45 / 78
programs and service delivery systems
to be more focused on serving the
job-seeker. However, fewer families
in poverty are being served by the
program than in 1996.
3
In Washington
in 2012–2013, fewer than 40 families
received assistance for every 100
families in poverty.
We need to improve the TANF
program and service delivery,
including intentional connections to
the rest of the workforce development
spectrum, so more low-income families
can be served and achieve the promise
of a job, a better job, and a career. We
have opportunities to use modern
technology and social media to engage
with participants (as described in
$2.00 a Day: Living on Almost Nothing
by Edin and Shaefer). It’s also time to
have a national conversation about the
effectiveness of the five-year time limit
on assistance and whether or not it
still makes sense given the new infor-
mation and research relative to brain
science, and the detrimental, cumula-
tive, and long-term adverse impact of
toxic stress.
3. Rethink TANF performance
measures—especially the Work
Participation Rate (WPR)—so they
don’t discourage education.
Block
grants were designed to give states
flexibility on the “how,” but the WPR
is a process measure, not an outcome
measure, so it drives the how, resulting
in an overemphasis on “countable
components” instead of preparing low-
income parents for work in a modern
economy. The WPR is a component of
the five-year lifetime limit on assis-
tance. It was designed to make sure
states and counties were truly providing
services to low-income parents who
were subject to a new limit, rather
than just let them ride out their five
years and then terminate their case.
In practice, the WPR has restricted
what services states and counties can
offer participants and still meet their
WPR requirements, especially when it
comes to higher education—one of our
primary tools to deliver on the promise
of a better job and a career. As a result,
some TANF programs lean toward
helping low-income parents quickly find
employment in low-skill, low-wage jobs.
4. Refocus outcome measures
on job placements and wage
progression. TANF performance
measures are not aligned with other
federally funded workforce devel-
opment programs.
The Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act
(WIOA) gives us an opportunity to
refocus outcome measures on job
placements and wage progression.
The original intent of TANF and
the movement from an entitlement
program to a block grant was to give
states flexibility in delivery of a wel-
fare-to-work systemwhile ensuring
that children are able to remain sup-
ported in their own homes. It was also
beneficial to have metrics to measure
the success of such a shift in policy.
As has been shown in the workforce
system, however, outcome metrics, not
process metrics, can demonstrate the
success of such programs much better.
WIOA provides a great opportunity
to align welfare-to-work programs
like TANF and SNAP Employment
and Training (SNAP E&T) programs
with other federal and state-funded
workforce development programs. By
aligning the outcome metrics of TANF,
SNAP E&T, and the WIOA, we provide
a greater opportunity to leverage the
resources of the entire system, allowing
states to use the appropriate program
with little to no additional adminis-
trative burden, because the outcome
metrics are the same—employment,
job retention, and career and wage
progression. Such alignment can
also produce a more streamlined
pathway
for low-income families and
individuals to move incrementally
through the education and workforce
system at a pace that allows them to
find stability (economic and social)
at each phase of their journey. From
an income eligibility perspective, this
could be accomplished by expanding
initiatives like broad-based categorical
eligibility across programs. We should
also explore options to make braided
funding easier. The “benefitting meth-
odology” requirements that apply to
most fund sources can be perceived as
a barrier to client-focused services. As
we saw when that standard was relaxed
with implementation of the Affordable
Care Act, states will use funds appropri-
ately if given the flexibility.
Those of us working in health and
human services have heard the term
“pathway to self-sufficiency.” We’ve
all talked about guiding and assisting
TANF participants along such a
pathway. When we think of a pathway,
we picture a pretty meadow on a lovely
afternoon, with one clearly marked
path heading off into a beautiful
sunset. The reality is the people we
serve are not on that idyllic pathway.
They are navigating a concrete, mul-
tilane, super-highway with many on
ramps and off ramps and many lanes of
traffic where clients can be lost or run
over by the very system(s) that purport
to help them.
As we begin to have honest and
open conversations about the reali-
ties TANF parents face on the modern
“superhighway” economy, we can also
think about that superhighway as an
opportunity to help people navigate
toward the best opportunities those
lanes present while supporting them
with basic needs (cash, food, housing),
barrier-removal activities (mental
health, chemical dependency, domestic
violence) and development of social
capital and social networking skills.
If we successfully help each person
navigate using an individualized map,
they will gain enough social capital,
education and training, and workforce
attachment that their momentum will
launch them toward job retention, and
career and wage progression.
Reference Notes
1. We think this book should be required
reading for any health and human service
manager. Mullainathan, Sendhil and
Shafir, Eldar.
Scarcity: Why Having Too
Little Means So Much.
2013. Times Books:
New York, NY
2. Since PRWORA was implemented by states
and counties across the country, welfare
rolls dropped to historically low levels
and stayed relatively low, even during the
Great Recession. For example, in August
1997, Washington’s TANF caseload was
88,975 (only 19.5%were child only cases),
and by December 2015, that caseload had
fallen to 31,630 (with nearly 46% of that
caseload being child only).
3. As stated in a Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities look at TANF (dated March 29,
2016 Chart Book: TANF at 19)
, “When
TANF was enacted, nationally, 68 families
received assistance for every 100 families
in poverty; that number has since fallen
to just 23 families receiving assistance for
every 100 families in poverty.”
August 2016
Policy&Practice
45