On September 8, the Human Resources Subcommittee heard testimony from experts with varying opinions on the success of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) legislation and recommendations for reauthorization. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) also released a report providing valuable information for the Congress as the reauthorization for the legislation is needed before expiration on September 30, 2011.  Between fiscal years 1997 and 2008, the total number of families receiving welfare cash assistance decreased by almost 50 percent. At the same time, there have been changes in the types of families receiving cash assistance. Specifically, child-only cases—in which the children alone receive benefits—increased from about 35 percent of the overall TANF caseload in 2000 to about half in 2008. As the number of families receiving TANF cash assistance declined, state spending shifted to support purposes other than cash assistance, which is allowed under the law. However, because states are primarily required to report data to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) on families receiving cash assistance and not on families receiving other forms of aid funded by TANF, this shift in spending has left gaps in the information gathered at the federal level to understand who TANF funds are serving and ensure state accountability.

Nationally, the proportion of TANF families who met their work requirements changed little after the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) was enacted in 2005, and many states have been able to meet their work participation rate requirements because of various policy and funding options allowed in federal law and regulations. Although federal law generally requires that a minimum of 50 percent of families receiving TANF cash assistance in each state participate in work activities, both before and after DRA, about one-third of TANF families nationwide met these requirements. Nonetheless, many states have been able to meet their required work participation rates because of policy and funding options. For example, states receive a caseload reduction credit, which generally decreases each state’s required work participation rate by the same percentage that state caseloads decreased over a specified time period. States can further add to their credits and decrease their required work rates by spending their own funds on TANF-related services beyond the amount that is required to receive federal TANF funds. In fiscal year 2009, 7 states met their rates because 50 percent or more of their TANF families participated in work activities for the required number of hours. However, when states’ caseload decreases and additional spending was included in the calculation of state caseload reduction credits, 38 other states were also able to meet their required work participation rates in that year.

Those speaking (http://waysandmeans.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=258003) offered varying opinions about how Congress should proceed with the necessary reauthorization for federal fiscal year 2012.  Work participation continues to be a key area of focus for TANF supporters, particularly with the ongoing significant unemployment rates impacting states’ economic recovery.  It is unclear what legislative changes the Ways and Means Committee will put forth to accomplish the goals