Title: Was Welfare Reform Successful
1Was Welfare Reform Successful?
- Todays Readings
- TANF AT 10?Program Results are More Mixed Than
Often Understood, Sharon Parrott and Arloc
Sherman http//www.cbpp.org/8-17-06tanf.htm. Surf
around, making sure to examine the Guide to TANF
Reauthorization Issues - Blank, Was Welfare Reform Successful?
Economists Voice, www.bepress.com/ev, March,
2006. - DeParle, Ch 16 Boyfriends Milwaukee, Spring
1999
2Todays Questions
- What criteria should be employed when evaluating
the success of welfare reform? - What are the prospects for valid evaluations of
the effects of welfare reform? - What methodology can we trust?
- What do the experts say about the success of
welfare reform?
3What criteria should be used to evaluate welfare
reform?
- Should we evaluate TANF in its own terms?
- TITLE TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES
(TANF) BLOCK GRANT OF THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY
AND WORK OPPORTUNITY RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1996
A bill to restore the American family, reduce
illegitimacy, control welfare spending and reduce
welfare dependence.
4What criteria should be used to evaluate welfare
reform?, cont.
- Should we ask if TANF has
- Restored the American family?
- Decrease divorce and cohabitation and increase
marriage - Reduced illegitimacy?
- reduce the number of children born to unmarried
mothers - Controlled welfare spending?
- Reduce the amount of money spent on welfare
- Reduced welfare dependency?
- Decrease the caseload
- If it has accomplished these goals should we
declare welfare reform a success?
5Alternative criteria
- Or should we also judge TANF by criteria
developed to evaluate previous welfare programs? - Does the reform reduce poverty? (adequacy)
- Does the program encourage personal
responsibility? (work incentives) - Does the reform treat participants and
non-participants fairly? - Does it treat persons in similar situations
similarly? (horizontal equity) - Does it treat people in different situations
differently? (vertical equity)
6Alternative criteria, cont.
- Does it target just the poor? (target efficiency)
- Are the rules easily understood by all?
(participants and tax payers) - Can be the programs be easily accessed by those
eligible? (hassle factor) - Can the program be administered without error or
fraud?
7What are the prospects for valid evaluation?
- 50 different programs in fifty different States
- No federal funds allocated for national
evaluations - States are not required to conduct TANF
evaluations - Much of what we know comes from State
experimental programs authorized by the Family
Support Act of 1988
8Lessons from Federally Mandated Evaluations of
Demonstration Projects
- National Evaluation of Welfare-to-Work Strategies
(NEWWS) - NEWWS sites Atlanta, GA Grand Rapids,MI
Riverside, CA - Participants followed for 3 to 5 years.
- Work-first programs increase employment and
reduce welfare receipt relative to not having
such a program - Major effect speed entry into a job
- Increases in earnings did not offset reductions
in case benefits and food stamps
9Lessons from Federally Mandated Evaluations of
Demonstration Projects, cont.
- Education-first programs
- No difference in impacts between work-first and
education-first programs for participants in many
programs - Where differences were recorded, work-first
outperformed education-first - None of the education-first programs increased
incomes over 5 years
10Lessons from Federally Mandated Evaluations of
Demonstration Projects, cont.
- Mixed Approach Portland, OR and Riverside, CA
(GAIN) Short-term educational activity and
delayed entry to look for good job - Significant increases in earnings (25 to 49)
- Significant decreases in cash assistance (15-24)
- No increase in incomes
11Ongoing Federally Funded Demonstration Projects
- Federal dollars support evaluations of
demonstration projects for specific subgroups of
the recipients - The hard to employ
- Substance abuse and/or chronic mental health
problems - Disabilities
- Victims of domestic abuse
- Families living in rural areas
12Ongoing Federally Funded Demonstration Projects,
cont.
- Programs that aim directly to affect family
formation outcomes - Encourage marriage between unmarried parents
- Support to sustain marriage among low-income
couples
13What methodology can we trust?
- The Gold Standard control versus treatment
groups - Identify two groups of eligible persons,
families, etc. with identical demographic and
socioeconomic compositions - Subject one group to the treatment
- Prohibit the other (control) group from
experiencing the new rules - Compare the outcomes for each group through time
14How are Conclusions Actually Drawn?
- Spotty privately sponsored analyses
- Evaluating Trends in
- national data bases (CPS)
- State/National administrative data
- Limitations
- Cross-sectional data--snap shots
- Data do not reflect what happened to families
when they left welfare
15Did TANFRestore the American Family ?
- National Healthy Marriage Resource Center
- http//www.healthymarriageinfo.org/
- (Go to Research and Trends)
- Marriage rates
- Attitudes toward Marriage
- Attitudes toward Cohabitation
16Marriage and Divorce Rates, 1950-2000
17DID TANFReduce illegitimacy ?
- Teen Births Continue Drop Births to Unmarried
Women on the Rise - Center for Disease Control and Prevention
http//www.cdc.gov/nchs/ - BirthsPreliminary Data, 2005,
- National Vital Statistics Reports
http//www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_11
.pdf
18Review Ch7FamilySize.ppt
- The total number of live births to all unmarried
women is rising - The number of births to black unmarried women is
down - The percentage of births to unmarried mothers is
rising - The percentage babies born outside of marriage is
rising for whites and declining for blacks - The percentage of low birth weight babies is
rising slightly.
19Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Martin JA, and Sutton
PD. Preliminary births for 2004. Health E-stats.
Hyattsville, MD National Center for Health
Statistics. Released October 28, 2005.
http//www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/hestats
/prelim_births/prelim_births04.htmFigure202
20Did TANFControl Welfare Spending?Per Capita
Spending on TANF, FY1997-2003
Source Spending on Social Welfare Programs?in
Rich and Poor States, http//aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/soci
al-welfare-spending04/summary.htm
21Source Ibid.
22Control Welfare Spending?Per Capita Spending on
Medicaid, FY1997-2003
Source Ibid.
23Did TANFDecrease Dependency ?
- Welfare rolls fell by around 60 percent between
1996 and 2000. - Caseloads continued to fall after 2000 as poverty
began to rise. - Caseloads did not increase with recession
- Personal responsibility
- Employment rates for single mothers rose from 62
in 1995 to 73 in 2000. In 2005 they had fallen
to 69. - Source TANF AT 10?Program Results are More Mixed
Than Often Understood, Sharon Parrott and Arloc
Sherman http//www.cbpp.org/8-17-06tanf.htm.
24National Welfare Caseloads, March 1994-September
2004
Source U.S. HHS, Administration for Children and
Families, http//www.ncsl.org/statefed/welfare/cas
eloadwatch.htmoverall
25Alternative Criteria Work and Income
- Adequacy
- Average incomes rose by about 5,000
- Earnings increases were larger than welfare
benefits declines - Income is not adjusted for costs of working
costs of working lower disposable income to
pre-reform levels. - Source Blank, 2006
26Work and Income
- Hardship? (Adequacy)
- More single-mothers report not being on welfare
and not working - Women involuntarily terminated have lower incomes
and worse outcomes--how are they surviving? - Source Parrott and Arloc Sherman, 2006
- http//www.cbpp.org/8-17-06tanf.htm.
27 Poverty Reduction
- Poverty fell initially
- Poverty rates for single-mother households fell
to historically low levels by late 1990s - ? Slight increase in past 4 years
- Increases in employment greater than declines in
poverty - Share of the working poor rose and is higher than
in early 1990s
28Poverty reduction
- 1994 2000 2004
- All ages
- All races 14.5 11.3 12.7
- Blacks 30.6 22.5 24.7
- Hispanics 30.7 21.5 21.9
- Under 18
- All races 21.8 16.2 17.8
- Blacks 43.8 31.2 33.6
- Hispanics 41.5 28.4 28.9
29Especially for children . . . Poverty Rates
Among Children
Source U.S. Census Bureau, http//www.mindfully.o
rg/Reform/2005/37-Million-US-Poverty1oct05b.gif
30Poverty Rates Among Black Children, cont.
Melissa G. Pardue, Sharp Reduction in Black
Child Poverty Due to Welfare Reform, The
Heritage Foundation Backgrounder 1661, June
12,2003 http//www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/b
g1661.cfm?renderforprint1
31Extreme Poverty (lt50 PL ) for all persons
- Trends 1994-2004
- Fell from 5.9 percent in 1994 to 4.5 percent in
2000 - Rose continuously to 5.4 percent by 2004
- By age in 2004
- Persons 18-24 had highest rates--9.0 percent
- Persons under 18 were next at 7.6 percent
- By family status
- Persons in unrelated subfamilies have highest
rates of extreme poverty 26.7 percent - Children under 6 years 9.0 percent
32Extreme Poverty Rates Among Children by Race
Source U.S. Census Bureau, http//www.jointcenter
.org/DB/printer/chilpovt.htm
33Alternative Criteria Other effects
- Effects on Children
- child abusedown since early 1990s
- Some positive achievement and behavioral effects
on young children associated with use of
center-based child care - Some small negative effects on adolescents
associated with lack of parental supervision - Source Blank, 2006
34What really caused the changes in work and income?
- Work enforcement
- Diversion effects.
- Sanctions, time limits, messages??
- Good economy
- Many jobs, even for the unskilled.
- Rising real wages.
- New benefits
- Especially EITC
- a higher minimum wage (Sept. 1997)
- Relative role of these factors is disputed.
35Limitations of reform A conservatives agenda
- By and large, welfare reform was a grand success
- Finish work enforcement.
- Recent reauthorization of TANF.
- Keep welfare leavers at work
- An hours threshold for EITC.
- Raise the incomes of leavers
- EITC, minimum wage.
- Extend work enforcement to men
- Using criminal justice and child support.
- Strengthen marriage.
- Source Larry Mead
36Limitations of reform A liberals agenda
- Too soon to claim success
- Collect and analyze nuanced data on
- Well-being of low-income families no longer on
welfare - Child effects
- Family effects
- Determine what combination of negative and
positive incentives work best - Increase child care subsidies
- Expand health insurance for low-income working
adults - Sustain safety net for those for whom employment
is just not possible - Source Blank, 2006
37Key Elements of TANF Reauthorization (Signed
into law, February 8, 2006)
- Eliminates the separate work participation rate
requirements for two-parent families (thus
applying the same lower rate to all families). - Increases minimum state work participation rates
from 50 for FY2006 to 70 for FY2010. - Revises requirements for calculation of
participation rates and recalibration of the
caseload reduction credit.
38Key Elements of TANF Reauthorization Work
Requirements
- Adds a new part C (Fatherhood Program) to promote
responsible fatherhood. - Requires TANF programs to be mandatory partners
with One-Stop Employment Training Centers created
under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 - Includes 150 million to support programs
designed to help couples form and sustain healthy
marriages.