link to page 2 

 
Updated December 12, 2018
TANF Reauthorization: House Ways and Means Committee 
Majority Discussion Draft of May 8, 2018
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 
child in poverty. Thus, the allocation of matching grants 
block grant provides grants to states, tribes, and the 
based on child poverty would change the distribution of 
territories for a wide range of benefits and services that seek 
funds. States with relatively low grants per poor child 
to address the effects of and root causes of child poverty 
would gain funds; those with relatively high grants per poor 
and economic disadvantage. Funding is set to expire on 
child would lose funds. The Congressional Research 
December 22, 2018, for TANF and related programs 
Service (CRS) estimates that funding changes would range 
providing mandatory child care funding and responsible 
from an increase of 118% for Texas (assuming it draws 
fatherhood and healthy marriage grants. On May 8, 2018, 
down its full match) to a decline of 19.5% for the District of 
the House Ways and Means Committee majority released a 
Columbia.  
“discussion draft” bill that would make policy changes and 
fund TANF through FY2023. 
Figure 1. TANF Basic Block Grants Per Child in 
Poverty, by State 
TANF Purpose and Goals 
FY2018 Grants; 2016 Child Poverty Counts 
Under current law, TANF’s purpose is to increase state 
flexibility to achieve four statutory goals: (1) provide 
assistance for needy families so that children may remain in 
their own homes; (2) end dependence of needy parents on 
government benefits through work, job preparation, and 
marriage; (3) reduce out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and (4) 
promote the formation and maintenance of two-parent 
families. The discussion draft would add a fifth statutory 
goal: to reduce the number of children in poverty by 
increasing the employment entry, retention, and 
advancement of their parents. 
TANF Financing 
For FY2018, TANF provides grants to states in its basic 
block grant ($16.5 billion total) and contingency funds 
($608 million). The TANF allocation to the states dates 
back to the 1996 welfare reform law, and is based on 
spending in the pre-TANF programs in the early- to mid-
1990s. In addition to federal funds, TANF requires states to 
spend a minimum of $10.3 billion per year in their own 
funds on TANF or TANF-related programs. This is known 
 
as the maintenance of effort requirement (MOE).  
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from 
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Census 
This discussion draft would extend funding for the basic 
Bureau’s Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE). 
block grant through FY2023 at its current national level, but 
change its structure. The basic block grant would have two 
Use of TANF Grants 
components: a fixed amount and a capped matching grant. 
Under current law, states may expend federal TANF funds 
The fixed portion of the grant would be 75% of its FY2018 
and count as MOE funds expenditures on benefits and 
grant. States would still have to fulfill an MOE requirement 
services that aim to further TANF’s broad purpose and 
to receive these funds, albeit at a reduced level (75% of 
statutory goals. Figure 2 shows TANF and MOE spending 
their FY2018 MOE requirement). Remaining funds would 
by category. Spending on basic assistance, which includes 
be provided to each state as a capped matching grant, with 
the monthly cash assistance checks that TANF is best 
its expenditures on “core” activities related to assistance 
known for, totaled $7.4 billion out of $30.9 billion, or 24% 
and work activities matched at its Medicaid matching rate 
of TANF spending. Work activity spending of $2.8 billion 
(Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, FMAP). Each 
accounted for an additional 9% of TANF spending. TANF 
state’s proportion of children living in poverty determines 
funds are also used for child care, child welfare services 
the allocation of its matching grant.  
(related to children in, or at risk of, foster care), early 
childhood programs, youth, and state spending on healthy 
Figure 1 shows TANF grants per poor child under current 
marriage and responsible fatherhood programs. 
law. It shows that state grants are not evenly divided per 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 

TANF Reauthorization: House Ways and Means Committee Majority Discussion Draft of May 8, 2018 
Figure 2. TANF and MOE Expenditures in FY2016 
Universal Engagement  
The term universal engagement means the state attempts to 
get all or nearly all TANF work-eligible recipients working 
or in activities. This is not in current law, though it was 
included in several proposals to reauthorize TANF during 
the 2002 to 2005 period. Under current law, states must 
assess the employability of adult TANF recipients. States 
then have the option of developing an individual 
responsibility plan (IRP) that sets forth an employment 
goal, obligations of the individual, and the services the state 
will provide. Currently, 37 states and the District of 
Columbia have an IRP requirement.  
 
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from 
The discussion draft replaces the optional IRP with a 
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). 
mandatory Individual Opportunity Plan (IOP) within 60 
 
days of a work-eligible individual becoming eligible for 
assistance. The plan must include an agreement in which 
The discussion draft limits spending from the capped 
the individual acknowledges receipt of publicly-funded 
matching grant to “core” assistance and work programs. 
benefits; set forth the obligation of the individual to 
Further, it prohibits direct spending within TANF for child 
participate in work or work preparation activities; establish 
care and child welfare services, requiring states to instead 
an employment goal and planned actions to achieve the 
transfer those funds to the Child Care and Development 
goal; and describe the job counseling and other services the 
Block Grant (CCDBG) and the Promoting Safe and Stable 
state will provide. The IOP would be signed by the 
Families (PSSF) programs. It would allow transfers to the  
recipient, and there would be a requirement to meet with 
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) 
the recipient to review progress under the IOP every 90 
programs as well as CCDBG and PSSF of up to 50% of the 
days. The draft uses the current minimum hours standard 
fixed portion of the grant. Within that limit, PSSF transfers 
for the WPR as a standard for individual recipients. As 
can be no more than 10% of that portion of the grant. It 
under current law, states would determine sanctions that 
eliminates the current authority for states to transfer funds 
would reduce benefits for families with an individual who 
to the Social Services Block Grant. Further, the draft limits 
does not comply with work and plan requirements. 
TANF direct and TANF funds transferred to WIOA to be 
spent on families with incomes of 200% of the federal 
Performance Outcome Measures 
poverty level or less. 
The discussion draft bill requires the U.S. Department of 
Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish a system of 
Work Requirements 
assessing program outcomes based on measures used in the 
Current TANF rules for engagement of assistance recipients 
WIOA system. These outcomes would measure job entry, 
in work fall within the context of meeting the minimum 
job retention and the median wages of those who exit 
work participation rate (WPR). The minimum WPR is a 
TANF assistance. Also, for recipients under the age of 24 
performance standard for the state; it does not apply 
who lack a high school diploma, the measures will consider 
directly to individual recipients. States that do not meet the 
whether or not they received a high school diploma or 
WPR are at risk of a reduction in their federal TANF funds.  
equivalent while on the program. These outcome measures 
would replace the WPR in assessing the performance of 
In order to meet the current TANF work participation 
states. States would negotiate state-specific performance 
standard, states must have 50% of “all families” and 90% of 
levels with HHS. States that do not achieve those 
families with two parents either working or engaged in 
performance levels would be at risk of a reduction in their 
activities. A state may lower these percentages by reducing 
federal TANF funds.  
its caseload. There are rules for what activities count, and 
minimum hours per week of participation required, for a 
Related Funding Streams 
family to be counted by the state toward meeting its 
The draft would provide annual appropriations at current 
minimum WPR. Work in an unsubsidized job and 
law levels for the Child Care Entitlement to States ($2.917 
participation in job preparation activities count toward 
billion) through FY2023. These mandatory child care funds 
meeting the standard.  
are integrated with discretionary CCDBG funds at the state 
level. The draft does not address healthy marriage and 
States have generally met their minimum WPR through 
responsible fatherhood grants or the TANF contingency 
either caseload reduction or by having parents in families 
fund, which are also scheduled to expire at the end of 
receiving assistance work in unsubsidized jobs. In FY2016, 
FY2018. 
less than a quarter of all non-employed work-eligible 
individuals were engaged in activities in a typical month 
Gene Falk, Specialist in Social Policy   
(see CRS In Focus IF10856, Temporary Assistance for 
Jameson A. Carter, Research Assistant   
Needy Families: Work Requirements). The discussion draft 
would replace the WPR with: (1) a universal engagement 
Mariam Ghavalyan, Research Assistant   
requirement; and (2) new performance standards for the 
IF10886
states, based on employment and educational outcomes. 
https://crsreports.congress.gov 
TANF Reauthorization: House Ways and Means Committee Majority Discussion Draft of May 8, 2018 
 
 
Disclaimer 
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to 
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. 
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has 
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the 
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be 
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include 
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you 
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. 
 
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10886 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED