 16.8 45.9 25.2 25.5 26.5
Texas
21.1 28.1 34.2 38.9 42.0 34.6 29.3 37.0 36.1
Utah
27.9 28.1 26.2 30.3 42.5 49.8 37.6 32.6 33.8
Vermont
21.4 24.3 24.9 22.4 22.2 22.4 23.2 29.0 34.9
Virginia
22.6 29.9 50.1 46.3 53.9 43.5 45.4 44.3 42.9
Washington
49.8 46.2 35.4 38.6 36.1 25.4 18.3 23.0 24.2
West
Virginia
19.2 14.2 11.7 16.3 26.2 15.4 17.6 19.6 25.9
Congressional Research Service
39

---

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

State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Wisconsin
69.4 67.2 61.3 44.3 36.2 36.7 37.1 39.9 42.5
Wyoming
82.9 83.0 77.8 82.1 77.2 65.4 50.5 61.3 63.4
Guam
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 1.0
Virgin
Islands
17.7 5.0 10.6 16.9 14.5 17.1 15.5 7.1 9.2
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: FY2002 through FY2006 work participation rates are based on federal work participation standard rules.
They exclude the effects of “grandfathered” waivers of pre-1996. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the
option to continue their pre-reform “waiver” programs and have their work participation rates based on the
rules of the state waivers, not the federal rules. The last of these pre-1996 waivers expired in 2006. The all-
family work participation rates for FY2002 through FY2006 that include the effect of the waivers are slightly
higher than the rates shown here.
Table B-8. TANF Two-Parent Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010
(NA denotes not applicable; state has no two-parent families in the participation rate calculation)
State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
United
States
44.2% 41.8% 45.3% 40.8% 45.9% 35.7% 27.6% 28.3% 33.4%
Alabama
NA NA NA NA NA 29.1 28.1 24.7 28.6
Alaska
44.5 44.6 52.8 54.7 54.2 58.6 47.0 40.5 35.3
Arizona
52.2 55.3 65.6 74.2 67.5 72.1 64.3 62.6 72.8
Arkansas
24.4 31.8 34.4 45.9 22.3 19.2 32.0 21.7 21.5
California
NA NA NA NA NA 31.7 26.5 28.6 35.6
Colorado
45.6 40.1 37.5 32.1 35.2 31.4 30.8 33.3 28.6
Connecticut
NA NA NA NA NA 26.8 NA NA NA
Delaware
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
District
of
Columbia 13.4 19.6 20.1 35.9 13.1 NA NA NA NA
Florida
NA NA NA NA NA 59.4 37.5 54.4 56.4
Georgia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Hawai
NA NA NA NA NA NA 70.4 NA 56.3
Idaho
40.2 42.3 37.1 41.4 39.2 NA NA NA NA
Illinois
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Indiana
NA NA NA NA NA 30.7 31.4 17.8 18.7
Iowa
41.6 39.2 NA NA NA 39.7 39.8 27.0 28.0
Kansas
38.5 30.3 93.7 92.8 82.3 12.1 15.5 25.6 28.9
Kentucky
43.7 46.2 51.2 48.9 51.3 48.1 38.8 35.1 42.7
Louisiana
57.2 39.0 38.0 37.0 42.5 NA NA NA NA
Maine
58.2 29.2 NA NA NA 30.1 8.6 16.6 17.2
Maryland
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Massachusetts
12.9 12.0 15.4 13.5 NA NA 96.4 92.8 90.1
Congressional Research Service
40

---

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

State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Michigan
46.5 36.2 35.7 30.4 26.2 NA NA NA NA
Minnesota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Mississippi
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Missouri
27.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Montana
54.8 55.9 90.8 85.4 83.3 55.8 51.6 58.7 57.2
Nebraska
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Nevada
NA NA NA NA NA 45.7 51.4 46.8 45.2
New
Hampshire
30.4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
New
Jersey
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
New
Mexico
57.5 52.0 55.3 57.5 54.5 47.2 50.9 63.0 57.4
New
York
56.3 52.2 48.3 43.4 48.9 NA NA NA NA
North
Carolina
46.7 49.2 47.2 44.7 54.0 53.6 51.3 46.6 60.9
North
Dakota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Ohio
60.0 67.8 68.4 58.1 55.5 29.3 27.9 23.1 25.4
Oklahoma
NA 50.5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Oregon
18.9 23.4 35.5 21.1 22.6 12.6 11.1 5.9 7.2
Pennsylvania
11.0 8.8 15.0 17.7 32.5 89.8 79.8 84.2 86.8
Puerto
Rico
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rhode
Island
93.8 94.9 94.9 95.1 94.3 98.5 94.5 13.6 9.2
South
Carolina
30.1 25.5 55.9 63.7 64.7 88.0 NA NA NA
South
Dakota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Tennessee
NA NA NA NA NA 44.1 11.9 0.0 0.0
Texas
NA NA NA NA NA 59.2 NA NA NA
Utah
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Vermont
32.7 37.5 38.2 35.8 33.9 31.6 31.8 24.0 38.2
Virginia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Washington
50.7 44.3 31.1 37.7 43.1 25.2 17.2 18.6 22.3
West
Virginia
26.5 25.2 NA NA NA 16.4 NA NA 89.6
Wisconsin
39.3 40.3 33.1 25.5 17.1 20.9 31.6 33.0 31.1
Wyoming
93.8 91.5 87.5 65.2 75.9 74.1 69.4 75.7 48.5
Guam
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 1.1
Virgin
Islands
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: FY2002 through FY2006 work participation rates are based on federal work participation standard rules.
They exclude the effects of “grandfathered” waivers of pre-1996. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the
option to continue their pre-reform “waiver” programs and have their work participation rates based on the
rules of the state waivers, not the federal rules. The last of these pre-1996 waivers expired in 2006. The all-
Congressional Research Service
41

---

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

family work participation rates for FY2002 through FY2006 that include the effect of the waivers are slightly
higher than the rates shown here.

Author Contact Information

Gene Falk

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

Congressional Research Service
42

---