Support Services to Children and Families in Need

Enacted in 1996, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, a $16.6 billion block grant, transferred the responsibility for carrying out welfare policy from the federal government to the state governments. Under the law, families do not have an entitlement to cash assistance. In addition, Congress imposed a five-year time limit on receipt of aid, and established sanctions for TANF recipients who do not comply with program and work requirements. TANF required states to move 25 percent of their welfare recipients into jobs or work-related activities by 1997, and 50 percent by 2002.

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program transferred the responsibility for carrying out welfare policy from the federal government to the state governments. TANF was scheduled for reauthorization in 2002; however, Congress has approved several short-term extensions while it continues to revise the law

When created, TANF was a $16.5 billion block grant. The funds were divided among the states, which were given the authority to determine what services should be provided. Under the law, families do not have an entitlement to cash assistance. In addition, Congress imposed a five-year lifetime limit on receipt of aid, and established sanctions for TANF recipients who do not comply with program and work requirements. TANF required states to move 25 percent of their welfare recipients into jobs or work-related activities by 1997, and 50 percent by 2002.

According to the Annie E. Casey Foundation, welfare caseloads decreased nearly 50 percent in the first five years after TANF was enacted. As of June 2005, 1.9 million families were receiving TANF assistance, down from 5 million families receiving welfare assistance in 1994. In addition, until the economic recession of 2001, more families were working as a result of TANF. Often, however, the wages were so low that the working families were living below the poverty level. Most of these families were not receiving employee benefits (health insurance, sick leave, vacation, etc.).

According to the National Women’s Law Center, about 40 percent of the families who no longer receive welfare benefits do not work. Urban Institute data show that in some states, a significant number of welfare case closures are due to sanctions, noncompliance with program requirements, and other administrative reasons.

Some families receive welfare but face barriers to employment, such as limited education or no work history. Research by the Urban Institute found that in 1997, 48 percent of the families receiving welfare assistance indicated that either their general health or their mental health was poor.

The Casey Foundation reports that when TANF was passed, states received funds based on what their welfare expenditures were in 1994. Since caseloads are now smaller, some states are using the money for child care and other social services. Some states, however, are using TANF funds to supplant existing state spending on social services, or are leaving TANF funds unspent.

An August 2001 Children’s Defense Fund (CDF) report concluded that, while research is limited, there is a connection between how welfare-to-work programs affect family finances and how well children succeed. Programs that substantially lift income have positive effects on children (such as reducing the number of behavioral and emotional problems, improving school performance, and raising math scores), while programs that lower income have negative effects (such as creating a higher incidence of school suspensions and increasing the number of children in special classes for behavioral or emotional problems). Programs that had little or no impact on income levels had a mixed effect on children.

Both the CDF and the Urban Institute report that being employed does not guarantee living improvements for children and families. For example, while some families received higher wages due to their jobs, they experienced a decline in total disposable income. The loss of assistance in the form of food stamps, job training, health care, child care, and other support services results in an overall decline in income. Both the CDF and the Urban Institute conclude that Congress should focus on reducing poverty and increasing the income levels of families. Policy makers should examine

• Redirecting to support services TANF dollars no longer needed for ongoing cash assistance. These funds should be used to supplement, not supplant, state efforts.
• Requiring that individuals who lose benefits be notified why they did not meet program requirements, and allowing reinstatement of assistance when individuals comply with rules.
• Ensuring that children of working families have access to health insurance and food stamps.
• Increasing child-care funding and preschool services.
• Improving job-training services.
• Enhancing child support measures.

National PTA supports policies that meet the special needs of children and families in poverty. In addition, National PTA supports federal legislation that assists states in providing necessary public health and welfare services to children, youth, and families.

Talking Points

• Research shows a connection between how welfare-to-work programs affect family finances and how well children succeed. When programs increase family incomes and offer supports, such as quality early childhood opportunities, there is a positive effect on children.
• Welfare caseloads have decreased by more than 50 percent since TANF was enacted; yet, more families are living below the poverty line. In addition, many working families do not receive employee benefits, such as health insurance, sick leave, or vacation.
• Welfare reform must address the serious barriers—such as health problems, illiteracy, substance abuse, domestic violence, and ill or disabled family members—that often prevent employment.
• The reauthorization of TANF and other welfare programs must address whether or not these programs help move children and families out of poverty, not just off of welfare rolls.