The Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy
July 9, 2015
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 FY2013, expenditures on basic assistance (cash
assistance) totaled $8.7 billion—28% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. TANF also
contributes funds for child care and services for children who have been, or are at risk of being,
abused and neglected.
Cash Assistance Caseload. A total of 1.7 million families, composed of 4.2 million recipients,
received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in December 2014. The bulk of the “recipients” were
children—3.1 million in that month. The cash assistance caseload is 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 FY2012. Additionally,
18% of cash assistance families had an employed adult, while 36% of all TANF families were
“child-only” and had no adult recipient. Child-only families include those with disabled adults
receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI), adults who are nonparents (e.g., grandparents,
aunts, uncles) caring for children, and families consisting of citizen children and ineligible
noncitizen parents.
Cash Assistance Benefits. TANF cash benefits are set by states. In July 2013, 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 (the District of
Columbia), the maximum monthly benefit of $428 for a family of three represents 26% 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 the
amount of a state’s 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
FY2012 states achieved an all-family participation rate of 34.4% and a two-parent rate of 33.9%.
That year, 16 jurisdictions failed the all-family standard, and 20 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
May States Require Drug Testing of TANF Cash Assistance Recipients? ................................ 2
What Are TANF’s Rules for Drug Felons? ................................................................................ 2
What Are TANF’s Rules for Substance Abuse Treatment? ....................................................... 2
What Is the Administration’s “Waiver” Initiative? .................................................................... 3
Has Any State Formally Applied for a “Waiver” of TANF Work Participation
Standards? .............................................................................................................................. 3
Are there Restrictions on a Family’s Use of TANF Benefits? ................................................... 3
Funding and Expenditures ............................................................................................................... 4
How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation? .............................. 4
How May States Use Federal TANF Funds? ............................................................................. 5
What Expenditures May a State Count Toward its Maintenance of Effort (MOE)
Requirement?.......................................................................................................................... 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 ............................................................................................. 12
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? ....................................... 12
Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted Since the 1996
Welfare Reform Law? .......................................................................................................... 13
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved? .................................................... 13
How Many Jurisdictions Have Failed the All-Families Standard From FY2002
Through FY2012? ................................................................................................................ 14
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard? ............................................. 16

Figures
Figure 1. Uses of TANF Federal Grants and State MOE Funds: FY2013 ....................................... 6
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-December 2014.................. 9
Figure 3. Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families, Selected Years FY1988 to FY2012 ......... 10
Figure 4. TANF Cash Assistance Maximum Monthly Benefit Amounts for a Single Parent
Family with Two Children, July 2013 ........................................................................................ 12
Congressional Research Service

---

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

Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families, FY2002-
FY2012 ....................................................................................................................................... 14

Tables
Table 1. Federal Funding for TANF Grants: FY2007 Through FY2015 ......................................... 1
Table 2. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Constant Dollars ..................................................... 4
Table 3. TANF Cash Assistance Caseload: December 2014 ............................................................ 8
Table 4. States Failing TANF All-Families Work Participation Standard: FY2002-FY2012 ........ 15
Table 5. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
FY2002-FY2012 ......................................................................................................................... 17
Table A-1. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2003-FY2006 ..................................................... 20
Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2015 ..................................................... 21
Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2013 .................................. 22
Table A-4. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961 to 2014 ............................................... 22
Table B-1. Use of FY2013 TANF and MOE Funds by Category .................................................. 25
Table B-2. Use of FY2013 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Funding ..................................................................................... 28
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2013 ............................................................... 31
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF Cash
Assistance by State, December 2014 .......................................................................................... 32
Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance by State,
December of Selected Years ....................................................................................................... 34
Table B-6. TANF Families by Number of Parents in Assisted Unit by State: December
2014 ............................................................................................................................................ 36
Table B-7. TANF Caseload Reduction Credits, Effective (After Credit) Standards, and
Work Participation Rates by State, All Families, FY2012 .......................................................... 38
Table B-8. TANF Caseload Reduction Credits, Effective (After Credit) Standards, and
Work Participation Rates by State, Two-Parent Families, FY2012 ............................................ 40

Appendixes
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables .............................................................................................. 20
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 Overview, by Gene Falk.
Current Topics
What Is TANF’s Current Funding Status?
P.L. 113-235, the omnibus appropriation act for FY2015, extends TANF funding through
September 30, 2015.1
What Is TANF’s Funding Level?
Table 1 shows TANF funding for FY2007 through FY2015. 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 amount was established in the 1996
welfare reform law and has not been changed since then.
FY2015 funding for TANF grants is the same as in previous years, except for the TANF
contingency fund. A total of $583 million is available for FY2015 contingency fund grants to
states, compared with $610 million in FY2014. A total FY2015 contingency fund appropriation of
$608 million includes set-asides of $15 million for HHS TANF research activities and $10
million for Census Bureau research activities related to TANF, leaving $583 million for
contingency fund grants to states.
Table 1. Federal Funding for TANF Grants: FY2007 Through FY2015
(Dollars in millions)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
State family assistance grant
$16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489 $16,489
Supplemental
grants
319 319 319 319 211 0 0 0 0
Healthy marriage/responsible
150 150 150 150 150 150 150
150 150
fatherhood grants
Grants to the territories
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
78
Grants for tribal work
8 8 8 8 8 8 8
8 8
programs

1 See Section 228 of Division G of P.L. 113-235.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

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


2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Contingency
fund
59 428
1,107 212 334 612 610a 610a 583b
Emergency
contingency
fund

617
4,383
Totals
17,103 17,472 18,768 21,639 17,270 17,337 17,335 17,335 17,308
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 was available for FY2013 and FY2014 TANF contingency fund grants to states.
b. P.L. 113-235 appropriated $608 mil ion to the TANF contingency fund for FY2015 and FY2016, but sets
aside from those funds $15 million for HHS welfare research activities and $10 million for U.S. Census
Bureau activities related to welfare research.
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.
May States Require Drug Testing of TANF Cash 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. 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. See also CRS Report R42326, Constitutional Analysis of Suspicionless Drug Testing
Requirements for the Receipt of Governmental Benefits, by David H. Carpenter.
What Are TANF’s Rules for Drug Felons?
The 1996 welfare reform 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.)2
What Are TANF’s Rules for Substance Abuse Treatment?
States may use TANF funds for substance abuse treatment. Federal TANF dollars cannot be used
for “medical services,” but can be used for “non-medical” treatment such as counseling. State
MOE dollars can be used for medical services connected with substance abuse treatment.

2 TANF also bars aid to fleeing felons and people convicted of welfare fraud by misrepresenting their state of
residence. For an overview of rules for TANF, as well as those for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP) and housing assistance programs related to drug testing and crime-related issues, see CRS Report R42394,
Drug Testing and Crime-Related Restrictions in TANF, SNAP, and Housing Assistance, by Maggie McCarty et al.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

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

TANF requires states to conduct an employability assessment of adult recipients, and 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.
Additionally, a state may engage recipients in substance abuse treatment and count that activity
toward its work participation standard, though such an activity is counted only for a limited
period of time. Substance abuse treatment is considered a “job readiness” activity; a state may
count job search and job readiness activities for a maximum of 12 weeks in a year toward its
work participation standards.
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 July 7, 2015, no state had formally applied for a waiver of TANF work participation
standards under the Administration’s waiver initiative.
Are there Restrictions on a Family’s Use of TANF Benefits?
TANF funds a wide range of benefits and services, many of which are for specific purposes.
However, TANF is best known for helping states finance their cash public assistance programs for
needy families with children. The “cash” benefits are often paid on an Electronic Benefit
Transaction (EBT) card that a recipient can take to an Automated Teller Machine (ATM) to draw
cash or use to purchase goods and services at a point-of-sale device. As “cash,” there are no
restrictions on the types of goods and services that can be purchased with a TANF benefit.
However, TANF law does restrict where a recipient might access benefits at an ATM. 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.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

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

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 FY2014 (ended September 30, 2014),
the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 32.3%. Table 2 shows the impact of inflation
on the value of the TANF block grant for each year, FY1997 through FY2014. On average, the
TANF basic block grant has lost 2.3% of its value each year over that period.
Table 2. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Constant Dollars
Cumulative
Value of the Basic
Change in Value of
TANF Block Grant
the Basic Block
in FY1997 Dollars
Grant from
Fiscal Year
($ in billions)
FY1997 Levels
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 11.2 -32.3



Average Annual Rate of Change in the Value
-2.3%
of the Block Grant
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), and the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
Notes: Constant dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for al Urban Consumers (CPI-U).
Congressional Research Service
4

---

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

How May States Use Federal TANF Funds?
TANF is a broad-purpose block grant that gives states the flexibility to use its funds to address
both the effects of, and the root causes of, childhood economic disadvantage. There are two sets
of rules: those that relate to the use of federal TANF grants, and those for which state
expenditures count toward meeting the TANF MOE state spending requirement.
States have broad discretion on how they expend federal TANF grants. States may use TANF
funds “in any manner that is reasonably calculated” to accomplish the block grant’s statutory
purpose. That purpose is to increase the flexibility of states in operating a program designed to
1. provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their
own homes or in the homes of relatives;
2. end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job
preparation, work, and marriage;
3. prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish
annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these
pregnancies; and
4. encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
In addition, states may also expend federal TANF grants on any activity financed by pre-TANF
programs. These are known as “grandfathered” activities.” Examples of activities that do not
meet a TANF goal but may be financed by TANF grants include foster care payments and funding
for juvenile justice activities, if they were financed in the pre-TANF programs.
In addition to expending federal funds on allowable TANF activities, federal law permits a
limited amount of the federal TANF basic block grant to be used for other programs. A maximum
of 30% of the TANF block grant may be used for the following combined transfers or
expenditures: (1) transfers to the Child Care and Development Block Grant; (2) transfers to the
Social Services Block Grant (SSBG), with a maximum transfer to the SSBG set at 10% of the
basic block grant; (3) as state match for “reverse commuter grants,” providing public
transportation from inner cities to the suburbs.
What Expenditures May a State Count Toward its Maintenance of
Effort (MOE) Requirement?
The range of expenditures on activities that states may count toward the maintenance of effort
requirement is—like the authority to spend federal funds—quite broad. The expenditures need
not be in the “TANF program” itself, but in any program that provides benefits and services to
TANF-eligible families in cash assistance, child care assistance, education and job training,
administrative costs, or any other activity designed to meet TANF’s statutory goals. States may
count expenditures made by local governments toward the MOE requirement. Additionally, there
is a general rule of federal grants management that permits states to count as a state expenditure
“third-party” in-kind donations, as long as they meet the requirements of providing benefits or
services to TANF-eligible families and meet the requirements of the types of activities that states
may count toward the MOE requirement.
Congressional Research Service
5

---

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

The MOE requirement sets a minimum amount that states must expend from their own funds.
Under current law, there are incentives for states to expend funds beyond this minimum. States
must spend more than the minimum MOE to access TANF contingency funds. Additionally, states
can receive extra “credit” toward their work participation standards for spending more than the
minimum required.
How Have States Used TANF Funds?
Figure 1 shows the uses of federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2013. In
FY2013, a total of $31.6 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% ($8.7 billion) of total FY2013 TANF and MOE
dollars.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2013, 16% 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. Uses of TANF Federal Grants and State MOE Funds: FY2013
(Total = $31.6 Billion)

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

See Appendix A, Table A-3 for 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 FY2013 (September 30, 2013, the latest data currently available), a total of $3.0
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
FY2013, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.5
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 FY2013, states also had $1.5 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% of all TANF expenditures. Therefore, the federal reporting requirements
that pertain to families receiving “assistance” are 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 4.2 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in December 2014. The bulk of
the “recipients” were children—3.1 million in that month. For state-by-state cash assistance
caseloads, see Table B-4.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

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

Table 3. TANF Cash Assistance Caseload: December 2014
Families 1,674,536
Total Recipients
4,216,251
Total Children
3,055,382
Total Adults
1,160,869
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?
Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving cash
assistance, from July 1959 to December 2014. Before 1996, these are families that received cash
assistance from the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. From 1997
onward, these are families that received cash assistance from TANF. The shaded areas of the
figure represent months when the national economy was in recession. Though the health of the
national economy affected the trend in the cash assistance caseload, the long-term trend in receipt
of cash assistance does not follow a classic counter-cyclical pattern. (Such a pattern would have
the caseload rise during economic slumps, and then fall again during periods of economic
growth.) Factors other than the health of the economy (demographic trends, policy changes) also
influenced the caseload trend.
The figure shows two periods of sustained caseload increases: the period from the mid-1960s to
the mid-1970s and a second period from 1988 to 1994. The number of families receiving 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.
During the recent 2007-2009 recession and its aftermath, the caseload began to rise from its post-
welfare reform low in August 2008 (1.7 million families), peaking in December 2010 at close to
2.0 million families. By December 2014, the cash assistance caseload had declined to
approximately match its post-welfare reform low at about 1.7 million families.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

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

Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-December 2014
Millions of Families
6
MAR 1994
Historic Peak:
5.1 million families
5
4
3
DEC 2014
1.7 million
families
2
1
0
1959
1964
1969
1974
1979
1984
1989
1994
1999
2004
2009
2014

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: Shaded areas denotes months when the national economy was in recession. Information represents
families receiving cash assistance from Aid to Dependent Children (ADC), Aid to Families with Dependent
Children (AFDC), and TANF. For October 1999 through December 2014, includes families receiving assistance
from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort
requirement. See Table A-4 for average annual data on families, recipients, adult recipients, and child recipients
of ADC,/AFDC and TANF cash assistance for 1961 to 2014.

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. Figure 3 shows the change in the size and composition of the cash
assistance caseload under both AFDC (1988 and 1994) and under TANF. In FY1988, 84% of
AFDC families were headed by an unemployed adult recipient. In FY2012, families with an
unemployed adult recipients represented 45% of all cash assistance families. This decline
occurred, in large part, as the number of families headed by unemployed adult recipients
declined.
With the decline in families headed by unemployed adults, the share of the caseload that
represented families with employed adults and “child only” families has increased. In FY2012,
families with employed adult recipients represented 18% of all cash assistance families. “Child-
only” families are those where no adult recipient receives benefits in their own right; the family
receives benefits on behalf of its children. The share of the caseload that was child-only in
Congressional Research Service
9

---

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

FY2012 was 36.5%. In FY2012, families with a non-recipient, non-parent relative (grandparents,
aunts, uncles) represented 12% of all cash assistance families. Families with ineligible, noncitizen
adults or adults who have not reported their citizenship status made up 11% of the cash assistance
caseload in that year. Families where the parent received Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and
the children received TANF made up 9% of all cash assistance families in FY2012.
Figure 3. Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families, Selected Years FY1988 to
FY2012

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the TANF national data files.
Notes: TANF cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
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):
Size and 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.
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.
Figure 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a single mother caring for
two children (family of three) in July 2013.3 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. For a family of three, the maximum TANF benefit
paid in July 2013 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi to $923 per month in Alaska. In all
states, the maximum TANF cash assistance amount for this sized family was less than 50% of
poverty-level income. 4


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 In 2013, the HHS poverty guidelines for the contiguous 48 states and the District of Columbia for a family of 3 was
$1,628 per month. Higher poverty lines applied in Alaska ($2,034 per month for a family of 3) and Hawaii ($1,873 per
month for a family of 3).
Congressional Research Service
11

---

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

Figure 4. TANF Cash Assistance Maximum Monthly Benefit Amounts for a Single
Parent Family with Two Children, July 2013

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules
Database.

For additional information on TANF benefit amounts by state, see CRS Report R43634,
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): Eligibility and Benefit Amounts in State TANF
Cash Assistance Programs, by Gene Falk.
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.

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

---

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

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 and by year.
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.
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.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5), a law enacted in
response to the sharp economic downturn of 2007-2009, held states “harmless” for caseload
increases affecting the work participation standards for FY2009 through FY2011. It did so by
allowing states to “freeze” caseload reduction credits at pre-recession levels through the FY2011
standards.
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).
Congressional Research Service
13

---

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

Figure 5 shows the national average all-families work participation rate for FY2002 through
FY2012. For the period FY2002 through FY2011, states have achieved an all-families work
participation rate hovering around 30%. In FY2012, the all-families work participation rate ticked
up to 34.4%. In that year, states faced higher work participation standards because the “freeze” to
the caseload reduction credit enacted in ARRA expired.
Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families, FY2002-
FY2012
Work Participation Rate
50%
40%
34.4%
28.9%
29.4% 30.3% 30.6% 29.7% 29.4% 29.4%
27.5%
29.0% 29.5%
30%
20%
10%
0%
FY02
FY03
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12

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

How Many Jurisdictions Have Failed the All-Families Standard
From FY2002 Through FY2012?
Table 4 shows which states failed the TANF all-families work participation standards from
FY2002 through FY2012. Before FY2007, only a few jurisdictions failed to meet TANF all-
families work participation standards. However, in FY2007, 15 jurisdictions failed to meet the
all-families standard. FY2007 was the first year policies under the DRA were effective. This
number declined to nine in FY2008 and eight in FY2009.
In FY2012, despite the uptick in the national average work participation rate, 16 states failed to
meet the all-family standard, the largest number of states that did not meet their participation
standards in any one year since the enactment of TANF. FY2012 was the year that ARRA’s
“freeze” of the caseload reduction credit expired, and states were generally required to meet
higher standards than in previous years. For state-by-state information on FY2012 caseload
reduction credits, effective (after credit) standards, and work participation rates related to the “all
families” standard, see Table B-7.

Congressional Research Service
14

---

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

Table 4. States Failing TANF All-Families Work Participation Standard:
FY2002-FY2012
(Changes to TANF Work Participation Standard Rules Under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA)
Effective in FY2007)

Pre-DRA
Post-DRA
State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Alabama

Alaska










X
Arizona











Arkansas











California
X
X
X
X
X
X
Colorado










X
Connecticut
X
Delaware











District
of
Columbia
X
X
X
Florida











Georgia











Hawai











Idaho










X
Illinois

Indiana
X X X
Iowa











Kansas











Kentucky
X
Louisiana











Maine
X
X
X
X
X
X
Maryland











Massachusetts











Michigan
X
X X
X
Minnesota
X
Mississippi

Missouri
X
X X
X
Montana











Nebraska











Nevada
X X X
New Hampshire











New Jersey











New
Mexico
X
Congressional Research Service
15

---

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


Pre-DRA
Post-DRA
State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
New York











North Carolina











North Dakota











Ohio
X
X
X
X
X
Oklahoma











Oregon
X
X
X
X
X
X
Pennsylvania

Puerto
Rico
X
X
X
X
X
X
Rhode Island










X
South Carolina










X
South Dakota











Tennessee











Texas











Utah











Vermont
X X
Virginia










X
Washington










X
West
Virginia
X
X
Wisconsin










X
Wyoming











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












Totals
1 2 1 2 3 15 9 8 8 9 16
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard?
In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second, 90%
standard for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard too can be
reduced for caseload reduction.
Table 5 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-
Congressional Research Service
16

---

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

parent families subject to the work participation standard.6 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 FY2012, 27 jurisdictions reported that no two-parent families were included in the TANF work
participation standard calculation. Of the 27 jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their
TANF work participation calculation, 7 met the standard and 20 did not. For state-by-state
information on FY2012 caseload reduction credits, effective (after credit) standards, and work
participation rates related to two-parent families, see Table B-8.
Table 5. Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State:
FY2002-FY2012
(“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- Deficit Reduction Act (DRA)
Post-Deficit Reduction Act (DRA)
State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Alabama
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES YES YES
Alaska
YES YES YES YES YES NO NO NO NO YES NO
Arizona
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Arkansas
NO NO NO YES NO YES YES YES YES YES NO
California
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES YES NO
Colorado
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO
Connecticut
NA NA NA NA NA YES NA NA NA NA NA
Delaware
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
District
of
Columbia
NO NO NO NO NO NA NA NA NA NA NA
Florida
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES YES NO
Georgia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Hawai
NA NA NA NA NA NA YES NA YES YES YES
Idaho
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA NA NA
Illinois
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Indiana
NA NA NA NA NA NO YES YES YES YES NO
Iowa
YES YES NA NA NA YES YES YES YES YES NO
Kansas
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO
Kentucky
YES YES YES YES YES YES NO NO YES YES NO
Louisiana
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA NA NA

6 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
17

---

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


Pre- Deficit Reduction Act (DRA)
Post-Deficit Reduction Act (DRA)
State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Maine
YES YES NA NA NA YES NO NO NO NO NO
Maryland
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Massachusetts
YES YES YES YES MA NA YES YES YES NA YES
Michigan
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA NA NA
Minnesota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Mississippi
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Missouri
NO NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Montana
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Nebraska
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Nevada
NA NA NA NA NA NO NO NO NO NO NO
New
Hampshire
YES NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
New
Jersey
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
New
Mexico
YES YES YES YES YES NO YES YES YES YES NO
New
York
YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA NA NA
North
Carolina
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
North
Dakota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Ohio
YES YES YES YES YES NO YES YES YES YES NO
Oklahoma
NA YES NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Oregon
YES YES YES YES YES NO NO NO NO NO NO
Pennsylvania
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
Puerto
Rico
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rhode
Island
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO NO NO NO
South
Carolina
YES YES YES YES YES YES NA NA NA NA NA
South
Dakota
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Tennessee
NA NA NA NA NA YES YES YES YES YES NA
Texas
NA NA NA NA NA YES NA NA NA NA NA
Utah
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Vermont
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO
Virginia
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Washington
YES YES NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO
West
Virginia
NO NO NA NA NA NO NA NA YES NA NA
Wisconsin
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO
Wyoming
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES NO
Guam
NO NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO NO
Virgin
Islands
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Congressional Research Service
18

---

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


Pre- Deficit Reduction Act (DRA)
Post-Deficit Reduction Act (DRA)
State
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Number
of
Jurisdictions
without
Two-Parent
Families 24 25 29 29 29 24 26 27 25 27 27
Number
of
Jurisdictions
with
Two-Parent
Families
30 29 25 25 25 30 28 27 29 27 27
Number
of
Jurisdictions
Meeting
Two-Parent
Standard 25 25 21 23 21 22 22 20 23 22 7
Number
of
Jurisdictions
Failing
Two-Parent
Standard 5 4 4 2 3 7 6 7 6 5 20
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).

Congressional Research Service
19

---

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).
Note: Table shows extensions through 2006, when the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-171) extended TANF
through FY2010. Temporary extensions after 2010 are shown in Table A-2.
Congressional Research Service
20

---

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

Table A-2. Temporary Extensions of TANF, FY2011-FY2015
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-Feb. 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
Feb. 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.
P.L. 113-164
Oct. 1, 2014-Dec 11, 2014
Extension of TANF funding through Dec. 11, 2014,
as part of a continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-202
Dec. 12, 2014-Dec 13, 2014
Extension of TANF funding through Dec. 13, 2014,
as part of a short-term continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-203
Dec 14, 2014-Dec 17, 2014
Extension of TANF funding through Dec. 17, 2014,
as part of a short-term continuing resolution.
P.L. 113-235
Dec. 18, 2014-Sept. 30, 2015
Extension of TANF funding for the remainder of
FY2015 as part of an omnibus appropriations act.
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS).

Congressional Research Service
21

---

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

Table A-3. Use of TANF and State Maintenance of Effort Funds: FY2013
(Dollars in Billions)
Percent of Total
Federal TANF
and State MOE

Billions of Dollars
Dollars
Basic Assistance
$8.7
27.6%
Administration 2.3
7.2
Work Program Expenditures
2.0
6.4
Child Care
5.0
15.8
Other Work Supports
2.8
9.0
Other Expenditures
10.7
33.9
Totals 31.6
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
Table A-4. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961 to 2014





TANF Child Recipients
As a
As a
Percent of
Percent of
Families
Recipients
Adults
Children
All
All Poor
Year
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
Children
Children
1961
0.873 3.363 0.765 2.598 3.7% 14.3%
1962
0.939 3.704 0.860 2.844 4.0 15.7
1963
0.963 3.945 0.988 2.957 4.1 17.4
1964
1.010 4.195 1.050 3.145 4.3 18.6
1965
1.060 4.422 1.101 3.321 4.5 21.5
1966
1.096 4.546 1.112 3.434 4.7 26.5
1967
1.220 5.014 1.243 3.771 5.2 31.2
1968
1.410 5.702 1.429 4.274 5.9 37.8
1969
1.696 6.689 1.716 4.973 6.9 49.7
1970
2.207 8.462 2.250 6.212 8.6 57.7
1971
2.763 10.242 2.808 7.435 10.4 68.5
1972
3.048 10.944 3.039 7.905 11.1 74.9
1973
3.148 10.949 3.046 7.903 11.2 79.9
1974
3.219 10.847 3.041 7.805 11.2 75.0
1975
3.481 11.319 3.248 8.071 11.8 71.2
1976
3.565 11.284 3.302 7.982 11.8 76.2
1977
3.568 11.015 3.273 7.743 11.6 73.9
Congressional Research Service
22

---

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






TANF Child Recipients
As a
As a
Percent of
Percent of
Families
Recipients
Adults
Children
All
All Poor
Year
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
Children
Children
1978
3.517 10.551 3.188 7.363 11.2 72.8
1979
3.509 10.312 3.130 7.181 11.0 68.0
1980
3.712 10.774 3.355 7.419 11.5 63.2
1981
3.835 11.079 3.552 7.527 11.7 59.2
1982
3.542 10.358 3.455 6.903 10.8 49.6
1983
3.686 10.761 3.663 7.098 11.1 50.1
1984
3.714 10.831 3.687 7.144 11.2 52.3
1985
3.701 10.855 3.658 7.198 11.3 54.4
1986
3.763 11.038 3.704 7.334 11.5 56.0
1987
3.776 11.027 3.661 7.366 11.5 56.4
1988
3.749 10.915 3.586 7.329 11.4 57.8
1989
3.798 10.992 3.573 7.419 11.5 57.9
1990
4.057 11.695 3.784 7.911 12.1 57.9
1991
4.497 12.930 4.216 8.715 13.2 59.8
1992
4.829 13.773 4.470 9.303 13.9 59.9
1993
5.012 14.205 4.631 9.574 14.1 60.0
1994
5.033 14.161 4.593 9.568 13.9 61.7
1995
4.791 13.418 4.284 9.135 13.1 61.5
1996
4.434 12.321 3.928 8.600 12.3 58.7
1997 3.740 10.376 NA NA
10.0 50.1
1998 3.050 8.347 NA NA 8.1 42.9
1999 2.578 6.924 NA NA 6.7 39.4
2000
2.303 6.143 1.655 4.479 6.1 38.1
2001
2.192 5.717 1.514 4.195 5.7 35.3
2002
2.187 5.609 1.479 4.119 5.6 33.6
2003
2.180 5.490 1.416 4.063 5.5 31.3
2004
2.153 5.342 1.362 3.969 5.4 30.2
2005
2.061 5.028 1.261 3.756 5.1 28.9
2006
1.906 4.582 1.120 3.453 4.6 26.7
2007
1.730 4.075 0.956 3.119 4.2 23.2
2008
1.701 4.005 0.946 3.059 4.1 21.6
2009
1.838 4.371 1.074 3.296 4.4 21.2
2010
1.919 4.598 1.163 3.435 4.6 20.9
2011
1.907 4.557 1.149 3.408 4.6 20.9
Congressional Research Service
23

---

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






TANF Child Recipients
As a
As a
Percent of
Percent of
Families
Recipients
Adults
Children
All
All Poor
Year
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
Children
Children
2012
1.852 4.402 1.104 3.298 4.4 20.3
2013
1.726 4.042 0.993 3.050 4.1 20.6
2014
1.650 3.957 1.007 2.949 4.0 NA
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Notes: NA denotes not available. During transition reporting from AFDC to TANF, caseload statistics on adult
and child recipients were not col ected. For those years, TANF children as a percent of all children and percent
of all poor children were estimated by HHS and published in Welfare Indicators and Risk Factors, Annual Report to
Congress, Table TANF 2, p. A-7. See http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/14/indicators/rpt_indicators.pdf. Child poverty data
for 2014 will not be available until September 2015.



Congressional Research Service
24

---

Appendix B. State Tables
Table B-1. Use of FY2013 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
(Dollars in millions)
Other
Child
Work
Other
State Basic
Assistance
Administration
Work
Care
Supports
Expenditures Total
Alabama $45.9
$24.4
$21.0
$5.5
$3.8
$70.3
$170.9
Alaska
38.7
4.6 12.6 27.4
0.6
5.4 89.2
Arizona -21.8
44.4
8.8
10.1
0.2
337.7
379.4
Arkansas 13.2
14.0
23.5
8.6
3.2
94.2
156.6
California
3,225.3
556.6 507.3 840.4 183.5
1,718.7 7,031.8
Colorado
70.7
20.7 2.1 1.2 8.3
212.7 315.7
Connecticut
81.3
29.3 16.1 35.5
4.9
318.1 485.2
Delaware 12.9
-0.2
1.4
57.2
0.0
11.9
83.2
District of Columbia
59.0
7.4
37.4
76.4
16.0
57.4
253.7
Florida 173.2
30.3
58.4
342.7
5.5
387.4
997.5
Georgia 47.5
15.7
-0.7
22.2
20.1
389.1
493.9
Hawai
64.1
14.9 94.7 13.0
4.0
53.9 244.5
Idaho 6.5
5.6
6.2
10.8
0.3
16.8
46.3
Illinois 81.0
27.5
31.1
645.5
25.1
350.7
1,160.9
Indiana
28.9
18.0 16.0 77.7 33.9
104.9 279.3
Iowa
54.1
7.1 15.9 44.2 13.3
76.1 210.7
Kansas 27.5
13.5
0.4
22.5
54.2
55.5
173.6
Kentucky
102.1
11.9 34.1 74.4 21.7
33.5 277.7
Louisiana
25.7
20.4 6.4 5.2 19.0
145.1 221.7
CRS-25

---

Other
Child
Work
Other
State Basic
Assistance
Administration
Work
Care
Supports
Expenditures Total
Maine 49.8
2.7
12.4
9.9
11.9
9.2
95.9
Maryland
139.2
61.2 36.3 24.2 147.6
175.9 584.2
Massachusetts 338.7
33.3
6.5
296.2
109.3
354.3
1,138.4
Michigan
206.6
180.5 81.0 19.5 51.6
890.4 1,429.6
Minnesota
94.1
46.3 54.7 53.7 134.7
53.4 437.0
Mississippi
16.7
3.2 33.0 19.1 16.8
17.6 106.4
Missouri
101.3
9.4 17.4 42.3
0.0
232.7 403.1
Montana
15.3
8.4 12.1 10.0
0.0
7.8 53.6
Nebraska
24.2
3.5 19.4 23.5 36.0
2.3 108.9
Nevada
43.5
8.1 1.8 0.0 1.1
35.5 90.1
New
Hampshire
23.9
12.0 6.9 8.8 1.3
20.1 73.0
New
Jersey
304.0
81.5 87.6 73.2 190.5
558.1 1,295.0
New Mexico
53.1
10.7
8.7
36.3
47.6
57.1
213.5
New
York
1,606.0
333.9 124.4 536.9 1,432.6
1,576.8 5,610.7
North Carolina
59.1
47.8
42.6
172.3
60.8
240.4
623.0
North
Dakota
5.1
4.0 4.0 1.0 1.3
18.5 33.9
Ohio 301.9
146.0
36.1
382.0
9.9
126.5
1,002.3
Oklahoma 19.8
23.9
0.0
70.0
25.7
59.6
199.0
Oregon
141.8
37.3 17.1 11.1
3.8
112.8 324.0
Pennsylvania 271.5
80.0
78.1
395.4
9.5
208.2
1,042.8
Rhode Island
42.4
16.2
9.4
24.4
13.6
80.4
186.4
South Carolina
34.8
19.1
20.1
4.1
1.9
150.3
230.2
South
Dakota
12.6
2.8 4.2 0.8 0.1
7.1 27.6
CRS-26

---

Other
Child
Work
Other
State Basic
Assistance
Administration
Work
Care
Supports
Expenditures Total
Tennessee
108.2
31.4 71.2 29.5
0.0
77.7 318.1
Texas
75.4
68.3 87.8 26.8
5.6
591.0 854.9
Utah
23.2
7.6 18.0 10.5
0.3
18.1 77.6
Vermont 20.0
7.1
0.1
28.9
24.9
11.4
92.5
Virginia
100.5
22.3 52.7 30.8
8.7
66.0 281.0
Washington
201.7
59.9 159.5 130.7
2.5
308.9 863.3
West Virginia
31.0
26.2
1.8
10.4
29.8
45.4
144.6
Wisconsin 134.2
23.0
34.2
200.0
47.8
164.7
603.9
Wyoming
2.5
7.4 1.8 3.7 0.0
17.5 32.8








Totals
8,737.9
2,290.9 2,033.7 5,006.5 2,844.8
10,735.3 31,649.2
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Negative entries denote adjustments for prior year reporting changes.
CRS-27

---

Table B-2. Use of FY2013 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percent of Total Federal TANF and State MOE Funding
Other
Basic
Child
Work
Other
State
Assistance Administration Work Care
Supports
Expenditures Total
Alabama 26.9%
14.3%
12.3%
3.2%
2.2%
41.1%
100.0%
Alaska 43.3
5.2
14.1
30.7
0.6
6.0
100.0
Arizona -5.8
11.7
2.3
2.7
0.1
89.0
100.0
Arkansas 8.4
8.9
15.0
5.5
2.0
60.2
100.0
California 45.9
7.9
7.2
12.0
2.6
24.4
100.0
Colorado 22.4
6.6
0.7
0.4
2.6
67.4
100.0
Connecticut 16.8
6.0
3.3
7.3
1.0
65.6
100.0
Delaware 15.5
-0.2
1.7
68.7
0.0
14.3
100.0
District of Columbia
23.3
2.9
14.8
30.1
6.3
22.6
100.0
Florida 17.4
3.0
5.8
34.4
0.6
38.8
100.0
Georgia 9.6
3.2
-0.1
4.5
4.1
78.8
100.0
Hawai 26.2
6.1
38.7
5.3
1.6
22.0
100.0
Idaho 14.2
12.1
13.5
23.3
0.6
36.4
100.0
Illinois 7.0
2.4
2.7
55.6
2.2
30.2
100.0
Indiana 10.4
6.4
5.7
27.8
12.1
37.6
100.0
Iowa 25.7
3.4
7.5
21.0
6.3
36.1
100.0
Kansas 15.8
7.8
0.2
13.0
31.2
32.0
100.0
Kentucky 36.8
4.3
12.3
26.8
7.8
12.1
100.0
Louisiana 11.6
9.2
2.9
2.4
8.6
65.4
100.0
Maine 51.9
2.8
12.9
10.3
12.4
9.6
100.0
Maryland 23.8
10.5
6.2
4.1
25.3
30.1
100.0
Massachusetts 29.8
2.9
0.6
26.0
9.6
31.1
100.0
CRS-28

---

Other
Basic
Child
Work
Other
State
Assistance Administration Work Care
Supports
Expenditures Total
Michigan 14.5
12.6
5.7
1.4
3.6
62.3
100.0
Minnesota 21.5
10.6
12.5
12.3
30.8
12.2
100.0
Mississippi 15.7
3.0
31.0
17.9
15.8
16.5
100.0
Missouri 25.1
2.3
4.3
10.5
0.0
57.7
100.0
Montana 28.6
15.7
22.6
18.6
0.0
14.5
100.0
Nebraska 22.3
3.2
17.8
21.6
33.0
2.1
100.0
Nevada 48.2
9.0
2.0
0.0
1.3
39.4
100.0
New Hampshire
32.7
16.4
9.5
12.0
1.8
27.5
100.0
New Jersey
23.5
6.3
6.8
5.7
14.7
43.1
100.0
New Mexico
24.9
5.0
4.1
17.0
22.3
26.8
100.0
New York
28.6
6.0
2.2
9.6
25.5
28.1
100.0
North Carolina
9.5
7.7
6.8
27.7
9.8
38.6
100.0
North Dakota
15.0
11.7
11.9
3.0
3.8
54.6
100.0
Ohio 30.1
14.6
3.6
38.1
1.0
12.6
100.0
Oklahoma 10.0
12.0
0.0
35.2
12.9
29.9
100.0
Oregon 43.8
11.5
5.3
3.4
1.2
34.8
100.0
Pennsylvania 26.0
7.7
7.5
37.9
0.9
20.0
100.0
Rhode Island
22.7
8.7
5.1
13.1
7.3
43.2
100.0
South Carolina
15.1
8.3
8.7
1.8
0.8
65.3
100.0
South Dakota
45.7
10.0
15.3
2.9
0.4
25.7
100.0
Tennessee 34.0
9.9
22.4
9.3
0.0
24.4
100.0
Texas 8.8
8.0
10.3
3.1
0.6
69.1
100.0
Utah 29.9
9.8
23.2
13.5
0.3
23.3
100.0
CRS-29

---

Other
Basic
Child
Work
Other
State
Assistance Administration Work Care
Supports
Expenditures Total
Vermont 21.7
7.7
0.1
31.2
27.0
12.3
100.0
Virginia 35.8
7.9
18.8
11.0
3.1
23.5
100.0
Washington 23.4
6.9
18.5
15.1
0.3
35.8
100.0
West Virginia
21.4
18.1
1.3
7.2
20.6
31.4
100.0
Wisconsin 22.2
3.8
5.7
33.1
7.9
27.3
100.0
Wyoming 7.5
22.5
5.4
11.1
0.0
53.4
100.0








Totals 27.6
7.2
6.4
15.8
9.0
33.9
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Negative entries denote adjustments for prior year reporting changes.
CRS-30

---

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

Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2013
(September 30, 2013, in millions of dollars)
Total
Obligated but
Unspent
State
not Spent
Unobligated
Funds
Alabama $3.7
$10.6
$14.3
Alaska 0.0
69.7
69.7
Arizona 2.7
0.0
2.7
Arkansas 18.3
16.0
34.3
California 8.4
0.0
8.4
Colorado 0.0
19.1
19.1
Connecticut 0.0
6.3
6.3
Delaware 9.6
10.4
20.0
District of Columbia
6.5
54.4
60.9
Florida 29.6
0.5
30.1
Georgia 21.2
60.9
82.1
Hawai 5.8
59.5
65.2
Idaho 31.7
0.0
31.7
Illinois 0.0
16.0
16.0
Indiana 238.1
21.7
259.7
Iowa 14.1
3.0
17.1
Kansas 11.6
32.3
43.9
Kentucky 0.0
3.5
3.5
Louisiana 0.0
0.0
0.0
Maine 0.0
24.6
24.6
Maryland 4.9
0.0
4.9
Massachusetts 0.0
0.0
0.0
Michigan 0.0
42.4
42.4
Minnesota 0.0
161.4
161.4
Mississippi 4.0
7.9
11.9
Missouri 22.3
-0.2
22.1
Montana 0.4
42.7
43.1
Nebraska 0.0
59.6
59.6
Nevada 0.0
12.7
12.7
New Hampshire
0.0
13.2
13.2
New Jersey
32.4
37.5
69.9
New Mexico
50.2
0.0
50.2
New York
273.4
104.0
377.4
Congressional Research Service
31

---

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

Total
Obligated but
Unspent
State
not Spent
Unobligated
Funds
North Carolina
192.6
3.5
196.1
North Dakota
0.0
15.8
15.8
Ohio 201.3
34.0
235.4
Oklahoma 53.3
0.0
53.3
Oregon 0.0
17.9
17.9
Pennsylvania 52.1
300.1
352.2
Rhode Island
0.0
0.0
0.0
South Carolina
0.0
12.4
12.4
South Dakota
0.0
14.9
14.9
Tennessee 0.0
59.3
59.3
Texas 152.7
0.0
152.7
Utah 0.0
109.2
109.2
Vermont 0.0
0.0
0.0
Virginia 5.1
33.9
39.0
Washington 69.5
0.0
69.6
West Virginia
0.0
0.1
0.1
Wisconsin 0.0
12.9
12.9
Wyoming 3.2
21.2
24.5




Totals 1,518.7
1,525.0
3,043.7
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).

Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF
Cash Assistance by State, December 2014
State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Alabama 14,835
35,066
26,859
8,207
Alaska
3,066 8,277 5,618 2,659
Arizona 12,193
27,292
20,203
7,089
Arkansas
5,447 12,171 8,908 3,263
California 626,297
1,745,407
1,237,834
507,573
Colorado
17,680 46,925 33,119 13,806
Connecticut 13,711
27,512
19,350
8,162
Delaware
4,670 13,178 8,071 5,107
District of Columbia
5,027
12,637
9,230
3,407
Congressional Research Service
32

---

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

State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Florida
50,288 87,711 72,331 15,380
Georgia 13,910
27,197
24,168
3,029
Guam 1,133
2,545
2,030
515
Hawaii 8,166
23,547
15,804
7,743
Idaho 1,903
2,830
2,708
122
Illinois 19,410
43,526
35,829
7,697
Indiana 9,753
19,736
17,745
1,991
Iowa
14,169 35,460 25,361 10,099
Kansas 6,478
15,424
11,453
3,971
Kentucky
26,486 53,071 42,998 10,073
Louisiana 5,619
12,686
11,006
1,680
Maine
23,345 48,172 26,662 21,510
Maryland
20,803 50,484 37,250 13,234
Massachusetts 63,094
149,391
101,532
47,859
Michigan
23,364 57,661 44,255 13,406
Minnesota 19,055
41,193
32,390
8,803
Mississippi 7,642
15,572
11,760
3,812
Missouri
28,870 70,128 48,501 21,627
Montana
3,068 7,457 5,595 1,862
Nebraska 5,803
14,029
11,455
2,574
Nevada 12,015
31,578
23,005
8,573
New
Hampshire
5,816 14,185 9,698 4,487
New
Jersey
26,397 61,824 44,981 16,843
New Mexico
11,522
34,081
26,864
7,217
New
York
150,121 386,055 275,109 110,946
North Carolina
6,806
14,818
11,189
3,629
North Dakota
1,208
3,025
2,452
573
Ohio 61,872
118,421
100,551
17,870
Oklahoma 7,373
16,416
13,926
2,490
Oregon 57,659
174,750
109,621
65,129
Pennsylvania 68,231
170,018
122,507
47,511
Puerto
Rico
11,818 32,495 20,228 12,267
Rhode
Island
5,237 12,512 8,817 3,695
South Carolina
11,064
25,089
19,999
5,090
South Dakota
3,042
6,053
5,366
687
Tennessee
41,109 96,181 71,628 24,553
Texas 34,110
75,102
66,362
8,740
Congressional Research Service
33

---

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

State Families
Recipients
Children
Adults
Utah
4,004 9,894 7,204 2,690
Vermont
3,470 8,059 5,675 2,384
Virgin
Islands
381 1,207 824 383
Virginia
26,293 57,457 42,359 15,098
Washington
36,004 81,972 57,822 24,150
West Virginia
8,130
17,407
13,342
4,065
Wisconsin
25,225 60,670 45,262 15,408
Wyoming
344 697 566 131





Totals
1,674,536 4,216,251 3,055,382 1,160,869
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.

Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Cash Assistance
by State, December of Selected Years






Percentage Change to 2014 from ...
State
1994
2007
2010
2013
2014
1994
2007
2013
Alabama
47,903
18,584
24,212
18,394
14,835
-69.0%
-20.2%
-19.3%
Alaska
12,370
2,989
3,572
3,439
3,066
-75.2
2.6
-10.8
Arizona
72,158
37,122
19,366
14,036
12,193
-83.1
-67.2
-13.1
Arkansas
25,047
8,741
8,632
6,395
5,447
-78.3
-37.7
-14.8
California
923,358
477,465
601,286
533,081
626,297
-32.2
31.2
17.5
Colorado
40,244
9,094
8,064
17,270
17,680
-56.1
94.4
2.4
Connecticut
60,965
19,424
16,750
14,335
13,711
-77.5
-29.4
-4.4
Delaware
11,227
3,997
5,745
4,792
4,670
-58.4
16.8
-2.5
District of Columbia
27,420
5,237
9,410
6,021
5,027
-81.7
-4.0
-16.5
Florida
238,564
48,608
58,144
53,087
50,288
-78.9
3.5
-5.3
Georgia
141,154
22,740
20,686
16,481
13,910
-90.1
-38.8
-15.6
Guam
2,088
NA
1,260
1,342
1,133
-45.7
NA
-15.6
Hawaii
21,489
6,621
10,240
8,865
8,166
-62.0
23.3
-7.9
Idaho
8,953
1,527
1,848
1,838
1,903
-78.7
24.6
3.5
Illinois
241,091
20,562
27,177
20,354
19,410
-91.9
-5.6
-4.6
Indiana
69,933
31,103
31,461
11,195
9,753
-86.1
-68.6
-12.9
Iowa
38,022
19,762
21,037
16,126
14,169
-62.7
-28.3
-12.1
Congressional Research Service
34

---

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







Percentage Change to 2014 from ...
State
1994
2007
2010
2013
2014
1994
2007
2013
Kansas
28,838
12,853
15,647
7,553
6,478
-77.5
-49.6
-14.2
Kentucky
76,824
29,323
31,336
29,488
26,486
-65.5
-9.7
-10.2
Louisiana
82,792
11,106
11,117
6,151
5,619
-93.2
-49.4
-8.6
Maine
22,025
12,235
15,435
26,604
23,345
6.0
90.8
-12.3
Maryland
80,890
20,466
26,160
21,310
20,803
-74.3
1.6
-2.4
Massachusetts
105,769
52,473
51,179
71,012
63,094
-40.3
20.2
-11.2
Michigan
209,695
69,327
67,596
29,782
23,364
-88.9
-66.3
-21.5
Minnesota
61,343
26,387
24,726
22,267
19,055
-68.9
-27.8
-14.4
Mississippi
53,221
11,631
12,078
9,260
7,642
-85.6
-34.3
-17.5
Missouri
91,802
39,054
39,617
32,172
28,870
-68.6
-26.1
-10.3
Montana
11,660
3,192
3,694
3,149
3,068
-73.7
-3.9
-2.6
Nebraska
15,427
7,515
8,406
6,379
5,803
-62.4
-22.8
-9.0
Nevada
15,559
7,410
11,066
11,914
12,015
-22.8
62.1
0.8
New Hampshire
11,078
4,497
6,168
6,080
5,816
-47.5
29.3
-4.3
New Jersey
113,293
34,175
35,153
28,658
26,397
-76.7
-22.8
-7.9
New Mexico
34,854
12,195
21,664
13,206
11,522
-66.9
-5.5
-12.8
New York
463,692
155,798
158,133
153,078
150,121
-67.6
-3.6
-1.9
North Carolina
128,848
24,544
23,639
18,575
6,806
-94.7
-72.3
-63.4
North Dakota
5,309
2,072
1,931
1,366
1,208
-77.2
-41.7
-11.6
Ohio
236,298
80,629
103,513
64,371
61,872
-73.8
-23.3
-3.9
Oklahoma
45,893
8,951
9,472
7,270
7,373
-83.9
-17.6
1.4
Oregon
39,967
19,299
33,123
45,270
57,659
44.3
198.8
27.4
Pennsylvania
208,949
55,389
59,034
69,667
68,231
-67.3
23.2
-2.1
Puerto Rico
56,132
12,356
14,621
12,818
11,818
-78.9
-4.4
-7.8
Rhode Island
22,599
8,349
6,778
5,815
5,237
-76.8
-37.3
-9.9
South Carolina
50,251
14,428
19,038
11,770
11,064
-78.0
-23.3
-6.0
South Dakota
6,521
2,904
3,290
3,204
3,042
-53.4
4.8
-5.1
Tennessee
105,616
55,161
63,150
50,850
41,109
-61.1
-25.5
-19.2
Texas
281,011
57,002
52,972
38,460
34,110
-87.9
-40.2
-11.3
Utah
17,240
5,140
6,811
4,382
4,004
-76.8
-22.1
-8.6
Vermont
9,707
4,242
3,335
3,638
3,470
-64.3
-18.2
-4.6
Virgin Islands
1,264
399
511
432
381
-69.9
-4.5
-11.8
Virginia
74,203
31,041
37,105
28,866
26,293
-64.6
-15.3
-8.9
Washington
102,603
52,013
69,805
42,747
36,004
-64.9
-30.8
-15.8
West Virginia
39,546
8,725
10,676
8,862
8,130
-79.4
-6.8
-8.3
Wisconsin
73,714
17,788
25,270
27,522
25,225
-65.8
41.8
-8.3
Congressional Research Service
35

---

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







Percentage Change to 2014 from ...
State
1994
2007
2010
2013
2014
1994
2007
2013
Wyoming
5,400
265
312
380
344
-93.6
29.8
-9.5









Totals
4,971,819 1,703,910 1,952,451 1,671,379 1,674,536
-66.3
-1.8
0.2
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: Caseload data for 2007 through 2014 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:
December 2014
Single
Two
No
Single
Two
No
State
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Alabama
8,028 129
6,678 54.1 0.9 45.0
Alaska
1,874 362 830 61.1 11.8 27.1
Arizona
6,197 356
5,640 50.8 2.9 46.3
Arkansas
3,092 110
2,245 56.8 2.0 41.2
California
344,136
110,621
171,540 54.9 17.7 27.4
Colorado
10,355 1,380 5,945 58.6
7.8 33.6
Connecticut
8,087 0
5,624 59.0 0.0 41.0
Delaware
1,586 22
3,062 34.0 0.5 65.6
District of Columbia
3,561
0
1,466
70.8
0.0
29.2
Florida
11,677 693
37,918 23.2 1.4 75.4
Georgia
2,946 0
10,964 21.2 0.0 78.8
Guam
363 106 664 32.0 9.4 58.6
Hawai
4,712
1,871
1,583 57.7 22.9 19.4
Idaho
121 0
1,782 6.4 0.0 93.6
Illinois
6,731 0
12,679 34.7 0.0 65.3
Indiana
2,491 133
7,129 25.5 1.4 73.1
Iowa
8,235 863
5,071 58.1 6.1 35.8
Kansas
3,018 419
3,041 46.6 6.5 46.9
Kentucky
8,674 657
17,155 32.7 2.5 64.8
Louisiana
1,645 0
3,974 29.3 0.0 70.7
Maine
20,645 436
2,264 88.4 1.9 9.7
Maryland
13,322 0
7,481 64.0 0.0 36.0
Massachusetts
41,362
4,418
17,314 65.6 7.0 27.4
Michigan
12,067 0
11,297 51.6 0.0 48.4
Minnesota
8,949 0
10,106 47.0 0.0 53.0
Congressional Research Service
36

---

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

Single
Two
No
Single
Two
No
State
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Parent
Mississippi
3,783 0
3,859 49.5 0.0 50.5
Missouri
22,082 0
6,788 76.5 0.0 23.5
Montana
1,605 291
1,172 52.3 9.5 38.2
Nebraska
2,692 0
3,111 46.4 0.0 53.6
Nevada
5,681
1,388
4,946 47.3 11.6 41.2
New
Hampshire
4,341 48
1,427 74.6 0.8 24.5
New
Jersey
18,427 0
7,970 69.8 0.0 30.2
New
Mexico
5,573 822
5,127 48.4 7.1 44.5
New
York
96,025
3,129
50,967 64.0 2.1 34.0
North
Carolina
3,354 144
3,308 49.3 2.1 48.6
North
Dakota
572 0 636 47.4 0.0 52.6
Ohio
14,333
1,520
46,019 23.2 2.5 74.4
Oklahoma
2,490 0
4,883 33.8 0.0 66.2
Oregon
49,333 2,918 5,408 85.6
5.1
9.4
Pennsylvania
49,875
1,450
16,906 73.1 2.1 24.8
Puerto
Rico
10,816 712 290 91.5 6.0 2.5
Rhode
Island
3,150 319
1,768 60.1 6.1 33.8
South
Carolina
5,277 0
5,787 47.7 0.0 52.3
South
Dakota
687 0
2,355 22.6 0.0 77.4
Tennessee
23,199 182
17,728 56.4 0.4 43.1
Texas
8,740 0
25,370 25.6 0.0 74.4
Utah
2,102 0
1,902 52.5 0.0 47.5
Vermont
1,662 352
1,456 47.9 10.1 42.0
Virgin
Islands
338 0 43 88.7 0.0 11.3
Virginia
15,477 0
10,816 58.9 0.0 41.1
Washington
17,759
3,093
15,152 49.3 8.6 42.1
West
Virginia
3,224 0
4,906 39.7 0.0 60.3
Wisconsin
12,845 862
11,518 50.9 3.4 45.7
Wyoming
125 3 216 36.3 0.9 62.8







Totals
919,441 139,809 615,286
54.9
8.3
36.7
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.

Congressional Research Service
37

---

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

Table B-7. TANF Caseload Reduction Credits, Effective (After Credit) Standards, and
Work Participation Rates by State, All Families, FY2012
Effective
Caseload
(After
Reduction
Caseload
Credit
Reduction
Work
(Percentage
Credit)
Participation
Met
State
Points)
Standard
Rate
Standard?
United States

34.4%

Alabama 7.7
42.3%
46.0
Yes
Alaska 9.8
40.2
36.7
No
Arizona 38.0
12.0
27.1
Yes
Arkansas 50.0
0.0
40.2
Yes
California 0.0
50.0
27.2
No
Colorado 14.9
35.1
23.8
No
Connecticut
24.2
25.8
52.7
Yes
Delaware 12.8
37.2
41.5
Yes
District of Col.
17.8
32.2
34.8
Yes
Florida 9.7
40.3
45.1
Yes
Georgia 50.0
0.0
64.5
Yes
Guam 0.0
50.0
29.0
No
Hawai 50.0
0.0
50.6
Yes
Idaho 0.0
50.0
49.8
No
Illinois 17.5
32.5
38.6
Yes
Indiana 38.8
11.2
31.0
Yes
Iowa 17.3
32.7
38.4
Yes
Kansas 39.8
10.2
28.4
Yes
Kentucky 19.6
30.4
53.3
Yes
Louisiana 34.8
15.2
26.8
Yes
Maine 0.0
50.0
34.9
No
Maryland 5.1
44.9
46.1
Yes
Massachusetts 24.2
25.8 39.7
Yes
Michigan 12.5
37.5
43.1
Yes
Minnesota 8.8
41.2
45.3
Yes
Mississippi 26.8
23.2
67.6
Yes
Missouri 12.9
37.1
20.5
No
Montana 3.1
46.9
47.3
Yes
Nebraska 50.0
0.0
53.4
Yes
Nevada 2.9
47.1
35.1
No
New Hampshire
0.0
50.0
73.0
Yes
Congressional Research Service
38

---

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

Effective
Caseload
(After
Reduction
Caseload
Credit
Reduction
Work
(Percentage
Credit)
Participation
Met
State
Points)
Standard
Rate
Standard?
New Jersey
47.6
2.4
19.6
Yes
New Mexico
16.1
33.9
46.0
Yes
New York
31.4
18.6
31.6
Yes
North Carolina
29.4
20.6
47.3
Yes
North Dakota
36.0
14.0
71.1
Yes
Ohio 0.0
50.0
61.9
Yes
Oklahoma 25.8
24.2
24.7
Yes
Oregon 0.0
50.0
33.8
No
Pennsylvania 21.4
28.6
29.8
Yes
Puerto Rico
9.0
41.0
16.3
No
Rhode Island
0.0
50.0
10.0
No
South Carolina
0.0
50.0
36.8
No
South Dakota
0.0
50.0
55.0
Yes
Tennessee 28.5
21.5
30.5
Yes
Texas 43.4
6.6
29.1
Yes
Utah 24.8
25.2
41.4
Yes
Vermont 4.7
45.3
42.2
No
Virgin Islands
42.9
7.1
15.1
Yes
Virginia 7.0
43.0
42.6
No
Washington 32.7
17.3
11.1
No
West Virginia
11.9
38.1
38.7
Yes
Wisconsin 0.0
50.0
32.4
No
Wyoming 0.6
49.4
79.4
Yes
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Congressional Research Service
39

---

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

Table B-8. TANF Caseload Reduction Credits, Effective (After Credit) Standards, and
Work Participation Rates by State, Two-Parent Families, FY2012
Effective
Caseload
(After
Reduction
Caseload
Credit
Reduction
(Percentage
Credit)
Work Participation
State
Points)
Standard
Rate
Met Standard?
United States

33.9%

Alabama 56.5
33.5%
40.0
Yes
Alaska 18.9
71.1
38.1
No
Arizona 38.0
52.0
66.1
Yes
Arkansas 53.7
36.3
27.4
No
California 0.0
90.0
30.8
No
Colorado 14.9
75.1
20.1
No
Connecticut
NA
NA
NA
NA
Delaware NA
NA
NA
NA
District of Col.
NA
NA
NA
NA
Florida 19.4
70.6
53.0
No
Georgia NA
NA
NA
NA
Guam 0.0
90.0
62.3
No
Hawai 55.6
34.4
58.7
Yes
Idaho NA
NA
NA
NA
Illinois NA
NA
NA
NA
Indiana 38.8
51.2
24.0
No
Iowa 45.8
44.2
29.3
No
Kansas 39.8
50.2
30.8
No
Kentucky 19.6
70.4
51.8
No
Louisiana NA
NA
NA
NA
Maine 0.0
90.0
19.0
No
Maryland NA
NA
NA
NA
Massachusetts 24.2
65.8
83.9
Yes
Michigan NA
NA
NA
NA
Minnesota NA
NA
NA
NA
Mississippi NA
NA
NA
NA
Missouri NA
NA
NA
NA
Montana 34.1
55.9
56.6
Yes
Nebraska NA
NA
NA
NA
Nevada 2.9
87.1
41.6
No
New Hampshire
NA
NA
NA
NA
Congressional Research Service
40

---

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

Effective
Caseload
(After
Reduction
Caseload
Credit
Reduction
(Percentage
Credit)
Work Participation
State
Points)
Standard
Rate Met
Standard?
New Jersey
NA
NA
NA
NA
New Mexico
16.1
73.9
53.5
No
New York
NA
NA
NA
NA
North Carolina
29.4
60.6
63.6
Yes
North Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
Ohio 0.0
90.0
60.1
No
Oklahoma NA
NA
NA
NA
Oregon 0.0
90.0
8.7
No
Pennsylvania 72.7
17.3
54.0
Yes
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
0.0
90.0
6.3
No
South Carolina
NA
NA
NA
NA
South Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
Tennessee NA
NA
NA
NA
Texas NA
NA
NA
NA
Utah NA
NA
NA
NA
Vermont 4.7
85.3
52.2
No
Virgin Islands
NA
NA
NA
NA
Virginia NA
NA
NA
NA
Washington 32.7
57.3
11.8
No
West Virginia
NA
NA
NA
NA
Wisconsin 0.0
90.0
16.9
No
Wyoming 0.6
89.4
77.4
No
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: NA denotes that the state does not have two-parent families in their TANF or MOE programs.


Congressional Research Service
41

---

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

Author Contact Information

Gene Falk

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

Congressional Research Service
42

---