The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions

Contents

• Introduction
• Current Topics
• What Is TANF's Current Funding Status?
• What Is TANF's Funding Level?
• May States Require Drug Testing of TANF Cash Assistance Recipients?
• What Are TANF's Rules for Drug Felons?
• What Are TANF's Rules for Substance Abuse Treatment?
• What Is the Administration's "Waiver" Initiative?
• Has Any State Formally Applied for a "Waiver" of TANF Work Participation Standards?
• Are there Restrictions on a Family's Use of TANF Benefits?
• Funding and Expenditures
• How Much Has the TANF Grant Declined in Value Because of Inflation?
• How May States Use Federal TANF Funds?
• What Expenditures May a State Count Toward its Maintenance of Effort (MOE) Requirement?
• How Have States Used TANF Funds?
• How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?
• The Caseload
• How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services?
• How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Cash Assistance?
• How Does the Current Cash Assistance Caseload Level Compare with Historical Levels?
• What Are the Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families?
• TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month?
• TANF Work Participation Standards
• What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet?
• Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted Since the 1996 Welfare Reform Law?
• What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?
• How Many Jurisdictions Have Failed the All-Families Standard From FY2002 Through FY2013?
• Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard?

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 In Focus IF10036, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant, by [author name scrubbed]).

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 FY2014, expenditures on basic assistance (cash assistance) totaled $8.4 billion—26% 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. Some states also count expenditures in the pre-Kindergarten programs toward the MOE requirement.

Cash Assistance Caseload. A total of 1.6 million families, composed of 4.1 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in March 2015. The bulk of the "recipients" were children—2.9 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 (45%) of all families on the rolls in FY2013. Additionally, 17% of cash assistance families had an employed adult, while 38% 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 FY2013 states achieved, on average, an all-family participation rate of 33.5% and a two-parent rate of 32.9%. That year, 11 jurisdictions failed the all-family standard, and 18 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.

---

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions

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 a non-technical overview of TANF, see CRS In Focus IF10036, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant, by [author name scrubbed].

Current Topics

What Is TANF's Current Funding Status?

P.L. 114-113 (The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016) extends TANF funding through September 30, 2016.¹ Funding for TANF is provided at the same level, and on the same terms, as in FY2015.

What Is TANF's Funding Level?

Table 1 shows TANF funding for FY2008 through FY2016. 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.

FY2016 funding for TANF grants is the same as in FY2015. As was the case in the prior year, a total of $583 million is available for FY2016 contingency fund grants to states, compared with $610 million in FY2014.

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 welfare reform 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 [author name scrubbed] et al. See also CRS Report R42326, Constitutional Analysis of Suspicionless Drug Testing Requirements for the Receipt of Governmental Benefits, by [author name scrubbed].

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.

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. Under the initiative, states would have to apply for a waiver and have that waiver approved by HHS and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). For a discussion, see CRS Report R42627, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF): Welfare Waivers, by [author name scrubbed].

Has Any State Formally Applied for a "Waiver" of TANF Work Participation Standards?

As of March 16, 2016, one state (Ohio) had requested a waiver of TANF work participation standards. As of that date, the Administration had made no decision on whether to approve the waiver request.

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.

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 FY2015 (ended September 30, 2015), the real value of the TANF block grant declined by 32.5%. Table 2 shows the impact of inflation on the value of the TANF block grant for each year, FY1997 through FY2015. On average, the TANF basic block grant has lost 2.2% of its value each year over that period.

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 from non-governmental entities. These third-party donations may be counted toward the TANF MOE 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.

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 FY2014. In FY2014, a total of $31.9 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 26% ($8.4 billion) of total FY2014 TANF and MOE dollars.

TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2014, 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 not clearly capture expenditures associated with spending on the child welfare system. Most TANF funding for these programs is subsumed in the catch-all "other" expenditure category. Some states also count as MOE dollars their expenditures on pre-Kindergarten programs. These expenditures too are subsumed in the "other" expenditure category.

Figure 1. Uses of TANF and MOE Funds, FY2014 (Dollars in billions)

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

See Table A-3 for dollar amounts of total federal TANF and state MOE funds associated with each of these categories. For state-specific information on the use of TANF funds, see Table B-1 and Table B-2.

How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent?

TANF law permits states to "reserve" unused funds without time limit. This permits flexibility in timing of the use of TANF funds, including the ability to "save" funds for unexpected occurrences that might increase costs (such as recessions or natural disasters).

At the end of FY2014 (September 30, 2014, the latest data currently available), a total of $3.4 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 FY2014, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.7 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 FY2014, states had $1.6 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 basic (i.e., 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 26% 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 1.6 million families, composed of 4.1 million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded cash in March 2015. The bulk of the "recipients" were children—2.9 million in that month. For state-by-state cash assistance caseloads, see Table B-4.

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 March 2015. Before 1997, 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 1.7 million families in August 2008, peaking in December 2010 at close to 2.0 million families. By March 2015, the cash assistance caseload had declined to a new post welfare reform low of 1.6 million families.

Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-March 2015

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) with data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Notes: Shaded areas denote 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 March 2015, 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 FY2013, families with an unemployed adult recipient represented 45% of all cash assistance families. This decline occurred, in large part, as the number of families headed by unemployed adult recipients declined more rapidly than other components of the cash assistance caseload.

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 FY2013, families with employed adult recipients represented 17% 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 FY2013 was 38%. In FY2013, families with a non-recipient, non-parent relative (grandparents, aunts, uncles) represented 13% 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 FY2013.

Figure 3. Characteristics of Cash Assistance Families, Selected Years FY1988 to FY2013

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 [author name scrubbed].

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

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 [author name scrubbed].

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 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).

Figure 5 shows the national average all-families work participation rate for FY2002 through FY2013. For the period FY2002 through FY2011, states achieved an average all-families work participation rate hovering around 30%. In FY2012, the average 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. The FY2013 average all-families work participation rate declined slightly to 33.5%.

Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families, FY2002-FY2013

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 FY2013?

Table 4 shows which states failed the TANF all-families work participation standards from FY2002 through FY2013. 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 in which policies under the DRA were effective. This number declined to 9 in FY2008 and 8 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.

In FY2013, the number of jurisdictions that failed the all-family work participation standard declined to 11. The 11 jurisdictions are California, Colorado, Missouri, Nevada, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, Puerto Rico, and Guam. California, Oregon, and Guam have failed their all-family work standards for all years, FY2007 through FY2013.

For state-by-state information on FY2013 caseload reduction credits, effective (after credit) standards, and work participation rates related to the "all families" standard, see Table B-7.

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 FY2013. 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.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 FY2013, 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, 9 met the standard and 18 did not. For state-by-state information on FY2013 caseload reduction credits, effective (after credit) standards, and work participation rates related to two-parent families, see Table B-8.

Appendix A. Supplementary Tables

Appendix B. State Tables