Temporary Assistance to Needy Families in the United States
After passing the welfare reform law of 1996, Congress created Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) to replace Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). Through TANF, states receive grants that they use to run individual social services. Despite the grant from the federal government, states must spend some of their money alongside the grants received in a program known as Maintenance of Effort. States are not controlled in regards to their use of federal TANF and state money to meet their goals, such as assisting low-income families that would help them take care of children in their possession or under the supervision of relatives. Additionally, the agencies can use available funds to ensure that needy parents stop being overly dependent on government benefits. This is achievable through promoting job preparation and marriage as well as reducing the prevalence of pregnancies outside wedlock
New York provides temporary assistance to its citizens through two major programs, namely Family Assistance and Safety Net Assistance. The State of New York allows individuals who fail to qualify for other assistance programs to enroll for Safety Net Assistance. Individuals who wish to enter into temporary assistance programs in New York have to follow a work plan meant to make them economically self-sufficient. Through the program, families receive cash assistance that enables their families to train for work and also take care of the health of their family members. Additionally, the law requires that families and individuals cooperate with social services to stay in the program. Individuals who apply for the program need to provide their birth certificates or any other document that can prove their identity. Furthermore, New York law stipulates that they provide proof of shelter as well as expenses for their residence. Those applying for Safety Net Assistance must provide proof of fuel as well as utility expenses. Moreover, the law requires that families provide proof of their income and resources. Individuals who had a job in the last four months before application are also required to provide proof of wages. Applicants are mandated by law to download and fill the application before handing it over to the local Department of Social Services.
Family Assistance, just as the name suggests, provides cash assistance to families in need provided that they meet program requirements. As per the directives and guidelines set by TANF, these families have to meet financial eligibility and also receive benefits through this program. Family assistance in New York provides benefits to adults for sixty months throughout their lifetime. To enforce this policy, the program considers any funds received through TANF programs from other states. Also, it defines the period left for Family Assistance while putting into consideration the time when such funds were received. To receive the benefits associated with Family Assistance, individuals must cooperate with federal work requirements and commit to following training and work activities. Those who fail to cooperate or take part in such activities are not eligible for cash assistance through the Family Assistance program. Individuals who fail to qualify for other assistance programs may still be eligible for Safety New Assistance (SNA) that only provides two years of assistance in the lifetime of an individual. After exhaustion of the two year period in which families have been receiving benefits, they can still receive non-cash benefits that are also available to families and individuals who abuse alcohol and drugs as well as those who have already exhausted their cash assistance limit.
Social service programs in New York mainly get their funding through the TANF block grant and MOE contributions. The basic TANF grant has since the year 1996 remained at sixteen billion dollars every year. Inflation has caused the value of the grant to fall by close to forty percent in the preceding years. States are required by law to spend their funds on family programs for them to receive the federal TANF block grant in full. Specifically, the law requires that states spend eighty percent of their contributions to programs related to AFDC in the year 1994. The match rate has been more advantageous for poor states as compared to wealthier states. However, their benefits have been lower, which means that the federal funds per child in a low-income family were lower. The block grants received per low-income child have revealed significant disparities across states. In the states that receive the least generous federal grant, the low-income child only receives four hundred and twenty-nine dollars from the TANF block grant. In the states that receive the most dollars from the federal government, the TANF block provides close to five times more. The disparities in funding by TANF are worsened by the fact that the law requires states which receive a higher federal allocation to spend more of their money to meet MOE requirements.
Social workers are integral in the success of TANF grants not only in New York but also across the United States. One of their leading roles is providing casework and counseling services. Eligibility for temporary assistance is a process that requires vetting to ensure that only deserving cases get help. Additionally, vetting enrollees helps to ensure that nobody goes against the requirements of TANF, especially regarding the period that one can get assistance. Social workers hence have to vet enrollees and ensure that they get their funds on time. Additionally, social workers must follow up on enrollees to ensure that they are workers who face difficulty in running their families and not individuals who wish to get free cash to use in activities such as drug abuse. Moreover, social service workers under TANF take part in social-care planning activities such as following up on delivery services in kind and nurturing the involvement of volunteers and informal care providers.
TANF has often received praise as a model that should be used to reform other programs. However, this is not true because TANF has done much less than its predecessor AFDC in eliminating poverty and hardship. The broad flexibility by states in determining the eligibility of individuals and families has created variations in regards to program access as well as disparities by race. Additionally, there has been the minimal success of TANF’s programs, ensuring that parents get enrolled in jobs that could be consequential in moving them out of poverty. In recent years, TANF has seen steep declines in the numbers of families that receive cash assistance as well as the number of low-income families. The grant has been inconsequential in responding to need. In the most recent economic downturn, TANF only responded modestly.
As the nation grappled with the recession, TANF caseloads rose by sixteen percent before reaching peak levels in the year 2010, after which they fell below their levels before the recession in 2013. The number of low-income families at the same time also reached an all-time high and remained above pre-recession levels until the year 2016. Since its creation, there has been a seventy-four percent decline in national caseload that significantly exceeds the reduction in poverty. It is undeniable that some families leave TANF rolls and get employment opportunities. However, many others leave after their time limits lead to termination because of failure to comply with the requirements of the program. TANF has failed in its mandate of helping needy families with various barriers that impede their ability to find employment, most of whom have been disconnected from cash assistance as well as work.
In the future, states should take advantage of the fact that they have broad flexibility over TANF and use this knowledge to reduce racial disparities and improve their programs. On top of their agenda should be reinvesting TANF and MOE into essential assistance and other areas to meet the basic needs of families. Benefits should also be increased to recover the value lost since the year 1996. Moreover, there should be a plan to adjust the benefits upwards every year to prevent loss of value in the future. The program also needs to be accessible and states can achieve this by lifting income thresholds and removing barriers to access cash assistance. Additionally, states should also stop cutting off struggling families.