Social Security: parent

8/14/2019 Social Security: parent

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/social-security-parent 1/12

1TANF and Disabled Parents

March 2003

Background

States’ welfare reforms largely focus on movingparents into employment and many states are now

facing questions about disabled parents who may be unable to work or remain employed. Time limitand work requirement provisions prompted a shiftfrom an on going cash assistance system to onefocused on moving parents into permanent jobs.The federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Fami-lies (TANF) rules allow welfare recipients to re-ceive cash assistance for a maximum of five years,although many states have implemented shorterlimits. States are allowed to exempt from the timelimit on cash assistance up to 20 percent of theirTANF caseload that’s experiencing severe barriers

to self-sufficiency.

Since the passage of the federal law, the number of families that are receiving cash assistance has de-creased by more than 50 percent nationwide.Those recipients who remain on the rolls oftenexperience one or more barriers to employmentthat inhibit their ability to provide for their fami-lies without the support of public assistance. Someof the most prevalent barriers reported by thispopulation are physical or mental health problemsor the need to care for a disabled household mem-ber. Disabilities among TANF recipients vary inseverity and the degree to which they affect anindividual’s ability to work. Disabled recipientsoften fall into one of three categories.

• Recipients who experience a disability severe enough to interfere with employment, but notsevere enough to prevent work. These individuals can benefit from intensive case managementand work accommodations.

• As reported by parents who remain on welfare, some of the most commonbarriers to employment are physical or

mental health problems or the need tocare for a disabled household member.• These individuals are expected to

comply with TANF work activities andother program requirements, unless thestate has granted them an exemption.

• Disabled recipients or caretakers whohave not received a work exemption arelikely to encounter difficulty complying with program expectations.

• Many TANF recipients experience ahealth problem severe enough to

prevent them from working but notsevere enough to qualify for SSIpayments. This circumstance cannecessitate long-term reliance onTANF.

• Recipients who do have a disability severe enough to qualify for SSI pay-ments often must rely on TANF whiletheir SSI claim is pending. The lengthy SSI approval process causes many TANF recipients to expend their lim-ited months on TANF while they wait

for their claim to be approved.

TANF and Disabled Parents

By Andrea Wilkins



Welfare Reform2

• Recipients who experience a disability that temporarily prevents work. These indi-viduals will benefit from work-related program exemptions.

• Recipient who experience a permanent disability severe enough to prevent them from working. These recipients will likely need some type of long-term income support,such as Supplemental Security Income (SSI), or may be appropriate for inclusion in

the 20 percent exemption category. TANF caseworkers may want to work with theseindividuals to determine if they qualify for SSI payments and help them begin theapplication process.

Before the enactment of the TANF program, caregivers and those with physical or mentaldisabilities were exempt from work requirements. Today, unless the state has granted theman exemption, these individuals are expected to comply with time limit and work partici-pation policies. Although exemptions are available in most states, they are generally aimedat those with temporary disabilities who may be able to work with the assistance of special-ized services or workplace accommodations. Those recipients who have not received anexemption are likely to encounter great difficulties complying with the program work re-quirements. These individuals are at risk of sanction or may exhaust their lifetime limit onreceipt of cash assistance, without having secured steady employment or income.

This issue is further complicated by the factthat many TANF recipients experience ahealth problem severe enough to preventthem from working but not severe enoughto qualify for SSI. These impairments caninclude health problems such as diabetesor asthma, mental disorders including so-cial anxiety or severe depression, chronicpain problems, or learning disabilities.

However, those who do have a health prob-lem severe enough to qualify for SSI pay-ments may need to rely on TANF whiletheir pending SSI application makes its way through the lengthy approval or appeals

process. These individuals often are forced to expend their limited months on TANF,bringing them closer to the expiration of the time limit.

The SSI Administrative Process

Eligibility

Supplemental Security Income is a monthly cash benefit designed to provide for basicliving expenses or to supplement existing income for the elderly or those with disabilities who are unable to work or sustain employment. Unlike TANF eligibility and benefitlevels—which differ from state to state—SSI has federally established eligibility criteria,benefit levels and a nationwide disability determination process. For eligibility purposes,the Social Security Administration (SSA) defines disability as “an inability to engage insubstantial, gainful activity because of any medically determinable impairment that haslasted, or is expected to last, for a continuous period of no less than 12 months or that may result in death.” In addition, an applicant’s monthly income cannot exceed $531 (with

Case Study: Ashanta Martin is a TANF recipient in Minnesota. Althoughshe has held various jobs, she has been unable to maintain steady employ-ment and leave welfare. While working as a janitor, she would confuse theportions when mixing cleaning solutions. She would become confused andflustered during rush hours while employed at a fast-food restaurant. Ashantahad continuous problems in school as well. She repeated kindergarten,dropped out of school in the ninth grade and does not have the skillsnecessary to earn her GED. After spending years on welfare, screeningconducted by state welfare officials revealed that she has learning disabili-ties and a low IQ that had not previously been detected. Upon learning of

the diagnosis, Ashanta reports that she is still determined to get a job, butfeels relief knowing there was a reason for her job and school-related diffi-culties. “I felt relief because now I know why.”

Source: St. Paul Pioneer Press , April 15, 2002.




resources totaling no more than $2,000) for individuals and $796 (with resources totalingno more than $3,000) for couples. In addition to a monthly benefit, recipients also may receive Medicaid and Food Stamps, depending on eligibility criteria in their state of resi-dence. Medicare premiums are covered in all states.

Non-citizens are eligible for SSI if they are legal permanent residents with 40 work credits,

certain non-citizens with a military service connection, certain refugees within the firstseven years of U.S. residence, or non-citizens who were residing in the U.S. or receiving SSIon or before Aug. 22, 1996.

Federal rules prohibit individuals from receiving TANF and SSI payments simultaneously,although it is common that individuals will rely on TANF while their SSI application orappeal is pending. Families also may collect SSI payments for a qualifying disabled house-hold member while receiving TANF payments for other eligible members of the household.

Although states have always referred severely disabled individuals to the SSI program, theproblem lies in the large number of TANFrecipients whose disabilities are not severeenough to qualify for SSI. Given the factthat these recipients are expected to par-ticipate in work activities in most states,programs that help parents address theirbarriers to employment may be helpful inmoving some disabled TANF recipients into jobs. However, participation in remedialprograms or other modified work-partici-pation activities may not qualify as a work activity under the federal work requirements,thereby prohibiting the state from factoring these individuals into their work participation

rate. The implications for states may become more serious if the scope of allowable work activities is narrowed with the reauthorization of the federal welfare law.

Application and Appeals Process

Navigating the SSI application and appeals process can be time-consuming and difficult tounderstand. The current claims process consists of an initial decision and up to three levels of administrative appeals (figure 1). Each level involves multiple steps regarding evidence col-lection, review and decision making.1 The Disability Determination Service (DDS) reviewsdisability claims. If the claim is denied, the claimant can request a hearing before an admin-istrative law judge (ALJ) at a local SSA hearings office. If the claim is denied at the hearing,the claimant can appeal to the Appeals Council—the final review level within the SSA. Once

a claimant has exhausted her appeals remedies within the SSA, she may file a complaint infederal district court. It is not uncommon for a claimant to wait a year or more before theclaim is finally resolved. As many as three-fourths of all disability claims initially denied by DDS are appealed. Up to two-thirds are approved at the hearings level, however.2

The length of the application and appeals process can create a serious hardship for many low-income individuals. This, combined with a dramatic increase in the number of dis-ability claims processed in the 1990s, has resulted in a huge backlog of undecided claims.

State Exemption PoliciesWashingtonIn November 2001, Governor Gary Locke announced new work and time

limit exemptions for TANF recipients who have physical or mental disabili-ties severe enough to prevent employment. Exemptions also are providedfor individuals who are providing care for disabled family members. Theseindividuals are exempt from the state’s 60-month time limit on cash assis-tance as long as they have minor children residing in their household.

North Carolina Time limit extensions are granted to TANF recipients whose SSI applica-tions are pending approval.

Source: NCSL, 2002.



Welfare Reform4

Two sets of restructuring initiatives launched in the mid-1990s in hopes of improving thedisability claims and appeals process have not generated anticipated improvements.3

Employment Barriers Related to DisabilitiesHealth-related problems are common employment barriers for many TANF recipients.Research has indicated that welfare recipients experience a variety of barriers at a higherrate than the general population. For example, welfare recipients surveyed for a study conducted by the University of Michigan were twice as likely to report a physical limita-tion compared to individuals in the non-welfare population. 4 In addition, 35 percentreported some type of mental health problem and 15 percent reported suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. Similarly, a 1999 study found that up to 40 percent of unem-ployed adults have a diagnosable learning disability, which can impair the individual’sability to speak, listen, read and write, process information and perform basic math func-tions.5 In turn, state TANF programs are designed with the goal of helping recipients find

permanent employment and attain long-term self-sufficiency. To further this goal, stateshave structured their programs’ work requirements based on the premise that recipientsshould participate in some type of work activity—up to their level of ability. As a result,many states provide relatively few exemptions from work requirements and time limits.Some states do not provide any program exemptions, even for those with disabilities. Thisapproach is often referred to as a “universal engagement.” In the states that do providedisability-related exemptions, the definition or scope of required work activities has oftenbeen redefined in order to accommodate participation of disabled recipients. 6

Step 1—Application Process Begins• SSA personnel obtains information and de-

termines eligibility for non-medical factors.• If non-medical eligibility factors are met, ap-

plication is forwarded to DDS.

Figure 1. Disability Claims Process

Step 2—Initial Determination• DDS personnel gathers and reviews medical

evidence. Eligibility is based on medical and work-related factors.

• Claimant has 60 days to request a reconsid-

eration if claim is denied.

Step 3—Reconsideration• DDS personnel reexamine previous and new

evidence and render a new decision.• Claimant has 60 days to request a hearing

before an ALJ if claim is denied.

Step 4—Hearing• ALJ reviews additional medical evidence, con-

ducts hearing and renders a new decision.• Claimant has 60 days to request a review by

the Appeals Council.

Step 5—Appeals Council• Council decides whether it will review the

case. If review is granted, council decides toreverse the decision or return case to ALJ.

• If decision is not favorable, claimant can ap-

peal to federal court.

Step 6—Federal Court• Reviews case and renders new decision.

Source: U.S. General Accounting Office, 2002.




Among the 30 states that have redefinedtheir exemption criteria or expanded theirdefinition of allowable work activities toincrease participation, 17 states require par-ticipation among some recipients who would have been exempt under the previ-

ous welfare program, Aid to Families withDependent Children (AFDC). An addi-tional 13 states have adopted the universalapproach, which requires all recipients toparticipate in some type of work activity.7

Program Considerations

Complying with Federal Disability Law

In the effort to move TANF recipients off welfare and into work, states need to ensure thatprogram requirements do not discriminate—or have the effect of discriminating—against,disabled recipients. Given the high number of individuals on TANF who have health-relatedproblems or disabilities, many recipients will need additional support services or programmodifications to help them successfully comply with program requirements. Failure to pro-vide adequate screening and assessment, reasonable modifications, support services, or ex-emptions or extensions, where appropriate, may result in a violation of the Americans withDisabilities Act (ADA) or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504).8

The ADA applies to programs and servicesof state, city and county governments, evenif the services are provided indirectly by con-

tract organizations. Section 504 applies toall entities that receive federal funds, in-cluding state and local government agen-cies that are operating TANF programs withfederal money and public or private orga-nizations that are using federal funds toprovide services. State TANF programs canbe affected by each of these laws. As a re-sult, policymakers will want to ensure thatprograms are structured in a manner thatdoes not violate the rights of disabled TANFrecipients.9

The Office of Civil Rights at the U.S. De-partment of Health and Human Services has developed guidelines to help state policymakersand TANF administrators structure their welfare programs to allow for meaningful partici-pation by disabled recipients.

Screening, Assessment and Staff Training• States can train caseworkers to recognize potential disabilities. All applicants should

be screened for possible impairments. More in-depth screening may be needed for

Modified Work PlansIdahoDisabled TANF recipients in Idaho work with self-reliance specialists todevelop welfare-to-work plans that take health-related barriers into con-sideration. The specialist works to tailor work activities to the needs andabilities of the recipient. Specialists maintain frequent contact with recipi-

ents through the course of her or his participation in the TANF program tomonitor and update the plan.

UtahSpecialized case managers work with disabled recipients in Utah to helpthem participate in activities designed to increase their income and improvethe quality of their lives, even if such activities cannot be counted forpurposes of calculating the federal work participation rate.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and

Evaluation, 1998.

Source: Welfare Law Center, 2001.

State Screening PracticesIn October 2001, the California Department of Social Services establisheda statewide protocol for screening, evaluating and providing program modi-fications for CalWORKS clients with learning disabilities. The state re-

quires CalWORKS caseworkers to screen all incoming and existing partici-pants for learning disabilities at the time the client’s welfare-to-work con-tract is developed, at annual eligibility re-determinations, any time a clientdiscloses a learning disability or reports that she or he was enrolled in aspecial education program while in school, or at client request. Screeningmust be offered to all clients who are sanctioned, who fail to make satisfac-tory progress in their welfare-to-work activities, or who fail to progress inemployment after termination of cash assistance. Screening is voluntary and clients cannot be sanctioned for refusing to participate. Thecaseworker’s evaluation must provide a description of the client’s strengthsand weaknesses and recommendations for additional services and programaccommodations. The evaluation must be considered in developing theclient’s welfare-to-work contract. Existing plans must be modified accord-ing to the evaluation findings.



Welfare Reform6

those who appear to have a disability based on the initial screening. States will want toensure that programs are not administered in a way that has a discriminatory effect ondisabled recipients. Caseworkers should be trained to provide equal access to those with disabilities and ensure that staff of contract organizations are similarly trained.States can establish guidelines and policies for incorporating program modificationsand clarify service-delivery methods for disabled recipients.

Programs and Services• States may find it useful to modify program requirements or service-delivery methods

to increase the level of participation by disabled recipients. Such modifications may include specialized instruction, on-the-job training and ensuring that job opportuni-ties are physically accessible to individuals with mobility impairments.

Work Requirements and Time Limits• States can provide exemptions from program work requirements or time limits for

disabled recipients who cannot reasonably comply—with or without program modifi-cations, grant extensions to recipients with learning disabilities participating in educa-tion or job training programs to allow for program completion or modify sanctionpolicies to accommodate those who have a disability that prevents compliance.

Communication with Applicants and Recipients• States will want to ensure that caseworkers are effectively communicating and making

reasonable accommodations for those with speech, hearing or visual impairments. Com-munication can be facilitated by using interpreters or notetakers and producing mate-rials in alternative formats. (Source: Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services, 2001).

Employer-provided accommodations may include transportation, allowing employees to usetape recorders, making physical modifications to the work site, presenting training material

in a visual format, and providing job mentors or coaches or equipment for those with hearingor visual impairments. The employer will be responsible for providing the necessary accom-modations in public sector work places or in large businesses. The state may need to providefunding to small, private-sector businesses to cover the cost of the accommodations.

State Screening Efforts

TANF recipients experience a wide range of disabilities. The type and extent of disability and necessary treatment or accommodations will vary among individuals. Effective screening

is an important tool to accurately detect disabilities amongTANF applicants and recipients and can reveal a host of physical or mental health problems that explain why some

parents have remained on welfare for so long. A recent GAOsurvey of more than 600 county TANF administrators fromaround the country revealed that the most common methodof identifying recipients with disabilities was self-disclosure(figure 2).10

This can be problematic in that many impairments will notbe accurately identified. Clients may be reluctant to dis-close disabilities to caseworkers without a more establishedSource: GAO survey of county TANF agencies, 2001.

Figure 2. Screening Methods Used by Counties

Recipient’sself-disclosure

77 percent

Caseworkerobservation11 percent

Screeningexam

12 percent




0

20

40

60

80

100

relationship, or the client may not be aware of a “hidden” disability. States may wish totrain TANF caseworkers to identify recipients with potential disabilities and follow up with referrals for more in-depth screening with a trained professional. Special consider-ation may be needed when training caseworkers to accurately identify learning disabilitiesor other mental impairments due to the difficulty in detecting such conditions. In addi-tion to detecting potential disabilities, TANF caseworkers may find screening helpful in

identifying individuals who may be eligible for SSI, those who should be exempt from timelimits and work requirements, and those in need of special services such as treatment refer-rals or workplace accommodations.11

Disability screening may be needed at various points throughout a recipient’s participationin the TANF program. Timely screening can reduce a client’s risk of sanction and increasethe ability of caseworkers to provide appropriate accommodations or referrals for special-ized services. According to the GAO study, more than 90 percent of counties surveyedconduct an initial screening at the intake or eligibility determination phase, but screeningoccurs less frequently as the client encounters difficulties complying with program require-ments. Figure 3 illustrates the points at which counties screen recipients for disabilities,using any method.

Caring for Disabled Relatives

Under AFDC, parents who were providing care for a disabled child or other householdmember were exempt from program work requirements. Since the implementation of TANF, caregivers are expected to participate in work activities and are subject to the state’stime limit policy unless the state has granted them an exemption. Recipients who providecare for a disabled family member also are likely to experience difficulties participating in work activities and leaving welfare before the expiration of their time limit. Further, theseparents are likely to encounter increased financial hardship due to the high cost of caringfor a child with disabilities. These recipients typically experience different barriers than

Source: GAO survey of county TANF agencies, 2001.

Figure 3. Points at Which Counties Screen Recipients for Disabilities

Intake/eligibility

determination

Employmentplanningprocess

OtherRecipient isunable tofind a job

Recipienthas lost job

Recipient isabout to besanctioned

P e r c e n t o f R e c i p i e n t s

0

20

40

60

80

10091 percent

77 percent

45 percent

39 percent44 percent

16 percent



Welfare Reform8

individuals with disabilities, although moststates apply very similar policies to the twogroups. For example, all but one state hasadopted the same time limit policy forcaregivers as for disabled recipients.12 Al-though caregivers may not have personal

limitations that inhibit their ability to par-ticipate in required activities, their ability to work and attain financial stability is lim-ited due to their obligations to care for anill or incapacitated family member. In ad-dition, it is common for caregivers to havebeen out of the work force for long periods

of time.13 Child care for disabled or seriously ill children is scarce and typically is very expensive when available. Personal barriers of this nature are likely to create unique cir-cumstances for caretakers that states may wish to consider.

Granting Exemptions Based on Disability

Receipt of cash assistance can have adverse time limit implications both for recipients whorely on TANF while their SSI claim is pending and for recipients whose disabilities preventthem from working but do not qualify for SSI. Cash assistance no longer is intended to bea long-term support for low-income individuals. Many recipients that rely on TANF as aninterim support are forced to accumulate months on cash assistance, reducing their timeframe for eligibility should they encounter a future emergency. Those who do not qualify for SSI but are not able to work are forced to rely on TANF continuously—up to theexpiration of their time limit. In states that do not provide recipients with the accommo-dations needed to enable them to participate in work or training activities, recipients are indanger of having their case closed due to time limits without having obtained the educa-

tion, training or work experience necessary for future success in the work force.

According to the GAO survey of county TANF administrators, 63 percent of countiesexempt recipients with impairments from work requirements. Of these, 27 percent ex-empt recipients from work requirements but not from the time limit. Similarly, one-thirdexempt parents who are caring for a disabled child from both the work requirement andtime limit, while an additional 28 percent exempt caregivers from only the work require-ment. More than half the counties studied provide work exemptions for recipients who were referred to SSA for an SSI eligibility determination. One-fourth of the counties sur-veyed exempt recipients from work activities but not from the state’s time limit. Theserecipients may be at risk of exhausting their time limit without having found a job orhaving received the services needed to move toward employment.14

By the end of 2002, all but four states had reached some sort of time limit on cash assis-tance. States are increasing their screening, assessment and referral efforts as many recipi-ents with health-related barriers to work near the limit.

For example, the Utah Department of Workforce Services has begun using specialized casemanagers to identify clients who may be eligible for SSI. Similarly, the New Jersey Depart-ment of Human Services is working with Legal Services of New Jersey to move TANFrecipients with severe disabilities into the SSI program. The state has yet to decide how to

Caregiving as a Work Activity Wisconsin counts full-time caregiving for a disabled family member as anallowable work activity. The state is attempting to fund a contract with asocial service agency that would employ TANF recipients as caregivers inthe home and provide them with compensation and benefits for caregivingactivities. The state is considering a variety of funding options including

applying for a Medicaid waiver, applying for a federal waiver to allow morethan 10 percent of TANF funds to be transferred to the Social ServicesBlock Grant (SSBG) to administer the program through the state’s Depart-ment of Health and Family Services, or pursuing a state statutory changethat would enable the state to target existing SSBG fund, toward thisproject.

Source: Welfare Information Network, 2002.




serve those with impairments that are not severe enough to qualify them for SSI. Case- workers in Colorado are assigned to long-term recipients who are nearing the time limit todetermine if an SSI referral is necessary. As of mid-2001, 11 percent of this population hadreceived referrals.15

Finally, as the first group of Minnesota recipients reached the expiration of their time limit,

state TANF administrators began to focus more attention on individuals who are believedto have a disability severe enough to qualify for SSI. TANF caseworkers conduct exit inter-views with recipients who are nearing the end of their five-year limit. These assessmentshave uncovered a high number of disabilities among those who have been unable to leavethe rolls. Counties with high concentrations of disabled recipients have begun testingrecipients for learning disabilities and physical or mental health problems. Two-thirds of the recipients tested in these counties have disabilities severe enough to qualify for anextension. Welfare officials in Ramsey County found that the average IQ for native En-glish-speakers was 82, nearly 20 points below average. Similarly, officials in HennepinCounty found that, out of a sample of 66 parents who are nearing the time limit, 24percent had a mental illness. State officials in Minnesota estimate that approximately 3,300 parents will reach the time limit in fiscal year 2003.16 Of the 650 recipients subjectto case closure on July 1, 2002, approximately 10 percent had been moved to SSI by mid-2002. Statewide, applications for SSI were up 9 percent over the latter part of 2001 andearly 2002, compared to the same time the previous year.17

Policy Development Suggestions

The following policy suggestions may be helpful to states in developing and altering ser-vice-delivery methods to better serve the needs of TANF recipients with disabilities.

• Effective screening and assessment are necessary to identify recipients with disabilities who may be unable to comply with work and other program requirements. States may

wish to contract with agencies with more expertise in identifying and addressing physicalor mental impairments to conduct assessments and provide follow-up services.

• States may find it helpful to conduct screening at various points of the client’s partici-pation in the TANF program (i.e., periods of non compliance, after job loss or failure toadvance).

• States will need to define eligibility requirements for the 20 percent time limit exemp-tion for recipients who have impairments that prevent employment but who are noteligible for SSI. Policymakers also may want to recognize that caregivers will face differ-ent barriers to self-sufficiency than those who experience personal disabilities and cre-ate separate exemption categories for parents with disabled children.

• States can train TANF caseworkers to identify applicants or recipients who may beeligible for SSI and assist them with the applications process. SSI benefits can provideindividuals with a long-term income support and allows states to avoid counting theseindividuals in their 20 percent exemption.

• States may want to establish partnerships with legal services organizations in the stateto help clients apply for SSI or appeal claim denials.



Welfare Reform10

• States will want to ensure that adequate services are in place to serve clients who arescreened and diagnosed with a disability. Disability experts note that identifying dis-abilities without providing the necessary follow-up treatment can be frustrating anddemoralizing to clients.

• States can work with employers to establish work place accommodations for clients

with more minor disabilities so these individuals can better comply with work require-ments and develop work skills prior to the expiration of their time limit on cash assis-tance.

• States may want to restructure their current method of service delivery and make pro-gram modifications to accommodate the needs of recipients with health-related em-ployment barriers in order to avoid discriminating against these individuals.

As time limits expire for many on cash assistance, states will need to focus their attentionon those who remain on the rolls. Now that recipients with multiple barriers to work comprise a greater share of the TANF caseloads, it is increasingly important for states todevelop programs designed to help those who are capable of work to move into jobs and toprovide the necessary exemptions and program modifications for those who cannot reason-ably be expected to work.

Notes

1. U.S. General Accounting Office, Disappointing Results From SSA’s Efforts to Improve the Disability Claims Process Warrant Immediate Attention (Washington, D.C.: U.S. GAO,2002), 5.

2 . Ibid., 7.

3 . Ibid., 27.

4. Sandra Danziger et al., Barriers to Employment of Welfare Recipients (Ann Arbor,Mich.: University of Michigan Poverty Research and Training Center, 2000).

5. Robin M. Dion, et al., Reaching All Job-Seekers: Employment Programs for Hard-to-Employ Populations (Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research Inc., 1999), 5.

6. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, State Welfare-to-Work Policies for People with Disabilities, Changes Since Welfare Reform (Washington, D.C.: U.S. DHHS, ASPE, 1998), 18, section 4.

7. Ibid., executive summary, iii.

8. “Protecting the Rights of TANF Applicants and Recipients with Disabilities: New Tools, Resources and Litigation,” Welfare News (Welfare Law Center), March 2001.

9. Ibid.

10. U.S. General Accounting Office, More Coordinated Federal Effort Could Help States and Localities Move TANF Recipients with Impairments Toward Employment (Washington,D.C.: U.S. GAO, 2001).




11. Ibid., 16.

12. U.S. General Accounting Office, State Welfare-to-Work Policies , executive summary v.

13. Ibid., 27, section 5.

14. United States General Accounting Office, “Coordinated Federal Effort,” 21-23.

15. Berkeley Policy Associates, Evaluation of the Colorado Works Program, Third An-nual Report, Caseload Trends, Employment Outcomes and Post-Exit Support Services(Oakland, Calif.: Berkeley Policy Associates, 2001), 52.

16. Jean Hopfensperger, “Pieces of Minnesota Welfare Puzzle Falling into Place,” Star Tribune (Minneapolis-St. Paul), May 6, 2002.

17. Maja Beckstrom, “Some Find Help Beyond Welfare,” Pioneer Press (St. Paul), April15, 2002.

Families Leaving Welfare"Employment Experiences of Former TANF Recipients?"

(Item # 6900-0001) (ISBN 1-58024-225-1) May 2002

"Child Care Experiences of Former TANF Recipients"(Item # 6900-0002) (ISBN 1-58024-226-X) May 2002

"Description of State Leaver Studies"(Item # 6900-0003) (ISBN 1-58024-227-8) May 2002

State Choices on Welfare“Faith-Based Initiatives in Welfare Reform”

(Item # 6900-0004) (ISBN 1-58024-228-6) May 2002

“Strategies for Hard-to-Serve TANF Recipients”(Item # 6900-0005) (ISBN 1-58024-229-4) June 2002

“Time-Limited TANF Recipients”(Item # 6900-0006) (ISBN 1-58024-230-8) July 2002

“Programs That Serve Children in Low-Income Families”(Item # 6900-0007) (ISBN 1-58024-262-9) November 2002

“Strengthening Marriage and Two-Parent Families”(Item # 6900-0008) (ISBN 1-58024-271-5) February 2003

“TANF and Disabled Parents”(Item # 6900-0009) (ISBN 1-58024-277-4) March 2003

The Welfare Reform Series

Printed on recycled paper

©2003 by the National Conference of State Legislatures. All rights reserved.ISBN 1-58024-277-4

Item # 6900-0009Price: $15.00



Welfare Reform12

N a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e o f S t a t e L e g i s l a t u r e s 7 7 0 0 E a s t F i r s t P l a c e

D e n v e r , C o l o r a d o 8 0 2 3 0 - 7 1 4 3

P R S R T S T D U . S . P o s t a g e

P A I D D e n v e r , C o l o r a d o P e r m i t N o . 4 7 1 1

Documents

Social Security: parent