1. TANF at 10: How Has Georgia Fared Dr. Michael J. Rich Emory University Department of Political Science and Office of University-Community Partnerships mrich@emory.edu (404) 712-9691 Atlanta Community Food Bank and Georgia Legal Services October 22, 2007

2. Ending Welfare as We Know It Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 – Reduce dependency and promote work – Abolished AFDC and replaced with TANF – Ended entitlement replaced with time limits – New behavioral requirements “Work First” Promote marriage, reduce out-of-wedlock births

3. What happened to TANF caseloads?

4. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Seventh Annual Report to Congress, December 2006, p. I-9.

5. TANF Caseload Change August 1996 – March 2007 Adult TANF RecipientsChild TANF RecipientsTANF Recipients RankStatePercentRankStatePercentRankStatePercent United States-76.2 United States-63.8 United States-67.6 1Wyoming-98.01Wyoming-94.71Wyoming-95.6 2Georgia-96.62Louisiana-86.82Louisiana-89.7 2Idaho-96.63Illinois-86.23Illinois-88.2 4Louisiana-95.94Idaho-84.54Idaho-88.1 5Florida-93.25Florida-82.95Georgia-86.5 6Illinois-92.86Georgia-82.56Florida-85.9 7Dist. of Col.-91.07Mississippi-80.97 District of Columbia-83.6 8 North Carolina-90.58 District of Columbia-80.48 North Carolina-82.2 9Texas-89.29 North Carolina-78.49Mississippi-81.9 10Oklahoma-88.710Maryland-77.310Oklahoma-79.9 42 New Hampshire-61.042Delaware-52.042Arizona-54.7 43Nevada-59.743Iowa-49.942Nevada-54.7 44Virginia-58.144Washington-49.742Vermont-54.7 45Vermont-57.245Arizona-49.544Washington-54.2 46Iowa-55.546California-47.745Missouri-53.1 47Oregon-55.447 New Hampshire-47.646 New Hampshire-52.2 48Missouri-48.048Kansas-43.547Iowa-51.8 49Tennessee-41.949Oregon-41.148Oregon-45.6 50Kansas-37.050Tennessee-35.449Kansas-41.6 51Indiana-32.351Indiana-10.050Tennessee-37.4 51Indiana-16.5

6. TANF Recipients Percent Change, 1996 - 2007 U.S. = -76.2%

7. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, The Green Book, Assessing the effects of welfare reform initiatives, p. L-8.

8. Where did TANF recipients go? U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Seventh Annual Report to Congress, December 2006.

9. Georgia Welfare Leavers Study Percent of TANF Leavers Year Employed, Did Not Return Employed, Returned Not Employed, Returned Neither Employed nor Returned 19976016420 19985917420 19995819418 20005421520 20015222720 20025020722 20034920823 Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Family and Children Services, Employment, Earnings, and Recidivism among Georgia’s TANF Leavers, January 2003 and March 2005

10. What happened to poverty rates? 1995 - 2004 ChangeNumber of States Statistically significant increase1 (Wisconsin) Increase14 states Stayed the same2 states (Indiana, Kansas) Decreased23 states Statistically significant decrease11 states (Arkansas, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia)

11. Change in Poverty Rate 1995 - 2004

12. Percent of persons below poverty 1995 - 2004 Change No. of counties Statistically significant increase 1 (Gwinnett) Increase15 Same2 Decrease142 Statistically significant decrease 0

13. Do changes in TANF caseloads track with changes in poverty? Poverty Rate, 1995-2004 TANF Caseload Change, 1996-2004 IncreasedStayed the SameDecreased Above U.S. rate5 (Connecticut, Illinois, North Carolina, Ohio, Wisconsin) 1 (Maryland)15 states (including Georgia) Below U.S. rate10 states1 (Rhode Island)19 states Total15 states2 states34 states

14. Change in TANF and Poverty Populations 1995 - 2004

15. Can changes in poverty be attributed to Georgia’s welfare reform initiatives?

16. TANF, Unemployment, & Poverty Georgia, 1995 - 2007

17. TANF High Performance Bonuses PRWORA of 1996 provisions for high performance bonuses – $200 million per year to states that demonstrate strong performance relative to other states on certain measures related to the goals and purposes of the TANF program – Annual bonuses, limited to 5 percent of a state’s TANF grant, are awarded each year

18. High Performance Bonus Categories Job Entry Rate Increase in the job entry rate Success in the work force – Job retention rate – Earnings gain rate Increase in the work force rate – Increase in job retention rate – Increase in earnings gain rate Medicaid/SCHIP enrollment of former recipients Food Stamp participation rate of low-income working households with children Increase in Food Stamp participation rate of low-income households with children Performance in payment of child care subsidies Increase in family formation & stability

19. High Performance Bonus Awards Year No. of States CompetingNo. of AwardsGeorgia Award 19984627None 19994828None 20004927None 20015042None 20025041Child care subsidies ($663,097) Increase in job entry ($3.7 million) 20035038None 20045042Success in the work force increase ($4.0 million)

20. High Performance Bonus Awards Top States State No. Years Receiving AwardState (Rank) Bonus Awards, 2000 – 2004 ($millions) California, Indiana, North Dakota, Utah, West Virginia (5 states) 7California (1)$75.9 Arizona, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wyoming (15 states) 6Ohio (2)$64.2 11 states5Missouri (3)$54.3 11 states4Indiana (4)$50.5 5 states3Florida (5)$48.3 Georgia, North Carolina2Georgia (35)$8.4 Maryland1Illinois (50)$0.7 Colorado0Colorado (51)$0

21. Georgia Rankings High Performance Bonus Categories Indicator2001200220032004 Job entry421416 Job retention49 4628 Earnings gain21254810 Success in the work force 46475013 Medicaid/SCHIP-- Food Stamps40353022 Child Care— accessibility 2726--20 Child Care— affordability 2510--22 Family formation and stability 413840

22. Georgia KIDS COUNT Rankings 1997 - 2007 YearOverall Rank Children living in families where no parent has full- time, year-round employment Children living below poverty 19974532 19984332 1999422530 2000423037 2001444237 2002443036 2003412034 2004401934 2005392034 2006442936 2007412636