< Back to Search

TANF-ACF-IM-1998-04 (Final Tables Based On Form ACF-108 Jobs Data For Fiscal Year 1996)

Published: February 18, 1998
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Data Collection and Reporting
Information Memoranda (IM)








To disseminate final Form ACF-108 data for Fiscal Year 1996


Form 108 is a case sample reporting system and replaced the Form FSA-104 aggregate data. Fiscal Year (FY) 1996 represents the fifth year that States reported JOBS program data on a case sample basis.


The attached tables are based on final JOBS case sample data from Form ACF-108. Data are weighted to the total State JOBS participant population and presented for all States except Alaska, District of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands which did not report data and Arizona, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico which aid not report monthly sample weights. There are 39 tables provided for FY 1996. Data for the selected characteristics are presented as either percent distributions based on monthly averages or as means.

2. The data presented are based on information as provided by the State.

3. where a State did not report data for a particular item, the weighted values of the missing data are treated as missing values. Therefore, the total number of participants is different for each table and does not add up to the total U.S weighted monthly average number of reported cases of 637, 534.

4. The monthly average for any State that did not report every month is determined by dividing the State total by the number of months that the State reported data.

5. Where a footnote indicates a data problem for one or more States, the U.S. total will reflect that data problem.

6. All data are reported on a monthly basis, but the attached tables are average monthly numbers for the fiscal year covered. Because they are average numbers, rounding errors occur. All discrepancies in summation are attributed to rounding, unless otherwise indicated.

Notes to Specific Tables

1. Since an individual can participate in more than one component during a sample month, only the first component was reported in table 1, table 27, and tables 14 through 26, in order to avoid duplicated counts.

2. In table 3 the average number of days since entry into JOBS is truncated because it is calculated for all cases including those that continue to participate in the program after the sample month.

3. In table 7, many States miscoded missing data for initial education as no formal schooling (code 0). It was not always possible to determine when no formal schooling is correct; therefore, all no formal schooling values are treated as missing data.

4. In table 17, and table 30, the average number of days spent in a component is underestimated because it is calculated only for participants who completed a component or dropped out from a component during the fiscal year.


Inquiries should be directed to the appropriate Administration for Children and Families Regional Administrator.


Howard Rolston
Office of Planning, Research & Evaluation




The average monthly number of participants in JOBS is estimated at 665,000. The percent distribution of JOBS participants is based on a monthly average. Alaska, District of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands did not submit data during FY 1996. Arizona, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico did not provide us with monthly sample weights for FY 1996.

Program Characteristics

Tables 1 and 31:

The distribution of JOBS participants by component from high to low was as follows: Job Entry, 14.6%; Assessment and Employability Planning, 10.30-.; Job Search, 9.00-.; Assigned Higher Education, 7.7i; Job Readiness Activities, 7.4i; Vocational Training, 7.1'-.; High School, 6.80-.; GED, 6.6-.; Job Skills Training, 6.30-.; Self Initiated Higher Education, 6.0'-.; CWEP, 5.7'-.; Other, 5.0%; Remedial Education, 3.7%; English as a Second Language(ESL), 2.6%; Job Development, 0.6-.; OJT, 0.6%; and Work Supplementation, 0.3%.

The largest percentage of JOBS participants increased for Job Search, Other (paid and unpaid), and OJT and decreased for Job Development, Remedial Education, ESL, and Job Skills Training when compared with FY '95.

Tables 2, 14 and 27:

The distribution of JOBS participants by weekly scheduled hours was as follows: 1-5 hours, 12.5%; 6-10 hours, 6.9%; 11-15 hours 9.4%; 16-20 hours, 36.1%; 21-25 hours, 8.6%; 26-30 hours, 10.0%; 31-35 hours, 5.8%; and over 35 hours, 10.7%.

Table 3:

The average number of days since entry into JOBS was 518. This is an increase of 50 days from FY '95.

Tables 4, 16 and 29:

The distribution of JOBS participants by number of months since their last AFDC opening was as follows: 1 year or less, 40.6%; 13-24 months, 17.6%; 25-36 months, 11.0%; 37-60 months, 14.6%; and over 5 years, 16.2%.

Tables 5 and 18:

AFDC case status distribution was as follows: AFDC Basic, 78.2%; AFDC-UP, 12.3%; AFDC applicants, 6.ooi; no longer receiving AFDC, 3.0%; and eligible for AFDC-UP (but not receiving a money payment), 0.5%.

Tables 6, 19 and 32:

Of all JOBS participants, 35.7% were not in a target group; 42.01 received AFDC for any 36 of the preceding 60 months; 12.0% were custodial parents under age 24 who have not completed high school, and were not enrolled in high school at the time of application; 7.9% were custodial parents under age 24 with little or no work experience in the preceding year; 2.0% were members of a family in which the youngest child is within 2 years of ineligibility for AFDC because of age; and 0.4% in a State plan approved alternative group.

Demographic Characteristics

Tables 7, 20 and 33:

The distribution of JOBS participants initial education was as follows: Did not complete elementary school, 3.3%; completed elementary school and some high school, 42.1%; completed high school or GED, 44.5%; and attended some post secondary school or completed post secondary education, 10.2%.

Tables 8, 21 and 34:

The age distribution of JOBS participants was as follows: Under 20 years of age, 10.5i; 20-24, 20.0%; 25-29, 21.2%; 30-34, 19.7%; 35-39, 14.7%; and 40 and over, 13.8%.

Tables 9, 22 and 35:

The ethnic distribution of JOBS participants was as follows:

White, 43.40-.; Black, 33.7%; Hispanic, 15.8%; Asian, 3.1%; Native American, 0.9%; and Other, 3.1%. The 71.3% other category for Louisiana should be coded as Black.

The percentage of White JOBS participants decreased by O.5% and increased by O.5% for Hispanic.

Tables 10, 23 and 36:

The sex distribution of JOBS participants was Female, 87.9%; and Male, 12.1%.

Tables 11, 24 and 37:

The distribution of number of children in the family was as follows: 1, 41.8%; 2, 31.3%, 3, 16.7%, 4, 6.6%; and S or more,


Tables 12, 25 and 38:

The number of children receiving child care of JOBS participants was as follows: 0, 70%; 1, 16.7%; 2, 8.5%; and 3 or more, 4.7%.

Tables 13, 26 and 39:

The age distribution of JOBS participants' youngest child was as follows: Under 1 year of age, 9.3%; 1-2, 23.1%; 3-5, 30.9%; 6-11, 26.0%; 12-15, 8.0%; and 16 and over, 2.6%.

Tables 15 and 28:

The number of months since entry into JOBS distribution was as follows: less than 1 month, 10.8%; 1-2 months, 17.8%; 3-4 months, 11.6%; 5-6 months, 8.3%; 7-8 months, 6.4%; over 8 months, 45.1%.

Tables 17 and 30:

The average number of days spent in a component was 64. This is a decrease of 11 days from FY 195.

Note to Table

There may be a slight difference in the percentages stated above between the associated tables.



The source of the data is the Form ACF-108. Each State selects a sample of the JOBS participant population each month (or submits the entire JOBS participant universe each month) and transmits the data specified on the Form ACF-108 for each JOBS participant electronically to the ACF computer center.


Sample Design

Prior to submitting data, States developed a JOBS sampling plan that demonstrated the integrity of their sampling procedures. The sampling plan included a complete description of the sample frame, sample design and selection procedures. The sample frame consisted of all unduplicated JOBS individuals scheduled to participate in a component, actively engaged in assessment or employability planning in the month, or who had a job entry in the sample month or the month previous to the sample month.

Precision of the Estimates

The sample size must be large enough to provide a precision of plus or minus two percentage points for a 0.2 attribute at a 95 percent confidence level. This results in a required annual sample size of 1,537. Where appropriate, States may adjust the sample size using the following equation for the finite population correction factor: 1,537/(1+1,537/N), where N is the estimated average monthly number of JOBS participants subject to JOBS sampling for the fiscal year. The average monthly sample size is determined by dividing the required sample size by 12 and rounding the result up to the nearest whole number. A State must oversample by 10 percent in order to compensate for cases that might be dropped from the sample.

Response Errors

Data entries are based on information in the case record. Errors may have occurred because of misinterpretation of Form ACF-108 instructions and because of incomplete or out-of-date case record data. Errors may also have occurred in coding and transmission of data. There are no measures of the reliability of the coded information. Unreliable data entries that resulted in unreasonable data distributions were left in the tables unless specified otherwise.

Nonresponse Errors

Every effort was made to assure that each sample is complete. However, some States did not report some data elements. The following States did not report data for the following months of the fiscal year: Alaska, District of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands did not report any FY 1996 data; Idaho did not report August 96; Mississippi did not report April 96; New Hampshire did not report May through September 96; North Carolina did not report March 96; Ohio did not report June through September 96; Oregon did not report October 95, January 96, March 96, August 96, and September 96; Rhode Island did not report September 96; and West Virginia did not report February to September 96.

Arizona, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico did not provide us with the total number of JOBS participants for each month of FY 1996. These numbers are needed for weighing the sample data to the total JOBS population.

For some items, incorrect information was recorded or no response was given. Such items were recorded as unknown and are not imputed in the distribution.


Percentages less than .05% are rounded down to 0.0%.