CBPP STATEMENT ON THE NEW TANF REGULATIONS ISSUED TODAY BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Today the Department of Health and Human Services
issued new regulations related to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) program. These new regulations are intended to provide specifics to
states about how they will be measured against the new requirements placed on
them by the Deficit Reduction Act, including both increased work participation
requirements and new requirements for how states must verify the hours that
TANF recipients participate in work activities.Sharon Parrott, Director of the Center’s
Welfare Reform and Income Support Division, noted that the rules are unduly
restrictive, “Unfortunately, the Administration chose to adopt rigid rules
that deny states the flexibility to prepare families for employment most
effectively. Some states will no longer get credit for successful programs
they now run.” She added, “This result was not required by Congress; it was a
choice made by the Administration. The new welfare law gave HHS the authority
to provide states broader flexibility in a number of areas, but it chose not
to do so.”
Initial analysis of the regulations, which were
made available today at the Government Printing Office, shows the following:
- The regulations adopt narrow definitions
of the work activities that limit the ability of states to place a parent with
a disability or other barrier to employment into more specialized services to
address those problems. Research has consistently documented that a large
percentage of TANF recipients have physical and mental health problems or low
cognitive functioning. While these recipients are often able to move toward
employment, they sometimes need more specialized rehabilitative services to
help them prepare for employment. In March, the National Governors’
Association and the American Public Human Services Association asked HHS to
provide flexibility to states so these specialized programs can count toward
the participation rate. Under the new regulations, however, these activities
can count only for four consecutive weeks, and only for six weeks in any 12
month period. States that have adopted broader definitions of the countable
work activities will encounter difficulty under the new rules.
Parrott noted, “By disallowing credit for these
activities, HHS has increased the incentives for states to restrict access to
assistance to the poor families that have the greatest problems.” She urged
states not to fall prey to the new negative incentives, observing that,
“States should strive to operate programs that not only seek to meet federal
requirements but also comport with the broader welfare reform goal of helping
all families move toward employment to the fullest degree possible.”
- The regulations make it difficult for
states to engage recipients in important and effective education and
training activities. The regulations preclude states from getting
credit when recipients participate in English as a Second Language programs
as a stand-alone activity (with a limited exception that could allow several
weeks of ESL participation), even if a state determines that intensive ESL
is an essential precursor to work or training activities. Until now,
states have been able to recognize the importance of English language
acquisition as a vocational skill, and a number of states have defined ESL
as part of vocational educational training.
Parrott noted that, “The regulations do not allow
states to make their own judgments about when ESL instruction is needed to
improve prospects for employment or participation in other work activities.”
- The regulations are unrealistic about the
difficulty in of juggling training and child-rearing. Under the regulations,
time that students spend doing homework for their vocational educational
training programs cannot count toward the participation requirements unless it
is done in a supervised study session. This is an apparent reversal of prior HHS guidance allowing credit for study time. Parrott noted, “Requiring single
parents who are trying to juggle school attendance and family responsibilities
to complete homework in a supervised study hall (rather than at home while
minding their children) fails to recognize both the importance of building in
study time and the realities of the lives of single parents.”
- The new rules penalize states that provide
assistance to children after their parents reach the time limit.
Under the regulations, if a state continues to provide aid to children after
their parents reach the time limit and are ineligible for assistance, the
state must count those families in its work participation rate calculation —
effectively requiring parents who are not getting aid to participate in work
activities — thereby making it more difficult for states to meet the new
requirements. This creates a significant inequity between states that
terminate all assistance to families when the parent exhausts the time limit
and states that have made the policy choice of continuing some aid to the
children in these families to prevent destitution among these children.
Not all of the provisions in the regulations are
problematic. For example, the regulations include a very reasonable provision
that allows states to project the number of hours that an employed recipient
will work over a six month period based on a recent paystubs without requiring
the recipient or the employer to document the number of hours worked every
month. And, the regulations allow for some excused absences, though parents who
miss more than two days of participation because they are ill or their children
are ill are still likely to fail to meet the federal work participation
standards.
# # #
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization and policy institute that conducts research and analysis on a range of government policies and programs. It is supported primarily by foundation grants. |