The Temporary Assistance for
September 14, 2021
Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:
Gene Falk
Responses to Frequently Asked Questions
Specialist in Social Policy

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant funds a wide range of
Patrick A. Landers
benefits and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the Personal
Analyst in Social Policy
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 (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
For a copy of the full report,
on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk).
please call 7-5700 or visit
www.crs.gov.
TANF Funding and Expenditures. TANF provides fixed funding for the 50 states, the District
of Columbia, the territories, and American Indian tribes. The basic block grant totals $16.5 billion per year. States are also
required in total to contribute, from their own funds, at least $10.3 billion annually under a maintenance-of-effort (MOE)
requirement. The basic block grant is not adjusted for changes in circumstances (e.g., inflation, population) over time. In
FY2020, the TANF basic block grant was 38% below what its value (adjusting for inflation) was in FY1997.
Though TANF is best known for funding basic assistance payments for needy families with children, the block grant and
MOE funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2019, expenditures on basic assistance totaled $6.5
billion—21% of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. Basic assistance is often—but not exclusively—paid as cash and on an
ongoing basis (monthly). In addition to funding basic assistance, TANF also contributes funds for child care, employment
services (for both assistance recipients and others), state refundable tax credits for low income families, pre-Kindergarten and
Head Start programs, and services for children who have been, or are at risk of being, abused and neglected. Some states also
count expenditures in prekindergarten programs toward the MOE requirement.
The TANF Assistance Caseload. A total of 1.0 million families, composed of 2.6 million recipients, received TANF- or
MOE-funded assistance in November 2020. The bulk of the “recipients” were children—1.9 million in that month. The
assistance caseload is heterogeneous. The type of family once thought of as the “typical” assistance family—one with an
unemployed adult recipient—accounted for 32% of all families on the rolls in FY2019. Additionally, 26% of cash assistance
families had an employed adult, while 42% 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.
Assistance Benefits. TANF assistance benefit amounts are set by states. In July 2019, the maximum monthly benefit for a
family of three ranged from $1,066 in New Hampshire to $170 in Mississippi. Only New Hampshire (at 60% of the federal
poverty guidelines) had a maximum TANF assistance amount for this sized family in excess of 50% of poverty-level income.
Work Requirements. TANF’s main federal work requirement is a performance measure that applies to the states. States
determine the work rules that apply to individual recipients. TANF law requires states to engage 50% of all families and 90%
of two-parent families with work-eligible individuals in work activities, though these standards can be reduced by “credits.”
Therefore, the effective standards states face are often less than the 50% or 90% targets, and vary by state. In FY2020, states
achieved, on average, an all-family participation rate of 39.6% and a two-parent rate of 46.9%. In FY2020, all jurisdictions
met the all-family participation standard, but six jurisdictions (California, Guam, Nevada, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and
Wyoming) did not meet the two-parent standard.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 16 link to page 19 link to page 6 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. Appendix A provides additional data on families receiving TANF
assistance over time. Appendix B presents a series of tables with state-level data on TANF
expenditures and families receiving assistance.
This report does not provide information on TANF program rules (for a discussion of TANF
rules, see CRS Report RL32748, The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block
Grant: A Primer on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by Gene Falk).
Funding and Expenditures
What Is TANF’s Funding Status?
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260 ) extends TANF funding through the
end of FY2021 (September 30, 2021).
How Are State TANF Programs Funded?
TANF programs are funded through a combination of federal and state funds. In FY2018, TANF
has two federal grants to states. The bulk of the TANF funding is in a basic block grant to the
states, totaling $16.5 billion for the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, the
Virgin Islands, and American Indian tribes. There is also a contingency fund available that
provides extra federal funds to states that meet certain conditions.
Additionally, states are required to expend a minimum amount of their own funds for TANF and
TANF-related activities under what is known as the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
States are required to spend at least 75% of what they spent in FY1994 on TANF’s predecessor
programs. The minimum MOE amount, in total, is $10.3 billion per year for the 50 states, the
District of Columbia, and the territories.
How Much Has the Value of the TANF Basic Block Grant Changed
Over Time?
TANF was created by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of
1996 (PRWORA, P.L. 104-193). A TANF basic block grant amount—both nationally and for each
state—was established in the 1996 law. That amount for the 50 states, District of Columbia,
territories, and tribes was $16.6 billion in total. From FY1997 through FY2016, that amount
remained the same. The basic block grant was not adjusted for changes that occur over time, such
as inflation, the size of the TANF assistance caseload, or changes in the poverty population.
During this period, the real (inflation-adjusted) value of the block grant declined by one-third
(33.1%). Beginning with FY2017, the state family assistance grant was reduced by 0.33% from
its historical levels to finance TANF-related research and technical assistance. The reduced block
grant amount is $16.5 billion.
Table 1 shows the state family assistance grant, in both nominal (actual) and real (inflation-
adjusted) dollars for each year, FY1997 through FY2020. In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the
FY2020 block grant was 38% below its value in FY1997.
Congressional Research Service

1

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

Table 1. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Nominal and Constant Dollars
(In Billions of $)
State Family
State
Assistance
Family
Grant: 50
Assistance
States, DC,
Grant
Cumulative
Tribes, and
Constant
Percentage
Fiscal Year
Territories
1997 dollars
Change

1997
$16.567
$16.567
1998
16.567
16.306
-1.6%
1999
16.567
15.991
-3.5
2000
16.567
15.498
-6.5
2001
16.567
15.020
-9.3
2002
16.567
14.792
-10.7
2003
16.567
14.456
-12.7
2004
16.567
14.124
-14.7
2005
16.567
13.680
-17.4
2006
16.567
13.190
-20.4
2007
16.567
12.893
-22.2
2008
16.567
12.345
-25.5
2009
16.567
12.382
-25.3
2010
16.567
12.182
-26.5
2011
16.567
11.859
-28.4
2012
16.567
11.585
-30.1
2013
16.567
11.394
-31.2
2014
16.567
11.217
-32.3
2015
16.567
11.179
-32.5
2016
16.567
11.082
-33.1
2017
16.512
10.820
-34.7
2018
16.512
10.564
-36.2
2019
16.512
10.372
-37.4
2020
16.512
10.224
-38.3
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 dol ars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for al Urban Consumers (CPI-U).
How Have States Used TANF Funds?
In FY2019, a total of $30.9 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Basic assistance—ongoing benefits to
families to meet basic needs—represented 21% ($6.5 billion) of total FY2019 TANF and MOE
dollars.
Congressional Research Service

2

link to page 7 link to page 19 link to page 22

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

TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2019, $5.0 billion (16% of all TANF and
MOE funds) were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the
Child Care and Development Fund, or CCDF). TANF work-related activities (including education
and training) were the third-largest TANF and MOE spending category at $3.2 billion, or 10% of
total TANF and MOE funds. TANF also helps low-wage parents by helping to finance state
refundable tax credits, such as state add-ons to the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). TANF and
MOE expenditures on refundable tax credits in FY2019 totaled $2.8 billion, or 9% of total TANF
and MOE spending.
TANF and MOE funds also help fund state prekindergarten (pre-K) programs, with total FY2019
expenditures for that category at $2.6 billion. 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,
spending about $2.6 billion on such activities. TANF and MOE funds are also used for short-term
and emergency benefits and a wide range of other social services. Figure 1 shows the uses of
federal TANF grants to states and state MOE funds in FY2019.
Figure 1. Uses of TANF Funds by Spending Category, FY2019
(Dollars in Billions)

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: Detail may not add to totals because of rounding. Excludes TANF funds used in the territories and in
tribal TANF programs.
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 FY2019 (September 30, 2019, the most recent data currently available), a total of
$5.8 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 FY2019, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.4
billion. At the end of FY2019, states had $4.5 billion of “unobligated balances.” These funds are
Congressional Research Service

3

link to page 25 link to page 8 link to page 26 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs

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 assistance. There is no complete reporting on families receiving other TANF
benefits and services.
“Assistance” is defined as benefits provided to families to meet ongoing, basic needs.1 It is most
often paid in cash. However, some states use TANF or MOE funds to provide an “earnings
supplement” to working parents added to monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP) allotments. These earnings supplements are paid separately from the regular TANF cash
assistance program. Additionally, TANF MOE dollars are used to fund food assistance for
immigrants barred from regular SNAP benefits in certain states. These forms of nutrition aid meet
an ongoing need, and thus are considered TANF assistance.
As discussed in a previous section of this report, TANF basic assistance accounts for about 21%
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 Assistance?
Table 2 provides assistance caseload information. A total of 1.0 million families, composed of 2.6
million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in November 2020.2 The bulk of
the “recipients” were children—1.9 million in that month. For state-by-state assistance caseloads,
see Table B-4.
Table 2. Families and Recipients of TANF Assistance, November 2020

Families
1,002,327

Recipients
2,598,799

Children
1,912,820

Adults
685,979

1 The definition of TANF assistance is not in statute. However, because the statutory language has most TANF
requirements triggered by a family receiving “assistance,” the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
regulations define assistance at 45 C.F.R. §260.31.
2 The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has posted data on families and recipients of TANF assistance
through December 2020. However, the data reported for Oregon are erroneous. Therefore, this report will show TANF
assistance family and recipient data for November 2020, as the most recent data available for all states as of the update
of this report.
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 10 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: TANF assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
How Does the Current Assistance Caseload Level Compare with
Historical Levels?
Figure 2 provides a long-term historical perspective on the number of families receiving
assistance from TANF or its predecessor program, from July 1959 to November 2020. The shaded
areas of the figure represent months when the national economy was in recession. Though the
health of the national economy has affected the trend in the cash assistance caseload, the long-
term trend in receipt of cash assistance does not follow a classic countercyclical 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 have 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
assistance peaked in March 1994 at 5.1 million families. The assistance caseload fell rapidly in
the late 1990s, after PRWORA, before leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the caseload began another
decline, albeit at a slower pace than in the late 1990s. During the 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. The number of families receiving assistance
declined by almost half (to a little over 1 million families) during the long economic expansion of
2010 through 2019.
During 2020, a year when the economy was affected by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-
19) pandemic, there was a brief uptick in the number of families receiving assistance. The
number of families receiving assistance increased in the April through June 2020 period.
However, after June 2020, the number of families receiving TANF assistance again began to
decline.3 In November 2020, the number of families receiving assistance was reported at 1.0
million families, down 6.4% from its level in November 2019.

3 In 2020 and 2021, Congress enacted expansions to other programs – in particular, unemployment insurance—that
might have lessened the need for need-tested cash from TANF. See: CRS Report R46687, Current Status of
Unemployment Insurance (UI) Benefits: Permanent-Law Programs and COVID-19 Pandemic Response. For estimates
of the impact of the poverty interventions in response to COVID-19’s economic downturn, see: Laura Wheaton, Linda
Giannarelli, and Ilham Dehry, 2021 Poverty Projections: Assessing the Impact of Benefits and Stimulus Measures,
Urban Institute, July 2021.
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 16 link to page 28 link to page 11

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

Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Assistance, June 1959 to November 2020

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 the last month shown, includes families receiving
assistance from Separate State Programs (SSPs) with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of
effort requirement. See Table A-1 for average annual data on families, recipients, adult recipients, and child
recipients of ADC, AFDC, and TANF cash assistance for 1961 to 2019.

Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash assistance families by state.
What Are the Characteristics of Families Receiving TANF
Assistance?
Before PRWORA, the “typical” family receiving assistance had been headed by a single parent
(usually the mother) with one or two children. That single parent had also typically been
unemployed. However, since 1996, the 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 assistance caseload under both
AFDC (1988 and 1994) and TANF. In FY1988, an estimated 84% of AFDC families were headed
by an unemployed adult recipient. In FY2019, families with an unemployed adult recipient
represented 32% 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 assistance caseload. In FY1994, a monthly average of 3.8 million families per
month who received AFDC cash assistance had adult recipients who were not working. In
FY2019, a monthly average of 359,000 families per month had adult recipients or work-eligible
individuals, with no adult recipient or work-eligible individual working.
With the decline in families headed by unemployed adults, the share of the caseload represented
by families with employed adults and “child-only” families has increased. The first category
includes families in “earnings supplement” programs separate from the regular TANF cash
Congressional Research Service

6

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

assistance program. In FY2019, families with an employed adult comprised 26% of all TANF
families.
Child-only TANF 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 FY2019 was 42%. In FY2019, families with a nonrecipient, nonparent relative
(grandparents, aunts, uncles) represented 17% of all assistance families. Families with ineligible,
noncitizen adults or adults who have not reported their citizenship status made up 10% of the
assistance caseload in that year. Families where the parent received Supplemental Security
Income (SSI) and the children received TANF made up 9% of all assistance families in FY2019.
Figure 3. Composition of the AFDC/TANF Assistance Caseload by Family Type:
Selected Years, FY1988 to FY2019

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the TANF national data files.
Notes: TANF assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.
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 not meeting a program
requirement (e.g., a work requirement), and are also paid a lower benefit.
Congressional Research Service

7

link to page 12

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

Figure 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a single parent caring for
two children (family of three) in July 2019.4 For a family of three, the maximum TANF benefit
paid in July 2019 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi to $1,066 per month in New
Hampshire. The map shows a regional pattern to the maximum monthly benefit paid, with lower
benefit amounts in the South than in other regions. Only New Hampshire (at 60% of the federal
poverty guidelines) had a maximum TANF cash assistance amount for this sized family in excess
of 50% of poverty-level income.
Figure 4. TANF Cash Assistance Maximum Monthly Benefit Amounts for a Single-
Parent Family with Two Children, 50 States and the District of Columbia, July 2019

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the Urban Institute’s Welfare Rules
Database. The welfare rules database has information for the 50 states and District of Columbia. It does not have
information on TANF assistance programs in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands or tribal TANF
programs.

4 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). 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 substate geography.

Congressional Research Service

8

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

TANF Work Participation Standards
TANF’s main federal work requirement is actually a performance measure that applies to the
states, rather than individual recipients. States determine the work rules that apply to individual
recipients.
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.
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 do not 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 not meeting 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 (DRA, 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.

5 Families without a work-eligible individual are excluded from the participation rate calculation. It excludes families
where the parent is a nonrecipient (for example, disabled receiving Supplemental Security Income or an ineligible
noncitizen) or the children in the family are being cared for by a nonparent relative (e.g., grandparent, aunt, uncle) who
does not receive assistance on his or her behalf.
Congressional Research Service

9

link to page 15 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs

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
FY2020. For the period FY2002 through FY2011, states achieved an average all-families work
participation rate hovering around 30%. The work participation rate increased since then. In
FY2016, it exceeded 50% for the first time since TANF was established. However, it is important
to note that the increase in the work participation rate has not come from an increase in the
number of recipients in regular TANF assistance programs who are either working or in job
preparation activities. This increase stems mostly from states creating new “earnings supplement”
programs that use TANF funds to aid working parents in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps) or who have left the regular TANF assistance programs
for work.6 The national average TANF work participation rate for all families declined in 2018
and 2019 from its 2017 high of 53.0%. In FY2020, a year affected by the COVID-19 virus and its
economic fallout, the national average all-families rate fell by 7.5 percentage points. However, in
FY2020 all states met their all-families TANF work participation standards despite this decline
(in FY2019, only Montana did not meet its standard).

6 See CRS In Focus IF10856, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Work Requirements.
Congressional Research Service

10

link to page 30 link to page 32

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

Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families, FY2002-
FY2020

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
In FY2020, 5 states (California, Nevada, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Wyoming) as well as
Guam failed the separate, higher two-parent standard. Table B-6 provides information for each
jurisdiction on the TANF work standard, caseload reduction credit, and work participation rate for
all families for FY2020. Table B-7 provides that information for two-parent families. However,
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has the ability to reduce or waive the
penalty on states for failing to meet the TANF work participation standard. HHS, under the
Administration of President Donald Trump, said that it would exercise its authority to provide
states with relief from the penalty for not meeting participation standards “to the maximum extent
possible.”7 HHS has not revised this statement under the current, Biden Administration.

7 U.S. Department of Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance,
Questions and answers about TANF and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, TANF-ACF-Pi-2020-
01, https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ofa/resource/tanf-acf-pi-2020-01.
Congressional Research Service

11

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

Appendix A. Supplementary Tables
Table A-1. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961-2019

TANF Child Recipients
As a
As a
Percentage Percentage
Families
Recipients
Adults
Children
of All
of 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
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
Congressional Research Service

12

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

TANF Child Recipients
As a
As a
Percentage Percentage
Families
Recipients
Adults
Children
of All
of All Poor
Year
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
(millions)
Children
Children
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
2012
1.852
4.402
1.104
3.298
4.4
20.3
2013
1.726
4.042
0.993
3.050
4.1
19.1
2014
1.650
3.957
1.007
2.950
4.0
18.9
2015
1.609
4.126
1.155
2.971
4.0
20.4
2016
1.479
3.780
1.037
2.743
3.7
20.7
2017
1.358
3.516
0.930
2.577
3.5
20.1
2018
1.196
3.150
0.833
2.317
3.2
19.5
2019
1.093
2.866
0.747
2.199
2.9
20.2
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
https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/private/pdf/116161/FINAL%20Fourteenth%20Report%20-
%20FINAL%209%2022%2015.pdf. For 2019, the ratio of TANF recipient children to all children in poverty might
be overstated. This is because child poverty might have been underestimated, as responses to the survey used to
Congressional Research Service

13

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

estimate poverty were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. See Jonathan Rothbaum and Adam Bee, Coronavirus
Infects Surveys, Too: Nonresponse Bias During the Pandemic in the CPS ASEC, U.S. Census Bureau, SEHSD Working
Paper no. 2020-10, September 15, 2020.
Table A-2. Families Receiving AFDC/TANF Assistance by Family Category, Selected
Years, FY1988-FY2019

1988
1994
2010
2019
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working
3,136,566
3,798,997
879,922
358,761
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working
243,573
378,620
287,146
286,373
Child-Only/SSI Parent
59,988
171,391
181,852
104,397
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent
47,566
184,397
217,487
108,249
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent
51,764
146,227
4,968
3,391
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative
188,598
328,290
254,088
190,494
Child-Only/Unknown
19,897
38,341
84,378
68,743
Totals
3,747,952
5,046,263
1,909,841
1,120,407

Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working
83.7%
75.3%
46.1%
32.0%
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working
6.5
7.5
15.0
25.6
Child-Only/SSI Parent
1.6
3.4
9.5
9.3
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent
1.3
3.7
11.4
9.7
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent
1.4
2.9
0.3
0.3
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative
5.0
6.5
13.3
17.0
Child-Only/Unknown
0.5
0.8
4.4
6.1

Totals
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the FY1988 and FY1994 AFDC Quality Control
(QC) data files and the FY2010 and FY2019 TANF National Data Files.
Notes: FY2010 and FY2019 data include families receiving assistance from separate state programs (SSPs) with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.

Congressional Research Service

14

Appendix B. State Tables
Table B-1. Use of FY2019 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
($ in Billions)
Work,
Emergency
Other
Educa-
Refundable
Pre-
and Short-
Benefits
Basic
Child
tion, and
Tax
K/Head
Child
Adminis-
Term
and
Total
State
Assistance
Care
Training
Credits
Start
Welfare
tration
Benefits
Services Spending
Alabama
$17.263
$5.524
$7.500
$0.000
$22.005
$38.271
$12.855
$38.280
$35.228
$176.926
Alaska
37.176
14.782
10.152
0.000
0.000
0.000
6.239
0.367
16.192
84.908
Arizona
43.599
0.000
0.682
0.000
0.000
211.345
15.911
26.535
48.201
346.273
Arkansas
4.912
2.660
14.025
0.000
30.143
0.276
16.510
4.780
6.819
80.125
California
2,204.396
797.841
1,761.212
0.000
0.000
0.309
539.356
275.796
965.421
6,544.331
Colorado
75.424
12.422
11.619
76.440
59.323
50.090
18.451
18.121
60.979
382.870
Connecticut
41.886
41.485
11.267
59.300
82.701
70.619
38.627
20.945
134.497
501.326
Delaware
11.388
79.081
1.809
0.000
0.000
0.000
4.823
1.795
16.771
115.667
District of Columbia
164.956
59.117
34.563
23.681
0.000
0.000
9.725
69.144
7.068
368.253
Florida
145.677
290.578
46.106
0.000
0.000
250.139
88.941
0.950
81.598
903.989
Georgia
98.333
0.000
8.573
0.000
0.000
308.162
18.683
5.429
53.552
492.731
Hawaii
30.805
11.972
41.870
0.000
0.000
1.736
14.491
8.146
96.396
205.415
Idaho
8.299
13.293
3.250
0.000
1.505
1.998
6.840
12.540
0.724
48.450
Il inois
43.335
495.256
16.342
90.136
108.715
239.682
0.028
0.651
93.317
1,087.462
Indiana
12.749
123.164
6.365
25.177
0.000
9.169
30.519
0.191
144.564
351.898
Iowa
29.339
55.616
9.463
24.902
0.000
53.820
6.171
0.392
20.871
200.575
Kansas
11.901
6.673
0.737
40.117
17.990
34.534
10.418
0.000
47.000
169.371
CRS-15

Work,
Emergency
Other
Educa-
Refundable
Pre-
and Short-
Benefits
Basic
Child
tion, and
Tax
K/Head
Child
Adminis-
Term
and
Total
State
Assistance
Care
Training
Credits
Start
Welfare
tration
Benefits
Services Spending
Kentucky
186.166
30.490
27.922
0.000
0.000
0.000
11.424
0.000
12.509
268.512
Louisiana
17.404
10.742
34.530
11.836
40.644
19.780
16.939
7.851
26.938
186.664
Maine
32.738
28.664
9.533
7.900
0.595
10.688
5.033
5.760
30.163
131.075
Maryland
117.921
6.468
29.644
156.514
70.018
16.909
30.668
38.835
43.987
510.963
Massachusetts
220.293
334.776
177.164
171.271
0.000
4.819
37.826
104.098
78.236
1,128.483
Michigan
74.149
27.829
4.039
40.146
188.527
75.330
58.542
17.654
748.702
1,234.920
Minnesota
78.515
166.913
58.409
142.862
5.700
0.000
44.752
23.846
25.246
546.243
Mississippi
5.543
1.715
25.349
0.000
0.000
27.088
11.422
0.000
29.945
101.062
Missouri
31.318
31.460
64.115
0.000
0.000
106.116
9.959
67.182
51.512
361.662
Montana
19.597
9.277
3.036
0.000
0.000
3.964
5.456
2.147
9.832
53.310
Nebraska
24.037
23.059
9.248
32.813
0.000
4.901
3.934
0.127
0.809
98.928
Nevada
33.727
21.966
4.783
0.000
3.006
26.899
10.333
6.975
16.189
123.879
New Hampshire
34.054
12.282
7.535
0.000
0.000
5.918
11.244
8.286
17.508
96.826
New Jersey
69.186
163.904
69.698
373.073
559.777
0.000
48.640
14.785
64.225
1,363.288
New Mexico
47.430
32.976
17.272
45.478
47.614
0.317
4.760
9.473
26.815
232.134
New York
1,473.353
467.812
162.000
1,324.586
492.403
339.964
424.079
266.100
334.652
5,284.951
North Carolina
32.930
198.883
5.566
0.000
90.203
131.687
47.863
5.117
52.186
564.436
North Dakota
3.896
1.117
3.714
0.000
0.000
18.430
3.680
0.015
1.151
32.002
Ohio
239.856
410.532
78.974
0.000
0.000
20.101
112.034
57.001
234.621
1,153.119
Oklahoma
17.988
32.714
11.092
0.000
9.059
19.263
8.418
0.629
29.307
128.471
Oregon
84.649
11.951
19.574
3.381
11.924
13.786
24.708
29.005
38.863
237.841
CRS-16

Work,
Emergency
Other
Educa-
Refundable
Pre-
and Short-
Benefits
Basic
Child
tion, and
Tax
K/Head
Child
Adminis-
Term
and
Total
State
Assistance
Care
Training
Credits
Start
Welfare
tration
Benefits
Services Spending
Pennsylvania
151.419
506.841
99.100
0.000
235.879
0.000
80.402
14.261
143.073
1,230.975
Rhode Island
23.911
45.352
12.079
22.715
0.000
33.194
5.022
27.702
12.662
182.638
South Carolina
52.507
4.085
9.840
0.000
27.193
6.693
21.205
0.000
43.959
165.482
South Dakota
13.246
0.803
3.261
0.000
0.000
3.125
1.823
2.264
2.847
27.369
Tennessee
57.657
0.000
19.316
0.000
82.092
0.000
26.804
0.000
2.427
188.297
Texas
39.782
0.000
83.597
0.000
349.682
324.487
118.891
5.686
70.626
992.751
Utah
22.529
22.922
19.109
0.000
10.122
1.567
7.981
1.835
18.884
104.949
Vermont
13.716
32.255
1.923
19.420
0.000
6.998
5.533
1.447
14.856
96.147
Virginia
62.525
38.527
37.792
0.524
4.009
55.156
49.769
4.556
34.619
287.476
Washington
141.868
144.488
99.704
0.000
50.235
4.152
87.620
63.991
416.008
1,008.066
West Virginia
25.140
10.021
0.344
0.000
0.000
31.140
12.543
14.229
23.623
117.041
Wisconsin
71.793
201.426
31.826
69.700
0.000
6.413
31.914
38.011
126.522
577.606
Wyoming
8.321
2.883
4.742
0.000
0.000
0.000
4.329
3.294
1.982
25.551
Totals
6,510.603
5,044.598
3,231.368
2,761.975 2,601.063 2,589.039
2,224.139
1,326.224 4,614.682 30,903.691
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Excludes TANF funds used in the territories and in tribal TANF programs.
CRS-17

Table B-2. Uses of FY2018 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percentage of Total Federal TANF and State MOE
Spending
Work,
Emergency
Other
Education,
Refund-
Pre-
and Short-
Benefits
Basic
Child
and
able Tax
K/Head
Child
Adminis-
Term
and
Total
State
Assistance
Care
Training
Credits
Start
Welfare
tration
Benefits
Services
Spending
Alabama
9.8%
3.1%
4.2%
0.0%
12.4%
21.6%
7.3%
21.6%
19.9%
100.0%
Alaska
43.8
17.4
12.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
7.3
0.4
19.1
100.0
Arizona
12.6
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
61.0
4.6
7.7
13.9
100.0
Arkansas
6.1
3.3
17.5
0.0
37.6
0.3
20.6
6.0
8.5
100.0
California
33.7
12.2
26.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
8.2
4.2
14.8
100.0
Colorado
19.7
3.2
3.0
20.0
15.5
13.1
4.8
4.7
15.9
100.0
Connecticut
8.4
8.3
2.2
11.8
16.5
14.1
7.7
4.2
26.8
100.0
Delaware
9.8
68.4
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.2
1.6
14.5
100.0
District of Columbia
44.8
16.1
9.4
6.4
0.0
0.0
2.6
18.8
1.9
100.0
Florida
16.1
32.1
5.1
0.0
0.0
27.7
9.8
0.1
9.0
100.0
Georgia
20.0
0.0
1.7
0.0
0.0
62.5
3.8
1.1
10.9
100.0
Hawaii
15.0
5.8
20.4
0.0
0.0
0.8
7.1
4.0
46.9
100.0
Idaho
17.1
27.4
6.7
0.0
3.1
4.1
14.1
25.9
1.5
100.0
Il inois
4.0
45.5
1.5
8.3
10.0
22.0
0.0
0.1
8.6
100.0
Indiana
3.6
35.0
1.8
7.2
0.0
2.6
8.7
0.1
41.1
100.0
Iowa
14.6
27.7
4.7
12.4
0.0
26.8
3.1
0.2
10.4
100.0
Kansas
7.0
3.9
0.4
23.7
10.6
20.4
6.2
0.0
27.7
100.0
Kentucky
69.3
11.4
10.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.3
0.0
4.7
100.0
Louisiana
9.3
5.8
18.5
6.3
21.8
10.6
9.1
4.2
14.4
100.0
CRS-18

Work,
Emergency
Other
Education,
Refund-
Pre-
and Short-
Benefits
Basic
Child
and
able Tax
K/Head
Child
Adminis-
Term
and
Total
State
Assistance
Care
Training
Credits
Start
Welfare
tration
Benefits
Services
Spending
Maine
25.0
21.9
7.3
6.0
0.5
8.2
3.8
4.4
23.0
100.0
Maryland
23.1
1.3
5.8
30.6
13.7
3.3
6.0
7.6
8.6
100.0
Massachusetts
19.5
29.7
15.7
15.2
0.0
0.4
3.4
9.2
6.9
100.0
Michigan
6.0
2.3
0.3
3.3
15.3
6.1
4.7
1.4
60.6
100.0
Minnesota
14.4
30.6
10.7
26.2
1.0
0.0
8.2
4.4
4.6
100.0
Mississippi
5.5
1.7
25.1
0.0
0.0
26.8
11.3
0.0
29.6
100.0
Missouri
8.7
8.7
17.7
0.0
0.0
29.3
2.8
18.6
14.2
100.0
Montana
36.8
17.4
5.7
0.0
0.0
7.4
10.2
4.0
18.4
100.0
Nebraska
24.3
23.3
9.3
33.2
0.0
5.0
4.0
0.1
0.8
100.0
Nevada
27.2
17.7
3.9
0.0
2.4
21.7
8.3
5.6
13.1
100.0
New Hampshire
35.2
12.7
7.8
0.0
0.0
6.1
11.6
8.6
18.1
100.0
New Jersey
5.1
12.0
5.1
27.4
41.1
0.0
3.6
1.1
4.7
100.0
New Mexico
20.4
14.2
7.4
19.6
20.5
0.1
2.1
4.1
11.6
100.0
New York
27.9
8.9
3.1
25.1
9.3
6.4
8.0
5.0
6.3
100.0
North Carolina
5.8
35.2
1.0
0.0
16.0
23.3
8.5
0.9
9.2
100.0
North Dakota
12.2
3.5
11.6
0.0
0.0
57.6
11.5
0.0
3.6
100.0
Ohio
20.8
35.6
6.8
0.0
0.0
1.7
9.7
4.9
20.3
100.0
Oklahoma
14.0
25.5
8.6
0.0
7.1
15.0
6.6
0.5
22.8
100.0
Oregon
35.6
5.0
8.2
1.4
5.0
5.8
10.4
12.2
16.3
100.0
Pennsylvania
12.3
41.2
8.1
0.0
19.2
0.0
6.5
1.2
11.6
100.0
Rhode Island
13.1
24.8
6.6
12.4
0.0
18.2
2.7
15.2
6.9
100.0
CRS-19

Work,
Emergency
Other
Education,
Refund-
Pre-
and Short-
Benefits
Basic
Child
and
able Tax
K/Head
Child
Adminis-
Term
and
Total
State
Assistance
Care
Training
Credits
Start
Welfare
tration
Benefits
Services
Spending
South Carolina
31.7
2.5
5.9
0.0
16.4
4.0
12.8
0.0
26.6
100.0
South Dakota
48.4
2.9
11.9
0.0
0.0
11.4
6.7
8.3
10.4
100.0
Tennessee
30.6
0.0
10.3
0.0
43.6
0.0
14.2
0.0
1.3
100.0
Texas
4.0
0.0
8.4
0.0
35.2
32.7
12.0
0.6
7.1
100.0
Utah
21.5
21.8
18.2
0.0
9.6
1.5
7.6
1.7
18.0
100.0
Vermont
14.3
33.5
2.0
20.2
0.0
7.3
5.8
1.5
15.5
100.0
Virginia
21.7
13.4
13.1
0.2
1.4
19.2
17.3
1.6
12.0
100.0
Washington
14.1
14.3
9.9
0.0
5.0
0.4
8.7
6.3
41.3
100.0
West Virginia
21.5
8.6
0.3
0.0
0.0
26.6
10.7
12.2
20.2
100.0
Wisconsin
12.4
34.9
5.5
12.1
0.0
1.1
5.5
6.6
21.9
100.0
Wyoming
32.6
11.3
18.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
16.9
12.9
7.8
100.0
Totals
21.1
16.3
10.5
8.9
8.4
8.4
7.2
4.3
14.9
100.0
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notes: Excludes TANF funds used in the territories and in tribal TANF programs.

CRS-20

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

Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2019
(September 30, 2019; $ in Millions)
Unliquidated
State
Obligations
Unobligated Balance
Alabama
$50.8
$59.6
Alaska
1.9
30.5
Arizona
0.0
41.8
Arkansas
40.9
49.2
California
259.3
0.0
Colorado
0.0
103.1
Connecticut
0.0
0.0
Delaware
3.1
29.7
District of Columbia
0.0
31.1
Florida
64.5
0.0
Georgia
39.7
48.1
Hawaii
23.7
328.1
Idaho
0.0
8.7
Il inois
0.0
0.0
Indiana
5.0
32.4
Iowa
0.0
0.9
Kansas
3.3
69.4
Kentucky
0.0
48.7
Louisiana
45.5
4.0
Maine
25.5
102.9
Maryland
0.0
29.5
Massachusetts
0.0
0.0
Michigan
0.0
99.2
Minnesota
0.0
64.4
Mississippi
0.0
15.7
Missouri
0.0
0.0
Montana
0.0
14.4
Nebraska
0.0
79.4
Nevada
0.0
28.9
New Hampshire
0.0
35.9
New Jersey
54.8
6.3
New Mexico
0.0
94.1
New York
17.4
649.1
North Carolina
64.6
0.0
Congressional Research Service

21

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

Unliquidated
State
Obligations
Unobligated Balance
North Dakota
0.0
5.3
Ohio
582.4
0.0
Oklahoma
0.8
212.6
Oregon
0.0
33.5
Pennsylvania
93.2
403.3
Rhode Island
0.0
12.6
South Carolina
0.0
0.0
South Dakota
0.0
22.0
Tennessee
0.0
731.9
Texas
0.0
330.3
Utah
0.0
55.9
Vermont
0.0
0.0
Virginia
6.7
133.6
Washington
0.0
111.9
West Virginia
0.0
101.8
Wisconsin
0.0
186.5
Wyoming
0.0
28.6

Totals
1,383.0
4,475.2
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: Excludes TANF funds used in the territories and in tribal TANF programs.

Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF
Assistance by Jurisdiction, November 2020
State
Families
Recipients Children
Adults
Alabama
7,228
16,719
13,642
3,077
Alaska
2,013
5,376
3,692
1,684
Arizona
7,581
15,342
12,680
2,662
Arkansas
1,953
4,492
3,431
1,061
California
308,432
984,915
704,151
280,764
Colorado
12,359
30,023
22,338
7,685
Connecticut
6,320
13,403
9,791
3,612
Delaware
2,650
7,356
4,296
3,060
District of Columbia
7,465
21,847
16,103
5,744
Florida
41,491
75,073
59,340
15,733
Congressional Research Service

22

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

State
Families
Recipients Children
Adults
Georgia
8,060
15,222
13,889
1,333
Guam
437
1,078
834
244
Hawaii
6,881
21,265
13,595
7,670
Idaho
1,773
2,496
2,456
40
Il inois
10,735
21,098
18,996
2,102
Indiana
8,327
19,721
15,351
4,370
Iowa
7,504
17,947
13,759
4,188
Kansas
3,520
3,520
1,882
1,638
Kentucky
14,168
28,696
24,903
3,793
Louisiana
3,855
8,982
7,555
1,427
Maine
11,778
39,372
24,821
14,551
Maryland
23,055
56,580
39,938
16,642
Massachusetts
41,560
108,953
77,773
31,180
Michigan
10,762
26,774
21,444
5,330
Minnesota
19,680
47,585
35,101
12,484
Mississippi
1,877
3,158
2,888
270
Missouri
8,776
20,513
15,579
4,934
Montana
2,438
5,696
4,557
1,139
Nebraska
4,737
11,759
9,644
2,115
Nevada
6,658
17,198
12,826
4,372
New Hampshire
4,422
10,342
7,713
2,629
New Jersey
9,459
22,892
16,902
5,990
New Mexico
11,582
29,935
21,739
8,196
New York
113,201
289,625
198,575
91,050
North Carolina
13,775
25,289
22,273
3,016
North Dakota
1,078
2,820
2,244
576
Ohio
51,566
94,341
84,268
10,073
Oklahoma
5,592
12,901
10,932
1,969
Oregon
25,192
72,859
48,144
24,715
Pennsylvania
29,869
71,549
55,079
16,470
Puerto Rico
4,357
11,800
7,195
4,605
Rhode Island
2,577
6,094
4,622
1,472
South Carolina
8,133
18,749
15,127
3,622
South Dakota
2,716
5,495
5,051
444
Tennessee
15,578
32,436
26,923
5,513
Texas
21,404
44,545
37,455
7,090
Utah
2,657
6,195
4,621
1,574
Congressional Research Service

23

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

State
Families
Recipients Children
Adults
Vermont
2,052
4,305
3,233
1,072
Virgin Islands
69
225
156
69
Virginia
18,311
34,337
26,552
7,785
Washington
41,979
99,966
66,093
33,873
West Virginia
5,703
11,121
9,379
1,742
Wisconsin
16,495
37,683
30,420
7,263
Wyoming
487
1,136
869
267

Totals
1,002,327
2,598,799
1,912,820
685,979
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 Assistance
by Jurisdiction, November of Selected Years
Percentage Change

to 2020 from …
1994-
2019-
1994
2010
2019
2020
2020
2020

Alabama
48,142
23,954
7,456
7,228
-85.0%
-3.1%
Alaska
12,145
3,423
2,110
2,013
-83.4
-4.6
Arizona
72,171
19,406
7,108
7,581
-89.5
6.7
Arkansas
25,039
8,525
2,364
1,953
-92.2
-17.4
California
914,344
593,714
363,509
308,432
-66.3
-15.2
Colorado
39,171
11,998
13,671
12,359
-68.4
-9.6
Connecticut
60,846
16,922
7,659
6,320
-89.6
-17.5
Delaware
11,102
5,794
3,226
2,650
-76.1
-17.9
District of Columbia
27,390
9,963
7,243
7,465
-72.7
3.1
Florida
239,902
57,861
38,479
41,491
-82.7
7.8
Georgia
141,307
20,630
8,719
8,060
-94.3
-7.6
Guam
2,060
1,289
422
437
-78.8
3.6
Hawaii
21,415
10,019
4,022
6,881
-67.9
71.1
Idaho
8,608
1,809
2,014
1,773
-79.4
-12.0
Il inois
239,840
26,014
10,957
10,735
-95.5
-2.0
Indiana
70,161
33,553
5,410
8,327
-88.1
53.9
Congressional Research Service

24

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

Percentage Change

to 2020 from …
1994-
2019-
1994
2010
2019
2020
2020
2020

Iowa
37,941
21,478
8,787
7,504
-80.2
-14.6
Kansas
28,774
15,563
3,984
3,520
-87.8
-11.6
Kentucky
77,403
31,175
16,234
14,168
-81.7
-12.7
Louisiana
84,031
11,062
4,478
3,855
-95.4
-13.9
Maine
21,782
15,397
14,586
11,778
-45.9
-19.3
Maryland
80,480
25,347
16,761
23,055
-71.4
37.6
Massachusetts
106,736
50,878
50,505
41,560
-61.1
-17.7
Michigan
211,259
68,790
11,119
10,762
-94.9
-3.2
Minnesota
61,352
24,759
15,087
19,680
-67.9
30.4
Mississippi
53,652
12,052
3,011
1,877
-96.5
-37.7
Missouri
91,205
39,737
9,687
8,776
-90.4
-9.4
Montana
11,464
3,650
3,266
2,438
-78.7
-25.4
Nebraska
15,543
8,381
4,346
4,737
-69.5
9.0
Nevada
15,330
10,778
7,821
6,658
-56.6
-14.9
New Hampshire
11,154
6,097
5,286
4,422
-60.4
-16.3
New Jersey
113,444
34,996
9,003
9,459
-91.7
5.1
New Mexico
34,906
21,447
9,901
11,582
-66.8
17.0
New York
462,309
157,247
112,549
113,201
-75.5
0.6
North Carolina
127,829
23,879
14,236
13,775
-89.2
-3.2
North Dakota
5,290
1,967
972
1,078
-79.6
10.9
Ohio
239,144
104,370
43,736
51,566
-78.4
17.9
Oklahoma
45,863
9,380
5,650
5,592
-87.8
-1.0
Oregon
39,763
32,548
36,514
25,192
-36.6
-31.0
Pennsylvania
209,875
59,090
39,133
29,869
-85.8
-23.7
Puerto Rico
56,378
13,953
4,410
4,357
-92.3
-1.2
Rhode Island
22,581
6,648
3,846
2,577
-88.6
-33.0
South Carolina
50,351
19,371
8,220
8,133
-83.8
-1.1
South Dakota
6,434
3,247
2,928
2,716
-57.8
-7.2
Tennessee
107,498
63,925
18,804
15,578
-85.5
-17.2
Texas
281,897
52,970
21,904
21,404
-92.4
-2.3
Utah
17,387
7,097
3,133
2,657
-84.7
-15.2
Vermont
9,691
3,264
2,665
2,052
-78.8
-23.0
Virgin Islands
1,222
526
101
69
-94.4
-31.7
Virginia
73,692
37,478
16,586
18,311
-75.2
10.4
Washington
102,718
67,762
35,846
41,979
-59.1
17.1
Congressional Research Service

25

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

Percentage Change

to 2020 from …
1994-
2019-
1994
2010
2019
2020
2020
2020

West Virginia
39,299
10,747
6,361
5,703
-85.5
-10.3
Wisconsin
73,730
25,056
14,839
16,495
-77.6
11.2
Wyoming
5,457
302
482
487
-91.1
1.0

Totals
4,968,507
1,947,288
1,071,146
1,002,327
-79.8
-6.4
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-6. TANF Work Participation Standard and Rate, By Jurisdiction for All
Families: FY2020
Effective
Caseload
(after-
Work
Statutory
Reduction
credit)
Participation
Met the
State
Standard
Credit
standard
Rate
Standard?
Alabama
50.0%
50.0%
0.0%
44.3%
Yes
Alaska
50.0
42.4
7.6
38.2
Yes
Arizona
50.0
50.0
0.0
15.2
Yes
Arkansas
50.0
50.0
0.0
17.4
Yes
California
50.0
25.3
24.7
50.5
Yes
Colorado
50.0
35.0
15.0
39.9
Yes
Connecticut
50.0
50.0
0.0
11.3
Yes
Delaware
50.0
50.0
0.0
28.6
Yes
District of Col.
50.0
47.7
2.3
49.9
Yes
Florida
50.0
39.0
11.0
19.1
Yes
Georgia
50.0
50.0
0.0
16.1
Yes
Guam
50.0
50.0
0.0
9.6
Yes
Hawaii
50.0
50.0
0.0
18.2
Yes
Idaho
50.0
0.0
50.0
54.7
Yes
Il inois
50.0
46.1
3.9
66.5
Yes
Indiana
50.0
50.0
0.0
21.3
Yes
Iowa
50.0
50.0
0.0
20.0
Yes
Kansas
50.0
50.0
0.0
31.8
Yes
Kentucky
50.0
50.0
0.0
41.0
Yes
Congressional Research Service

26

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

Effective
Caseload
(after-
Work
Statutory
Reduction
credit)
Participation
Met the
State
Standard
Credit
standard
Rate
Standard?
Louisiana
50.0
50.0
0.0
3.5
Yes
Maine
50.0
0.0
50.0
83.5
Yes
Maryland
50.0
50.0
0.0
14.3
Yes
Massachusetts
50.0
25.1
24.9
56.9
Yes
Michigan
50.0
50.0
0.0
32.2
Yes
Minnesota
50.0
44.6
5.4
22.3
Yes
Mississippi
50.0
50.0
0.0
40.3
Yes
Missouri
50.0
50.0
0.0
17.1
Yes
Montana
50.0
18.4
31.6
35.5
Yes
Nebraska
50.0
50.0
0.0
10.2
Yes
Nevada
50.0
39.2
10.8
27.0
Yes
New Hampshire
50.0
0.0
50.0
55.1
Yes
New Jersey
50.0
50.0
0.0
17.4
Yes
New Mexico
50.0
50.0
0.0
25.8
Yes
New York
50.0
48.9
1.1
17.8
Yes
North Carolina
50.0
47.7
2.3
10.0
Yes
North Dakota
50.0
50.0
0.0
35.2
Yes
Ohio
50.0
42.5
7.5
29.4
Yes
Oklahoma
50.0
50.0
0.0
20.1
Yes
Oregon
50.0
0.0
50.0
59.6
Yes
Pennsylvania
50.0
50.0
0.0
14.5
Yes
Puerto Rico
50.0
50.0
0.0
6.6
Yes
Rhode Island
50.0
50.0
0.0
6.8
Yes
South Carolina
50.0
50.0
0.0
20.4
Yes
South Dakota
50.0
0.0
50.0
52.7
Yes
Tennessee
50.0
50.0
0.0
33.6
Yes
Texas
50.0
50.0
0.0
11.3
Yes
Utah
50.0
50.0
0.0
13.0
Yes
Vermont
50.0
46.7
3.3
39.7
Yes
Virgin Islands
50.0
50.0
0.0
4.1
Yes
Virginia
50.0
45.5
4.5
29.3
Yes
Washington
50.0
50.0
0.0
41.8
Yes
West Virginia
50.0
48.6
1.4
24.8
Yes
Wisconsin
50.0
42.2
7.8
37.3
Yes
Wyoming
50.0
0.0
50.0
76.0
Yes
Congressional Research Service

27

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

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

Table B-7. TANF Work Participation Standard and Rate, By Jurisdiction, for Two-
Parent Families: FY2020
Effective
Caseload
(after-
Work
Statutory
Reduction
credit
Participation
Met the
State
Standard
Credit
standard)
Rate
Standard?
Alabama
90.0%
90.0%
0.0%
48.1%
Yes
Alaska
90.0
54.8
35.2
52.1
Yes
Arizona
90.0
76.0
14.0
27.1
Yes
Arkansas
90.0
75.8
14.2
16.8
Yes
California
90.0
30.5
59.5
27.5
No
Colorado
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Connecticut
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Delaware
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
District of Col.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Florida
90.0
86.7
3.3
17.1
Yes
Georgia
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Guam
90.0
52.9
37.1
9.5
No
Hawaii
90.0
77.9
12.1
26.4
Yes
Idaho
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Il inois
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Indiana
90.0
83.2
6.8
29.3
Yes
Iowa
90.0
84.5
5.5
13.1
Yes
Kansas
90.0
77.1
12.9
33.8
Yes
Kentucky
90.0
56.0
34.0
43.0
Yes
Louisiana
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Maine
90.0
0.0
90.0
94.0
Yes
Maryland
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Massachusetts
90.0
25.1
64.9
86.0
Yes
Michigan
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Minnesota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Mississippi
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Missouri
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Montana
90.0
54.8
35.2
41.8
Yes
Congressional Research Service

28

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

Effective
Caseload
(after-
Work
Statutory
Reduction
credit
Participation
Met the
State
Standard
Credit
standard)
Rate
Standard?
Nebraska
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Nevada
90.0
39.2
50.8
38.3
No
New Hampshire
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
New Jersey
90.0
82.9
7.1
94.2
Yes
New Mexico
90.0
64.4
25.6
32.0
Yes
New York
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
North Carolina
90.0
47.7
42.3
11.1
No
North Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Ohio
90.0
88.6
1.4
27.8
Yes
Oklahoma
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Oregon
90.0
0.0
90.0
97.8
Yes
Pennsylvania
90.0
89.6
0.4
20.5
Yes
Puerto Rico
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Rhode Island
90.0
62.4
27.6
7.3
No
South Carolina
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
South Dakota
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Tennessee
90.0
77.4
12.6
30.9
Yes
Texas
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Utah
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Vermont
90.0
63.7
26.3
63.0
Yes
Virgin Islands
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Virginia
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Washington
90.0
51.9
38.1
62.4
Yes
West Virginia
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Wisconsin
90.0
63.4
26.6
45.9
Yes
Wyoming
90.0
0.0
90.0
78.6
No
Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).

Congressional Research Service

29

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

Author Information

Gene Falk
Patrick A. Landers
Specialist in Social Policy
Analyst in Social Policy

Acknowledgments
Amber Wilhelm and Calvin DeSouza produced this report’s data visualizations.

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.

Congressional Research Service
RL32760 · VERSION 201 · UPDATED
30