The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
March 12, 2014
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL32760

---

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

Summary
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide range of benefits
and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the 1996 welfare
reform law (P.L. 104-193). This report responds to some frequently asked questions about TANF;
it does not describe TANF rules (see, instead, CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal
Requirements, by Gene Falk).
TANF Funding. TANF provides fixed funding to states, the bulk of which is provided in a $16.5
billion-per-year basic federal block grant. States are also required in total to contribute, from their
own funds, at least $10.4 billion under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement.
Federal and State TANF Expenditures. Though TANF is best known for funding cash
assistance payments for needy families with children, the block grant and MOE funds are used for
a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2012, expenditures on basic assistance (cash
assistance) totaled $9.0 billion—28.6% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. TANF also
contributes funds for child care and services for children who have been, or are at risk of being,
abused and neglected.
Cash Assistance Caseload. A total of 1.7 million families, composed of 4.0 million recipients,
received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in September 2013. The bulk of the “recipients” were
children—3.0 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 2012, 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 27% 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
What Is TANF’s Funding Level? ............................................................................................... 1
What Does President Obama’s FY2015 Budget Propose for TANF? ....................................... 2
What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative? .................................................................... 2
Has Any State Formally Applied for a “Waiver” of TANF Work Participation
Standards? .............................................................................................................................. 2
May States Require Drug Testing of Assistance Recipients? .................................................... 3
History ............................................................................................................................................. 3
When Was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant
Created? .................................................................................................................................. 3
Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law? ............................................................ 3
Funding and Expenditures ............................................................................................................... 4
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? .............................. 4
How Have States Used TANF Funds? ....................................................................................... 5
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? ................................................................. 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? .......................................................................................................... 16
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 Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance: July
1959-September 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 FY2014 .......................................................... 1
Table 2. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Constant (Inflation-Adjusted) Dollars .................... 5
Table 3. TANF Cash Assistance Caseload: September 2013 ........................................................... 8
Table 4. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits for a Family of Three and
as a Percent of the Federal Poverty Guideline by State: July 2012 ............................................ 11
Table 5. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits by Family Size and State:
July 2012..................................................................................................................................... 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-FY2014 ..................................................... 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 by State: September 2013 ........................................................................................ 31
Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance by State,
September of Selected Years....................................................................................................... 33
Table B-6. TANF Families by Number of Parents in Assisted Unit by State: September
2013 ............................................................................................................................................ 35
Table B-7. TANF All-Family Work Participation Rate by State: FY2002 Through FY2010 ........ 37
Table B-8. TANF Two-Parent Work Participation Rate: FY2002-FY2010 ................................... 38

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

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 40
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?
P.L. 113-76 funds TANF through September 30, 2014. It funds TANF at the same levels as were
provided in FY2013 through that date. It makes no changes in TANF policies.
What Is TANF’s Funding Level?
Table 1 shows TANF funding for FY2006 through FY2014. 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 FY2014
(Dollars in millions)

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
State family assistance grant
$16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489
Supplemental
grants
319 319 319 319 319 211 0 0 0
Healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood
150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150
grants
Grants
to
the
territories
78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78 78
Grants
for
tribal
work
programs
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
Regular
contingency
funds
93 59 428
1,107 212 334 612 610a 610a
Emergency contingency

617
4,383
funds
Totals
17,137 17,103 17,472 18,768 21,639 17,270 17,337 17,335 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 FY2014, and
reserved $2 million in each year of these funds for a commission on child abuse and neglect fatalities. Thus,
$610 million is available for FY2013 and FY2014 TANF contingency fund grants to states.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

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

In addition to federal TANF funds, states are required in total to contribute, from their own funds,
at least $10.4 billion per year for TANF-related activities for low-income families with children.
This level of state funding, known as maintenance-of-effort (MOE) funding, was also established
in the 1996 welfare law and has not been changed since then.
What Does President Obama’s FY2015 Budget Propose for TANF?
The President’s FY2015 budget does not propose a comprehensive reauthorization of TANF. It
proposes to extend TANF funding for FY2015 at current levels. The Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) summary document of the FY2015 budget proposals states:
When Congress takes up reauthorization, the Administration will be prepared to work with
lawmakers to strengthen the program’s effectiveness in accomplishing its goals. This effort
should include using performance indicators to drive program improvement and ensuring
that states have the flexibility to engage recipients in the most effective activities to promote
success in the workforce, including families with serious barriers to employment.1
Though the budget proposal would not reauthorize TANF, it does propose several legislative
changes to the block grant. It would
• change the purpose of the “contingency fund,” from providing extra funding
during economic downturns to finance any TANF activity to one focused on
subsidized employment;
• provide that $10 million in funding (from the contingency fund) be used for
federal oversight of state TANF programs; and
• restrict expenditures counted toward the MOE to those made by state and local
governments, eliminating the ability of states to count expenditures or the value
of services provided by third parties (e.g., charitable organizations) directed
toward a TANF-eligible activity.
What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative?
On July 12, 2012, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it would
accept applications for “waivers” of the TANF work participation standards. In general, these are
waivers of the way the performance of state welfare-to-work programs are assessed, the Federal
work participation standards. For a discussion, see CRS Report R42627, Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF): Welfare Waivers, by Gene Falk.
Has Any State Formally Applied for a “Waiver” of TANF Work
Participation Standards?
As of February 21, 2014, no state had formally applied for a waiver of TANF work participation
standards under the Administration’s waiver initiative.

1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Fiscal Year 2015 Budget in Brief, March 2014, p. 117.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

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

May States Require Drug Testing of Assistance Recipients?
Yes. The 1996 assistance reform law gave states the option of requiring drug tests for assistance
recipients and penalizing those who fail such tests. (See Section 902 of P.L. 104-193.) However,
specific state policies regarding drug testing raise constitutional issues. See CRS Report R42326,
Constitutional Analysis of Suspicionless Drug Testing Requirements for the Receipt of
Governmental Benefits, by David H. Carpenter.
The 1996 welfare reform law contained two other provisions related to drug abuse and TANF
applicants or recipients. The law established a lifetime ban on eligibility for TANF and food
stamps for those convicted of a drug-related felony. However, states may either opt out entirely or
modify and limit this lifetime ban. (See Section 115 of P.L. 104-193.)
Further, TANF allows states to establish Individual Responsibility Plans (IRPs) for their TANF
families. The IRP may require participation in a substance abuse treatment program. A family
may be sanctioned for failure to comply with its IRP.
For a discussion of states that require drug testing in TANF and related programs, see CRS Report
R42394, Drug Testing and Crime-Related Restrictions in TANF, SNAP, and Housing Assistance,
by Maggie McCarty et al.
History
When Was the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Block Grant Created?
The TANF block grant was created by the 1996 welfare reform law, the Personal Responsibility
and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). PRWORA is also
referred to in this report as the 1996 welfare reform law. TANF replaced the program of Aid to
Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which dated back to the Social Security Act of 1935,
and several other related programs.
Has Legislation Modified TANF Since the 1996 Law?
The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) included provisions establishing “welfare-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.)
Congressional Research Service
3

---

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

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA, P.L. 109-171) included a long-term extension of
funding for TANF through FY2010. It also modified TANF work participation standards;
established $100 million per year in TANF research and technical assistance funds for “healthy
marriage promotion” initiatives; and provided $50 million per year for “responsible fatherhood
initiatives.” (For a discussion of TANF provisions in the DRA, see CRS Report RS22369, TANF,
Child Care, Marriage Promotion, and Responsible Fatherhood Provisions in the Deficit
Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171), by Gene Falk.) The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (P.L.
111-291) provided that healthy marriage and responsible fatherhood initiatives would be funded
at $75 million each for FY2011. Temporary extension legislation continued these activities for
FY2012 and FY2013 at $75 million for responsible fatherhood and $75 million for healthy
marriage initiatives.
P.L. 112-96 (the law that extended the payroll tax cut through 2012) provided TANF funding
through the end of FY2012. It provided FY2012 funding for the basic TANF block grant, healthy
marriage and responsible fatherhood competitive grants, and certain other funds at their FY2011
levels. It did not provide FY2012 funding for TANF supplemental grants.
In addition, P.L. 112-96
• prevents electronic benefit transaction access to TANF cash at liquor stores,
casinos, and strip clubs; states are required to prohibit access to TANF cash at
Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) at such establishments; and
• requires states to report TANF data in a manner that facilitates the exchange of
that data with other programs’ data systems.
Legislation that extended TANF funding for FY2013 and FY2014 did not include policy changes.
Funding and Expenditures
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because
of Inflation?
From FY1997 (the first full year of TANF funding) through FY2013 (ended September 30, 2013),
the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 31.2%. Table 2 shows the impact of inflation
on the value of the TANF block grant for each year, FY1997 through FY2013. It also shows the
projected effect of inflation over the period FY2014 to FY2019 if the TANF basic block grant
remains at its current funding level. As shown on the table, if the block grant remains funded at
current levels, by FY2019 it would have lost almost 40% of its value due to inflation from
FY1997.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

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

Table 2. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Constant (Inflation-Adjusted) Dollars
Value of the
Cumulate Change
Basic TANF
in Value of the
Block Grant in
Block Grant from
Fiscal Year
1997 Dollars
FY1997
1997 $16.5

1998 16.2 -1.6%
1999 15.9 -3.5
2000 15.4 -6.4
2001 14.9 -9.4
2002 14.7 -10.7
2003 14.4 -12.7
2004 14.1 -14.7
2005 13.6 -17.4
2006 13.1 -20.4
2007 12.8 -22.2
2008 12.3 -25.5
2009 12.3 -25.3
2010 12.1 -26.5
2011 11.8 -28.4
2012 11.5 -30.1
2013 11.3 -31.2
2014 (est.)
11.2
-32.2
2015 (est.)
11.0
-33.5
2016 (est.)
10.7
-34.9
2017 (est.)
10.5
-36.3
2018 (est.)
10.3
-37.7
2019 (est.)
10.0
-39.2
Source: Congressional Research Service based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and
Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
Notes: Inflation adjustment uses the Consumer Price Index for al Urban Consumers (CPI-U). FY2014-FY2019
figures are based on the CBO February 2014 economic forecast.

How Have States Used TANF Funds?
TANF is best known as a funding source of cash assistance benefits for needy families with
children. However, states have considerable discretion in using TANF funds, and have used them
for a wide range of benefits and services.
Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2012. In
FY2012, a total of $31.4 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
Congressional Research Service
5

---

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

expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance, the category that most
closely reflects cash assistance, represented 28.6% ($9.0 billion) of total FY2012 TANF and
MOE dollars.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2012, 16.0% of all TANF funds used
were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the Child Care and
Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF is also a major contributor to the child welfare system,
which provides foster care, adoption assistance, and services to families with children who either
have experienced or are at risk of experiencing child abuse or neglect. However, TANF’s
accounting system does a poor job of capturing expenditures associated with spending on the
child welfare system. Most TANF funding for these programs is subsumed in the catch-all “other”
expenditure category.
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).
See Appendix A, Table A-3 for dollar amounts of total federal TANF and state MOE funds
associated with each of these categories. For state-specific information on the use of TANF funds,
see Table B-1 and Table B-2.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

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

How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?
TANF law permits states to “reserve” unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in
timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to “save” funds for unexpected
occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).
At the end of FY2012 (September 30, 2012, the latest data currently available), a total of $3.1
billion of federal TANF funding remained neither transferred nor spent. However, some of these
unspent funds represent monies that states had already committed to spend later. At the end of
FY2012, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.4
billion. Generally, obligations are binding commitments to spend, and they come in the form of
contracts and grants to provide benefits and services. However, the definition of “obligation”
varies from program to program, and because TANF essentially consists of 54 different programs
(one for each state, the District of Columbia, and the territories), what constitutes an obligation
may vary.
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 1.7 million families, composed
of 4.0 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in September 2013. The bulk of
the “recipients” were children—3.0 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: September 2013


Total Families
1,711,437
Total Recipients
4,011,571
Total Children
3,027,634
Total Adults
983,937
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
How Does the Current Cash Assistance Caseload Level Compare
with Historical Levels?
The number of families receiving cash assistance peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families.
The cash assistance caseload fell rapidly in the late 1990s (after the 1996 welfare reform law)
before leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace
than in the late 1990s. Nationally, the caseload began to rise beginning in August 2008, peaking
in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families.
Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving cash
assistance, from July 1959 to September 2013.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

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

Figure 2. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance: July
1959-September 2013
In Millions of Families
6
March 1994:
5.1 million
5
4
3
2
Sept. 2013:
1.7 million
1
0
9
1
3
5
7
9
1
3
5
7
9
1
3
5
7
9
1
3
5
7
9
1
3
5
7
9
1
3
5
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
l-
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju
Ju

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 September 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
2012.2 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-parent family with two children. Some
states vary their benefit amounts for other family types such as two-parent families or “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 2012 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi (10.7% of poverty-level income) to
$923 per month in Alaska (46.4% of poverty-level income).3
Table 4. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits for a Family of Three and
as a Percent of the Federal Poverty Guideline by State: July 2012
Benefits for a Single Parent and Two Children
Maximum Benefit Per
As a Percent of the 2012
Month for a Family of
Federal Poverty
State
Three
Guideline
Alabama $215
13.5
Alaska $923
46.4
Arizona $277
17.4
Arkansas $204
12.8
California $638
40.1

2 States are not required to report to the federal government their cash assistance benefit amounts in either the TANF
state plan (under Section 402 of the Social Security Act) or in annual program reports (under Section 411 of the Social
Security Act). The benefit amounts shown are from the “Welfare Rules Database,” maintained by the Urban Institute
and funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
3 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 $770 per month represents 48.4% 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 Benefit Per
As a Percent of the 2012
Month for a Family of
Federal Poverty
State
Three
Guideline
Colorado $462
29.0
Connecticut $576
36.2
Delaware $338
21.2
D.C. $428
26.9
Florida $303
19.0
Georgia $280
17.6
Hawaii $610
33.3
Idaho $309
19.4
Illinois $432
27.2
Indiana $288
18.1
Iowa $426
26.8
Kansas $429
27.0
Kentucky $262
16.5
Louisiana $240
15.1
Maine $485
30.5
Maryland $574
36.1
Massachusetts $618
38.8
Michigan $492
30.9
Minnesota $532
33.4
Mississippi $170
10.7
Missouri $292
18.4
Montana $504
31.7
Nebraska $364
22.9
Nevada $383
24.1
New Hampshire
$675
42.4
New Jersey
$424
26.7
New Mexico
$380
23.9
New York
$770
48.4
North Carolina
$272
17.1
North Dakota
$427
26.8
Ohio $450
28.3
Oklahoma $292
18.4
Oregon $506
31.8
Pennsylvania $403
25.3
Rhode Island
$554
34.8
Congressional Research Service
12

---

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

Maximum Benefit Per
As a Percent of the 2012
Month for a Family of
Federal Poverty
State
Three
Guideline
South Carolina
$216
13.6
South Dakota
$555
34.9
Tennessee $185
11.6
Texas $263
16.5
Utah $498
31.3
Vermont $640
40.2
Virginia $320
20.1
Washington $478
30.0
West Virginia
$340
21.4
Wisconsin $653
41.0
Wyoming $602
37.8

Maximum $923
48.4
Minimum $170
10.7
Median $427
26.8
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules Database
and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

As discussed above, most states vary maximum benefits by family size, paying larger benefits for
larger families. The exceptions are Idaho and Wisconsin, which pay a flat maximum benefit.
Additionally, some states do not increase benefits—or provide a smaller than usual increase in
benefits—for a family already on the rolls when a new baby is born. This is known as the “family
cap” policy, which 17 states had in July 2012.4 Table 5 shows maximum monthly TANF cash
assistance benefits by family size and state for July 2012.
Table 5. Maximum Monthly TANF Cash Assistance Benefits by Family Size and State:
July 2012
Benefits for a Single Mother and Children
State Two
Three
Four
Five

Six
Alabama
190 215 245 275 305
Alaska 821
923
1,025
1,127
1,229

4 States that had a family cap policy as of July 2012 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
Arizona
220 277 334 392 448
Arkansas
162 204 247 286 331
California
516 638 762 866 972
Colorado
364 462 561 665 767
Connecticut
470 576 677 775 877
Delaware
270 338 407 475 544
DC
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
229 288 346 405 463
Iowa
361 426 495 548 610
Kansas
352 429 497 558 619
Kentucky
225 262 325 361 398
Louisiana
188 240 284 327 366
Maine
363 485 611 733 856
Maryland
453 574 695 805 885
Massachusetts
518 618 713 812 912
Michigan
403 492 597 694 828
Minnesota
437 532 621 697 773
Mississippi
146 170 194 218 242
Missouri
234 292 342 388 431
Montana
401 504 606 709 812
Nebraska
293 364 435 506 577
Nevada
318 383 448 513 578
New
Hampshire 606 675 738 798 879
New
Jersey
322 424 488 552 616
New
Mexico
304 380 459 536 613
New
York
562 770 928
1,091
1,204
North
Carolina 236 272 297 324 349
North
Dakota 328 427 523 620 717
Ohio
368 450 555 650 723
Oklahoma
225 292 361 422 483
Congressional Research Service
14

---

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

State Two
Three
Four
Five

Six
Oregon
432 506 621 721 833
Pennsylvania
316 403 497 589 670
Rhode
Island
449 554 634 714 794
South
Carolina 171 216 261 307 350
South
Dakota
496 555 613 671 730
Tennessee
142 185 226 264 305
Texas
228 263 316 351 404
Utah
399 498 583 663 731
Vermont
536 640 726 817 879
Virginia
254 320 382 451 479
Washington
385 478 562 648 736
West
Virginia
301 340 384 420 460
Wisconsin
653 653 653 653 653
Wyoming
567 602 602 638 638
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules Database

TANF Work Participation Standards
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet?
The TANF statute requires states to have 50% of their caseload meet standards of participation in
work or activities—that is, a family member must be in specified activities for a minimum
number of hours.5 There is a separate participation standard that applies to the two-parent portion
of a state’s caseload, requiring 90% of the state’s two-parent caseload to meet participation
standards. States that fail the TANF work participation standards are at risk of being penalized by
a reduction in their block grant amounts.
However, the statutory work participation standards are reduced by a “caseload reduction credit.”
The caseload reduction credit reduces the participation standard one percentage point for each
percentage point decline in a state’s caseload. Additionally, under a regulatory provision, a state
may get “extra” credit for caseload reduction if it spends more than required under the TANF
MOE. Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% and 90% targets,
and vary by state.

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

---

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

Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted
Since the 1996 Welfare Reform Law?
The 50% and 90% target standards that states face, as well as the caseload reduction credit, date
back to the 1996 welfare reform law. However, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171)
made several changes to the work participation rules effective in FY2007:
• The caseload reduction credit was changed to measure caseload reduction from
FY2005, rather than the original law’s FY1995.
• The work participation standards were broadened to include families receiving
cash aid in “separate state programs.” Separate state programs are programs run
with state funds, distinct from a state’s “TANF program,” but with expenditures
countable toward the TANF MOE.
• HHS was instructed to provide definition to the allowable TANF work activities
listed in law. HHS was also required to define what is meant by a “work-eligible”
individual, expanding the number of families that are included in the work
participation calculation.
• States were required to develop plans and procedures to verify work activities.
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
HHS computes two work participation rates for each state that are then compared with the
effective (after-credit) standard to determine if it has met the TANF work standard. An “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.6

6 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.7 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.
7 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-FY2014
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.
P.L. 113-46
Oct. 17, 2013-Jan 15, 2014
Extension of TANF as a part of a continuing
resolution. The resolution ended the “government
shutdown,” and a TANF funding gap between Oct
1 and Oct 16, 2013
P.L. 113-73
Jan. 16, 2014-Jan. 18, 2014
Extension of TANF funding as part of a short-term
continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-76
Jan 19, 2014-Sept. 30, 2014
Extension of TANF funding for the remainder of
FY2014 as part of an omnibus appropriation act.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).
Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2012
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 by State: September 2013
State
Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Alabama 19,015
45,873
34,119
11,754
Alaska 3,421
9,118
6,185
2,933
Arizona 15,497
35,607
25,497
10,110
Arkansas 6,631
14,998
10,780
4,218
California 553,496
1,326,032
1,054,722
271,310
Colorado 17,001
44,639
31,466
13,173
Connecticut 14,665
28,451
20,009
8,442
Delaware 4,938
13,903
8,505
5,398
District of Columbia
6,151
16,053
12,288
3,765
Florida 51,991
90,553
75,121
15,432
Georgia 17,048
33,643
29,571
4,072
Guam 1,332
3,189
2,430
759
Hawaii 8,922
25,833
17,142
8,691
Congressional Research Service
31

---

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

State
Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Idaho 1,846
2,789
2,631
158
Illinois 20,269
44,529
36,839
7,690
Indiana 11,894
24,326
21,408
2,918
Iowa 16,830
42,849
30,045
12,804
Kansas 7,784
18,844
13,676
5,168
Kentucky 30,267
61,707
48,936
12,771
Louisiana 6,518
14,636
12,740
1,896
Maine 27,451
57,413
31,826
25,587
Maryland 21,471
52,104
38,234
13,870
Massachusetts 71,964
169,558
114,139
55,419
Michigan 32,046
73,751
55,582
18,169
Minnesota 22,628
50,319
38,351
11,968
Mississippi 9,549
20,127
14,815
5,312
Missouri 33,525
80,800
55,169
25,631
Montana 3,464
7,633
5,622
2,011
Nebraska 6,590
15,720
12,723
2,997
Nevada 10,950
28,268
20,679
7,589
New Hampshire
6,180
15,184
10,285
4,899
New Jersey
30,005
70,601
51,110
19,491
New Mexico
12,589
32,677
24,945
7,732
New York
154,124
392,347
280,938
111,409
North Carolina
19,547
37,818
31,762
6,056
North Dakota
1,390
3,530
2,806
724
Ohio 65,509
128,328
105,903
22,425
Oklahoma 7,315
16,103
13,648
2,455
Oregon 42,868
111,074
73,929
37,145
Pennsylvania 71,288
175,820
126,135
49,685
Puerto Rico
12,311
34,105
21,413
12,692
Rhode Island
6,043
14,651
10,046
4,605
South Carolina
12,399
28,496
22,206
6,290
South Dakota
3,152
6,340
5,508
832
Tennessee 52,083
125,826
91,506
34,320
Texas 39,853
88,690
77,394
11,296
Utah 4,357
10,712
7,804
2,908
Vermont 3,760
8,799
6,091
2,708
Virgin Islands
434
1,254
901
353
Virginia 30,045
66,245
48,181
18,064
Congressional Research Service
32

---

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

State
Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Washington 43,689
100,519
68,317
32,202
West Virginia
9,029
19,927
14,722
5,205
Wisconsin 27,966
68,133
50,147
17,986
Wyoming 347
1,127
687
440





Totals 1,711,437
4,011,571
3,027,634
983,937
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data include those families in Separate State Programs with expenditures countable toward the
TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.

Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance by
State, September of Selected Years
Percentage Change to






Sept 2013 from Sept...
1994 2007 2010 2012 2013
1994
2012
Alabama
48,752 18,104 23,052 20,744 19,015
-61.0
-8.3
Alaska
12,450 3,127 3,507 3,628 3,421
-72.5
-5.7
Arizona
72,728 36,934 18,774 17,805 15,497
-78.7
-13.0
Arkansas
25,298 8,472 8,469 7,314 6,631
-73.8
-9.3
California
916,795 470,502 590,121 569,654 553,496
-39.6
-2.8
Colorado
40,544 9,355 11,707 14,287 17,001
-58.1
19.0
Connecticut
60,336 20,322 16,848 15,000 14,665
-75.7
-2.2
Delaware
11,408 4,034 5,508 5,134 4,938
-56.7
-3.8
District of
27,320 6,231 8,547 6,061 6,151
-77.5
1.5
Columbia
Florida
239,702 46,864 57,742 52,689 51,991
-78.3
-1.3
Georgia
141,596 23,600 20,133 18,440 17,048
-88.0
-7.5
Guam
2,089 936 1,276 1,338 1,332
-36.2
-0.4
Hawai
21,312 6,426 9,953 9,742 8,922
-58.1
-8.4
Idaho
8,635 1,506 1,820 1,870 1,846
-78.6
-1.3
Illinois
241,290 26,222 24,337 34,112 20,269
-91.6
-40.6
Indiana
72,654 42,058 36,062 14,874 11,894
-83.6
-20.0
Iowa
39,137 19,872 21,548 18,087 16,830
-57.0
-6.9
Kansas
29,524 13,892 15,554 9,770 7,784
-73.6
-20.3
Kentucky
78,720 29,492 30,875 30,729 30,267
-61.6
-1.5
Louisiana
84,162 11,023 10,849 8,037 6,518
-92.3
-18.9
Congressional Research Service
33

---

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

Percentage Change to






Sept 2013 from Sept...
1994 2007 2010 2012 2013
1994
2012
Maine
22,322 12,352 15,377 29,599 27,451
23.0
-7.3
Maryland
80,266 19,630 25,110 23,406 21,471
-73.3
-8.3
Massachusetts
108,985 46,483 49,836 64,056 71,964
-34.0
12.3
Michigan
215,873 71,892 67,241 40,987 32,046
-85.2
-21.8
Minnesota
59,987 26,642 24,574 23,893 22,628
-62.3
-5.3
Mississippi
55,232 11,658 11,895 10,909 9,549
-82.7
-12.5
Missouri
91,875 39,544 39,262 37,285 33,525
-63.5
-10.1
Montana
11,416 3,217 3,686 3,056 3,464
-69.7
13.4
Nebraska
15,435 6,913 8,702 6,845 6,590
-57.3
-3.7
Nevada
14,620 7,411 10,612 10,265 10,950
-25.1
6.7
New
Hampshire 11,398 4,733 6,175 6,286 6,180
-45.8
-1.7
New
Jersey
122,376 34,123 34,516 33,559 30,005
-75.5
-10.6
New
Mexico
34,535 12,503 21,223 17,040 12,589
-63.5
-26.1
New
York
461,751 156,420 154,936 154,935 154,124
-66.6
-0.5
North
Carolina 129,258 24,537 23,705 21,015 19,547
-84.9
-7.0
North
Dakota
5,410 2,156 1,996 1,602 1,390
-74.3
-13.2
Ohio
244,099 78,129 105,140 72,114 65,509
-73.2
-9.2
Oklahoma
46,572 9,002 9,388 8,467 7,315
-84.3
-13.6
Oregon
40,504 18,645 31,751 44,142 42,868
5.8
-2.9
Pennsylvania
212,457 60,167 53,274 75,732 71,288
-66.4
-5.9
Puerto
Rico
57,337 12,617 13,371 13,392 12,311
-78.5
-8.1
Rhode
Island
22,776 8,107 6,758 6,442 6,043
-73.5
-6.2
South
Carolina
50,430 14,936 19,347 13,042 12,399
-75.4
-4.9
South
Dakota
6,601 2,842 3,291 3,280 3,152
-52.2
-3.9
Tennessee
109,678 58,244 62,714 54,999 52,083
-52.5
-5.3
Texas
284,973 59,972 51,931 44,870 39,853
-86.0
-11.2
Utah
17,505 5,069 6,646 4,429 4,357
-75.1
-1.6
Vermont
9,761 4,503 3,256 3,714 3,760
-61.5
1.2
Virgin
Islands
1,146 395 537 431 434 -62.1
0.7
Virginia
74,257 31,563 37,448 33,335 30,045
-59.5
-9.9
Washington
101,542 49,076 70,200 49,620 43,689
-57.0
-12.0
West
Virginia
40,279 9,699 10,496 9,227 9,029
-77.6
-2.1
Wisconsin
75,086 17,824 24,746 25,629 27,966
-62.8
9.1
Wyoming
5,351 255 318 322 347 -93.5
7.8








Congressional Research Service
34

---

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

Percentage Change to






Sept 2013 from Sept...
1994 2007 2010 2012 2013
1994
2012
Totals
5,015,545 1,720,231 1,926,140 1,807,240 1,711,437
-65.9
-5.3
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data for 2007 through 2013 include those families in Separate State Programs with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.

Table B-6. TANF Families by Number of Parents in Assisted Unit by State:
September 2013





As a Percent of Total Families
Single
Two
No
Total
State
Parent
Parent
Parent
Families Single Parent Two Parent
No Parent
Total Families
Alabama 11,379
203
7,433
19,015
59.8%
1.1%
39.1%
100.0%
Alaska 2,162
349
910
3,421
63.2
10.2
26.6
100.0
Arizona 8,788
594
6,115
15,497
56.7
3.8
39.5
100.0
Arkansas 3,961
155
2,515
6,631
59.7
2.3
37.9
100.0
California 246,420
49,959
257,117
553,496
44.5
9.0
46.5
100.0
Colorado 10,000
1,213
5,788
17,001
58.8
7.1
34.0
100.0
Connecticut 8,728
0
5,937
14,665
59.5
0.0
40.5
100.0
Delaware 1,778
20
3,140
4,938
36.0
0.4
63.6
100.0
District of Columbia
3,841
0
2,310
6,151
62.4
0.0
37.6
100.0
Florida 11,940
580
39,471
51,991
23.0
1.1
75.9
100.0
Georgia 3,995
0
13,053
17,048
23.4
0.0
76.6
100.0
Guam 400
197
735
1,332
30.0
14.8
55.2
100.0
Hawai
5,209 2,098 1,615 8,922
58.4
23.5
18.1
100.0
Idaho 156
0
1,690
1,846
8.5
0.0
91.5
100.0
Illinois 6,786
0
13,483
20,269
33.5
0.0
66.5
100.0
Indiana 3,526
168
8,200
11,894
29.6
1.4
68.9
100.0
Iowa 10,528
955
5,347
16,830
62.6
5.7
31.8
100.0
Kansas 4,070
475
3,239
7,784
52.3
6.1
41.6
100.0
Kentucky 11,136
770
18,361
30,267
36.8
2.5
60.7
100.0
Louisiana 1,858
0
4,660
6,518
28.5
0.0
71.5
100.0
Maine 24,138
750
2,563
27,451
87.9
2.7
9.3
100.0
Maryland 13,946
0
7,525
21,471
65.0
0.0
35.0
100.0
Massachusetts 47,298
5,049
19,617
71,964 65.7 7.0 27.3 100.0
Congressional Research Service
35

---

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






As a Percent of Total Families
Single
Two
No
Total
State
Parent
Parent
Parent
Families Single Parent Two Parent
No Parent
Total Families
Michigan 18,132
0
13,914
32,046
56.6
0.0
43.4
100.0
Minnesota 12,102
0
10,526
22,628
53.5
0.0
46.5
100.0
Mississippi 5,237
0
4,312
9,549
54.8
0.0
45.2
100.0
Missouri 26,003
0
7,522
33,525
77.6
0.0
22.4
100.0
Montana 1,755
289
1,420
3,464
50.7
8.3
41.0
100.0
Nebraska 3,094
0
3,496
6,590
46.9
0.0
53.1
100.0
Nevada 5,200
1,174
4,576
10,950
47.5
10.7
41.8
100.0
New Hampshire
4,721
81
1,378
6,180
76.4
1.3
22.3
100.0
New Jersey
21,396
0
8,609
30,005
71.3
0.0
28.7
100.0
New Mexico
6,764
484
5,341
12,589
53.7
3.8
42.4
100.0
New York
96,780
2,802
54,542
154,124
62.8
1.8
35.4
100.0
North Carolina
5,549
253
13,745
19,547
28.4
1.3
70.3
100.0
North Dakota
720
0
670
1,390
51.8
0.0
48.2
100.0
Ohio 17,411
2,186
45,912
65,509
26.6
3.3
70.1
100.0
Oklahoma 2,455
0
4,860
7,315
33.6
0.0
66.4
100.0
Oregon 37,576
0
5,292
42,868
87.7
0.0
12.3
100.0
Pennsylvania 50,585
993
19,710
71,288
71.0 1.4
27.6 100.0
Puerto Rico
9,170
704
2,437
12,311
74.5
5.7
19.8
100.0
Rhode Island
3,720
480
1,843
6,043
61.6
7.9
30.5
100.0
South Carolina
6,480
0
5,919
12,399
52.3
0.0
47.7
100.0
South Dakota
832
0
2,320
3,152
26.4
0.0
73.6
100.0
Tennessee 33,021
289
18,773
52,083
63.4
0.6
36.0
100.0
Texas 11,297
0
28,556
39,853
28.3
0.0
71.7
100.0
Utah 1,915
0
2,442
4,357
44.0
0.0
56.0
100.0
Vermont 1,919
389
1,452
3,760
51.0
10.3
38.6
100.0
Virgin Islands
434
0
0
434
100.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
Virginia 18,632
0
11,413
30,045
62.0
0.0
38.0
100.0
Washington 23,546
4,176
15,967
43,689
53.9 9.6
36.5 100.0
West Virginia
4,124
0
4,905
9,029
45.7
0.0
54.3
100.0
Wisconsin 15,348
892
11,726
27,966
54.9
3.2
41.9
100.0
Wyoming 121
7
219
347
34.9
2.0
63.1
100.0









Total 888,082
78,734
744,621
1,711,437
51.9
4.6
43.5
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), on the basis of data from the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
36

---

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

Notes: Caseload data for 2007 through 2013 include those families in Separate State Programs with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.


Table B-7. TANF All-Family Work Participation Rate by State:
FY2002 Through FY2010
State
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
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
Congressional Research Service
37

---

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

State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
New
Hampshire
32.6 28.2 30.2 24.6 24.1 42.0 47.4 46.5 46.6
New
Jersey
36.4 35.0 34.6 29.0 29.2 33.0 18.9 20.1 19.9
New
Mexico
42.7 42.0 46.2 41.6 42.3 36.4 37.5 43.1 42.5
New
York
38.5 37.1 37.8 35.2 37.8 38.0 37.3 33.4 35.0
North
Carolina
27.4 25.3 31.4 27.5 32.4 32.4 24.5 32.3 37.1
North
Dakota
30.4 27.0 25.3 31.4 51.9 58.7 50.2 61.0 68.7
Ohio
56.1 62.2 65.2 58.3 54.9 23.7 24.5 23.3 23.1
Oklahoma
26.7 29.2 33.2 34.0 32.9 38.1 29.2 23.0 24.3
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
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
Congressional Research Service
38

---

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

State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Alaska
44.5 44.6 52.8 54.7 54.2 58.6 47.0 40.5 35.3
Arizona
52.2 55.3 65.6 74.2 67.5 72.1 64.3 62.6 72.8
Arkansas
24.4 31.8 34.4 45.9 22.3 19.2 32.0 21.7 21.5
California
NA NA NA NA NA 31.7 26.5 28.6 35.6
Colorado
45.6 40.1 37.5 32.1 35.2 31.4 30.8 33.3 28.6
Connecticut
NA NA NA NA NA 26.8 NA NA NA
Delaware
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
District
of
Columbia 13.4 19.6 20.1 35.9 13.1 NA NA NA NA
Florida
NA NA NA NA NA 59.4 37.5 54.4 56.4
Georgia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
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
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
Congressional Research Service
39

---

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

State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Pennsylvania
11.0 8.8 15.0 17.7 32.5 89.8 79.8 84.2 86.8
Puerto
Rico
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rhode
Island
93.8 94.9 94.9 95.1 94.3 98.5 94.5 13.6 9.2
South
Carolina
30.1 25.5 55.9 63.7 64.7 88.0 NA NA NA
South
Dakota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Tennessee
NA NA NA NA NA 44.1 11.9 0.0 0.0
Texas
NA NA NA NA NA 59.2 NA NA NA
Utah
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Vermont
32.7 37.5 38.2 35.8 33.9 31.6 31.8 24.0 38.2
Virginia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Washington
50.7 44.3 31.1 37.7 43.1 25.2 17.2 18.6 22.3
West
Virginia
26.5 25.2 NA NA NA 16.4 NA NA 89.6
Wisconsin
39.3 40.3 33.1 25.5 17.1 20.9 31.6 33.0 31.1
Wyoming
93.8 91.5 87.5 65.2 75.9 74.1 69.4 75.7 48.5
Guam
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 1.1
Virgin
Islands
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: FY2002 through FY2006 work participation rates are based on federal work participation standard rules.
They exclude the effects of “grandfathered” waivers of pre-1996. The 1996 welfare reform law gave states the
option to continue their pre-reform “waiver” programs and have their work participation rates based on the
rules of the state waivers, not the federal rules. The last of these pre-1996 waivers expired in 2006. The all-
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
40

---