Table of Contents | Previous | Next |
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) funded a study to determine how local management of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs has adapted practices to address changing needs and improve program results. To understand these local adaptations, the research team—which included staff from the Lewin Group and the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government—visited five local TANF offices to interview staff and collect data. The sites selected were among locations where field research was conducted several years ago in order to gauge changes since the early years of TANF implementation. The five sites were in Phoenix, Arizona; Macon, Georgia; Kansas City, Missouri; Newark, New Jersey; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Site visits were conducted between February and July 2006. This report presents major findings from the site visits. Several cross-cutting findings emerged from the study:
TANF programs continue to evolve. Although many of the large-scale policy changes were adopted in the years immediately following welfare reform, states and local areas continue to adapt their programs. The research team observed changes in organizational structures (e.g., separating the eligibility and employment functions at the state and local levels), pre-eligibility requirements (e.g., upfront job search, meetings with child support staff), program activities (e.g., new employment programs), and case flow (e.g., new intake procedures).
Program goals and philosophies varied considerably from site to site. Goals and philosophies were typically similar to those found at the sites in previous field research studies, though incremental changes have occurred. For example, promoting rapid employment and thus minimizing dependency on cash assistance was a stated goal among staff in Macon and Milwaukee, while supporting poor families with barriers to self-sufficiency was a much more salient goal in Newark. By contrast, Kansas City and Phoenix revealed less agreement on TANF goals in part because different agencies administer the program at the state and local levels.
Most changes in policies and procedures affecting the local implementation of TANF originated at the state level. Although the field research sought to identify local TANF adaptations to changing circumstances and TANF performance, the site visits revealed that most of the significant changes in recent years were initiated at the state level. Such changes included alterations in sanction policies and procedures; shifts in agency control over employment services; reinstating job up front search requirements; changes in pre-eligibility requirements; extensions of assistance; changes in contracts and contractors; and new pilot programs.
Locally initiated changes most often involved office procedures. Such changes included redesigns of intake processes for income support programs; better communications with vendors about employment activity “slots” available among local vendors; and the closing and consolidation of human service offices. Notable policy changes included new or expanded work programs and expansions in transportation services.
State and local policies and procedures have been adopted that by design or otherwise, have limited participation in TANF cash assistance. In four of the five sites, local office operations have changed since the first years of TANF in ways that have the effect of limiting entry onto cash assistance rolls. Macon, for example, established a new, intensive employment program for TANF applicants. In Phoenix, greater emphasis is placed on exposing clients to the state’s diversion program. Milwaukee requires work search before eligibility is determined. And three sites—Phoenix, Milwaukee, and Newark—made cooperating with child support enforcement a pre-qualification requirement (in the latter two sites, the change occurred somewhat earlier but after the first years of TANF implementation).
Institutional structures have become more complex in most of the local sites in recent years. This complexity may challenge client participation in TANF, as well as working relationships among different staffs. Compared to only a few years ago, TANF functions in these sites have been increasingly divided between human service and labor departments; between public and private agencies; and among a variety of specialists. The changes have often increased the number of distinct persons and places that clients must contact, and they strain communications and coordination among workers who deal with TANF families.
It is important to emphasize that the findings above are based on visits to five sites, and it is unwise to draw too many conclusions from a very small sample. In addition, the findings do not capture changes that states and local areas have undertaken or will undertake as a result of the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) because this study began before the DRA was passed, and the site visits occurred as state staff were only beginning to wrestle with the effect of the changes on their TANF programs. Among other things, the DRA recalibrates and updates the baseline for caseload reduction credits and reduces states’ flexibility in using certain activities to satisfy the participation requirements. Many states are thus expected to have difficulties meeting the new participation requirements. Although further research would be informative, the findings suggest that certain program elements are associated with higher participation rates and, thus, may increase the likelihood that states will comply with the new regulations. This includes programs that are work-oriented in philosophy and practice. In these programs, state and local staff alike send a consistent message to applicants and clients that employment is good and is the expected outcome. Specifically:
-
The overriding philosophy of the TANF program supports work by moving people into work or a work-oriented activity quickly.
-
Eligibility and work functions are organizationally integrated, with a central chain of command and common performance measures that stress employment goals.
-
The TANF work objective is invoked early (e.g., prior to and as a condition of eligibility).
-
There are certain and swift consequences for non-participation in work activities.
-
Work requirements are backed up with work supports.
| Table of Contents | Previous | Next |