The Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant:

Responses to Frequently Asked Questions

Updated October 24, 2019

Congressional Research Service

https://crsreports.congress.gov
RL32760
 SUMMARY

RL32760
The Temporary Assistance for
October 24, 2019
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
benefits and services for low-income families with children. TANF was created in the Personal
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 on TANF Financing and Federal Requirements, by
Gene Falk).

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.

Though TANF is best known for funding assistance payments for needy families with children, the block grant and MOE
funds are used for a wide variety of benefits and activities. In FY2018, expenditures on assistance totaled $6.7 billion—21%
of total federal TANF and MOE dollars. Assistance is often—but not exclusively—paid as cash. In addition to funding basic
assistance, TANF also contributes funds for child care 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 1.2 million families, composed of 3.1 million recipients, received TANF- or
MOE-funded assistance in September 2018. The bulk of the “recipients” were children—2.3 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 FY2016. Additionally, 31% of cash assistance
families had an employed adult, while 38% 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 2017, the maximum monthly benefit for a
family of three ranged from $1,021 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 actually 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
FY2018, states achieved, on average, an all-family participation rate of 48.1% and a two-parent rate of 57.9%. In FY2018,
only Montana did not meet the all-family participation standard. This is a reduction from FY2012, when 16 states did not
meet that standard. In FY2018, seven jurisdictions did not meet the two-parent standard. States that do not meet work
standards are at risk of being penalized by a reduction in their block grant.

Congressional Research Service

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

Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Funding and Expenditures ............................................................................................................... 1
What Is TANF’s Funding Status? ............................................................................................. 1
How Are State TANF Programs Funded? ................................................................................. 1
How Much Has the Value of the TANF Basic Block Grant Changed Over Time? ................... 1
How Have States Used TANF Funds? ...................................................................................... 2
How Much of the TANF Grant Has Gone Unspent? ................................................................ 3
The Caseload ................................................................................................................................... 4
How Many Families Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded Benefits and Services? ....................... 4
How Many Families and People Currently Receive TANF- or MOE-Funded
“Assistance”? ......................................................................................................................... 4
How Does the Current Assistance Caseload Level Compare with Historical Levels? ............. 5
What Are the Characteristics of Families Receiving TANF Assistance? .................................. 6
TANF Cash Benefits: How Much Does a Family Receive in TANF Cash Per Month? .................. 7
TANF Work Participation Standards ............................................................................................... 8
What Is the TANF Work Participation Standard States Must Meet? ........................................ 8
Have There Been Changes in the Work Participation Rules Enacted Since the 1996
Welfare Reform Law? ............................................................................................................ 9
What Work Participation Rates Have the States Achieved?...................................................... 9
How Many Jurisdictions Did Not Meet the All-Families Standard? ....................................... 10
Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard? ............................................. 13

Figures
Figure 1. Uses of TANF Funds by Spending Category, FY2018 .................................................... 3
Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-September 2018................. 5
Figure 3. Characteristics of Assistance Families, Selected Years FY1988 to FY2017.................... 7
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 2017 ........................... 8
Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families,
FY2002-FY2018 ........................................................................................................................ 10
Figure 6.States That Met or Did Not Meet the TANF All-Families Work Participation
Standard: FY2006-FY2018 ........................................................................................................ 12
Figure 7.Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State: FY2006-
FY2018 ....................................................................................................................................... 14

Tables
Table 1. TANF Basic Block Grant Funding in Nominal and Constant Dollars ............................... 2
Table 2. TANF Assistance Caseload: September 2018.................................................................... 4

Table A-1. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961-2018................................................... 15

Congressional Research Service

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

Table A-2. Families Receiving AFDC/TANF Assistance by Family Category, Selected

Years, FY1988-FY2017 ............................................................................................................. 17
Table B-1. Use of FY2018 TANF and MOE Funds by Category .................................................. 18
Table B-2. Uses of FY2018 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percentage of Total
Federal TANF and State MOE Spending ................................................................................... 21
Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2018 ............................................................... 24
Table B-4. Number of Families, Recipients, Children, and Adults Receiving TANF
Assistance by State, September 2018 ......................................................................................... 25
Table B-5. Number of Needy Families with Children Receiving Assistance by State,
September of Selected Years ...................................................................................................... 27
Table B-6. TANF Assistance Families by Number of Parents by State: September 2018 ............ 29

Appendixes
Appendix A. Supplementary Tables .............................................................................................. 15
Appendix B. State Tables .............................................................................................................. 18

Contacts
Author Information........................................................................................................................ 31

Congressional Research Service

 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 B presents a series of tables with state-level data. 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?
P.L. 116-59, the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2020, and Health Extenders Act of 2019 extends
TANF block grant funding through the first quarter of FY2020.1

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 in the 1996 welfare reform law, 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 welfare reform law. The
amount established in that law 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. It 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.

1 Section 1502 of P.L. 116-59. Though the language of P.L. 116-59 says that TANF is extended through November 21,
2019, TANF law itself says that grants are made quarterly. Therefore, the authority was provided to obligate to states
their first quarter TANF grant.

Congressional Research Service 1

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

Table 1 shows the state family assistance grant, in both nominal (actual) and real (inflation-
adjusted) dollars for each year, FY1997 through FY2018. In real (inflation-adjusted) terms, the
FY2018 block grant was 36% below its value in FY1997.

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

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

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 dollars were computed using the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U).

How Have States Used TANF Funds?

In FY2018, a total of $31.3 billion of both federal TANF and state MOE expenditures were either
expended or transferred to other block grant programs. Assistance—ongoing benefits to families
to meet basic needs—represented 21% ($6.7 billion) of total FY2018 TANF and MOE dollars.
TANF is a major contributor of child care funding. In FY2018, $5.3 billion (17% of all TANF and
MOE funds) were either expended on child care or transferred to the child care block grant (the

Congressional Research Service 2

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

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 $3.3 billion, or 11% 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 FY2018 totaled $2.8 billion, or 9% of total TANF
and MOE spending.
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 $2.4 billion on such activities. TANF
and MOE funds also help fund state prekindergarten (pre-K) programs, with total FY2018
expenditures for that category at $2.6 billion. 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 FY2018.

Figure 1. Uses of TANF Funds by Spending Category, FY2018

(Dollars in billions)

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Note: 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 FY2018 (September 30, 2018, the most recent data currently available), a total of
$5.1 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 FY2018, states had made such commitments to spend—that is, had obligated—a total of $1.4
billion. At the end of FY2018, states had $3.7 billion of “unobligated balances.” These funds are
available to states to make new spending commitments. Table B-3 shows unspent TANF funds
by state.

Congressional Research Service 3

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

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.2 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 24%
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 1.2 million families, composed of 3.1
million recipients, received TANF- or MOE-funded assistance in September 2018. The bulk of
the “recipients” were children—2.3 million in that month. For state-by-state assistance caseloads,
see Table B-4.

Table 2. TANF Assistance Caseload: September 2018

Families 1,175,335
Recipients 3,104,094
Child Recipients 2,280,173
Adult Recipients 823,921

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.

2 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.

Congressional Research Service 4

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

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 September 2017. 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 the 1996 welfare reform law) before leveling off in 2001. In 2004, the
caseload began another decline, albeit at a slower pace than in the late 1990s. During the recent
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. By September 2018, the
assistance caseload had declined to 1.2 million families.

Figure 2. Number of Families Receiving Cash Assistance, July 1959-September 2018

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 September 2018, 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 2017.

Table B-5 shows recent trends in the number of cash assistance families by state.

Congressional Research Service 5

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

What Are the Characteristics of Families Receiving TANF

Assistance?
Before PRWORA, the “typical” family receiving assistance has been headed by a single parent
(usually the mother) with one or two children. That single parent has also typically been
unemployed. However, over the past 20 years 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
FY2016, 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 FY2016, a monthly average of 485,000
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. In FY2017, families
with all adult recipients unemployed and families with employed adult recipients each
represented 31% of all assistance families. The latter category includes families in “earnings
supplement” programs separate from the regular TANF cash assistance program. “Child-only”
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
FY2017 was 38%. In FY2017, families with a nonrecipient, nonparent relative (grandparents,
aunts, uncles) represented 14% of all assistance families. Families with ineligible, noncitizen
adults or adults who have not reported their citizenship status made up 9% 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 FY2017.

Congressional Research Service 6

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

Figure 3. Characteristics of Assistance Families,

Selected Years FY1988 to FY2017

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the TANF national data files.
Notes: TANF cash 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.
Figure 4 shows the maximum monthly TANF cash benefit by state for a single mother caring for
two children (family of three) in July 2017.3 The benefit amounts shown are those for a single-
parent family with two children.4 For a family of three, the maximum TANF benefit paid in July

3 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).
4 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 7

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

2017 varied from $170 per month in Mississippi to $1,201 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.5

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 2017

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.

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

5 In 2017, the HHS poverty guidelines for the contiguous 48 states and the District of Columbia for a family of three
was $1,702 per month. Higher poverty lines applied in Alaska ($2,126 per month for a family of three) and Hawaii
($1,933 per month for a family of three).

Congressional Research Service 8

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

number of hours.6 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.
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-

6Families 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

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

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
FY2018. 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.7

Figure 5. National Average TANF Work Participation Rate for All Families,
FY2002-FY2018

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

How Many Jurisdictions Did Not Meet the All-Families Standard?

Figure 6 shows which states did not meet the TANF all-families work participation standards
from FY2006 through FY2018. Before FY2007, the first year that DRA was effective, only a few
jurisdictions did not meet TANF all-families work participation standards. However, in FY2007,
15 jurisdictions did not meet the all-families standard. This number declined to 9 in FY2008 and
8 in FY2009.
In FY2012, despite the uptick in the national average work participation rate, 16 states did not
meet the all-family standard, the largest number of states that did not meet their participation

7 See CRS In Focus IF10856, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families: Work Requirements.

Congressional Research Service 10

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

standards in any one year since the enactment of TANF. FY2012 was the year that ARRA’s
“freeze” of the caseload reduction credit expired, and states were generally required to meet
higher standards than in previous years.
The number of jurisdictions that did not meet the all-families standard declined over the FY2012
to FY2017 period. In FY2018, Montana was the only jurisdiction that did not meet the all-family
participation standard.

Congressional Research Service 11

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

Figure 6.States That Met or Did Not Meet the TANF All-Families Work Participation
Standard: FY2006-FY2018
(Changes to TANF work participation standard rules under the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 [DRA],
effective in FY2007)

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

Congressional Research Service 12

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

Have States Met the Two-Parent Work Participation Standard?

In addition to meeting a work standard for all families, TANF also imposes a second standard—
90%—for the two-parent portion of its cash assistance caseload. This standard can also be
lowered by caseload reduction.
Figure 7 shows whether each state met its two-parent work participation standard for FY2006
through FY2018. However, the display on the table is more complex than that for reporting
whether a state met or did not meet its “all family” rate.
A substantial number of states have reported no two-parent families subject to the work
participation standard. These states are denoted on the table with an “NA,” indicating that the
two-parent standard was not applicable to the state in that year. Before the changes made by the
DRA were effective, a number of states had their two-parent families in separate state programs
that were not included in the work participation calculation. When DRA brought families
receiving assistance in separate state programs into the work participation rate calculations, a
number of states moved these families into solely state-funded programs. These are state-funded
programs with expenditures not countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort requirement,
and hence are outside of TANF’s rules.
For states with two-parent families in their caseloads, the table reports “Yes” for states that met
the two-parent standard, and “No” for states that did not meet the two-parent standard. Of the 29
jurisdictions that had two-parent families in their FY2018 TANF work participation calculation,
22 met the standard and 7 did not.

Congressional Research Service 13

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

Figure 7.Two-Parent TANF Work Participation Standard, Status by State: FY2006-

FY2018
(“Yes” indicates a state met the standard; “No” indicates the state did not meet the standard; and “NA”
means the standard was not applicable to the state in that year [no two-parent families in its caseload].)

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Note: A “qual.” state is one that has two-parent families within its TANF or SSP caseload.

Congressional Research Service 14

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

Appendix A. Supplementary Tables

Table A-1. Trends in the Cash Assistance Caseload: 1961-2018

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 15

 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

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 collected. 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 http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/14/indicators/rpt_indicators.pdf.

Congressional Research Service 16

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

Table A-2. Families Receiving AFDC/TANF Assistance by Family Category, Selected

Years, FY1988-FY2017
AFDC TANF

1988 1994 2001 2006 2017

Number of Families Receiving Assistance

Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working 3,136,566 3,798,997 992,445 825,490 434,602
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working 243,573 378,620 420,794 259,001 435,259
Child-Only/SSI Parent 59,988 171,391 171,951 176,670 126,483
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent 47,566 184,397 125,900 153,445 133,173
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent 51,764 146,227 91,447 158,113 4,370
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative 188,598 328,290 255,984 261,944 198,103
Child-Only/Unknown 19,897 38,341 143,834 122,738 70,882
Totals 3,747,952 5,046,263 2,202,356 1,957,402 1,402,871
Percentage of All Families Receiving Assistance
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Not Working 83.7% 75.3% 45.1% 42.2% 31.0%
Adult Recipient or Work-Eligible Parent/Working 6.5 7.5 19.1 13.2 31.0
Child-Only/SSI Parent 1.6 3.4 7.8 9.0 9.0
Child-Only/Noncitizen Parent 1.3 3.7 5.7 7.8 9.5
Child-Only/Other Ineligible Parent 1.4 2.9 4.2 8.1 0.3
Child-Only/Caretaker Relative 5.0 6.5 11.6 13.4 14.1
Child-Only/Unknown 0.5 0.8 6.5 6.3 5.1
Totals 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) tabulations of the FY1988 and FY1994 AFDC Quality Control
(QC) data files and the FY2001, FY2006, and FY2017 TANF National Data Files.
Notes: FY2001 through FY2017 data include families receiving assistance from separate state programs (SSPs)
with expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement. For FY2017, TANF
families with an adult recipient include those families with “work-eligible” nonrecipient parents. These include
nonrecipient parents who have been time-limited or sanctioned off the rolls, but the family continues to receive
a reduced benefit. For FY2001 and FY2006, such families cannot be identified and are classified as “child-only”
families.

Congressional Research Service 17

Appendix B. State Tables
Table B-1. Use of FY2018 TANF and MOE Funds by Category
(Dollars in millions)
Emer-
Work, gency Other
Education, Refund- Pre- Short- Benefits
Child and able Tax K/Head Child Administ- Term and
State Assistance Care Training Credits Start Welfare ration Benefits Services Totals

Alabama $20.322 $5.869 $6.318 $0.000 $22.273 $40.456 $19.381 $34.229 $34.613 $183.461
Alaska 42.074 18.167 8.775 0.000 0.000 0.000 8.356 0.303 15.111 92.786
Arizona 41.697 2.547 0.377 0.000 0.000 227.246 19.510 9.483 33.361 334.222
Arkansas 4.099 15.515 14.674 0.000 108.351 0.330 13.143 4.079 4.985 165.175
California 2,329.995 742.572 1,778.602 0.000 0.000 0.003 536.493 254.368 951.812 6,593.846
Colorado 55.969 17.933 10.675 78.133 62.010 46.305 23.917 20.468 65.744 381.154
Connecticut 50.236 39.992 11.732 56.444 76.203 62.230 36.063 19.726 145.736 498.362
Delaware 13.868 76.442 3.791 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.521 2.649 16.273 116.543
District of Columbia 114.482 59.117 29.873 0.000 0.000 0.000 9.730 67.559 8.899 289.659
Florida 160.443 316.879 43.770 0.000 0.000 269.205 70.038 0.902 80.325 941.562
Georgia 95.550 22.183 10.626 0.000 0.000 247.792 19.767 4.672 89.556 490.146
Hawaii 28.603 11.042 41.180 0.000 0.181 0.536 13.425 5.701 98.041 198.708
Idaho 8.219 13.637 2.759 0.000 1.509 1.507 7.759 12.651 1.506 49.547
Illinois 31.883 593.251 19.252 66.150 106.476 242.283 0.062 0.740 83.502 1,143.599
Indiana 14.744 118.452 83.762 27.530 0.000 9.337 24.102 0.388 136.557 414.873
Iowa 33.549 58.003 10.485 25.939 0.000 55.569 5.965 0.298 21.696 211.506
Kansas 13.026 6.673 1.021 49.902 15.198 24.611 11.446 0.001 43.604 165.480
Kentucky 172.118 36.051 29.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 11.201 0.000 13.154 261.549

CRS-18
 Emer-
Work, gency Other
Education, Refund- Pre- Short- Benefits
Child and able Tax K/Head Child Administ- Term and
State Assistance Care Training Credits Start Welfare ration Benefits Services Totals

Louisiana 19.673 11.122 33.016 13.627 45.490 37.556 18.429 11.686 34.916 225.516
Maine 30.393 16.412 12.457 7.592 0.719 8.425 5.099 4.867 31.073 117.038
Maryland 111.809 7.336 28.247 152.658 58.188 26.017 21.845 42.786 51.461 500.347
Massachusetts 197.096 338.728 168.496 173.120 0.000 5.412 37.800 106.280 68.388 1,095.319
Michigan 168.726 27.829 4.868 47.087 187.157 98.198 53.241 66.007 750.442 1,403.556
Minnesota 85.569 156.198 61.434 152.779 5.700 0.000 54.632 24.678 22.180 563.170
Mississippi 7.283 1.715 28.282 0.000 0.000 20.758 16.345 0.000 60.413 134.797
Missouri 35.600 48.658 77.253 0.000 0.000 131.817 7.822 76.644 37.671 415.466
Montana 25.091 9.410 3.931 0.000 0.000 2.460 4.688 2.748 11.092 59.420
Nebraska 26.057 22.244 11.926 33.834 0.000 4.174 5.032 0.146 0.741 104.154
Nevada 38.178 16.590 1.489 0.000 0.000 15.604 8.163 2.721 20.390 103.135
New Hampshire 30.651 4.582 7.689 0.000 0.000 5.309 11.234 7.129 17.733 84.327
New Jersey 81.594 166.219 80.724 348.961 549.240 0.000 51.532 15.091 71.483 1,364.843
New Mexico 55.419 31.278 18.902 71.929 41.168 0.870 4.953 2.919 19.230 246.666
New York 1,489.959 577.447 131.513 1,403.065 498.970 247.188 417.750 313.621 308.739 5,388.252
North Carolina 36.847 216.874 5.437 0.000 120.828 124.292 44.812 5.421 42.710 597.221
North Dakota 3.934 1.074 3.893 0.000 0.000 28.739 4.255 0.019 1.212 43.127
Ohio 236.819 405.938 90.064 0.000 0.000 11.916 110.937 54.605 222.014 1,132.292
Oklahoma 29.493 39.188 9.354 0.000 12.079 14.304 8.623 3.155 30.506 146.702
Oregon 83.385 11.175 16.521 3.381 8.630 14.588 41.043 32.056 65.658 276.435
Pennsylvania 167.239 478.148 102.955 0.000 176.997 0.000 73.820 14.928 140.721 1,154.808
Rhode Island 25.472 40.366 9.874 22.705 0.000 23.308 8.839 24.855 12.235 167.654

CRS-19
 Emer-
Work, gency Other
Education, Refund- Pre- Short- Benefits
Child and able Tax K/Head Child Administ- Term and
State Assistance Care Training Credits Start Welfare ration Benefits Services Totals

South Carolina 52.919 4.085 33.401 0.000 26.382 5.050 18.931 0.000 23.993 164.761
South Dakota 15.094 0.803 3.517 0.000 0.000 4.863 2.016 3.451 2.896 32.639
Tennessee 18.417 0.000 7.592 0.000 85.990 0.000 26.241 0.000 0.187 138.426
Texas 53.170 0.000 84.856 0.000 340.550 240.425 77.213 3.802 62.412 862.428
Utah 18.920 23.452 22.689 0.000 7.767 3.750 13.811 2.963 25.509 118.861
Vermont 14.148 29.849 1.989 18.312 0.000 5.770 6.032 1.317 15.925 93.342
Virginia 67.733 37.011 39.856 0.000 4.383 8.160 40.268 4.727 76.812 278.950
Washington 135.807 227.095 101.517 0.000 39.450 0.000 122.470 58.065 374.341 1,058.746
West Virginia 26.206 16.242 0.473 0.000 0.000 31.757 14.329 12.749 25.317 127.074
Wisconsin 82.282 203.163 26.142 69.700 0.000 5.364 26.429 38.640 129.371 581.091
Wyoming 9.075 1.554 3.033 0.000 0.939 0.000 4.270 3.175 1.582 23.628

Totals 6,710.93 5,326.11 3,340.09 2,822.85 2,602.83 2,353.48 2,196.78 1,379.47 4,603.83 31,336.37

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

CRS-20
 Table B-2. Uses of FY2018 TANF and MOE Funds by Category as a Percentage of Total Federal TANF and State MOE
Spending
Emer-
Work, gency Other
Education Refund- Pre- Short- Benefits
Child and able Tax K/Head Child Admin- Term and
State Assistance Care Training Credits Start Welfare istration Benefits Services Totals

Alabama 11.1% 3.2% 3.4% 0.0% 12.1% 22.1% 10.6% 18.7% 18.9% 100.0%
Alaska 45.3 19.6 9.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 0.3 16.3 100.0
Arizona 12.5 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 68.0 5.8 2.8 10.0 100.0
Arkansas 2.5 9.4 8.9 0.0 65.6 0.2 8.0 2.5 3.0 100.0
California 35.3 11.3 27.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.1 3.9 14.4 100.0
Colorado 14.7 4.7 2.8 20.5 16.3 12.1 6.3 5.4 17.2 100.0
Connecticut 10.1 8.0 2.4 11.3 15.3 12.5 7.2 4.0 29.2 100.0
Delaware 11.9 65.6 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 2.3 14.0 100.0
District of Columbia 39.5 20.4 10.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 23.3 3.1 100.0
Florida 17.0 33.7 4.6 0.0 0.0 28.6 7.4 0.1 8.5 100.0
Georgia 19.5 4.5 2.2 0.0 0.0 50.6 4.0 1.0 18.3 100.0
Hawaii 14.4 5.6 20.7 0.0 0.1 0.3 6.8 2.9 49.3 100.0
Idaho 16.6 27.5 5.6 0.0 3.0 3.0 15.7 25.5 3.0 100.0
Illinois 2.8 51.9 1.7 5.8 9.3 21.2 0.0 0.1 7.3 100.0
Indiana 3.6 28.6 20.2 6.6 0.0 2.3 5.8 0.1 32.9 100.0
Iowa 15.9 27.4 5.0 12.3 0.0 26.3 2.8 0.1 10.3 100.0
Kansas 7.9 4.0 0.6 30.2 9.2 14.9 6.9 0.0 26.3 100.0
Kentucky 65.8 13.8 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 0.0 5.0 100.0
Louisiana 8.7 4.9 14.6 6.0 20.2 16.7 8.2 5.2 15.5 100.0
Maine 26.0 14.0 10.6 6.5 0.6 7.2 4.4 4.2 26.5 100.0

CRS-21
 Emer-
Work, gency Other
Education Refund- Pre- Short- Benefits
Child and able Tax K/Head Child Admin- Term and
State Assistance Care Training Credits Start Welfare istration Benefits Services Totals

Maryland 22.3 1.5 5.6 30.5 11.6 5.2 4.4 8.6 10.3 100.0
Massachusetts 18.0 30.9 15.4 15.8 0.0 0.5 3.5 9.7 6.2 100.0
Michigan 12.0 2.0 0.3 3.4 13.3 7.0 3.8 4.7 53.5 100.0
Minnesota 15.2 27.7 10.9 27.1 1.0 0.0 9.7 4.4 3.9 100.0
Mississippi 5.4 1.3 21.0 0.0 0.0 15.4 12.1 0.0 44.8 100.0
Missouri 8.6 11.7 18.6 0.0 0.0 31.7 1.9 18.4 9.1 100.0
Montana 42.2 15.8 6.6 0.0 0.0 4.1 7.9 4.6 18.7 100.0
Nebraska 25.0 21.4 11.5 32.5 0.0 4.0 4.8 0.1 0.7 100.0
Nevada 37.0 16.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 15.1 7.9 2.6 19.8 100.0
New Hampshire 36.3 5.4 9.1 0.0 0.0 6.3 13.3 8.5 21.0 100.0
New Jersey 6.0 12.2 5.9 25.6 40.2 0.0 3.8 1.1 5.2 100.0
New Mexico 22.5 12.7 7.7 29.2 16.7 0.4 2.0 1.2 7.8 100.0
New York 27.7 10.7 2.4 26.0 9.3 4.6 7.8 5.8 5.7 100.0
North Carolina 6.2 36.3 0.9 0.0 20.2 20.8 7.5 0.9 7.2 100.0
North Dakota 9.1 2.5 9.0 0.0 0.0 66.6 9.9 0.0 2.8 100.0
Ohio 20.9 35.9 8.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 9.8 4.8 19.6 100.0
Oklahoma 20.1 26.7 6.4 0.0 8.2 9.8 5.9 2.2 20.8 100.0
Oregon 30.2 4.0 6.0 1.2 3.1 5.3 14.8 11.6 23.8 100.0
Pennsylvania 14.5 41.4 8.9 0.0 15.3 0.0 6.4 1.3 12.2 100.0
Rhode Island 15.2 24.1 5.9 13.5 0.0 13.9 5.3 14.8 7.3 100.0
South Carolina 32.1 2.5 20.3 0.0 16.0 3.1 11.5 0.0 14.6 100.0
South Dakota 46.2 2.5 10.8 0.0 0.0 14.9 6.2 10.6 8.9 100.0

CRS-22
 Emer-
Work, gency Other
Education Refund- Pre- Short- Benefits
Child and able Tax K/Head Child Admin- Term and
State Assistance Care Training Credits Start Welfare istration Benefits Services Totals

Tennessee 13.3 0.0 5.5 0.0 62.1 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.1 100.0
Texas 6.2 0.0 9.8 0.0 39.5 27.9 9.0 0.4 7.2 100.0
Utah 15.9 19.7 19.1 0.0 6.5 3.2 11.6 2.5 21.5 100.0
Vermont 15.2 32.0 2.1 19.6 0.0 6.2 6.5 1.4 17.1 100.0
Virginia 24.3 13.3 14.3 0.0 1.6 2.9 14.4 1.7 27.5 100.0
Washington 12.8 21.4 9.6 0.0 3.7 0.0 11.6 5.5 35.4 100.0
West Virginia 20.6 12.8 0.4 0.0 0.0 25.0 11.3 10.0 19.9 100.0
Wisconsin 14.2 35.0 4.5 12.0 0.0 0.9 4.5 6.6 22.3 100.0
Wyoming 38.4 6.6 12.8 0.0 4.0 0.0 18.1 13.4 6.7 100.0

Totals 21.4 17.0 10.7 9.0 8.3 7.5 7.0 4.4 14.7 100.0

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS) based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Note: Excludes TANF funds used in the territories and in tribal TANF programs.

CRS-23
 The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Block Grant: FAQs

Table B-3. Unspent TANF Funds at the End of FY2018

(September 30, 2018, in millions of dollars)

Obligated But Unobligated and

State Not Spent Unspent

Alabama $0.0 $86.4

Alaska 0.0 36.3

Arizona 0.0 49.4

Arkansas 20.4 53.4

California 257.8 0.0

Colorado 0.0 104.5

Connecticut 0.0 0.0

Delaware 0.6 14.1

District of Columbia 0.0 48.7

Florida 15.9 0.0

Georgia 10.7 66.8

Hawaii 20.7 280.6

Idaho 0.0 13.8

Illinois 0.0 0.0

Indiana 13.7 50.8

Iowa 0.7 0.0

Kansas 2.0 73.8

Kentucky 0.0 63.8

Louisiana 9.5 0.0

Maine 14.2 130.8

Maryland 0.0 8.6

Massachusetts 0.0 0.0

Michigan 0.0 56.1

Minnesota 0.0 58.0

Mississippi 0.0 8.4

Missouri 0.0 5.3

Montana 0.0 15.6

Nebraska 0.0 70.4

Nevada 0.0 32.8

New Hampshire 0.0 55.4

Congressional Research Service 24

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

Obligated But Unobligated and

State Not Spent Unspent

New Jersey 10.9 11.1

New Mexico 0.0 88.7

New York 34.1 513.3

North Carolina 51.1 0.0

North Dakota 1.9 0.0

Ohio 542.3 0.5

Oklahoma 134.5 0.0

Oregon 0.0 13.8

Pennsylvania 77.4 430.7

Rhode Island 0.0 16.8

South Carolina 0.0 0.0

South Dakota 0.0 19.6

Tennessee 0.0 570.7

Texas 204.9 123.5

Utah 0.0 60.6

Vermont 0.0 0.0

Virginia 6.9 133.9

Washington 0.0 48.4

West Virginia 0.0 74.6

Wisconsin 0.0 175.6

Wyoming 4.5 25.4

Totals 1,434.9 3,691.1

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Note: 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 State, September 2018
State Families Recipients Children Adults

Alabama 8,182 18,425 15,032 3,393

Alaska 2,571 6,815 4,732 2,083
Arizona 7,372 15,106 12,084 3,022

Congressional Research Service 25

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

State Families Recipients Children Adults

Arkansas 2,859 6,357 4,767 1,590

California 409,043 1,331,457 940,730 390,727
Colorado 12,502 32,692 22,727 9,965
Connecticut 8,964 18,713 13,545 5,168
Delaware 3,761 10,450 6,272 4,178
District of Columbia 5,840 16,632 12,546 4,086
Florida 41,469 65,627 56,117 9,510
Georgia 10,484 20,246 18,353 1,893
Guam 491 1,083 929 154
Hawaii 4,274 11,653 8,294 3,359
Idaho 2,046 2,996 2,912 84
Illinois 11,048 21,810 19,689 2,121
Indiana 6,048 12,053 10,982 1,071
Iowa 9,650 23,295 17,746 5,549
Kansas 4,360 4,359 2,619 1,740
Kentucky 18,774 37,748 32,695 5,053
Louisiana 5,402 13,292 11,007 2,285
Maine 17,367 57,543 35,301 22,242
Maryland 17,352 42,996 32,025 10,971
Massachusetts 50,270 124,630 85,801 38,829
Michigan 12,338 30,453 24,978 5,475
Minnesota 16,973 40,370 31,246 9,124
Mississippi 4,040 7,907 6,399 1,508
Missouri 10,761 24,687 19,063 5,624
Montana 3,691 9,156 7,010 2,146
Nebraska 4,832 11,945 9,954 1,991
Nevada 9,023 22,836 17,191 5,645
New Hampshire 5,257 12,575 9,081 3,494
New Jersey 10,326 23,089 18,000 5,089
New Mexico 10,632 26,529 20,122 6,407
New York 122,363 313,143 221,544 91,599
North Carolina 14,574 25,263 22,791 2,472
North Dakota 984 2,453 2,072 381
Ohio 42,549 75,664 69,415 6,249
Oklahoma 6,176 13,696 11,958 1,738
Oregon 40,932 120,311 77,812 42,499
Pennsylvania 45,022 111,572 83,045 28,527

Congressional Research Service 26

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

State Families Recipients Children Adults

Puerto Rico 4,992 13,559 8,411 5,148

Rhode Island 4,197 9,954 7,274 2,680
South Carolina 8,314 18,326 15,449 2,877
South Dakota 2,952 5,944 5,489 455
Tennessee 20,951 45,131 36,178 8,953
Texas 26,109 56,501 49,307 7,194
Utah 3,546 8,438 6,290 2,148
Vermont 2,918 6,599 4,703 1,896
Virgin Islands 160 496 334 162
Virginia 20,513 35,157 27,510 7,647
Washington 37,270 88,286 60,717 27,569
West Virginia 6,572 12,845 10,768 2,077
Wisconsin 15,740 34,089 28,275 5,814
Wyoming 499 1,142 882 260
Totals 1,175,335 3,104,094 2,280,173 823,921

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 State,
September of Selected Years
Percentage Change to 2018 from

State 1994 2010 2017 2018 1994 2010 2017

Alabama 48,752 23,052 9,326 8,182 -83.2 -64.5 -12.3

Alaska 12,450 3,507 3,093 2,571 -79.3 -26.7 -16.9
Arizona 72,728 18,774 8,222 7,372 -89.9 -60.7 -10.3
Arkansas 25,298 8,469 3,072 2,859 -88.7 -66.2 -6.9
California 916,795 590,121 511,311 409,043 -55.4 -30.7 -20.0
Colorado 40,544 11,707 16,646 12,502 -69.2 6.8 -24.9
Connecticut 60,336 16,848 9,798 8,964 -85.1 -46.8 -8.5
Delaware 11,408 5,508 3,873 3,761 -67.0 -31.7 -2.9
District of Columbia 27,320 8,547 3,124 5,840 -78.6 -31.7 86.9
Florida 239,702 57,742 45,027 41,469 -82.7 -28.2 -7.9
Georgia 141,596 20,133 10,399 10,484 -92.6 -47.9 0.8
Guam 2,089 1,276 541 491 -76.5 -61.5 -9.2
Hawaii 21,312 9,953 4,937 4,274 -79.9 -57.1 -13.4
Idaho 8,635 1,820 1,928 2,046 -76.3 12.4 6.1

Congressional Research Service 27

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

Percentage Change to 2018 from

State 1994 2010 2017 2018 1994 2010 2017

Illinois 241,290 24,337 12,613 11,048 -95.4 -54.6 -12.4

Indiana 72,654 36,062 6,962 6,048 -91.7 -83.2 -13.1
Iowa 39,137 21,548 10,694 9,650 -75.3 -55.2 -9.8
Kansas 29,524 15,554 4,462 4,360 -85.2 -72.0 -2.3
Kentucky 78,720 30,875 20,785 18,774 -76.2 -39.2 -9.7
Louisiana 84,162 10,849 5,521 5,402 -93.6 -50.2 -2.2
Maine 22,322 15,377 18,452 17,367 -22.2 12.9 -5.9
Maryland 80,266 25,110 18,611 17,352 -78.4 -30.9 -6.8
Massachusetts 108,985 49,836 51,196 50,270 -53.9 0.9 -1.8
Michigan 215,873 67,241 13,846 12,338 -94.3 -81.7 -10.9
Minnesota 59,987 24,574 18,519 16,973 -71.7 -30.9 -8.3
Mississippi 55,232 11,895 4,891 4,040 -92.7 -66.0 -17.4
Missouri 91,875 39,262 12,452 10,761 -88.3 -72.6 -13.6
Montana 11,416 3,686 4,517 3,691 -67.7 0.1 -18.3
Nebraska 15,435 8,702 5,262 4,832 -68.7 -44.5 -8.2
Nevada 14,620 10,612 9,828 9,023 -38.3 -15.0 -8.2
New Hampshire 11,398 6,175 4,884 5,257 -53.9 -14.9 7.6
New Jersey 122,376 34,516 12,640 10,326 -91.6 -70.1 -18.3
New Mexico 34,535 21,223 11,066 10,632 -69.2 -49.9 -3.9
New York 461,751 154,936 132,675 122,363 -73.5 -21.0 -7.8
North Carolina 129,258 23,705 16,108 14,574 -88.7 -38.5 -9.5
North Dakota 5,410 1,996 1,105 984 -81.8 -50.7 -11.0
Ohio 244,099 105,140 54,161 42,549 -82.6 -59.5 -21.4
Oklahoma 46,572 9,388 6,797 6,176 -86.7 -34.2 -9.1
Oregon 40,504 31,751 43,754 40,932 1.1 28.9 -6.4
Pennsylvania 212,457 53,274 50,615 45,022 -78.8 -15.5 -11.1
Puerto Rico 57,337 13,371 7,000 4,992 -91.3 -62.7 -28.7
Rhode Island 22,776 6,758 4,466 4,197 -81.6 -37.9 -6.0
South Carolina 50,430 19,347 8,672 8,314 -83.5 -57.0 -4.1
South Dakota 6,601 3,291 3,030 2,952 -55.3 -10.3 -2.6
Tennessee 109,678 62,714 24,562 20,951 -80.9 -66.6 -14.7
Texas 284,973 51,931 28,839 26,109 -90.8 -49.7 -9.5
Utah 17,505 6,646 4,013 3,546 -79.7 -46.6 -11.6
Vermont 9,761 3,256 3,371 2,918 -70.1 -10.4 -13.4
Virgin Islands 1,146 537 197 160 -86.0 -70.2 -18.8
Virginia 74,257 37,448 22,232 20,513 -72.4 -45.2 -7.7

Congressional Research Service 28

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

Percentage Change to 2018 from

State 1994 2010 2017 2018 1994 2010 2017

Washington 101,542 70,200 35,284 37,270 -63.3 -46.9 5.6

West Virginia 40,279 10,496 7,113 6,572 -83.7 -37.4 -7.6
Wisconsin 75,086 24,746 16,318 15,740 -79.0 -36.4 -3.5
Wyoming 5,351 318 513 499 -90.7 56.9 -2.7
Totals 5,015,545 1,926,140 1,349,323 1,175,335 -76.6 -39.0 -12.9

Source: Congressional Research Service (CRS), based on data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
Notes: Data for Puerto Rico are unavailable for September 2017. Total change excludes data for Puerto Rico
for all years. Caseload data for 2000 through 2017 include those families in Separate State Programs with
expenditures countable toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.

Table B-6. TANF Assistance Families by Number of Parents by State:

September 2018
Percentage of Total Families

Total
Single Two No Fami- Single Two No Total
State Parent Parent Parent lies Parent Parent Parent Families

Alabama 3,272 42 4,868 8,182 40.0% 0.5% 59.5% 100.0%

Alaska 1,510 252 809 2,571 58.7 9.8 31.5 100.0
Arizona 2,718 114 4,540 7,372 36.9 1.5 61.6 100.0
Arkansas 1,462 59 1,338 2,859 51.1 2.1 46.8 100.0
California 251,231 27,704 130,108 409,043 61.4 6.8 31.8 100.0
Colorado 9,331 0 3,171 12,502 74.6 0.0 25.4 100.0
Connecticut 2,942 0 6,022 8,964 32.8 0.0 67.2 100.0
Delaware 994 9 2,758 3,761 26.4 0.2 73.3 100.0
District of Columbia 4,086 0 1,754 5,840 70.0 0.0 30.0 100.0
Florida 5,287 215 35,967 41,469 12.7 0.5 86.7 100.0
Georgia 1,982 0 8,502 10,484 18.9 0.0 81.1 100.0
Guam 86 27 378 491 17.5 5.5 77.0 100.0
Hawaii 2,577 611 1,086 4,274 60.3 14.3 25.4 100.0
Idaho 84 0 1,962 2,046 4.1 0.0 95.9 100.0
Illinois 2,199 0 8,849 11,048 19.9 0.0 80.1 100.0
Indiana 1,366 40 4,642 6,048 22.6 0.7 76.8 100.0
Iowa 4,682 390 4,578 9,650 48.5 4.0 47.4 100.0
Kansas 1,806 206 2,348 4,360 41.4 4.7 53.9 100.0
Kentucky 4,308 382 14,084 18,774 22.9 2.0 75.0 100.0
Louisiana 2,268 0 3,134 5,402 42.0 0.0 58.0 100.0
Maine 9,178 6,529 1,660 17,367 52.8 37.6 9.6 100.0

Congressional Research Service 29

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

Percentage of Total Families

Total
Single Two No Fami- Single Two No Total
State Parent Parent Parent lies Parent Parent Parent Families

Maryland 10,651 281 6,420 17,352 61.4 1.6 37.0 100.0

Massachusetts 34,435 3,029 12,806 50,270 68.5 6.0 25.5 100.0
Michigan 4,646 0 7,692 12,338 37.7 0.0 62.3 100.0
Minnesota 9,185 0 7,788 16,973 54.1 0.0 45.9 100.0
Mississippi 1,481 0 2,559 4,040 36.7 0.0 63.3 100.0
Missouri 6,301 0 4,460 10,761 58.6 0.0 41.4 100.0
Montana 1,792 282 1,617 3,691 48.6 7.6 43.8 100.0
Nebraska 1,984 0 2,848 4,832 41.1 0.0 58.9 100.0
Nevada 4,161 680 4,182 9,023 46.1 7.5 46.3 100.0
New Hampshire 3,304 37 1,916 5,257 62.8 0.7 36.4 100.0
New Jersey 5,745 59 4,522 10,326 55.6 0.6 43.8 100.0
New Mexico 5,057 675 4,900 10,632 47.6 6.3 46.1 100.0
New York 77,545 2,508 42,310 122,363 63.4 2.0 34.6 100.0
North Carolina 1,772 24 12,778 14,574 12.2 0.2 87.7 100.0
North Dakota 381 0 603 984 38.7 0.0 61.3 100.0
Ohio 5,322 345 36,882 42,549 12.5 0.8 86.7 100.0
Oklahoma 1,738 0 4,438 6,176 28.1 0.0 71.9 100.0
Oregon 27,855 6,521 6,556 40,932 68.1 15.9 16.0 100.0
Pennsylvania 27,889 471 16,662 45,022 61.9 1.0 37.0 100.0
Puerto Rico 4,490 251 251 4,992 89.9 5.0 5.0 100.0
Rhode Island 2,959 164 1,074 4,197 70.5 3.9 25.6 100.0
South Carolina 2,877 0 5,437 8,314 34.6 0.0 65.4 100.0
South Dakota 455 0 2,497 2,952 15.4 0.0 84.6 100.0
Tennessee 8,052 224 12,675 20,951 38.4 1.1 60.5 100.0
Texas 7,194 0 18,915 26,109 27.6 0.0 72.4 100.0
Utah 1,564 0 1,982 3,546 44.1 0.0 55.9 100.0
Vermont 1,322 277 1,319 2,918 45.3 9.5 45.2 100.0
Virgin Islands 131 0 29 160 81.9 0.0 18.1 100.0
Virginia 11,114 0 9,399 20,513 54.2 0.0 45.8 100.0
Washington 17,561 7,313 12,396 37,270 47.1 19.6 33.3 100.0
West Virginia 1,572 0 5,000 6,572 23.9 0.0 76.1 100.0
Wisconsin 4,956 192 10,592 15,740 31.5 1.2 67.3 100.0
Wyoming 223 19 257 499 44.7 3.8 51.5 100.0
Totals 609,083 59,932 506,320 1,175,335 51.8 5.1 43.1 100.0

Congressional Research Service 30

 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 cash assistance caseload includes families receiving assistance in state-funded programs counted
toward the TANF maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.

Author Information

Gene Falk
Specialist in Social Policy

Acknowledgments
Jameson Carter and Mariam Ghavalyan updated the information in this report. Karen Lynch contributed to
the discussion of the TANF funding lapse and legislation to fund TANF in FY2019. Amber Wilhelm
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 189 · UPDATED 31