HHS/ASPE. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.Background

2008 Indicators of Welfare Dependence

Appendix A.
Program Data

[ Main Page of Report | Main Contents ]

Contents

The Welfare Indicators Act of 1994 specifies that the annual welfare indicators reports shall include analyses of families and individuals receiving assistance under three means-tested benefit programs:

This chapter includes information on these three programs, derived primarily from administrative data reported by state and federal agencies instead of the national survey data presented in previous chapters.  National caseloads and expenditure trend information on each of the three programs is included, as well as state-by-state trend tables and information on the characteristics of program participants.

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)

The Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program — originally named the Aid to Dependent Children program — was established by the Social Security Act of 1935 as a grant program to enable states to provide cash welfare payments for needy children who had been deprived of parental support or care because their fathers or mothers were absent from the home, incapacitated, deceased, or unemployed. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands operated an AFDC program.  States defined “need,” set their own benefit levels, established (within federal limitations) income and resource limits, and administered the program or supervised its administration.  States were entitled to unlimited federal funds for reimbursement of benefit payments, at “matching” rates that were inversely related to state per capita income.  States were required to provide aid to all persons who were in classes eligible under federal law and whose income and resources were within state-set limits.

During the 1990s, the federal government increasingly used its authority under section 1115 of the Social Security Act to waive portions of the federal requirements under AFDC. This allowed states to test such changes as expanded earned income disregards, increased work requirements and stronger sanctions for failure to comply with them, time limits on benefits, and expanded access to transitional benefits such as child care and medical assistance.  As a condition of receiving waivers, states were required to conduct rigorous evaluations of the impacts of these changes on the welfare receipt, employment, and earnings of participants.

Public Law 104-193, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), replaced AFDC, AFDC administration, the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) program and the Emergency Assistance (EA) program with a block grant called the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Key elements of TANF include a lifetime limit of five years (60 months)[1] on the amount of time a family with an adult can receive assistance funded with federal funds, increasing work participation rate requirements that states must meet, and broad state flexibility on program design.  Spending through the TANF block grant is capped and funded at $16.5 billion per year, slightly above FY 1995 federal expenditures for the four component programs.  States also must meet a “maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement” by spending on needy families at least 75 percent of the amount of state funds used in FY 1994 on these programs (80 percent if they fail work participation rate requirements).

TANF gives states wide latitude in spending both federal TANF funds and state MOE funds.   Subject to a few restrictions, TANF funds may be used in any way that supports one of the four statutory purposes of TANF:  to provide assistance to needy families so that children can be cared for at home; to end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work and marriage; to prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and to encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.

Legislative Changes

The current legislative authority for the TANF block grant is from the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-171).  Enacted in February 2006, the Act reauthorizes the original 1996 legislation at an annual funding level of $16.5 billion and continues to require each state to have at least 50 percent of its work eligible families participating in meaningful work activities.  However, prior to this Act, a caseload reduction credit allowed states to reduce their work requirement by their caseload declines since 1995.  As most states experienced dramatic caseload declines, the credit had virtually eliminated the work participation requirements for most states.  Starting with FY 2007, the Deficit Reduction Act recalibrates the base year for calculating the caseload reduction credit to 2005, effectively re-implementing a meaningful performance guideline.

Also starting in FY 2007, the Deficit Reduction Act expands the work participation calculations to include adults in certain welfare programs funded out of state funds countable toward the maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.  Under the original legislation, these adults were excluded from the calculations.  This change was implemented because there was some concern that states were moving work-eligible TANF adults into non-TANF programs with similar program structures, in part, to avoid federal work participation standards.[2] In addition, new regulations from the Department of Health and Human Services create consistent definitions of the activities that count toward federal work requirements and provide new flexibility for states to count adults who miss scheduled hours due to holidays and excused absences.  The new regulations also provide more detailed instructions to states as to which families they are to include in their work participation rate calculations.  In some circumstances states are required to include adults that have been removed from the assistance unit because of failing to comply with program rules.  In addition, the new regulations allow states to include adults receiving federal disability benefits on a case by case basis, and to exclude parents caring for disabled family members.

The Deficit Reduction Act also provides $100 million per year to support programs designed to promote healthy marriages, and up to $50 million annually for programs designed to encourage responsible fatherhood.  In addition, the new law increased mandatory child care funding to states to $2.9 billion annually.

Data Issues Relating to the TANF Program and the AFDC-TANF Transition

States had the option of beginning their TANF programs as soon as PRWORA was enacted in August 1996, and a few states began TANF programs as early as September 1996.  All states were required to implement TANF by July 1, 1997.  Because states implemented TANF at different times, the FY 1997 data reflect a combination of the AFDC and TANF programs.  In some states, limited data are available for FY 1997 because states were given a transition period of six months after they implemented TANF before they were required to report data on the characteristics and work activities of TANF participants.

Because of the greatly expanded range of activities allowed under TANF, a substantial portion of TANF funds are being spent on activities other than cash payments to families. Table TANF 4 in this Appendix which tracks overall expenditure trends includes only those TANF funds spent on “cash and work-based assistance” and “administrative costs,” not on work activities, supportive services, or other allowable uses of funds.  Spending on these other activities is detailed in Table TANF 5.  Note that TANF administrative costs include funds spent administering all activities, not just cash and work-based assistance. (Administrative costs under AFDC had included a small amount of funds for administering AFDC child care programs; such programs, and the costs of administering them, were transferred to the Child Care and Development Fund as part of PRWORA.)

There also is potential for discontinuity between the AFDC and the TANF caseload figures.  For example, under TANF there is no longer a separate “Unemployed Parent” (UP) program, as there was under AFDC.  While a separate work participation rate is calculated for two-parent families, this population is not identical to the UP caseload under AFDC.  It is also possible that a limited number of families will be considered recipients of TANF assistance, even if they do not receive a monthly cash benefit.  The vast majority of families receiving “assistance”[3] are, in fact, receiving cash payments.

Another data issue concerns the treatment of families who receive cash and other forms of assistance under Separate State Programs (SSPs), funded out of MOE dollars rather than federal TANF funds.  Under TANF, some states use SSP programs to serve specific categories of families (e.g., two-parent families, families who have exhausted their time limits).  From 1996-2005, such families were not subject to federal time limits.  States did not have to include them in the calculation of their work participation rates.  As of October 2006, such families are included in the work participation rate calculation, but may still be excluded from the application of the federal time limits on receipt of assistance.  Starting with the 2004 edition, this Indicators report adds recipients in SSPs into the caseload totals[4] (the split between TANF and SSP caseloads is shown in Table TANF 3, nationally, and in Table TANF 15, by state).  Native Americans served through state TANF and SSP programs are included in these caseload counts, but families served through TANF programs operated by Tribal governments are excluded. Expenditures for SSPs are shown in Table TANF 5.

AFDC/TANF Program Data

The following tables and figures present data on caseloads, expenditures, and recipient characteristics of the AFDC and TANF programs.  Trends in national caseloads and expenditures are shown in Figures TANF 1 and TANF 2, and the first set of tables (Tables TANF 1 through 6).  These are followed by information on characteristics of AFDC/TANF families (Table TANF 7)[5] and a series of tables presenting state-by-state data on trends in the AFDC/TANF program (Tables TANF 8 through 15).  These data complement the data on trends in AFDC/TANF recipiency and participation rates shown in Tables IND 3a and IND 4a in Chapter II.

AFDC/TANF Caseload Trends (Tables TANF 1 through TANF 3 and Figure TANF 1).  Welfare caseloads have stabilized over the past few years after declining dramatically during the 1990s.  In FY 2006, the average monthly number of TANF recipients was 4.7 million persons, down 7 percent from FY 2005.  Moreover, this was 62 percent lower than the average monthly AFDC caseload in FY 1996 and the smallest number of people on welfare since 1967. From the peak of 14.2 million in FY 1994, the number of AFDC/TANF recipients dropped by 67 percent to 4.7 million in FY 2007.[6] Over four-fifths of the reduction in the caseload since FY 1994 has occurred following the passage of PRWORA in FY 1996.  These are the largest welfare caseload declines in the history of U.S. welfare programs.

Several studies have attempted to explain the unprecedented decline in caseloads and, specifically, to disentangle the effects of PRWORA and welfare reform from the simultaneous growth in the U.S. economy.  Separating these effects is difficult, however, because PRWORA was enacted at a time when the economy was expanding dramatically, offering a uniquely conducive environment within which to move many recipients off the welfare rolls and into the labor market.  Other policy changes, most notably expansions in the Earned Income Tax Credit, add further complexity.

In general, studies have found that both economic conditions and welfare reform policies have played important roles in the recent caseload decline.  A review of a dozen studies concluded that roughly 15 to 30 percent of the caseload decline prior to 1996 was attributed by most studies to welfare policies under waivers to the AFDC rules with approximately 30 to 45 percent of the decline explained by economic conditions (Schoeni and Blank, 2000).  A study by the Council of Economic Advisers (1999) of the post-PRWORA period finds that just over one-third of the caseload decline can be explained by welfare reform policy, while 8 to 10 percent is due to the economy.  A more recent study estimates that over half the decline in caseloads after enactment of PRWORA was attributable to welfare reform (O’Neill and Hill, 2001).

AFDC/TANF Expenditures (Tables TANF 4 through TANF 6 and Figure TANF 2). Tables TANF 4 and 5 show trends in expenditures on AFDC and TANF.  Table TANF 4 tracks both programs, breaking out the costs of benefits and administrative expenses.  It also shows the division between federal and state spending.  Table TANF 5 shows the variety of activities funded under the TANF program.

Figure TANF 2 and Table TANF 6 show that inflation has had a significant effect in eroding the value of the average monthly AFDC/TANF benefit.  In real dollars, by 2006 the average monthly benefit per recipient had declined to 65 percent of what it was at its peak in the late 1970s.

AFDC/TANF Recipient Characteristics (Table TANF 7). With the dramatic declines in the welfare rolls since the implementation of TANF, there has been a great deal of speculation regarding how the composition of the caseload has changed.  Two striking trends are the increases in the proportion of families with no adult in the assistance unit and in employment among adult recipients.

One of the most dramatic trends is the increase in the proportion of adult recipients who are working. In FY 2006, 22 percent of TANF adult recipients were employed, down from 26 percent in 2000, but up from 11 percent in FY 1996 and 7 percent in FY 1992, as shown in Table TANF 7.  Adding in those in work experience and community service positions, the percentage working was 30 percent in FY 2006[7] (data not shown).  Similar trends are shown in data on income from earnings. These trends likely reflect the effects of expanded earnings disregards, welfare-to-work programs, and the economy.  One can also see a relationship between employment of welfare recipients and broader trends in labor force participation. (For example, see Table WORK 8 in Chapter III for trends in employment rates for women with children under age 18.)

Another dramatic change in the caseload is the increasing fraction of cases without an adult recipient. Such cases occur when the adults are ineligible (because they are a caretaker relative, SSI parent, immigrant parent, or sanctioned parent).  Families with no adults in the assistance unit have climbed from 15 percent of the caseload in FY 1992 to 47 percent in FY 2006.[8] This dramatic growth has been due to an increase in the number of cases without recipient adults during the early 1990s, followed by a decline in the number of cases that included adults in the assistance unit.  The number of cases without an adult in the assistance unit has fallen by about 127,000 since 1996 — between 1996 and 1998 they decreased by 254,000 but subsequently increased by 127,000.

In other areas, TANF administrative data show fewer changes in composition than might have been expected.  There has been widespread anecdotal evidence that the most job ready recipients — those with the fewest barriers to employment — have already exited the welfare caseload and have stopped coming onto the welfare rolls, leaving a more disadvantaged population remaining.  However, as the expectations for welfare recipients have increased, and fewer recipients are totally exempted from work requirements, others have speculated that the most disadvantaged recipients may also have been sanctioned off the rolls or terminated for failure to comply with administrative requirements.  In fact, analyses of program data have not found much evidence of an increase or decrease in readily observed barriers to employment in the current caseload.

The question of whether the caseload has become more disadvantaged cannot be answered simply through TANF administrative data provided by the states, which do not contain detailed information on such barriers to employment as lack of basic skills, alcohol and drug abuse, domestic violence, and disabilities.  A few recent studies have found very high levels of these barriers among the TANF population.  These studies also have found that the more barriers a recipient faces, the less likely she is to find a job and maintain consistent employment over a period of time.

AFDC/TANF State-by-State Trends (Tables TANF 8 through TANF 15).  There is a great deal of state-to-state variation in the trends discussed above.  For example, as shown in Table TANF 10, while every state has experienced a caseload decline since the 1990s, the percentage change between the state’s caseload peak and March 2007 ranges from 96 percent (Wyoming) to 44 percent (Nebraska).  Sixteen states have experienced caseload declines of 75 percent or more.  Table TANF 10 also shows that states reached their peak caseloads as early as May 1990 (Louisiana) and as late as June 1997 (Hawaii).

Table TANF 15 shows TANF and Separate State Program (SSP) families and recipients, by state.  Thirty-two states (including DC) had such programs.

Figure TANF 1.
AFDC/TANF Families Receiving Income Assistance

Figure TANF 1.  AFDC/TANF Families Receiving Income Assistance. See text for explanation and tables for data.

Note: “Basic Families” are single-parent families and “UP Families” are two-parent cases receiving benefits under AFDC Unemployed Parent programs that operated in certain states before FY 1991 and in all states after October 1, 1990. The AFDC Basic and UP programs were replaced by TANF as of July 1, 1997 under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. Shaded areas indicate NBER designated periods of recession from peak to trough. The decrease in number of families receiving assistance during the 1981-82 recession stems from changes in eligibility requirements and other policy changes mandated by OBRA 1981. Beginning in 2000, “Total Families” includes TANF and SSP families. Last data point plotted is March 2007.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation.

Figure TANF 2.
Average Monthly AFDC/TANF Benefit per Recipient in Constant 2006 Dollars

Figure TANF 2.  Average Monthly AFDC/TANF Benefit per Recipient in Constant 2006 Dollars. See text for explanation and tables for data.

Note: See Table TANF 6 for underlying data.  Comparison of trends in the average monthly AFDC/TANF benefit per recipient in constant 2006 dollars with the weighted average maximum benefit in constant 2006 dollars since 1988 indicates that the primary cause of the decline in the average monthly benefit has been the erosion of the real value of the maximum benefit due to inflation.  This is due to the fact that the current value of the maximum benefits has increased less than the cost of living in most states since the late1980s.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Quarterly Public Assistance Statistics, 1992 & 1993 and earlier years along with unpublished data.

Table TANF 1.
Trends in AFDC/TANF Caseloads: 1962-2006
Fiscal Year Average Monthly Number
(thousands)
Children as a Percent of Total Recipients Average1 Number
of Children per Family
Total
Families1
AFDC UP2
Two-Parent Families
TANF
Two-Parent Families
Total Recipients Child Recipients
1962 924 48 NA 3,593 2,778 77.3 3.0
1964 984 60 NA 4,059 3,043 75.0 3.1
1965 1,037 69 NA 4,323 3,242 75.0 3.1
1966 1,074 62 NA 4,472 3,369 75.3 3.1
1967 1,141 58 NA 4,718 3,560 75.5 3.1
1968 1,310 67 NA 5,349 4,013 75.0 3.1
1969 1,539 66 NA 6,146 4,591 74.7 3.0
1970 1,906 78 NA 7,415 5,484 74.0 2.9
1971 2,531 143 NA 9,557 6,963 72.9 2.8
1972 2,918 134 NA 10,632 7,698 72.4 2.6
1973 3,123 120 NA 11,038 7,967 72.2 2.6
1974 3,170 93 NA 10,845 7,825 72.2 2.5
1975 3,357 100 NA 11,067 7,952 71.9 2.4
1976 3,575 135 NA 11,386 8,054 70.7 2.3
1977 3,593 149 NA 11,130 7,846 70.5 2.2
1978 3,539 128 NA 10,672 7,492 70.2 2.1
1979 3,496 114 NA 10,318 7,197 69.8 2.1
1980 3,642 141 NA 10,597 7,320 69.1 2.0
1981 3,871 209 NA 11,160 7,615 68.2 2.0
1982 3,569 232 NA 10,431 6,975 66.9 2.0
1983 3,651 272 NA 10,659 7,051 66.1 1.9
1984 3,725 287 NA 10,866 7,153 65.8 1.9
1985 3,692 261 NA 10,813 7,165 66.3 1.9
1986 3,748 254 NA 10,997 7,300 66.4 1.9
1987 3,784 236 NA 11,065 7,381 66.7 2.0
1988 3,748 210 NA 10,920 7,325 67.1 2.0
1989 3,771 193 NA 10,934 7,370 67.4 2.0
1990 3,974 204 NA 11,460 7,755 67.7 2.0
1991 4,374 268 NA 12,592 8,513 67.6 1.9
1992 4,768 322 NA 13,625 9,226 67.7 1.9
1993 4,981 359 NA 14,143 9,560 67.6 1.9
1994 5,046 363 NA 14,226 9,611 67.6 1.9
1995 4,871 335 NA 13,660 9,280 67.9 1.9
1996 4,543 301 NA 12,645 8,672 68.6 1.9
1997 2 3,937 256 NA 10,935 7,781 3 71.2 3 2.0 3
1998 3,200 NA 162 8,790 6,273 71.4 2.0
1999 2,674 NA 125 7,188 5,319 74.0 2.0
2000 2,356 NA 132 6,324 4,598 72.7 2.0
2001 2,200 NA 119 5,761 4,227 73.4 1.9
2002 2,195 NA 118 5,656 4,149 73.3 1.9
2003 2,181 NA 116 5,518 4,075 73.9 1.9
2004 2,160 NA 113 5,376 3,993 74.3 1.8
2005 2,090 NA 108 5,118 3,819 74.6 1.8
2006 1, 962 NA 98 4,746 3,561 75.0 1.8
Note: Beginning in 2000, all caseload numbers include SSP families.
1 Includes unemployed parent families and child-only cases.
2 The AFDC Unemployed Parent program was replaced when the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 repealed AFDC and set up the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program beginning July 1, 1997.
3 Based on data from the AFDC reporting system that were available only for the first 9 months of the fiscal year.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance (available online at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/).

Table TANF 2.
Number of AFDC/TANF Recipients, and Recipients as a Percentage of Various Population Groups: 1970-2006
Calendar Year 1 Total Recipients in the States & DC
(thousands)
Child Recipients in the States & DC
(thousands)
Recipients as a Percent of Total Population 2 Recipients as a Percent of Poverty Population 3 Child Recipients as a Percent of Total Child Population 2 Child Recipients as a Percent of Children in Poverty 3
1970 8,303 6,104 4.0 32.7 8.7 58.5
1971 10,043 7,303 4.8 39.3 10.5 69.2
1972 10,736 7,766 5.1 43.9 11.2 75.5
1973 10,738 7,763 5.1 46.7 11.3 80.5
1974 10,621 7,637 5.0 45.4 11.3 75.2
1975 11,131 7,928 5.2 43.0 11.8 71.4
1976 11,098 7,850 5.1 44.4 11.8 76.4
1977 10,856 7,632 4.9 43.9 11.7 74.2
1978 10,387 7,270 4.7 42.4 11.2 73.2
1979 10,140 7,057 4.5 38.9 11.0 68.0
1980 10,599 7,295 4.7 36.2 11.5 63.2
1981 10,893 7,397 4.7 34.2 11.7 59.2
1982 10,161 6,767 4.4 29.5 10.8 49.6
1983 10,569 6,967 4.5 29.9 11.1 50.1
1984 10,643 7,017 4.5 31.6 11.2 52.3
1985 10,672 7,073 4.5 32.3 11.3 54.4
1986 10,850 7,206 4.5 33.5 11.5 56.0
1987 10,841 7,240 4.5 33.6 11.5 55.9
1988 10,728 7,201 4.4 33.8 11.4 57.8
1989 10,798 7,286 4.4 34.3 11.5 57.9
1990 11,497 7,781 4.6 34.2 12.1 57.9
1991 12,728 8,601 5.0 35.6 13.2 60.0
1992 13,571 9,189 5.3 35.7 13.8 60.1
1993 14,007 9,460 5.4 35.7 14.0 60.2
1994 13,970 9,448 5.3 36.7 13.8 61.8
1995 13,242 9,013 5.0 36.4 13.0 61.5
1996 12,156 8,355 4.5 33.3 11.9 57.8
1997 10,224 7,077 4 3.7 28.7 10.0 50.1
1998 8,215 5,781 3.0 23.8 8.1 42.9
1999 6,709 4,836 2.4 20.5 6.7 39.4
2000 6,043 4,415 2.1 19.1 6.1 38.1
2001 5,631 4,140 2.0 17.1 5.7 35.3
2002 5,534 4,073 1.9 16.0 5.6 33.6
2003 5,424 4,024 1.9 15.1 5.5 31.3
2004 5,282 3,936 1.8 14.3 5.4 30.2
2005 4,975 3,727 1.7 13.5 5.1 28.9
2006 4,542 3,430 1.5 12.5 4.7 26.7
1 Total recipients are calculated here as the monthly average for the calendar year in order to compare with the calendar year counts of the poverty populations used to compute the recipiency rates. From 2000 onward, total recipients includes SSP recipients as well as TANF recipients and likewise for child recipients. See Table IND 3a for fiscal year recipiency rates.
2 Population numbers used as denominators are resident population.  See Current Population Reports, Series P25-1106
3 For poverty population data see Current Population Reports, Series P60-231 (available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).
4 Estimated based on the ratio of children recipients to total recipients for January through June of 1997.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance and U.S. Census Bureau, “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-233 (available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).

Table TANF 3.
TANF and Separate State Program (SSP) Families and Recipients: 2000-2006

[In thousands]
Fiscal Year TANF SSP Total
Families
2000 2,265 91 2,356
2001 2,117 82 2,200
2002 2,065 129 2,195
2003 2,032 149 2,181
2004 1,987 173 2,160
2005 1,921 170 2,090
2006 1,807 155 1,962
  All Recipients
2000 5,943 380 6,324
2001 5,423 338 5,761
2002 5,149 508 5,656
2003 4,967 551 5,518
2004 4,784 592 5,376
2005 4,549 569 5,118
2006 4,229 517 4,749
  Child Recipients
2000 4,370 228 4,598
2001 4,025 202 4,227
2002 3,841 308 4,149
2003 3,731 344 4,075
2004 3,617 376 3,993
2005 3,459 360 3,819
2006 3,234 326 3,561
Note: Some states provide cash and other forms of assistance to specific categories of families (e.g., two-parent families) under Separate State Programs (SSPs) which are funded out of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) dollars rather than federal TANF funds. See Table TANF 15 for SSPs by state.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance (available online at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/).

Table TANF 4.
Total AFDC/TANF Expenditures on Cash Benefits and Administration: 1970 – 2006

[In millions of dollars]
Fiscal
Year
Federal Funds
(Current Dollars)
State Funds
(Current Dollars)
Total
(Current Dollars)
Total
(Constant 2006 Dollars1)
Benefits Admin Benefits Admin Benefits Admin Benefits Admin
1970 $2,187 $572 2 $1,895 $309 $4,082 $881 2 19,248 4,154
1971 3,008 271 2,469 254 5,477 525 24,724 2,370
1972 3,612 240 3 2,942 241 6,554 481 3 28,571 2,097
1973 3,865 313 3,138 296 7,003 610 29,320 2,554
1974 4,071 379 3,300 362 7,371 740 28,424 2,854
1975 4,625 552 3,787 529 8,412 1,082 29,566 3,803
1976 5,258 541 4,418 527 9,676 1,069 31,835 3,517
1977 5,626 595 4,762 583 10,388 1,177 31,815 3,605
1978 5,724 631 4,898 617 10,621 1,248 30,517 3,586
1979 5,825 683 4,954 668 10,779 1,350 28,480 3,567
1980 6,448 750 5,508 729 11,956 1,479 28,428 3,517
1981 6,928 835 5,917 814 12,845 1,648 27,763 3,562
1982 6,922 878 5,934 878 12,857 1,756 25,996 3,551
1983 7,332 915 6,275 915 13,607 1,830 26,303 3,538
1984 7,707 876 6,664 822 14,371 1,698 26,677 3,152
1985 7,817 890 6,763 889 14,580 1,779 26,127 3,188
1986 8,239 993 6,996 967 15,235 1,960 26,684 3,433
1987 8,914 1,081 7,409 1,052 16,323 2,133 27,845 3,639
1988 9,125 1,194 7,538 1,159 16,663 2,353 27,409 3,870
1989 9,433 1,211 7,807 1,206 17,240 2,417 27,204 3,814
1990 10,149 1,358 8,390 1,303 18,539 2,661 27,979 4,016
1991 11,165 1,373 9,191 1,300 20,356 2,673 29,396 3,860
1992 12,258 1,459 9,993 1,378 22,250 2,837 31,363 3,999
1993 12,270 1,518 10,016 1,438 22,286 2,956 30,637 4,064
1994 12,512 1,680 10,285 1,621 22,797 3,301 30,680 4,443
1995 12,019 1,770 10,014 1,751 22,032 3,521 28,963 4,629
1996 11,065 1,633 9,346 1,633 20,411 3,266 26,177 4,189
1997 4 9,748 1,273 7,799 1,098 17,547 2,371 21,960 2,967
1998 7,518 1,231 7,096 1,028 14,614 2,259 18,021 2,786
1999 6,475 1,407 6,975 884 13,449 2,291 16,292 2,775
2000 5,444 1,570 5,736 1,032 11,180 2,302 13,133 3,057
2001 4,772 1,598 5,390 1,042 10,163 2,639 11,569 3,005
2002 4,554 1,633 4,854 983 9,408 2,617 10,551 2,935
2003 5,820 1,592 4,398 859 10,219 2,451 11,195 2,685
2004 4,717 1,471 5,652 828 10,368 2,300 11,103 2,463
2005 5,193 1,507 5,546 870 10,739 2,377 11,136 2,464
2006 4,926 1,525 4,980 886 9,906 2,411 9,906 2,411
Note:  Benefits do not include emergency assistance payments and have not been reduced by child support collections.  Foster care payments are included from 1971 to 1980.  State funds for benefits include benefits under Separate State Programs. Beginning in fiscal year 1984, the cost of certifying AFDC households for food stamps is shown in the food stamp program’s appropriation under the U.S. Department of Agriculture.  Administrative costs include: Work Program, ADP, FAMIS, Fraud Control, Child Care administration (through 1996), SAVE and other State and local administrative expenditures.
1 Constant dollar adjustments to 2006 level were made using a CPI-U-RS fiscal year price index.
2 Includes expenditures for services.
3 Administrative expenditures only.
4 The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 repealed the AFDC program as of July 1, 1997 and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.  Under PRWORA, spending categories are not entirely equivalent to those under AFDC: for example administrative expenses under TANF do not include IV-A child care administration (which accounted for 4 percent of 1996 administrative expense).
Source:  U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Financial Systems.

Table TANF 5.
Federal and State TANF Program and Other Related Spending: 1997 – 2006

[In millions of dollars]
Fiscal Year Cash & Work-Based Assistance Work Activities Child Care Transpor-
tation
Adminis-
tration
Systems Transitional Services Other Expenditures Total Expenditures
Federal TANF Grants
1997 7,708 467 14 872 109 0 862 10,032
1998 7,168 763 252 938 224 6 1,136 10,487
1999 6,475 1,225 604 1,070 337 17 1,595 11,323
2000 5,444 1,606 1,553 496 1,328 242 2,715 13,384
2001 4,772 1,983 1,583 522 1,375 223 4,325 14,782
2002 4,554 2,121 1,572 339 1,339 294 4,368 14,588
2003 5,820 1,937 1,698 434 1,307 285 4,772 16,254
2004 4,717 1,613 1,427 354 1,220 251 4,811 14,393
2005 5,193 1,702 1,279 393 1,277 230 4,089 14,164
2006 4,926 1,681 1,238 341 1,294 231 3,859 13,570
State Maintenance of Effort Expenditures in the TANF Program
1997 5,955 311 752 704 101 9 926 8,758
1998 6,879 520 890 883 138 11 1,301 10,623
1999 6,541 503 1,135 743 118 23 1,334 10,397
2000 5,432 884 1,893 150 921 92 1,170 10,541
2001 4,887 685 1,730 113 920 83 1,195 9,613
2002 3,994 582 1,860 221 877 66 1,554 9,154
2003 3,597 596 1,993 73 766 60 1,441 8,526
2004 4,729 501 1,878 119 721 55 1,330 9,333
2005 4,537 429 1,761 111 776 46 1,489 9,148
2006 4,105 630 2,120 102 793 41 1,323 9,114
State Maintenance of Effort Expenditures in Separate State Programs
1997 69 12 111 0 0 18 210
1998 216 3 137 6 1 28 391
1999 434 26 257 22 0 0 126 865
2000 305 11 73 17 19 0 431 856
2001 503 28 34 20 38 1 499 1,125
2002 860 24 72 24 41 -.5 652 1,673
2003 801 66 -223 36 33 -.3 848 1,560
2004 922 40 45 19 52 1.1 1,016 2,095
2005 1,009 36 157 19 46 1.9 999 2,268
2006 875 53 184 29 51 1.3 1,716 2,910
Total Expenditures
1997 13,731 790 877 1,577 211 9 1,805 19,000
1998 14,264 1,286 1,280 1,828 362 17 2,465 21,502
1999 13,449 1,754 1,995 1,835 456 40 3,055 22,585
2000 11,180 2,501 3,519 663 2,267 335 4,316 24,781
2001 10,163 2,696 3,347 655 2,333 306 6,019 25,520
2002 9,408 2,727 3,504 584 2,258 359 6,574 25,414
2003 10,219 2,599 3,468 543 2,106 345 7,060 26,340
2004 10,368 2,154 3,350 492 1,992 307 7,157 25,821
2005 10,739 2,167 3,197 523 2,099 278 6,577 25,580
2006 9,906 2,364 3,542 472 2,138 273 6,898 25,594
Note: Administration and Systems, shown separately here in Table TANF 5, can be combined to show total administrative costs, as in Table TANF 3.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Financial Services (available online at http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofs/data/index.html).

Table TANF 6.
Trends in AFDC/TANF Average Monthly Payments: 1962 – 2006
Fiscal
Year
Monthly Benefit per Recipient Average Number of
Persons per Family
Monthly Benefit per Family
(not reduced by Child Support)
Weighted Average 1
Maximum Benefit
(per 3-person Family)
Current Dollars 2006 Dollars Current Dollars 2006 Dollars Current Dollars 2006 Dollars
1962 $31 $181 3.9 $121 $705 NA NA
1963 31 180 4.0 126 725 NA NA
1964 32 181 4.1 131 746 NA NA
1965 34 188 4.2 140 784 NA NA
1966 35 192 4.2 146 798 NA NA
1967 36 193 4.1 150 799 NA NA
1968 40 203 4.1 162 832 NA NA
1969 43 214 4.0 173 855 $186 2 $923
1970 46 216 3.9 178 840 194 2 916
1971 48 216 3.8 180 814 201 2 908
1972 51 224 3.6 187 816 205 2 895
1973 53 221 3.5 187 782 213 2 891
1974 57 218 3.4 194 747 229 2 882
1975 63 222 3.3 209 734 243 854
1976 71 233 3.2 226 742 257 845
1977 78 238 3.1 241 738 271 830
1978 83 238 3.0 250 719 284 817
1979 87 230 3.0 257 679 301 795
1980 94 224 2.9 274 650 320 761
1981 96 207 2.9 277 598 326 704
1982 103 208 2.9 300 607 331 668
1983 106 206 2.9 311 600 336 650
1984 110 205 2.9 322 597 352 653
1985 112 201 2.9 329 590 369 661
1986 115 202 2.9 339 593 383 671
1987 123 210 2.9 359 613 393 671
1988 127 209 2.9 370 609 403 663
1989 131 207 2.9 381 601 413 651
1990 135 203 2.9 389 587 420 634
1991 135 195 2.9 388 560 424 613
1992 136 192 2.9 389 548 419 590
1993 131 181 2.8 373 513 414 570
1994 134 180 2.8 376 507 416 559
1995 134 177 2.8 376 496 418 550
1996 135 173 2.8 374 480 419 538
1997 3 130 163 2.8 362 453 418 524
1998 130 161 2.7 358 441 429 529
1999 133 161 2.7 357 432 450 545
2000 130 153 2.7 349 410 446 524
2001 134 153 2.6 351 400 448 510
2002 141 158 2.6 364 408 452 507
2003 140 153 2.5 354 388 455 498
2004 145 155 2.5 360 386 462 495
2005 151 157 2.4 370 383 468 485
2006 154 154 2.4 372 372 495 495
Note: AFDC benefit amounts have not been reduced by child support collections.  Constant dollar adjustments to 2006 level were made using a CPI-U-RS fiscal-year price index.
1 The maximum benefit for a 3-person family in each state is weighted by that state’s share of total AFDC/TANF + SSP families.
2 Estimated based on the weighted average benefit for a 4-person family.
3 The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 repealed the AFDC program as of July 1, 1997 and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.  Beginning in 1997, average monthly benefits are calculated from case-level data rather than by dividing aggregate expenditures on cash assistance by aggregate caseloads, as in the past.  This change was necessary due to uncertainty about the extent to which states may be reporting non-cash basic assistance as well as cash assistance in the expenditure data formerly used to calculate average cash benefits.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Quarterly Public Assistance Statistics, 1992 & 1993 and earlier years along with unpublished data.

Table TANF 7.
Characteristics of AFDC/TANF Families: Selected Years 1969 – 2006
  May May March Fiscal year 1
1969 1975 1979 1983 1988 1992 1996 2000 2003 2006
Avg. Family Size (persons) 4.0 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.6 2.5 2.3
Number of Child Recipients
    One 26.6 37.9 42.3 43.4 42.5 42.5 43.9 44.2 47.9 50.2
    Two 23.0 26.0 28.1 29.8 30.2 30.2 29.9 28.4 27.8 27.2
    Three 17.7 16.1 15.6 15.2 15.8 15.5 15.0 15.3 13.8 13.2
    Four or More 32.5 20.0 13.9 10.1 9.9 10.1 9.2 10.1 8.6 7.5
    Unknown NA NA NA 1.5 1.7 0.7 1.3 2.0 1.9 2.0
Families with No Adult in Asst. Unit 2 10.1 12.5 14.6 8.3 9.6 14.8 21.5 34.4 40.9 47.2
Families with Non-Recipients 33.1 34.8 NA 36.9 36.8 38.9 49.9
Median Months on AFDC/TANF
    Since Most Recent Opening 23.0 31.0 29.0 26.0 26.3 22.5 23.6
Presence of Assistance
    Living in Public Housing 12.8 14.6 NA 10.0 9.6 9.2 8.8 17.7 19.1 17.2
    Participating in Food Stamp or Donated Food Program 52.9 75.1 75.1 83.0 84.6 87.3 89.3 79.9 80.9 80.7
Presence of Income
    With Earnings NA 14.6 12.8 5.7 8.4 7.4 11.1 23.6 3 19.5 3 18.4 3
    No Non-AFDC/TANF Income 56.0 71.1 80.6 86.8 79.6 78.9 76.0 71.6 3 74.4 3 76.6 3
Adult Employment Status (percent of adults)
    Employed 6.6 11.3 26.4 22.9 21.6
    Unemployed 49.2 49.0 54.8
    Not in Labor Force 24.3 28.1 23.6
Adult Women's employment status (percent of adult female recipients):4
    Full-time job 8.2 10.4 8.7 1.5 2.2 2.2 4.7
    Part-time job 6.3 5.7 5.4 3.4 4.2 4.2 5.4
Marital Status (percent of adults)
    Single 65.3 67.3 69.9
    Married 12.4 10.7 10.5
    Separated 13.1 12.8 11.4
    Widowed 0.7 0.5 0.6
    Divorced 8.5 8.7 7.9
Basis for Child's Eligibility (percent children):
    Incapacitated  11.7 5 7.7 5.3 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.3
    Unemployed 4.6 5 3.7 4.1 8.7 6.5 8.2 8.3
    Death 5.5 5 3.7 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6
    Divorce or Separation  43.3 5 48.3 44.7 38.5 34.6 30.0 24.3
    Absent, No Marriage Tie  27.9 5 31.0 37.8 44.3 51.9 53.1 58.6
    Absent, Other Reason 3.5 5 4.0 5.9 1.4 1.6 2.0 2.4
    Unknown 1.7 0.9 0.6
Note: Figures are percentages of families/cases unless noted otherwise.
1 Percentages are based on the average monthly TANF caseload during the year. Hawaii and the territories are not included in 1983.  Data after 1986 include the territories and Hawaii.  Unlike most of the figures in this report, this table does not include families from Separate State Programs (SSP).
2 Adults that live in TANF families with children are sometimes excluded from the assistance unit because they have been sanctioned, receive disability income from Supplemental Security Income (SSI), have been time-limited, do not qualify based on citizenship requirements, or are non-parental caretakers such as relatives or other adults taking responsibility for the children.
3 Presence of income is measured as a percentage of adult recipients, not families, in 1998 and subsequent years.
4 For years prior to 1983, data are for mothers only.
5 Calculated on the basis of total number of families.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, unpublished data and Characteristics and Financial Circumstances of TANF Recipients: TANF Annual Report to Congress selected years.

Table TANF 8.
AFDC/TANF Benefits by State: Selected Fiscal Years 1978 – 2006

[In millions of dollars]
State 1978 1984 1986 1988 1990 1994 1998 2000 2003 2006
Alabama $78 $74 $68 $62 $62 $92 $44 $36 $46 $35
Alaska 17 37 46 54 60 113 77 55 50 36
Arizona 30 67 79 103 138 266 145 107 175 137
Arkansas 51 39 48 53 57 57 26 34 22 15
California 1,813 3,207 3,574 4,091 4,955 6,088 4,128 3,643 3,119 3,480
Colorado 74 107 107 125 137 158 80 48 51 63
Connecticut 168 226 223 218 295 397 305 166 133 124
Delaware 28 28 25 24 29 40 24 20 20 18
Dist. of Columbia 91 75 77 76 84 126 97 72 68 62
Florida 145 251 261 318 418 806 357 234 251 170
Georgia 103 149 223 266 321 428 313 180 169 96
Hawaii 83 83 73 77 99 163 153 141 91 85
Idaho 21 21 19 19 20 30 6 3 6 7
Illinois 699 845 886 815 839 914 771 269 115 124
Indiana 118 153 148 167 170 228 104 87 139 109
Iowa 107 159 170 155 152 169 104 79 81 74
Kansas 73 87 91 97 105 123 41 43 55 63
Kentucky 122 135 104 143 179 198 147 104 102 101
Louisiana 97 145 162 182 188 168 103 58 67 45
Maine 51 69 84 80 101 108 80 73 66 65
Maryland 166 229 250 250 296 314 192 196 32 106
Massachusetts 476 406 471 558 630 730 442 336 339 320
Michigan 780 1,214 1,248 1,231 1,211 1,132 589 386 390 422
Minnesota 164 287 322 338 355 379 276 193 193 129
Mississippi 33 58 74 85 86 82 60 18 36 22
Missouri 152 196 209 215 228 287 180 139 130 122
Montana 15 27 37 41 40 49 30 21 31 17
Nebraska 38 56 62 56 59 62 41 41 59 63
Nevada 8 10 16 20 27 48 39 28 48 33
New Hampshire 21 16 20 21 32 62 39 32 39 35
New Jersey 489 485 509 459 451 531 372 222 222 78
New Mexico 32 49 51 56 61 144 104 113 78 74
New York 1,689 1,916 2,099 2,140 2,259 2,913 2,149 1,554 1,605 1,624
North Carolina 138 149 138 206 247 353 211 140 133 94
North Dakota 14 16 20 22 24 26 22 12 18 10
Ohio 441 725 804 805 877 1,016 546 368 304 331
Oklahoma 74 85 100 119 132 165 72 78 58 28
Oregon 148 101 120 128 145 197 141 34 82 89
Pennsylvania 726 724 389 747 798 935 523 573 324 393
Rhode Island 59 71 79 82 99 136 117 105 83 65
South Carolina 52 75 103 91 96 115 52 91 49 39
South Dakota 18 17 15 21 22 25 14 10 11 12
Tennessee 77 83 100 125 168 215 108 146 138 104
Texas 122 229 281 344 416 544 315 248 323 139
Utah 41 52 55 61 64 77 50 40 44 37
Vermont 21 40 40 40 48 65 47 39 34 35
Virginia 136 165 179 169 177 253 123 186 129 136
Washington 175 294 375 401 438 610 450 312 269 284
West Virginia 53 75 109 107 110 126 52 49 68 37
Wisconsin 260 519 444 506 440 425 145 7 109 111
Wyoming 6 13 16 19 19 21 7 9 15 10
United States $10,621 $14,371 $15,236 $16,663 $18,543 $22,798 $14,614 $11,180 $10,219 $9,906
Note: Benefits refers to total cash benefits paid, (see Table TANF 4) but does not include emergency assistance payments.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Program Support, Office of Management Services, data from the ACF-196 TANF Report and ACF-231 AFDC Line by Line Report.

Table TANF 9.
Comparison of Federal Funding for AFDC and Related Programs and 2006 Family Assistance Grants Awarded under PRWORA

[In millions of dollars]
State FY 1996
Grants for AFDC, EA,
& JOBS 1
FY 2006
Family Assistance Grants
& Supplemental 2
FY 2006
Bonus
Awards 3
FY 2006
Total
Awards
Increase
of FY 2006
over
FY 1996 Level
Percent Increase
from FY 1996 Level
Alabama $79.0 $104.4 $0.0 $104.4 $25.4 32
Alaska 60.7 54.8 0.0 54.8 -5.8 -10
Arizona 200.6 226.1 0.0 226.1 25.5 13
Arkansas 54.3 63.0 0.0 63.0 8.7 16
California 3,545.6 3,669.9 0.0 3,669.9 124.3 4
Colorado 138.9 149.6 0.0 149.6 10.7 8
Connecticut 221.1 266.8 0.0 264.4 43.3 20
Delaware 30.2 32.3 0.0 31.4 1.2 4
Dist. of Columbia 77.1 92.6 0.0 90.5 13.4 17
Florida 504.7 622.7 0.0 622.7 118.0 23
Georgia 301.2 368.0 0.0 368.0 66.8 22
Hawaii 98.4 98.9 0.0 98.9 0.5 1
Idaho 31.3 33.9 0.0 33.9 2.6 8
Illinois 593.8 585.1 0.0 585.1 -8.8 -1
Indiana 121.4 206.8 0.0 206.8 85.4 70
Iowa 129.3 131.5 0.0 131.5 2.2 2
Kansas 86.9 101.9 0.0 101.9 15.0 17
Kentucky 171.6 181.3 0.0 181.3 9.6 6
Louisiana 122.4 181.0 0.0 181.0 58.6 48
Maine 73.2 78.1 0.0 78.1 4.9 7
Maryland 207.6 229.1 0.0 227.5 19.9 10
Massachusetts 372.0 459.4 0.0 459.4 87.3 23
Michigan 581.5 775.4 0.0 775.4 193.9 33
Minnesota 239.3 263.4 0.0 263.4 24.1 10
Mississippi 68.6 95.8 0.0 95.8 27.2 40
Missouri 207.9 217.1 0.0 217.1 9.2 4
Montana 39.2 39.2 0.0 39.2 0.0 0
Nebraska 56.2 57.8 0.0 57.8 1.6 3
Nevada 41.2 47.7 0.0 46.4 5.1 12
New Hampshire 36.0 38.5 0.0 38.5 2.5 7
New Jersey 353.4 404.0 0.0 404.0 50.7 14
New Mexico 129.9 117.1 0.0 117.1 -12.8 -10
New York 2,332.7 2,442.9 0.0 2,442.9 110.2 5
North Carolina 311.9 338.3 0.0 338.3 26.5 8
North Dakota 24.5 26.4 0.0 26.4 1.9 8
Ohio 564.5 728.0 0.0 728.0 163.5 29
Oklahoma 125.1 147.6 0.0 147.6 22.5 18
Oregon 146.4 166.8 0.0 166.8 20.4 14
Pennsylvania 780.1 719.5 0.0 719.5 -60.6 -8
Rhode Island 82.9 95.0 0.0 95.0 12.2 15
South Carolina 99.4 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.5 1
South Dakota 19.7 21.3 0.0 21.3 1.5 8
Tennessee 178.9 213.1 19.2 232.2 53.3 30
Texas 437.1 539.0 0.0 539.0 101.9 23
Utah 68.0 84.3 0.0 84.3 16.4 24
Vermont 42.4 47.4 0.0 47.4 5.0 12
Virginia 134.6 158.3 0.0 158.3 23.6 18
Washington 393.2 382.9 0.0 382.9 -10.3 -3
West Virginia 95.1 110.2 0.0 109.2 14.0 15
Wisconsin 241.6 314.5 0.0 314.5 72.9 30
Wyoming 14.4 18.4 0.0 18.4 4.0 28
United States $15,067 $16,647 $19.2 $16,657 $1,590 11
1 Includes Administration and FAMIS but excludes IV-A child care.  AFDC benefits include the Federal share of child support collections to be comparable to the Family Assistance Grant.  The 1996 figures have been revised since earlier versions of this report, to reflect upward revisions in states' reports of expenditures on the JOBS program.
2 The FY 2006 Family Assistance Grants and Supplemental is net of the Tribal Grants amounts.
3 FY 2006 Bonus Awards include Contingency Fund Grants but not penalties assessed.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Financial Services.

Table TANF 10.
AFDC/TANF Caseload by State: October 1989 to March 2007 Peak

[In thousands]
State Peak Caseload Oct ‘89 to June ’06 Date Peak Occurred Oct ’89 to June ’06 Sept ’96
AFDC
Caseload
March ’07 TANF & SSP Caseload Percent Decline 1 Sept ’96 to March ’07 Percent Decline Peak to
March ’07
Alabama 52.3 Mar-93 40.7 18.0 56 66
Alaska 13.4 Apr-94 12.3 3.4 73 75
Arizona 72.8 Dec-93 61.8 35.7 42 51
Arkansas 27.1 Mar-92 22.1 8.6 61 68
California 933.1 Mar-95 870.3 471.8 46 49
Colorado 43.7 Dec-93 33.6 11.1 67 75
Connecticut 61.9 Mar-95 57.1 20.7 64 67
Delaware 11.8 Apr-94 10.5 4.6 56 61
Dist. of Columbia 27.5 Apr-94 25.1 5.3 79 81
Florida 259.9 Nov-92 200.3 47.3 76 82
Georgia 142.8 Nov-93 120.9 24.8 79 83
Hawaii 23.4 Jun-97 21.9 8.5 61 64
Idaho 9.5 Mar-95 8.4 1.7 80 83
Illinois 243.1 Aug-94 217.8 31.3 86 87
Indiana 76.1 Sep-93 49.7 41.2 17 46
Iowa 40.7 Apr-94 31.1 16.6 46 59
Kansas 30.8 Aug-93 23.4 14.6 38 53
Kentucky 84.0 Mar-93 70.4 29.8 58 65
Louisiana 94.7 May-90 66.5 10.7 84 89
Maine 24.4 Aug-93 19.7 11.0 44 55
Maryland 81.8 May-95 68.9 19.1 72 77
Massachusetts 115.7 Aug-93 84.3 44.6 47 61
Michigan 233.6 Apr-91 167.5 75.2 55 68
Minnesota 66.2 Jun-92 57.2 26.5 54 60
Mississippi 61.8 Nov-91 45.2 11.2 75 82
Missouri 93.7 Mar-94 79.1 42.8 46 54
Montana 12.3 Mar-94 9.8 3.2 68 74
Nebraska 17.2 Mar-93 14.4 9.5 34 44
Nevada 16.3 Mar-95 13.2 6.4 51 61
New Hampshire 11.8 Apr-94 8.9 5.1 42 56
New Jersey 132.6 Nov-92 100.8 34.9 65 74
New Mexico 34.9 Nov-94 33.0 14.0 57 60
New York 463.7 Dec-94 412.7 159.4 61 66
North Carolina 134.1 Mar-94 107.5 25.5 76 81
North Dakota 6.6 Apr-93 4.7 2.0 57 70
Ohio 269.8 Mar-92 201.9 77.6 62 71
Oklahoma 51.3 Mar-93 35.3 9.0 74 82
Oregon 43.8 Apr-93 28.5 18.9 34 57
Pennsylvania 212.5 Sep-94 180.1 59.9 67 72
Rhode Island 22.9 Apr-94 20.5 10.9 47 52
South Carolina 54.6 Jan-93 42.9 15.7 64 71
South Dakota 7.4 Apr-93 5.7 2.8 50 62
Tennessee 112.6 Nov-93 96.2 62.4 35 45
Texas 287.5 Dec-93 238.8 61.6 74 79
Utah 18.7 Mar-93 14.0 5.0 64 73
Vermont 10.3 Apr-92 8.7 4.5 49 57
Virginia 76.0 Apr-94 60.5 31.3 48 59
Washington 104.8 Feb-95 96.8 52.3 46 50
West Virginia 41.9 Apr-93 37.6 9.8 74 77
Wisconsin 82.9 Jan-92 49.9 17.2 66 79
Wyoming 7.1 Aug-92 4.3 0.3 94 96
United States 5,098 Mar-94 4,346 1,735 60 66
Note: these data do not include Tribal TANF families (about 8,000) in number).  This makes little difference nationally, but in States like Wyoming, New Mexico, and Arizona, their exclusion under TANF overstates the real decline from AFDC years.
1Negative values denote percent increase.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Division of Data Collection and Analysis.

Table TANF 11.
Average Monthly AFDC/TANF Recipients by State: Selected Fiscal Years

[In thousands]
  1965 1970 1980 1990 1994 1996 2000 2006 Percent Change
1996-00 2000-06
Alabama 78 123 180 130 132 105 46 46 -56 -1
Alaska 5 8 15 20 38 36 22 10 -38 -56
Arizona 40 51 51 124 201 172 87 87 -49 0
Arkansas 30 45 85 71 69 58 29 18 -50 -39
California 528 1,148 1,387 1,902 2,639 2,626 1,574 1,198 -40 -24
Colorado 42 66 77 102 119 99 29 37 -71 30
Connecticut 59 83 139 120 166 162 73 48 -55 -33
Delaware 12 20 32 21 27 23 13 13 -43 -5
Dist. of Columbia 20 40 85 49 74 70 47 40 -33 -15
Florida 106 204 256 370 669 561 158 90 -72 -43
Georgia 71 198 221 293 393 353 129 63 -64 -51
Guam 1 2 5 4 7 8 10 11 26 9
Hawaii 14 25 60 44 62 67 75 26 12 -64
Idaho 10 16 21 17 23 23 2 3 -90 32
Illinois 262 368 672 636 712 655 256 92 -61 -64
Indiana 48 73 157 154 216 148 103 130 -30 26
Iowa 44 64 104 98 110 89 54 49 -39 -10
Kansas 36 53 68 77 87 68 32 45 -54 42
Kentucky 81 129 167 175 208 175 89 70 -49 -21
Louisiana 104 202 213 282 248 236 75 27 -68 -64
Maine 19 36 60 56 64 56 32 32 -42 -2
Maryland 80 131 212 186 222 204 77 54 -62 -30
Massachusetts 94 208 350 263 307 237 102 98 -57 -3
Michigan 162 253 685 655 666 527 207 220 -61 6
Minnesota 51 76 135 171 187 171 116 80 -32 -31
Mississippi 83 115 173 179 159 129 34 28 -74 -18
Missouri 107 140 199 211 263 232 131 113 -44 -14
Montana 7 13 19 29 35 31 13 10 -58 -23
Nebraska 16 30 35 43 45 40 28 33 -30 20
Nevada 5 12 12 23 38 38 16 17 -58 8
New Hampshire 4 9 22 16 30 24 14 14 -42 2
New Jersey 104 286 459 309 335 288 138 109 -52 -21
New Mexico 30 51 53 57 102 101 72 43 -28 -41
New York 517 1,052 1,100 981 1,255 1,184 724 455 -39 -37
North Carolina 111 124 198 223 333 278 100 59 -64 -41
North Dakota 8 11 13 16 16 13 8 7 -44 -9
Ohio 183 266 513 632 685 546 245 170 -55 -31
Oklahoma 73 95 89 112 131 105 36 23 -66 -37
Oregon 31 75 102 89 114 87 39 42 -55 7
Pennsylvania 303 426 629 521 620 544 250 245 -54 -2
Puerto Rico 202 223 168 190 183 155 92 39 -40 -58
Rhode Island 24 38 52 46 63 58 50 31 -15 -37
South Carolina 30 52 153 111 140 119 41 42 -65 3
South Dakota 11 16 20 19 19 16 7 6 -59 -10
Tennessee 76 129 162 211 300 260 147 185 -43 25
Texas 91 214 308 611 788 684 342 169 -50 -51
Utah 22 33 37 45 50 40 23 18 -44 -19
Vermont 5 12 23 22 28 25 16 12 -36 -26
Virgin Islands 1 2 3 3 4 5 3 1 -35 -61
Virginia 46 87 166 151 195 162 75 82 -53 9
Washington 71 109 154 228 292 274 168 136 -39 -19
West Virginia 116 93 77 111 114 95 32 26 -66 -18
Wisconsin 45 79 213 237 226 170 40 41 -76 1
Wyoming 4 5 7 14 16 13 1 1 -91 -53
United States 4,323 7,415 10,597 11,460 14,226 12,645 6,324 4,746 -50 -25
Note: Recipients in 2000 and beyond include both TANF and SSP recipients.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance (available online at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofa/caseload/caseloadindex.htm).

Table TANF 12.
AFDC/TANF Recipiency Rates for Total Population by State: Selected Fiscal Years

[In percent]
  1965 1970 1980 1990 1994 1996 2000 2006 Percent Change
1996-00 2000-06
Alabama 2.2 3.6 4.6 3.2 3.1 2.4 1.0 1.0 -57 -4
Alaska 1.8 2.6 3.7 3.7 6.3 5.9 3.6 1.5 -40 -59
Arizona 2.6 2.9 1.9 3.4 4.7 3.7 1.7 1.4 -55 -16
Arkansas 1.5 2.3 3.7 3.0 2.8 2.3 1.1 0.6 -52 -42
California 2.9 5.7 5.8 6.3 8.4 8.2 4.6 3.3 -44 -29
Colorado 2.2 3.0 2.6 3.1 3.2 2.5 0.7 0.8 -73 18
Connecticut 2.1 2.7 4.5 3.6 5.0 4.8 2.1 1.4 -56 -35
Delaware 2.4 3.6 5.4 3.2 3.8 3.2 1.7 1.5 -46 -12
Dist. of Columbia 2.5 5.3 13.3 8.1 12.6 12.3 8.2 6.8 -33 -17
Florida 1.8 3.0 2.6 2.8 4.7 3.8 1.0 0.5 -74 -50
Georgia 1.6 4.3 4.0 4.5 5.5 4.7 1.6 0.7 -67 -57
Hawaii 1.9 3.2 6.2 3.9 5.2 5.5 6.1 2.1 11 -66
Idaho 1.4 2.2 2.2 1.6 2.0 1.9 0.2 0.2 -91 17
Illinois 2.5 3.3 5.9 5.6 6.0 5.4 2.1 0.7 -62 -65
Indiana 1.0 1.4 2.9 2.8 3.7 2.5 1.7 2.1 -32 21
Iowa 1.6 2.3 3.6 3.5 3.9 3.1 1.9 1.7 -40 -11
Kansas 1.6 2.4 2.9 3.1 3.4 2.6 1.2 1.6 -55 39
Kentucky 2.5 4.0 4.6 4.7 5.4 4.5 2.2 1.7 -51 -24
Louisiana 2.9 5.6 5.0 6.7 5.7 5.4 1.7 0.6 -69 -62
Maine 1.9 3.6 5.4 4.5 5.2 4.5 2.5 2.4 -43 -5
Maryland 2.2 3.3 5.0 3.9 4.4 4.0 1.5 1.0 -64 -34
Massachusetts 1.8 3.7 6.1 4.4 5.0 3.8 1.6 1.5 -58 -4
Michigan 2.0 2.9 7.4 7.0 6.9 5.4 2.1 2.2 -62 5
Minnesota 1.4 2.0 3.3 3.9 4.1 3.6 2.3 1.6 -35 -34
Mississippi 3.6 5.2 6.9 6.9 5.9 4.7 1.2 1.0 -75 -19
Missouri 2.4 3.0 4.0 4.1 4.9 4.3 2.3 1.9 -45 -17
Montana 1.0 1.9 2.4 3.6 4.0 3.5 1.4 1.0 -59 -27
Nebraska 1.1 2.0 2.2 2.7 2.8 2.4 1.6 1.9 -31 16
Nevada 1.2 2.4 1.5 1.9 2.5 2.3 0.8 0.7 -65 -12
New Hampshire 0.7 1.2 2.4 1.5 2.7 2.1 1.1 1.1 -45 -3
New Jersey 1.5 4.0 6.2 4.0 4.2 3.5 1.6 1.3 -54 -23
New Mexico 3.0 5.0 4.1 3.8 6.1 5.8 4.0 2.2 -31 -44
New York 2.9 5.8 6.3 5.4 6.8 6.4 3.8 2.4 -40 -38
North Carolina 2.2 2.4 3.4 3.4 4.6 3.7 1.2 0.7 -67 -46
North Dakota 1.2 1.7 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.1 1.2 1.1 -43 -9
Ohio 1.8 2.5 4.8 5.8 6.1 4.9 2.2 1.5 -56 -31
Oklahoma 3.0 3.7 2.9 3.6 4.0 3.1 1.0 0.6 -67 -39
Oregon 1.6 3.6 3.9 3.1 3.7 2.7 1.1 1.1 -58 -0
Pennsylvania 2.6 3.6 5.3 4.4 5.1 4.4 2.0 2.0 -54 -3
Rhode Island 2.7 4.0 5.5 4.6 6.2 5.7 4.7 3.0 -17 -37
South Carolina 1.2 2.0 4.9 3.2 3.8 3.1 1.0 1.0 -67 -5
South Dakota 1.6 2.4 2.9 2.7 2.6 2.2 0.9 0.8 -59 -14
Tennessee 2.0 3.3 3.5 4.3 5.7 4.8 2.6 3.0 -46 18
Texas 0.9 1.9 2.1 3.6 4.2 3.5 1.6 0.7 -54 -56
Utah 2.2 3.1 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.0 0.7 -48 -29
Vermont 1.4 2.6 4.4 3.9 4.8 4.3 2.7 1.9 -38 -28
Virginia 1.0 1.9 3.1 2.4 3.0 2.4 1.1 1.1 -56 2
Washington 2.4 3.2 3.7 4.7 5.4 4.9 2.8 2.1 -42 -25
West Virginia 6.4 5.3 4.0 6.2 6.3 5.2 1.8 1.5 -66 -18
Wisconsin 1.1 1.8 4.5 4.8 4.4 3.3 0.8 0.7 -77 -2
Wyoming 1.1 1.5 1.4 3.1 3.4 2.6 0.2 0.1 -91 -55
United States 2.1 3.5 4.6 4.5 5.3 4.6 2.2 1.6 -52 -29
Note: Recipiency rate refers to the average monthly number of AFDC recipients in each state during the given fiscal year expressed as a percent of the total resident population as of July 1 of that year.  The numerators are from Table TANF 11.
Sources: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Census Bureau (resident population by state available online at http://www.census.gov/popest/states/).

Table TANF 13.
Average Number of AFDC/TANF Child Recipients by State: Selected Fiscal Years

[In thousands]
  1965 1970 1980 1990 1994 1996 2000 2006 Percent Change
1996-00 2000-06
Alabama 62 96 129 93 96 79 37 35 -53 -5
Alaska 4 6 10 13 24 23 15 7 -35 -55
Arizona 31 39 38 87 136 118 66 66 -44 -1
Arkansas 23 34 62 51 49 42 22 14 -48 -38
California 391 816 932 1,294 1,804 1,805 1,163 961 -36 -17
Colorado 33 50 53 69 80 68 22 27 -68 24
Connecticut 43 62 97 81 111 108 50 33 -53 -34
Delaware 9 15 22 14 19 16 9 10 -41 2
Dist. of Columbia 16 31 59 34 51 48 34 30 -29 -12
Florida 85 160 184 264 463 395 124 75 -68 -40
Georgia 54 150 161 206 274 251 101 55 -60 -45
Guam 1 1 4 3 5 6 NA NA NA NA
Hawaii 10 18 40 29 41 44 50 18 14 -64
Idaho 7 11 14 11 16 16 2 3 -88 40
Illinois 202 283 473 436 486 456 193 73 -58 -62
Indiana 36 55 111 105 145 104 74 99 -29 33
Iowa 32 46 69 64 72 59 36 32 -39 -12
Kansas 28 41 49 52 59 48 23 31 -53 35
Kentucky 58 93 118 117 137 120 64 53 -47 -17
Louisiana 79 157 156 199 180 162 59 23 -64 -61
Maine 14 26 40 35 40 35 22 21 -38 -2
Maryland 61 100 145 124 151 140 56 40 -60 -29
Massachusetts 71 153 228 168 197 153 73 67 -53 -7
Michigan 119 190 460 427 439 354 153 160 -57 4
Minnesota 39 58 91 110 124 116 81 57 -30 -30
Mississippi 66 93 128 129 116 96 27 21 -72 -20
Missouri 82 106 135 139 176 162 94 77 -42 -18
Montana 6 10 13 19 23 21 9 7 -58 -21
Nebraska 12 23 25 29 31 28 20 23 -29 18
Nevada 4 9 8 16 27 27 12 13 -56 9
New Hampshire 3 7 15 11 19 16 10 10 -39 2
New Jersey 79 209 318 213 228 195 102 77 -48 -25
New Mexico 23 39 35 37 66 65 51 31 -23 -39
New York 380 759 759 658 813 771 491 321 -36 -35
North Carolina 83 94 141 152 223 191 76 47 -60 -38
North Dakota 6 8 9 10 11 9 5 5 -39 -12
Ohio 136 198 348 414 455 382 180 130 -53 -28
Oklahoma 55 71 65 77 90 74 28 19 -63 -33
Oregon 23 52 65 60 76 60 29 31 -52 8
Pennsylvania 217 307 432 345 417 368 184 173 -50 -6
Puerto Rico 161 166 118 130 124 105 64 27 -39 -57
Rhode Island 18 27 36 30 41 39 34 22 -14 -33
South Carolina 24 40 109 80 102 89 32 31 -64 -1
South Dakota 8 12 15 13 14 12 5 5 -54 -7
Tennessee 58 99 115 144 203 181 107 132 -41 23
Texas 68 162 225 428 549 484 252 139 -48 -45
Utah 16 23 24 31 33 27 16 14 -40 -16
Vermont 4 8 14 14 17 16 10 8 -34 -25
Virgin Islands 1 2 2 2 3 4 2 1 -38 -58
Virginia 35 66 116 104 134 114 55 58 -52 5
Washington 50 76 97 148 187 177 115 95 -35 -17
West Virginia 80 65 58 68 72 62 22 19 -64 -14
Wisconsin 34 60 142 158 153 123 34 34 -72 0
Wyoming 3 4 5 9 11 9 1 0 -90 -49
United States 3,242 5,483 7,320 7,755 9,611 8,672 4,598 3,561 -47 -23
Note: From FY 2000 onward, TANF child recipients include both TANF and SSP child recipients.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance (available online at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofa/caseload/caseloadindex.htm).

Table TANF 14.
AFDC/TANF Recipiency Rates for Children by State: Selected Fiscal Years 1965 – 2006

[In percent]
  1965 1970 1980 1990 1994 1996 2000 2006 Percent Change
1996-00 2000-06
Alabama 4.6 7.7 11.1 8.8 8.9 7.3 3.3 3.2 -55 -5
Alaska 3.1 5.0 8.0 7.4 12.8 12.4 7.9 3.7 -36 -53
Arizona 4.8 6.0 4.8 8.6 12.1 9.7 4.7 4.0 -52 -14
Arkansas 3.1 5.2 9.3 8.2 7.7 6.4 3.2 2.0 -49 -39
Colorado 4.4 6.4 6.5 7.8 8.3 6.8 1.9 2.3 -72 20
Connecticut 4.4 6.1 11.8 10.8 14.2 13.7 5.9 4.1 -57 -31
Delaware 4.7 7.5 13.4 8.7 10.5 8.9 4.9 4.7 -45 -5
Dist. of Columbia 6.0 13.8 40.9 30.7 44.5 44.1 31.4 26.5 -29 -16
Florida 4.3 7.6 7.8 8.8 14.1 11.6 3.3 1.9 -71 -44
Georgia 3.2 9.1 9.8 11.8 14.6 12.8 4.6 2.2 -64 -51
Hawaii 3.6 6.5 14.5 10.5 13.6 14.5 17.2 6.0 19 -65
Idaho 2.7 4.2 4.7 3.6 4.6 4.6 0.5 0.7 -89 32
Illinois 5.3 7.5 14.6 14.8 15.7 14.4 6.0 2.3 -58 -62
Indiana 2.0 3.0 6.9 7.3 9.8 7.0 4.7 6.2 -33 34
Iowa 3.2 4.7 8.4 8.8 9.9 8.2 5.0 4.5 -38 -12
Kansas 3.5 5.4 7.5 7.9 8.5 7.0 3.2 4.4 -54 36
Kentucky 4.9 8.3 10.9 12.4 14.1 12.4 6.7 5.3 -46 -21
Louisiana 5.5 11.3 11.8 16.5 14.6 13.3 4.9 2.1 -63 -57
Maine 3.9 7.7 12.5 11.5 13.1 11.8 7.5 7.6 -36 1
Maryland 4.6 7.3 12.4 10.6 12.0 11.1 4.1 2.9 -63 -29
Massachusetts 3.8 8.1 15.3 12.4 13.9 10.6 4.9 4.7 -53 -6
Michigan 3.7 5.8 16.7 17.4 17.4 13.9 5.9 6.4 -57 9
Minnesota 2.9 4.2 7.7 9.4 10.1 9.3 6.4 4.5 -32 -29
Mississippi 7.0 11.1 15.7 17.6 15.3 12.7 3.5 2.8 -72 -20
Missouri 5.2 6.9 9.9 10.6 12.9 11.6 6.6 5.4 -43 -18
Montana 2.0 4.0 5.7 8.4 9.7 8.9 3.8 3.1 -57 -18
Nebraska 2.3 4.4 5.5 6.8 7.0 6.1 4.4 5.2 -28 17
Nevada 2.5 5.2 3.8 5.0 7.1 6.5 2.2 2.1 -66 -7
New Hampshire 1.4 2.6 5.8 3.9 6.6 5.4 3.1 3.3 -42 7
New Jersey 3.4 8.8 16.0 11.7 11.7 9.9 4.9 3.7 -51 -24
New Mexico 5.2 9.5 8.5 8.3 13.5 13.1 10.1 6.1 -23 -39
New York 6.3 13.0 16.2 15.4 18.0 17.0 10.6 7.1 -37 -33
North Carolina 4.4 5.3 8.5 9.3 12.6 10.4 3.8 2.2 -63 -42
North Dakota 2.3 3.6 4.7 6.0 6.3 5.4 3.6 3.3 -34 -6
Ohio 3.6 5.3 11.2 14.9 16.0 13.4 6.3 4.7 -53 -25
Oklahoma 6.4 8.5 7.6 9.1 10.4 8.5 3.1 2.1 -63 -34
Oregon 3.3 7.4 9.0 8.1 9.7 7.4 3.4 3.6 -55 8
Pennsylvania 5.5 8.0 13.8 12.3 14.4 12.8 6.3 6.2 -50 -3
Rhode Island 5.9 9.1 14.7 13.4 17.5 16.5 13.8 9.4 -16 -32
South Carolina 2.3 4.2 11.6 8.7 10.8 9.4 3.2 3.0 -66 -7
South Dakota 3.1 5.0 7.1 6.7 6.6 5.9 2.7 2.6 -53 -5
Tennessee 4.2 7.5 8.9 11.8 15.7 13.7 7.7 9.2 -44 19
Texas 1.7 4.1 5.2 8.7 10.4 8.8 4.2 2.1 -52 -49
Utah 3.7 5.4 4.4 4.9 4.9 4.0 2.3 1.7 -42 -25
Vermont 2.7 5.4 9.9 9.5 11.7 10.8 7.2 5.8 -33 -20
Virginia 2.2 4.1 7.9 6.8 8.4 7.0 3.1 3.2 -56 2
Washington 4.7 6.5 8.5 11.3 13.3 12.4 7.6 6.2 -39 -18
West Virginia 12.2 11.2 10.4 15.7 16.8 14.6 5.5 4.9 -62 -12
Wisconsin 2.2 3.8 10.5 12.1 11.4 9.1 2.5 2.6 -73 3
Wyoming 2.1 3.2 3.4 7.0 8.1 6.8 0.8 0.4 -89 -48
United States 4.4 7.6 11.3 11.9 14.0 12.4 6.3 4.8 -49 -18
Note: Recipiency rate refers to the average monthly number of AFDC child recipients in each State during the given fiscal year as a percent of the resident population under 18 years of age as of July 1 of that year.  The numerators are from Table TANF 13.
Sources: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Census Bureau (resident population by state and age available online at http://www.census.gov/popest/states/).

Table TANF 15.
TANF and Separate State Program (SSP) Families and Recipients: 2006

[In thousands]
  Families All Recipients Child Recipients
TANF SSP Total TANF SSP Total TANF SSP Total
Alabama 19.2 0.3 19.4 44.7 1.0 45.7 34.8 0.5 35.4
Alaska 3.6 3.6 9.8 9.8 6.8 6.8
Arizona 39.6 39.6 87.4 87.4 65.7 65.7
Arkansas 8.2 8.2 17.9 17.9 13.7 13.7
California 449.3 38.4 487.8 1,048.0 150.4 1,198.3 865.9 95.5 961.3
Colorado 14.5 14.5 37.4 37.4 27.0 27.0
Connecticut 18.5 3.9 22.3 36.8 11.5 48.4 26.5 6.8 33.4
Delaware 5.5 0.1 5.6 12.2 0.4 12.6 9.3 0.2 9.5
Dist. of Columbia 15.7 0.5 16.2 38.7 1.3 40.0 29.7 0.8 30.5
Florida 52.5 0.9 53.3 86.4 3.4 89.8 73.4 1.6 75.1
Georgia 31.8 0.1 31.9 62.6 0.4 62.9 54.7 0.2 54.9
Guam 3.1 3.1 10.8 10.8 0.0
Hawaii 7.0 2.5 9.4 17.4 9.1 26.5 12.5 5.5 18.0
Idaho 1.8 1.8 3.1 3.1 2.6 2.6
Illinois 36.3 0.9 37.2 90.1 1.8 91.9 72.5 0.7 73.2
Indiana 42.5 2.1 44.6 119.3 10.4 129.7 92.7 5.9 98.6
Iowa 16.7 4.4 21.1 40.2 9.0 49.2 28.5 3.2 31.7
Kansas 17.2 17.2 45.0 45.0 30.7 30.7
Kentucky 33.1 33.1 69.9 69.9 53.1 53.1
Louisiana 11.9 11.9 26.7 26.7 23.1 23.1
Maine 9.3 1.9 11.2 24.8 7.1 31.9 17.0 4.5 21.4
Maryland 20.4 2.8 23.2 46.9 7.2 54.0 35.3 4.8 40.1
Massachusetts 46.6 1.3 47.9 93.4 4.9 98.2 65.0 2.5 67.5
Michigan 83.0 83.0 219.8 219.8 159.8 159.8
Minnesota 27.5 3.0 30.5 66.8 13.5 80.4 49.3 7.5 56.9
Mississippi 13.4 13.4 27.8 27.8 21.3 21.3
Missouri 38.7 5.6 44.3 93.7 19.2 112.9 65.7 11.0 76.7
Montana 3.8 3.8 9.9 9.9 6.8 6.8
Nebraska 10.1 2.7 12.8 24.3 9.0 33.3 17.7 5.3 23.0
Nevada 5.4 1.6 7.0 12.2 5.0 17.2 10.1 3.0 13.1
New Hampshire 6.1 0.2 6.3 13.7 0.6 14.4 9.5 0.4 9.9
New Jersey 40.8 2.0 42.8 101.1 8.2 109.2 72.4 4.3 76.7
New Mexico 16.9 16.9 43.0 43.0 31.1 31.1
New York 134.9 43.1 178.0 307.9 147.2 455.2 225.1 96.1 321.2
North Carolina 30.2 30.2 58.8 58.8 47.5 47.5
North Dakota 2.7 2.7 6.8 6.8 4.8 4.8
Ohio 79.5 79.5 170.2 170.2 130.0 130.0
Oklahoma 10.2 10.2 22.5 22.5 18.5 18.5
Oregon 18.5 18.5 41.8 41.8 31.2 31.2
Pennsylvania 94.7 94.7 245.1 245.1 173.4 173.4
Puerto Rico 14.3 14.3 38.8 38.8 27.4 27.4
Rhode Island 9.7 2.6 12.3 24.0 7.5 31.5 16.8 5.6 22.4
South Carolina 15.7 2.4 18.1 35.5 6.9 42.4 27.2 4.1 31.3
South Dakota 2.8 2.8 6.1 6.1 5.1 5.1
Tennessee 68.1 1.2 69.4 180.0 4.8 184.8 129.3 2.9 132.2
Texas 70.8 1.9 72.7 160.8 8.2 169.1 134.5 4.4 138.9
Utah 7.5 0.0 7.5 18.2 0.1 18.4 13.5 0.1 13.6
Vermont 4.4 0.3 4.8 10.9 1.0 11.9 7.1 0.6 7.7
Virgin Islands 0.4 0.4 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.9
Virginia 9.1 25.8 35.0 26.0 56.3 82.4 16.7 41.0 57.6
Washington 54.2 1.9 56.1 128.3 7.9 136.2 90.5 4.7 95.2
West Virginia 10.9 0.6 11.5 23.7 2.6 26.4 17.7 1.3 19.0
Wisconsin 18.0 0.3 18.3 39.5 1.5 41.0 32.9 1.0 33.9
Wyoming 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.5
U.S. Total 1,807 155 1,962 4,229 517 4,746 3,234 326 3,561
Note: Some states provide cash and other forms of assistance to specific categories of families (e.g., two-parent families) under Separate State Programs (SSPs) funded out of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) dollars rather than federal TANF funds.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance (available online at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofa/caseload/caseloadindex.htm).

[ Go to Contents ]

Endnotes

[1] Many states limit TANF assistance to less than the 60-month federal maximum.

[2] Separate State Programs (SSP) refer to programs funded by state MOE contributions.  Some states have additional programs that are similar to TANF, but are not funded by TANF or MOE sources.  These programs are sometimes called Solely State Funded programs and are excluded from any federal work standards and the 60-month limit on assistance.  Since States do not report data on these programs they are not included in any of the tables in this report.

[3] States are allowed to use TANF funds on a variety of services, including employment and training services, domestic violence services, child care, transportation, and other support services. Families receiving such services, however, generally should not be counted as recipients of TANF “assistance.”  Under the final regulations for TANF, “assistance” primarily includes payments directed at ongoing basic needs.  It includes payments when individuals are participating in community service and work experience (or other work activities) as a condition of receiving payments (e.g., workfare).  In addition, the definition also includes certain child care and transportation benefits when families are not employed.   It excludes, however, such things as:  non-recurrent, short-term benefits; services without a cash value, such as education and training, case management, job search, and counseling; and benefits such as child care and transportation when provided to employed families.

[4] States began submitting caseload data on SSPs in FY 2000.

[5] Family characteristics in Table TANF 7 may differ from those reported in Chapter II because the administrative data focus on the assistance unit, whereas the survey-based data in Chapter II often use a broader family unit definition.  For example, grandparents, adult siblings, aunts, uncles, and other adult relatives living in the same household as the recipient children may be excluded from the assistance unit and thus the administrative data, yet be included in survey data on the family in which the TANF recipient resides.

[6]  Note that these figures include recipients in SSPs, who are sometimes omitted from TANF caseload statistics reported by the Department.

[7] Not all of these adults are participating in enough hours to meet the TANF Work Participation Rate requirement.

[8] The percentages in this paragraph do not include cases served by SSP programs.  In FY 2006, 14.2 percent of SSP caseloads funded by MOE did not have an adult in the assistance unit compared to 47.2 percent of families served through the main TANF programs.

[ Go to Contents ]

Food Stamp Program

The Food Stamp Program (FSP), administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service, is the largest food assistance program in the country, reaching more poor individuals over the course of a year than any other public assistance program.  Unlike many other public assistance programs, FSP has few categorical requirements for eligibility, such as the presence of children, elderly, or disabled individuals in a household.  As a result, the program offers assistance to a large and diverse population of needy persons, many of whom are not eligible for other forms of assistance.

The Food Stamp Program was designed primarily to supplement the food purchasing power of eligible low-income households so they can buy a nutritionally adequate low-cost diet.  Participating households are expected to be able to devote 30 percent of their counted monthly cash income (after adjusting for various deductions) to food purchases.  Food stamp benefits then make up the difference between the household’s expected contribution to its food costs and an amount judged to be sufficient to buy an adequate low-cost diet. This amount, the maximum food stamp benefit level, is derived from USDA’s lowest-cost food plan, the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP).  

The federal government is responsible for virtually all of the rules that govern the program, and, with limited variations, these rules are nationally uniform, as are the benefit levels.  Nonetheless, states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and the Virgin Islands, through their local welfare offices, have primary responsibility for the day-to-day administration of the program.  They determine eligibility, calculate benefits, and issue food stamp allotments. The Food Stamp Act provides 100 percent federal funding of food stamp benefits.  States and other jurisdictions have responsibility for about half the cost of state and local food stamp agency administration.  

In addition to the regular Food Stamp Program, the Food Stamp Act authorizes alternative programs in Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. The largest of these, the Nutrition Assistance Program in Puerto Rico, was funded under a federal block grant of nearly $1.6 billion in 2006.  Unless noted otherwise, the food stamp caseload and expenditure data in this Appendix exclude costs for the Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) in Puerto Rico.  (Prior to 2004, editions of this Appendix included NAP, but caseload and expenditure data in this Appendix are now limited to the Food Stamp Program, to be consistent with FSP data published by the USDA.)

The Food Stamp Program is available to nearly all financially needy households.  To be eligible for food stamps, a household must meet eligibility criteria for gross and net income, asset holdings, work requirements, and citizenship or immigration status.  The FSP benefit unit is the household.  Generally, individuals living together constitute a household if they customarily purchase and prepare meals together.  The income, expenses and assets of the household members are combined to determine program eligibility and benefit allotment.

Certain households are categorically eligible for food stamps and therefore not subject to income or asset limits.  Households are categorically eligible if all of their members receive SSI, cash or in-kind TANF benefits, or General Assistance.

Monthly income is the most important determinant of household eligibility.  Except for categorically-eligible households, or households containing elderly or disabled members, gross income cannot exceed 130 percent of poverty.  After certain amounts are deducted for living expenses, working expenses, dependent care expenses, excess shelter expenses, child support payment, and - for elderly/disabled households - medical expenses, net income cannot exceed 100 percent of poverty.  Non categorically-eligible households also must not have more than $2,000 in assets comprised of cash, savings, stocks and bonds, and in some states some vehicles; households with an elderly or disabled member can have up to $3,000 in countable assets.

All nonexempt adult applicants for food stamps must register for work.  To maintain eligibility, they must accept a suitable job, if offered one, and fulfill any work, job search, or training requirements established by the FSP office.  Nondisabled adults living in households without children can receive benefits for three months only, unless they work or participate in work-related activities.  Participation is restricted for certain groups, including students, strikers, and people who are institutionalized.  Legal immigrants who are disabled, under age 18, were admitted as refugees or asylees, or have at least five years of legal US residency are eligible; all other noncitizens are not.

Food stamp benefits are a function of a household’s size, its net monthly income, its assets, and maximum monthly benefit levels.  Allotments are not taxable and food stamp purchases may not be charged sales taxes.  Receipt of food stamps does not affect eligibility for or benefits provided by other welfare programs, although some programs use food stamp participation as a “trigger” for eligibility and others take into account the general availability of food stamps in deciding what level of benefits to provide.

Legislative Changes

Title IV and subtitle A of title VIII of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) made major changes to the Food Stamp Program, including strong work requirements on able-bodied adults without dependent children, restricted eligibility of legal immigrants, and a reduction in maximum benefits.  These three provisions, and subsequent amendments, are discussed below; their impact on program participation and expenditures begins to appear in food stamp administrative data for 1997, with the fuller impact shown in data for 1998 and beyond.  

First, a work requirement was added for able-bodied adult food stamp recipients without dependents (ABAWDs).  Unless exempt, ABAWDs between the ages of 18 and 59 are not eligible for benefits for more than 3 months in every 36-month period unless they are:  (1) working at least 20 hours a week; (2) participating in and complying with a work program for at least 20 hours a week; or (3) participating in and complying with a workfare program.  Under the original legislation, the Department of Agriculture was authorized to waive application of the work requirement to any group of individuals at the request of the state agency, if a determination was made that the area where they reside has an unemployment rate over 10 percent or does not have a sufficient number of jobs to provide them employment.  The provision was further moderated under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33), which allowed states to exempt up to 15 percent of the ABAWD caseload (beyond those subject to waivers) and which increased funds for the food stamp employment and training program for the creation of job slots for able-bodied adults subject to time limits.

Separately, title IV of PRWORA (Public Law 104-193) made significant changes in the eligibility of noncitizens for food stamp benefits.  As first enacted, most qualified aliens, including legal immigrants (illegal aliens were already ineligible) were barred from receiving food stamps until citizenship. Subsequently, the Agriculture Research, Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-185) restored food stamp eligibility to certain groups of qualified aliens who were legally residing in the United States before passage of PRWORA on August 22, 1996 and were over 65 years of age on that date or were under age 18 or disabled.

Finally, the 1996 legislation restrained growth in future program expenditures by making changes in the benefit structure for eligible participants, including a reduction in the maximum food stamp allotment.  Other provisions of the 1996 act disqualified from eligibility those convicted of drug-related felonies and gave states the option to disqualify individuals, both custodial and non-custodial parents, from food stamps when they do not cooperate with child support agencies or are in arrears in their child support.

Between 1996 and 2001, regulatory and legislative changes were made to increase access to food stamps among working poor families.  Regulatory changes announced in July 1999 and expanded in November 2000 allowed states to reduce reporting requirements and made it easier for working families to report income changes on a semiannual basis.  Under the November 2000 regulations, states also were given the option of providing a three-month transitional food stamp benefit to most families leaving TANF.  Regulations that went into effect in 2001 expanded categorical eligibility to those receiving noncash TANF benefits, excluded vehicles with little equity from the assets test, and eliminated the equity test for most vehicles.  In addition, the Agriculture Appropriations Bill for 2001 (Public Law 106-387) provided states with the option of liberalizing the treatment of vehicle assets to align with the states’ TANF rules on vehicle eligibility.  These changes were intended to address concerns that some of the decline in food stamp caseloads may be leaving poor families without nutritional assistance as they make the transition from welfare dependence to full self-sufficiency.

The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 – also known as the 2002 Farm Bill – reauthorized the Food Stamp Program through fiscal year 2007. This law brought a number of significant changes to the program, including some that supersede earlier changes made through PRWORA and subsequent FSP legislation and regulations.  Specifically, the 2002 Farm Bill restores food stamp eligibility to legal immigrants who have lived in the country at least five years and to legal immigrants receiving disability benefits, regardless of entry date.  Children of legal immigrants also are eligible for food stamps regardless of entry date.  Effective in fiscal year 2004, the requirement that income and resources of an immigrant’s sponsor be counted in determining the eligibility and benefit amounts for immigrant children was eliminated. Each provision became effective at a different time, but all restorations were in effect by October 1, 2003.

The 2002 Farm Bill also increased the asset limit from $2,000 to $3,000 for households with a disabled member, making it consistent with the limit for households with elderly, and replaced the fixed standard deduction with a deduction that varies according to household size and is indexed to cost-of-living increases, in recognition of the higher expenses larger households incur.  For households in the 48 contiguous states and DC, Alaska, Hawaii and the Virgin Islands, the deduction is set at 8.31 percent of the applicable net income limit based on household size.  (Households in Guam will receive a slightly higher deduction.)  No household receives an amount less than the previous fixed standard deduction or more than the standard deduction for a household of six.

Other 2002 Farm Bill changes include the authorization of $5 million per year for education and outreach grants to help inform the low-income public of their eligibility for food stamps, and increased flexibility for states in spending Employment and Training program funds to promote work.  States also are now allowed to extend from three months to up to five months the period of time households may receive transitional food stamp benefits when they lose TANF cash assistance.  Benefits are equal to the amount the household received prior to termination of TANF with adjustments in income for the loss of TANF.  This change helps individuals moving off cash assistance to make the transition from welfare to work.

The 2002 Farm Bill also implemented a number of administrative reforms and program simplifications, including:

Food Stamp Program Data

The following six tables and accompanying figure provide information about the Food Stamp Program:

Food Stamp Caseload Trends (Table FSP 1).  Average monthly food stamp participation was 26.7 million persons in fiscal year 2006, excluding the participants in Puerto Rico’s block grant.  This represents a significant increase over the fiscal year 2000 record-low average of 17.2 million participants.  It is, however, still below the peak of 27.5 million recipients in fiscal year 1994.  See also Table IND 3b and Table IND 4b in Chapter II for further data trends in food stamp caseload, specifically, food stamp recipiency and participation rates.  

Considerable research has demonstrated that the Food Stamp Program is responsive to economic changes, with participation increasing in times of economic downturns and decreasing in times of economic growth (see Figure FSP 1).  Economic conditions alone did not explain the caseload growth in the late 1980s and early 1990s, however.  Studies suggest that a variety of factors contributed to this caseload growth, including a weak economy and higher rates of unemployment, expansions in Medicaid eligibility, the legalization of 3 million undocumented immigrants, and longer participation spells (McConnell, 1991; Gleason, 1998).

The decline in participation from 1994 to 2000 was caused by several factors, according to studies of this period.  Part of the decline is associated with the strong economy in the second half of the 1990s.  However, participation fell more sharply than expected during this period of sustained economic growth.  Some of the decline reflected restrictions on the eligibility of noncitizens and time limits for unemployed nondisabled childless adults.  Participation fell most rapidly among the following three groups: noncitizens and their US-born children, unemployed nondisabled childless adults, and persons receiving cash welfare benefits.  As people left the welfare rolls, many also stopped participating in food stamps, even while remaining eligible (Genser, 1999; Wilde et al., 2000; Gleason et al., 2001; Kornfeld, 2002).

The increase in FSP participation from 2000 to 2005 occurred during a period when unemployment increased from four percent to five percent, eligibility was restored to many legal immigrants, states took advantage of opportunities to expand categorical eligibility to those receiving noncash TANF benefits and services and to liberalize the treatment of vehicles, and the Food and Nutrition Service was encouraging states to conduct outreach efforts and simplify the program.  In addition, the proportion of eligible households participating in the Food Stamp Program, increased from 50 percent in 2000 to 59 percent in 2005.  Between 2000 and 2005, food stamp participation increased by 3.6 million households (see Table IND 4b).  Part of this increase was associated with an increase in the number of eligible households and part was associated with an increased participation rate among those households that were eligible.  

Food Stamp Expenditures.  Total program costs, shown in Table FSP 2, were higher in 2005 and 2006 than in 2004, reflecting the increase in participation during that period as well as an increase in average benefits.  Total federal program costs were $32.8 billion in 2006, $32.2 billion in 2005, and $29.0 billion in 2004 (after adjusting for inflation).  Average monthly benefits per person, also shown in Table FSP 2, were $94.30 per person in 2006, $96.00 in 2005 and $92.10 in 2004 (after adjusting for inflation).  The personal monthly benefit decreased 1.8 percent between 2005 and 2006.

Food Stamp Household Characteristics.  As shown in Table FSP 3, the proportion of food stamp households with earnings has increased, from about 20 percent for most of the 1980s and early 1990s, to 30 percent in 2006.  At the same time, the proportion of households with income from AFDC/TANF has declined, from 42 percent in 1990 to 13 percent in 2006, following the dramatic decline in AFDC/TANF caseloads.  Over half of all food stamp households have children, although the proportion has declined from over 60 percent in most of the 1980s and early 1990s to 52 percent in 2006.  The majority (87 percent in 2006) of households have incomes below the federal poverty guidelines.

Figure FSP 1.
Persons Receiving Food Stamps: 1962–2006
(In millions)

Figure FSP 1.  Persons Receiving Food Stamps: 1962–2006. See text for explanation and tables for data.

Note: Shaded areas are periods of recession as determined by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, data published online at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fssummar.htm and unpublished data from the Food Stamps National Data Bank.

Table FSP 1.
Trends in Food Stamp Caseloads:  Selected Years 1962–2006
Fiscal
Year
Food Stamp Participants Participants as a Percent of: Child Participants as a Percent of:
Including
Territories 1
(thousands)
Excluding
Territories (thousands)
Children
Excld. Terr.
(thousands)
Total
Population 2
All Poor
Persons 2
Total Child
Population 2
Children in
Poverty 2
1962 6,554 6,554 NA 3.5 17.0 NA NA
1965 5,167 5,167 NA 2.7 15.6 NA NA
1970 8,317 8,317 NA 4.1 32.7 NA NA
1971 13,010 13,010 NA 6.3 50.9 NA NA
1972 14,111 14,111 NA 6.7 57.7 NA NA
1973 14,607 14,607 NA 6.9 63.6 NA NA
1974 14,288 14,288 NA 6.7 61.1 NA NA
1975 4 17,152 16,320 NA 7.6 63.1 NA NA
1976 18,628 17,033 9,126 7.8 68.2 13.8 88.8
1977 17,161 15,604 NA 7.1 63.1 NA NA
1978 16,077 14,405 NA 6.5 58.8 NA NA
1979 5 17,758 15,942 NA 7.1 61.1 NA NA
1980 21,173 19,253 9,876 8.5 65.8 15.5 85.6
1981 22,518 20,655 9,803 9.0 64.6 15.5 78.4
1982 21,808 20,392 9,591 8.8 59.3 15.3 70.3
1983 21,727 20,095 10,910 8.6 61.4 17.4 78.4
1984 20,854 20,796 10,492 8.8 61.7 16.8 78.2
1985 19,899 19,847 9,906 8.3 60.0 15.7 75.3
1986 19,429 19,381 9,844 8.1 59.9 15.7 76.5
1987 19,113 19,072 9,771 7.9 59.2 15.5 76.1
1988 18,645 18,613 9,351 7.6 58.6 14.8 75.1
1989 18,806 18,778 9,429 7.6 59.6 14.9 74.9
1990 20,049 20,020 10,127 8.0 59.6 15.8 75.4
1991 22,625 22,599 11,952 8.9 63.3 18.3 83.3
1992 25,406 25,370 13,349 9.9 66.7 20.1 87.3
1993 26,982 26,952 14,196 10.4 68.6 21.0 90.3
1994 27,468 27,433 14,391 10.4 72.1 21.0 94.1
1995 26,619 26,579 13,860 10.0 73.0 20.0 94.5
1996 25,543 25,495 13,189 9.5 69.8 18.8 91.2
1997 22,858 22,820 11,847 8.4 64.1 16.7 83.9
1998 19,791 19,748 10,524 7.2 57.3 14.7 78.1
1999 18,183 18,146 9,332 6.5 55.3 13.0 76.0
2000 17,194 17,156 8,743 6.1 54.3 12.1 75.5
2001 17,318 17,282 8,819 6.1 52.5 12.1 75.2
2002 19,096 19,059 9,688 6.6 55.1 13.3 79.8
2003 21,259 21,222 10,605 7.3 59.2 14.5 82.4
2004 23,858 23,819 11,771 8.1 64.3 16.1 90.3
2005 25,718 25,677 12,405 8.7 69.5 16.9 96.2
2006 26,672 26,631 12,579 8.9 73.0 17.1 98.1
1 Total participants includes all participating states, the District of Columbia, and the territories (including Puerto Rico from 1975 to 1982–a separate Nutrition Assistance Grant for Puerto Rico was begun in July 1982).  From 1962 to 1983 the number of participants includes the Family Food Assistance Program (FFAP) that was largely replaced by the FSP in 1975.  The FFAP participants (as of December) for the seven years shown during the period from 1962 to 1974 were respectively: 6,411;  4,742;  3,977;  3,642;  3,002;  2,441;  and 1,406 (all in thousands).  From 1975 to 1983 the number of FFAP participants averaged only 88 thousand.
2 Includes all participating states and the District of Columbia only–the territories are excluded from both numerator and denominator.  Population numbers used as denominators are the resident population.
3 The pre-transfer poverty population used as denominator is the number of all persons in families or living alone whose income (cash income plus social insurance plus Social Security but before taxes and means-tested transfers) falls below the relevant poverty threshold. See Appendix J, Table 20, 1992 Green Book; data for subsequent years are unpublished Congressional Budget Office tabulations.
4 The first fiscal year in which food stamps were available nationwide.
5 The fiscal year in which the food stamp purchase requirement was eliminated, on a phased-in basis.
Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture, data published online at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fssummar.htm and unpublished data from the Food Stamps National Data Bank, the House Ways and Means Committee, 1996 Green Book, and U.S. Census Bureau, “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-233.

Table FSP 2.
Trends in Food Stamp Expenditures: Selected Years 1975–2006
Fiscal
Year
Total Federal Cost
 (Benefits + Administration)
Benefits
(Federal)
(millions)
Administration1 Total Program Cost
(millions)
Average Monthly Benefit per Person
Current Dollars
(millions)
2006 Dollars2
(millions)
Federal
(millions)
State & Local
(millions)
Current Dollars 2006 Dollars2
1975 $4,619 $16,263 $4,386 $233 $175 $4,794 $21.30 $75.00
1976 5,686 18,740 5,327 359 270 5,955 23.90 78.80
1977 5,461 16,755 5,067 394 295 5,756 24.80 76.10
1978 5,520 15,888 5,139 381 285 5,805 26.60 76.60
19793 6,940 18,336 6,480 460 388 7,328 30.50 80.60
1980 9,206 21,890 8,721 486 375 9,581 34.50 82.00
1981 11,225 24,262 10,630 595 504 11,729 39.50 85.40
1982 10,837 21,911 10,208 628 557 11,394 39.20 78.00
1983 11,847 22,901 11,152 695 612 12,459 43.00 83.10
19844 11,579 21,494 10,696 8835 805 12,384 42.70 79.30
1985 11,703 20,972 10,744 960 871 12,574 45.00 80.60
1986 11,638 20,384 10,605 1,033 935 12,573 45.50 79.70
1987 11,604 19,795 10,500 1,104 996 12,600 45.80 78.10
1988 12,317 20,260 11,149 1,168 1,080 13,397 49.80 81.90
1989 12,902 20,358 11,670 1,232 1,101 14,033 51.70 81.90
1990 15,447 23,313 14,143 1,305 1,174 16,664 58.80 88.60
1991 18,774 27,073 17,316 1,432 1,247 20,018 63.80 92.10
1992 22,462 31,662 20,906 1,557 1,375 23,837 68.60 96.70
1993 23,653 32,516 22,006 1,647 1,572 25,225 68.00 93.50
1994 24,494 32,964 22,749 1,745 1,643 26,136 69.00 92.90
1995 24,620 32,365 22,764 1,856 1,748 26,368 71.30 93.70
1996 24,331 31,206 22,440 1,891 1,842 26,173 73.20 93.90
1997 21,508 26,916 19,549 1,959 1,904 23,389 71.30 89.20
1998 18,988 23,415 16,891 2.098 1,988 20,876 71.10 87.70
1999 17,820 21,587 15,769 2,052 1,874 19,584 72.30 87.60
2000 17,054 20,032 14,983 2,071 2,086 19,140 72.60 85.30
2001 17,790 20,250 15,547 2,242 2,233 20,023 74.80 85.10
2002 20,637 23,143 18,256 2,381 2,397 23,034 79.70 89.40
2003 23,816 26,092 21,404 2,412 2,430 26,246 83.90 91.90
2004 27,098 29,018 24,619 2,479 2,500 29,598 86.00 92.10
2005 31,076 32,225 28,568 2,509 2,556 33,633 92.60 96.00
2006 32,761 32,761 30,187 2,574 2,869 35,626 94.30 94.30
Note: Total federal cost and the cost of benefits does include food stamps in Puerto Rico from 1975 to 1982 but does not include the funding for the Puerto Rico nutrition assistance grant from the last quarter of FY 1982 (when it replaced Puerto Rico’s food stamp program) to the present. (Puerto Rico’s nutrition assistance grant was $778 million in 1983 and rose to over $1.4 billion in 2004.)
1 Amounts include the federal share of state administrative and Employment and Training costs and certain direct federal administrative costs.  They do not generally include approximately $60 million in food stamp-related federal administrative costs budgeted under a separate appropriation account (although estimates prior to 1989 do include estimates of food stamp related federal administrative expenses paid out of other Agriculture Department accounts).  State and local costs are estimated based on the known federal shares and represent an estimate of all administrative expenses of participating states.
2 Constant dollar adjustments to 2006 level were made using a CPI-U-RS fiscal year average price index.
3 The fiscal year in which the food stamp purchase requirement was eliminated, on a phased-in basis.
4 Beginning 1984 USDA took over from DHHS the administrative cost of certifying public assistance households for food stamps.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service unpublished data (available at online at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fssummar.htm); and the House Ways and Means Committee, 2004 Green Book (available online at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/wmprints/green/2004.html).

Table FSP 3.
Characteristics of Food Stamp Households: Selected Years 1980–2006
  Year 1
1980 1984 1988 1990 1994 1996 1998 2000 2003 2006
With Gross Monthly Income: (In Percent)
   Below the Federal Poverty Levels 87 93 92 92 90 91 90 89 88 87
   Between the Poverty Levels & 130 percent of the Poverty Levels 10 6 8 8 9 8 9 10 11 11
   Above 130 Percent of Poverty 2 1 * * 1 1 1 1 2 2
With Earnings 19 19 20 19 21 23 26 27 28 30
With Public Assistance Income 2 §§ §§ §§ §§ §§ 61 59 56 47 41
   With AFDC/TANF Income NA 42 42 42 38 37 31 26 17 13
   With SSI Income 18 18 20 19 23 24 28 32 28 27
With Children 60 61 61 61 61 60 58 54 55 52
   And Female Heads of Household NA 47 50 51 51 50 47 44 44 43
      With No Spouse Present NA NA 39 37 43 43 41 38 37 36
With Elderly Members 3 23 22 19 18 16 16 18 21 18 18
Average Household Size 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.3 2.3
1 Data were gathered in August in the years 1980-84 and during the summer in the years from 1986 to 1994.  Reports from 1995 to the present are based on fiscal year averages.
2 Public assistance income includes: AFDC/TANF, SSI, and general assistance.
3 Elderly members and heads of household include those of age 60 or older.
§§ The total percentage of households with public assistance income is approximately equal to the sum of those with AFDC/TANF and SSI income with some small percentage of households receiving both due to having individual members eligible for different forms of assistance (in 1996 just under 6 percent of households received assistance from multiple sources).
* Less than 0.5 percent.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation, Characteristics of Food Stamp Households, Fiscal Year 2006, Report No. FSP-07-CHAR (available online at http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/MENU/Published/FSP/participation.htm) and earlier reports.

Table FSP 4.
Value of Food Stamps Issued by State: Selected Fiscal Years 1975–2006

[In millions]
  Percent Change
1975 1980 1985 1990 1996 2000 2003 2006 1996-00 2000-06
Alabama $103 $246 $318 $328 $440 $344 $466 $594 -22 73
Alaska 6 27 25 25 54 46 66 86 -15 88
Arizona 41 97 121 239 372 240 498 626 -35 161
Arkansas 78 122 126 155 224 206 304 414 -8 101
California 361 530 639 968 2,555 1,639 1,806 2,377 -36 45
Colorado 44 71 94 156 210 127 203 321 -40 154
Connecticut 36 59 62 72 175 138 165 239 -21 73
Delaware 6 21 22 25 47 31 48 70 -34 125
Dist. of Columbia 31 41 40 43 95 77 90 104 -19 36
Florida 207 421 368 609 1,296 771 988 1,684 -40 118
Georgia 129 264 290 382 703 489 782 1,098 -30 125
Guam 2 15 18 15 27 36 53 55 34 52
Hawaii 23 60 93 81 196 166 156 148 -15 -11
Idaho 11 29 36 40 61 46 77 100 -25 117
Illinois 238 394 713 835 1,034 777 1,053 1,503 -25 93
Indiana 58 154 242 226 330 268 484 648 -19 142
Iowa 28 54 107 109 141 100 149 244 -29 144
Kansas 12 38 64 96 135 83 140 188 -39 128
Kentucky 135 211 332 334 413 337 486 645 -18 92
Louisiana 148 243 365 549 597 448 685 1,032 -25 130
Maine 31 60 62 63 113 81 124 169 -28 108
Maryland 76 140 171 203 362 199 257 336 -45 69
Massachusetts 75 171 173 207 295 182 254 422 -38 132
Michigan 124 263 541 663 773 457 783 1,239 -41 171
Minnesota 40 62 105 165 221 165 227 282 -26 71
Mississippi 110 199 264 352 376 226 335 507 -40 124
Missouri 82 142 212 312 480 358 568 740 -25 107
Montana 11 18 31 41 58 51 69 90 -12 76
Nebraska 11 25 44 59 78 61 89 124 -21 104
Nevada 10 15 22 41 91 57 113 124 -38 120
New Hampshire 11 22 15 20 42 28 40 58 -32 106
New Jersey 125 226 260 289 508 304 339 456 -40 50
New Mexico 48 81 88 117 199 140 184 253 -30 82
New York 209 726 938 1,086 2,054 1,361 1,677 2,240 -34 65
North Carolina 122 234 237 282 547 403 645 921 -26 128
North Dakota 5 9 16 25 32 25 37 46 -22 83
Ohio 253 382 697 861 934 520 879 1,266 -44 143
Oklahoma 38 73 134 186 308 208 362 467 -32 124
Oregon 56 80 142 168 259 198 381 463 -24 134
Pennsylvania 175 373 547 661 981 656 785 1,182 -33 80
Rhode Island 18 31 35 42 78 59 69 81 -24 37
South Carolina 121 181 194 240 299 249 443 589 -17 136
South Dakota 8 18 26 35 41 37 51 66 -10 80
Tennessee 115 282 280 372 542 415 722 976 -23 135
Texas 314 514 701 1,429 2,140 1,215 1,881 2,939 -43 142
Utah 12 22 40 71 87 68 102 140 -21 106
Vermont 9 18 20 22 43 32 38 50 -26 57
Virgin Islands 6 19 23 18 42 21 18 21 -50 -2
Virginia 63 158 189 247 450 263 366 526 -42 100
Washington 70 90 140 229 426 241 394 595 -43 146
West Virginia 56 87 159 192 252 185 216 266 -26 44
Wisconsin 29 68 148 180 198 129 233 347 -35 169
Wyoming 3 6 15 21 28 19 24 26 -34 42
United States $4,386 $8,721 $10,744 $14,186 $22,441 $14,983 $21,404 $30,187 -33 101
Note: The totals for 1975 and 1980 include amounts for Puerto Rico of $366 and $828 million respectively.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service (2000 to 2006 data published online at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fsfybft.htm) and unpublished data from the Food Stamp National Data Bank.

Table FSP 5.
Average Number of Food Stamp Recipients by State: Selected Fiscal Years

[In thousands]
    Percent Change
1975 1980 1985 1990 1996 2000 2003 2006 1996-00 2000-06
Alabama 365 583 588 454 509 396 472 547 -22 38
Alaska 15 29 22 25 46 38 51 57 -19 52
Arizona 143 196 206 317 427 259 466 541 -39 109
Arkansas 267 301 253 235 274 247 310 385 -10 56
California 1,455 1,493 1,615 1,937 3,143 1,830 1,709 2,000 -42 9
Colorado 150 163 170 221 244 156 208 251 -36 61
Connecticut 155 170 145 133 223 165 181 210 -26 27
Delaware 26 52 40 33 58 32 46 66 -44 104
Dist. of Columbia 122 103 72 62 93 81 82 89 -13 10
Florida 647 912 630 781 1,371 882 1,041 1,418 -36 61
Georgia 498 627 567 536 793 559 750 947 -29 69
Guam 6 22 20 12 18 22 24 28 26 25
Hawaii 75 102 99 77 130 118 100 88 -9 -25
Idaho 39 61 59 59 80 58 82 91 -27 57
Illinois 926 903 1,110 1,013 1,105 817 954 1,225 -26 50
Indiana 392 353 406 311 390 300 470 575 -23 91
Iowa 115 141 203 170 177 123 154 226 -30 83
Kansas 58 90 119 142 172 117 161 183 -32 57
Kentucky 472 468 560 458 486 403 503 589 -17 46
Louisiana 510 569 644 727 670 500 655 830 -25 66
Maine 126 139 114 94 131 102 133 160 -22 58
Maryland 261 324 287 255 375 219 252 305 -41 39
Massachusetts 365 453 337 347 374 232 292 432 -38 86
Michigan 619 813 985 917 935 603 838 1,134 -36 88
Minnesota 167 171 228 263 295 196 235 264 -33 35
Mississippi 376 496 495 499 457 276 356 448 -40 62
Missouri 300 335 362 431 554 423 592 796 -24 88
Montana 38 43 58 57 71 59 71 82 -16 37
Nebraska 49 66 94 95 102 82 99 120 -19 45
Nevada 32 32 32 50 97 61 111 118 -37 94
New Hampshire 44 50 28 31 53 36 45 56 -31 55
New Jersey 490 605 464 382 540 345 339 406 -36 18
New Mexico 157 185 157 157 235 169 195 245 -28 44
New York 1,291 1,759 1,834 1,548 2,099 1,439 1,436 1,786 -31 24
North Carolina 466 582 474 419 631 488 649 854 -23 75
North Dakota 19 25 33 39 40 32 40 43 -20 34
Ohio 854 865 1,133 1,089 1,045 610 855 1,064 -42 74
Oklahoma 171 209 263 267 354 253 380 436 -28 72
Oregon 201 197 228 216 288 234 398 434 -19 85
Pennsylvania 848 980 1,032 952 1,124 777 823 1,092 -31 41
Rhode Island 86 87 69 64 91 74 74 73 -18 -1
South Carolina 410 426 373 299 358 295 451 534 -18 81
South Dakota 33 43 48 50 49 43 51 58 -12 36
Tennessee 397 624 518 527 638 496 728 870 -22 75
Texas 1,133 1,167 1,263 1,880 2,372 1,333 1,872 2,623 -44 97
Utah 46 54 75 99 110 82 106 132 -26 61
Vermont 44 46 44 38 56 41 41 47 -28 16
Virgin Islands 16 34 32 18 31 16 13 13 -49 -15
Virginia 257 384 360 346 538 336 393 507 -37 51
Washington 253 248 281 340 478 295 404 536 -38 82
West Virginia 242 209 278 262 300 227 247 268 -24 18
Wisconsin 148 215 363 286 283 193 297 368 -32 91
Wyoming 10 14 27 28 33 22 25 24 -32 8
United States 17,192 21,082 19,899 20,049 25,543 17,194 21,259 26,672 -33 55
Note: The totals for 1975 and 1980 include recipients in Puerto Rico of 810 thousand and 1.86 million respectively.
Source:  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service (2000 to 2006 data published online at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fsfypart.htm) and unpublished data from the National Data Bank.

Table FSP 6.
Food Stamp Recipiency Rates by State: Selected Fiscal Years

[In percent]
    Percent Change
1975 1980 1985 1990 1996 2000 2003 2006 1996-00 2000-06
Alabama 9.9 14.9 14.8 11.2 11.8 8.9 10.5 11.9 -24 34
Alaska 4.0 7.1 4.1 4.5 7.6 6.0 7.8 8.4 -21 41
Arizona 6.3 7.1 6.5 8.6 9.3 5.0 8.4 8.8 -46 75
Arkansas 12.4 13.1 10.9 10.0 10.6 9.2 11.4 13.7 -14 49
California 6.8 6.3 6.1 6.5 9.8 5.4 4.8 5.5 -45 2
Colorado 5.8 5.6 5.3 6.7 6.2 3.6 4.6 5.3 -42 46
Connecticut 5.0 5.5 4.5 4.0 6.7 4.8 5.2 6.0 -28 24
Delaware 4.5 8.7 6.5 5.0 7.8 4.1 5.6 7.7 -48 88
Dist. of Columbia 17.2 16.1 11.4 10.3 16.2 14.1 14.2 15.2 -13 8
Florida 7.6 9.3 5.5 6.0 9.2 5.5 6.1 7.9 -40 43
Georgia 9.8 11.4 9.5 8.2 10.6 6.8 8.6 10.1 -36 49
Hawaii 8.4 10.6 9.5 6.9 10.8 9.7 8.1 6.9 -10 -29
Idaho 4.6 6.4 5.9 5.8 6.6 4.5 6.0 6.2 -33 39
Illinois 8.2 7.9 9.7 8.8 9.1 6.6 7.6 9.6 -28 46
Indiana 7.3 6.4 7.4 5.6 6.6 4.9 7.6 9.1 -25 85
Iowa 4.0 4.8 7.2 6.1 6.2 4.2 5.2 7.6 -32 80
Kansas 2.5 3.8 4.9 5.7 6.6 4.3 5.9 6.6 -34 54
Kentucky 13.6 12.8 15.2 12.4 12.4 10.0 12.2 14.0 -20 41
Louisiana 13.1 13.5 14.6 17.2 15.2 11.2 14.6 19.6 -27 75
Maine 11.8 12.3 9.8 7.6 10.5 8.0 10.2 12.2 -24 53
Maryland 6.3 7.7 6.5 5.3 7.3 4.1 4.6 5.5 -44 32
Massachusetts 6.3 7.9 5.7 5.8 6.0 3.6 4.5 6.7 -40 84
Michigan 6.8 8.8 10.8 9.8 9.6 6.1 8.3 11.2 -37 85
Minnesota 4.2 4.2 5.5 6.0 6.3 4.0 4.6 5.1 -36 29
Mississippi 15.7 19.6 19.1 19.4 16.6 9.7 12.4 15.4 -42 59
Missouri 6.2 6.8 7.2 8.4 10.2 7.6 10.4 13.6 -26 81
Montana 5.1 5.5 7.1 7.1 8.0 6.6 7.8 8.6 -18 31
Nebraska 3.2 4.2 5.9 6.0 6.1 4.8 5.7 6.8 -21 41
Nevada 5.2 4.0 3.4 4.1 5.8 3.0 5.0 4.7 -48 57
New Hampshire 5.3 5.4 2.8 2.7 4.5 2.9 3.5 4.3 -35 47
New Jersey 6.7 8.2 6.1 4.9 6.6 4.1 3.9 4.7 -38 15
New Mexico 13.5 14.1 10.9 10.3 13.4 9.3 10.4 12.6 -31 35
New York 7.2 10.0 10.3 8.6 11.3 7.6 7.5 9.3 -33 22
North Carolina 8.4 9.9 7.6 6.3 8.4 6.0 7.7 9.6 -28 59
North Dakota 2.9 3.9 4.9 6.1 6.1 5.0 6.3 6.7 -19 35
Ohio 7.9 8.0 10.6 10.0 9.3 5.4 7.5 9.3 -42 73
Oklahoma 6.2 6.9 8.0 8.5 10.6 7.3 10.9 12.2 -31 66
Oregon 8.6 7.5 8.5 7.6 8.9 6.8 11.2 11.8 -23 72
Pennsylvania 7.1 8.3 8.8 8.0 9.2 6.3 6.7 8.8 -31 39
Rhode Island 9.2 9.1 7.2 6.4 8.9 7.1 6.9 6.9 -21 -2
South Carolina 14.1 13.6 11.3 8.5 9.4 7.3 10.9 12.3 -22 68
South Dakota 4.8 6.2 6.9 7.2 6.6 5.7 6.7 7.4 -14 31
Tennessee 9.3 13.6 11.0 10.8 11.8 8.7 12.4 14.3 -26 65
Texas 9.0 8.1 7.8 11.0 12.3 6.4 8.5 11.2 -48 76
Utah 3.7 3.7 4.6 5.7 5.3 3.7 4.5 5.1 -31 40
Vermont 9.1 8.9 8.2 6.8 9.5 6.7 6.7 7.6 -30 14
Virginia 5.1 7.2 6.3 5.6 8.0 4.7 5.3 6.6 -41 40
Washington 7.0 6.0 6.4 6.9 8.6 5.0 6.6 8.4 -42 68
West Virginia 13.1 10.7 14.6 14.6 16.4 12.6 13.7 14.8 -24 18
Wisconsin 3.2 4.6 7.6 5.8 5.4 3.6 5.4 6.6 -34 84
Wyoming 2.7 3.0 5.4 6.2 6.8 4.5 5.1 4.7 -33 4
United States 7.6 8.5 8.3 8.0 9.5 6.1 7.3 8.9 -36 47
Note: Recipiency rate refers to the average monthly number of food stamp recipients in each state during the particular fiscal year expressed as a percent of the total resident population as of July 1 of that year.  The numerator is from Table FSP 5.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service (2000 to 2006 data published online at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fsfypart.htm and unpublished data from the National Data Bank; U.S. Census Bureau (population by state available online at http://www.census.gov).

[ Go to Contents ]

Supplemental Security Income

The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Program is a means-tested, federally administered income assistance program authorized by title XVI of the Social Security Act.  Established in 1972 (Public Law 92-603) and begun in 1974, SSI provides monthly cash payments in accordance with uniform, nationwide eligibility requirements to needy aged, blind and disabled persons.  To qualify for SSI payments, a person must satisfy the program criteria for age, blindness, or disability.  Children may qualify for SSI if they are under age 18 and meet the applicable SSI disability or blindness, income and resource requirements.  Individuals and married couples are eligible for SSI if their countable incomes fall below the federal maximum monthly SSI benefit levels of $623 for an individual and $934 for a married couple (if both are eligible) in fiscal year 2007.  SSI eligibility is restricted to qualified persons who have countable resources/assets of not more than $2,000, or $3,000 for a couple.

The Social Security Administration (SSA) administers the SSI program. Since its inception, SSI has been viewed as the “program of last resort.” Therefore, SSA helps recipients obtain any other public assistance that they are eligible to receive before providing SSI benefits.  After evaluating all other income, SSI pays what is necessary to bring an individual to the statutorily prescribed income “floor.”

Prior to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), no individual could receive both SSI payments and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) benefits.  If eligible for both, the individual had to choose which benefit to receive.  Generally, the AFDC agency encouraged individuals to file for SSI and, once the SSI payments had started, the individual was removed from the AFDC filing unit.  Since states have the authority to set TANF eligibility standards and benefit levels under PRWORA, there is no federal prohibition against individuals receiving both TANF benefits and SSI.

With the exception of California, which converted food stamp benefits to cash payments that are included in the state supplementary payment, SSI recipients may be eligible to receive food stamps.  If all household members receive SSI, the household is categorically eligible for food stamps and does not need to meet the Food Stamp Program’s financial eligibility standards.  If SSI beneficiaries live in households in which other household members do not receive SSI benefits, the household must meet the net income eligibility standard of the Food Stamp Program to be eligible for food stamp benefits.

Legislative Changes

Public Law 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996, prohibited SSI eligibility to individuals whose drug addiction and/or alcoholism (DA&A) is a contributing factor material to the finding of disability.  This provision applied to individuals who filed for benefits on or after the date of enactment (March 29, 1996) and to individuals whose claims were finally adjudicated on or after the date of enactment.  It applied to current beneficiaries on January 1, 1997.

PRWORA made several changes designed to maintain the SSI program’s goal of limiting benefits to severely disabled children.   First, the act replaced the former “comparable severity” test with a new definition of disability specifically for children, based on a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that results in “marked and severe functional limitations.” Second, SSA discontinued use of the Individualized Functional Assessment (IFA) for children which it had implemented in 1991 following the Supreme Court's decision in Sullivan v Zebley, 493 U.S. 521 (1990).[1] Third, references to “maladaptive behaviors” in certain sections of the Listing of Impairments (among medical criteria for evaluation of mental and emotional disorders in the domain of personal/behavioral function) were eliminated.  The latter two provisions were effective for all new and pending applications upon enactment (August 22, 1996).  Beneficiaries who were receiving benefits due to an IFA or under the Listings because of limitations resulting from maladaptive behaviors received notice no later than January 1, 1997, that their benefits might end when their case was redetermined. Additional provisions of PRWORA with impact on enrollment are the requirement that eligibility be redetermined when beneficiaries reach age 18, using the adult disability standard; that "continuing disability reviews" be done for children; and that children who were eligible due to low birth weight have their eligibility redetermined at age one.

Title IV of Public Law 104-193 (PRWORA) also made significant changes in the eligibility of noncitizens for SSI benefits.  Some of the restrictions were subsequently moderated by Public Law 104-208, Public Law 106-169, and most notably by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33), which “grandfathered” immigrants who were receiving SSI at the time of enactment of the PRWORA.  Those immigrants who entered the U.S. after August 22, 1996, may be eligible to receive SSI after having been “lawfully admitted for permanent residence.”  In addition, Public Law 106-386, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, provides that noncitizens who are victims of “severe forms of trafficking in persons in the United States” shall be treated as refugees for purposes of SSI and be eligible for SSI benefits for the first 7 years they are in the United States.

Several provisions aimed at reducing SSI fraud and improving recovery of overpayments were enacted in 1999 as part of the Foster Care Independence Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-169). Other legislation enacted in 1999 (Public Law 106-170) provides additional work incentives for disabled beneficiaries of SSI (e.g., the Ticket to Work and Self-Sufficiency Program).

The Social Security Protection Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-203), enacted March 2, 2004, introduced program and beneficiary protections covering the use of representative payees and required documentation of changes in beneficiary status.  It also extended SSI eligibility to blind or disabled children living with a parent assigned to permanent U.S. military duty outside of the U.S. but who were not receiving SSI while in the U.S.  Furthermore, Public Law 109-163 provides that individuals who were made ineligible for SSI because of their spouses or parents being called to active military duty would not have to file a new application for SSI benefits if they again could be eligible for benefits before the end of 24 consecutive months of ineligibility.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-171) included two SSI program reforms, designed to improve the accuracy of disability determinations and benefit awards, among other program goals.

SSI Program Data

The following tables and figures provide SSI program data:

SSI Caseload Trends (Tables SSI 1 and SSI 2 and Figure SSI 1). From 1990 to 1995, the number of SSI beneficiaries increased from 4.8 million to 6.5 million, an average growth rate of over 7 percent per year.  Between 1995 and 2000, the number of beneficiaries fluctuated between 6.5 and 6.6 million persons.  Between 2000 and 2006, the caseload increased from 6.6 to 7.2 million beneficiaries, an average annual growth rate of 1.5 percent. Table SSI 1 presents information on the total number of persons receiving SSI payments in December of each year from 1974 through 2006, and also presents recipients by eligibility category (aged, blind, and disabled) and by type of recipient (child, adults ages 18-64, and adults ages 65 or older).  See also Tables IND 3c and IND 4c in Chapter II for further data on trends in recipiency and participation.

The composition of the SSI caseload has been shifting over time, as shown in Table SSI 1.  The number of beneficiaries eligible because of age has been declining steadily, from a high of 2.3 million persons in December 1975 to a low of 1.2 million persons in December 2004 and has since remained essentially unchanged.  At the same time, there has been strong growth in blind and disabled beneficiaries, from 1.7 million in December 1974 to 6.0 million in December 2006.  Moreover, the number of disabled children has increased dramatically, particularly during the 1990s, when the number of disabled children receiving SSI increased from 309,000 in December 1990 to 955,000 in December 1996.  The number of disabled children fell over the next three years, but has been increasing since 2000, reaching just under 1.1 million children in 2006.

Several factors have contributed to the growth of the Supplemental Security Income program. Expansions in disability eligibility (particularly for mentally impaired adults and for children), increased outreach, overall growth in immigration, and transfers from state programs were among the key factors identified in a 1995 study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).  GAO concluded that three groups – adults with mental impairments, children, and non-citizens – accounted for nearly 90 percent of the SSI program’s growth in the early 1990s.  The growth in disabled children beneficiaries is generally believed to be due to outreach activities, the Supreme Court decision in the Zebley case, expansion of the medical impairment category, and reduction in reviews of continuing eligibility.[2]

SSI Expenditures (Tables SSI 3 through SSI 5). While down slightly from 2004, the total amount of federally administered SSI benefits has increased over the past 5 years from $35.6 billion (inflation adjusted) in 2001 to over $38.9 billion in 2006, as shown in Table SSI 3. Average monthly federally administered benefits per person were $455 in 2006, up (4.4 percent) from 2001 inflation adjusted benefit level of $436. For more details see Table SSI 4.

SSI Recipient Characteristics (Table SSI 6). Over the last 20 years, the percentage of aged SSI recipients has dramatically decreased, while the percentage of disabled recipients has increased substantially. As shown in Table SSI 6, the proportion of SSI aged recipients has decreased dramatically, from 44 percent in 1980 to under 17 percent in 2006.  During the same period, the percentage of disabled recipients increased from 55 percent in 1980 to 82 percent in 2006.

Figure SSI 1.
SSI Recipients by Age: 1974 – 2006

Figure SSI 1.  SSI Recipients by Age: 1974 – 2006. See text for explanation and tables for data.

Source:  Social Security Administration, Supplemental Security Income, Annual Statistical Report, 2007 (available online at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2007/index.html).

Table SSI 1.
Number of Persons Receiving Federally Administered SSI Payments: 1974 – 2006

[In thousands]
Date Total Eligibility Category Type of Recipient
Aged Blind and Disabled Children Adults
Total Blind Disabled Age 18-64 65 or Older
Dec 1974 3,996 2,286 1,710 75 1,636 71 1 1,503 2,422
Dec 1975 4,314 2,307 2,007 74 1,933 107 1,699 2,508
Dec 1976 4,236 2,148 2,088 76 2,012 125 1,714 2,397
Dec 1977 4,238 2,051 2,187 77 2,109 147 1,738 2,353
Dec 1978 4,217 1,968 2,249 77 2,172 166 1,747 2,304
Dec 1979 4,150 1,872 2,278 77 2,201 177 1,727 2,246
Dec 1980 4,142 1,808 2,334 78 2,256 190 1,731 2,221
Dec 1981 4,019 1,678 2,341 79 2,262 195 1,703 2,121
Dec 1982 3,858 1,549 2,309 77 2,231 192 1,655 2,011
Dec 1983 3,901 1,515 2,386 79 2,307 198 1,700 2,003
Dec 1984 4,029 1,530 2,499 81 2,419 212 1,780 2,037
Dec 1985 4,138 1,504 2,634 82 2,551 227 1,879 2,031
Dec 1986 4,269 1,473 2,796 83 2,713 241 2,010 2,018
Dec 1987 4,385 1,455 2,930 83 2,846 251 2,119 2,015
Dec 1988 4,464 1,433 3,030 83 2,948 255 2,203 2,006
Dec 1989 4,593 1,439 3,154 83 3,071 265 2,302 2,026
Dec 1990 4,817 1,454 3,363 84 3,279 309 2,450 2,059
Dec 1991 5,118 1,465 3,654 85 3,569 397 2,642 2,080
Dec 1992 2 5,566 1,471 4,095 85 4,010 556 2,910 2,100
Dec 1993 5,984 1,475 4,509 85 4,424 723 3,148 2,113
Dec 1994 6,296 1,466 4,830 85 4,745 841 3,335 2,119
Dec 1995 6,514 1,446 5,068 84 4,984 917 3,482 2,115
Dec 1996 6,614 1,413 5,201 82 5,119 955 3,568 2,090
Dec 1997 6,495 1,362 5,133 81 5,052 880 3,562 2,054
Dec 1998 6,566 1,332 5,234 80 5,154 887 3,646 2,033
Dec 1999 6,557 1,308 5,249 79 5,169 847 3,691 2,019
Dec 2000 6,602 1,289 5,312 79 5,234 847 3,744 2,011
Dec 2001 6,688 1,264 5,424 78 5,346 882 3,811 1,995
Dec 2002 6,788 1,252 5,537 78 5,459 915 3,878 1,995
Dec 2003 6,902 1,233 5,670 77 5,593 959 3,878 1,990
Dec 2004 6,988 1,211 5,777 76 5,701 993 4,017 1,978
Dec 2005 7,114 1,214 5,900 75 5,825 1,036 4,083 1,995
Dec 2006 7,236 1,212 6,024 73 5,951 1,079 4,152 2,004
1 Includes students 18-21 in 1974 only.
2 The jump in benefits in 1992 is due to retroactive payments resulting from the Sullivan v. Zebley decision.
Source: Social Security Administration, Supplemental Security Income, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2007 (available online at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2007/index.html).

Table SSI 2.
SSI Recipiency Rates: 1974 – 2006
Date All Recipients
as a Percent of
Total Population 1
Adults 18-64
as a Percent of
18-64 Population 1
Child Recipients
as a Percent of
All Children 1
Elderly Recipients
(Persons 65 & Older)
as a Percent of
All Persons
65 & Older 1
All Elderly
Poor 2
Dec  1974 1.9 1.2 0.1 10.8 78.5
Dec  1975 2.0 1.3 0.2 10.9 75.6
Dec  1976 1.9 1.3 0.2 10.2 72.4
Dec  1977 1.9 1.3 0.2 9.7 74.1
Dec  1979 1.8 1.3 0.3 8.8 61.3
Dec  1980 1.8 1.2 0.3 8.6 57.5
Dec  1981 1.7 1.2 0.3 8.0 55.0
Dec  1982 1.7 1.2 0.3 7.4 53.6
Dec  1983 1.7 1.2 0.3 7.3 55.2
Dec  1984 1.7 1.2 0.3 7.2 61.2
Dec  1985 1.7 1.3 0.4 7.1 58.7
Dec  1986 1.8 1.3 0.4 6.9 57.9
Dec  1987 1.8 1.4 0.4 6.7 56.5
Dec  1988 1.8 1.5 0.4 6.6 57.6
Dec  1989 1.9 1.5 0.4 6.5 60.3
Dec  1990 1.9 1.6 0.5 6.5 56.3
Dec  1991 2.0 1.7 0.6 6.5 55.0
Dec  1992 2.2 1.9 0.8 6.4 53.5
Dec  1993 2.3 2.0 1.1 6.4 56.3
Dec  1994 2.4 2.1 1.2 6.3 57.9
Dec  1995 2.4 2.2 1.3 6.2 63.7
Dec  1996 2.4 2.2 1.4 6.1 61.0
Dec  1997 2.4 2.2 1.2 6.0 60.8
Dec  1998 2.4 2.2 1.2 5.9 60.0
Dec  1999 2.3 2.2 1.2 5.8 62.7
Dec  2000 2.3 2.1 1.2 5.7 60.5
Dec  2001 2.3 2.1 1.2 5.6 58.4
Dec  2002 2.3 2.1 1.3 5.6 55.8
Dec  2003 2.4 2.2 1.3 5.5 56.0
Dec  2004 2.4 2.2 1.4 5.4 57.3
Dec  2005 2.4 2.2 1.4 5.4 55.4
Dec  2006 2.4 2.2 1.5 5.3 59.1
1 Population numbers used for the denominators are Census Bureau resident population estimates adjusted to the December date by averaging the July 1 population of the current year with the July 1 population of the following year (resident population estimates by age are available online at http://www.census.gov).
 2 For the number of persons (65 years of age and older living in poverty) used as the denominator, see Current Population Reports, Series P60-233.
Note: Numerators for these ratios are from Table SSI 1. Rates computed by DHHS.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006," Current Population Reports, Series P60-233 (available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).

Table SSI 3.
Federally Administered SSI Benefits and Administration: 1974 – 2006
1
[In millions of dollars]
Calendar
Year
Total Benefits Federal
Payments
State
Supplementation
Administrative
Costs (fiscal year)
2006 2 Dollars Current Dollars
1974 $18,388 $5,097 $3,833 $1,264 $285
1975 19,045 5,716 4,314 1,403 399
1976 18,591 5,900 4,512 1,388 500
1977 18,169 6,134 4,703 1,431 526
1978 18,218 6,372 4,881 1,491 539
1979 18,330 6,869 5,279 1,590 611
1980 18,901 7,715 5,866 1,848 668
1981 18,724 8,357 6,518 1,839 717
1982 18,107 8,705 6,907 1,798 780
1983 17,988 9,134 7,423 1,711 846
1984 18,896 10,073 8,281 1,792 864
1985 19,321 10,750 8,777 1,973 956
1986 20,291 11,741 9,498 2,243 1,023
1987 20,942 12,592 10,029 2,563 977
1988 21,439 13,405 10,734 2,671 976
1989 22,393 14,561 11,606 2,955 1,052
1990 23,727 16,133 12,894 3,239 1,075
1991 25,395 17,996 14,765 3,231 1,230
1992 29,678 21,682 18,247 3,435 1,426
1993 31,938 23,991 20,722 3,270 1,468
1994 32,900 25,291 22,175 3,116 1,780
1995 34,312 27,037 23,919 3,118 1,978
1996 35,000 28,252 25,265 2,988 1,953
1997 34,384 28,371 25,457 2,913 2,055
1998 34,885 29,408 26,405 3,003 2,304
1999 34,998 30,106 26,805 3,301 2,493
2000 34,835 30,672 27,290 3,381 2,321
2001 35,577 32,166 28,706 3,460 2,397
2002 36,464 33,719 29,899 3,820 2,522
2003 36,978 34,693 30,688 4,005 2,656
2004 37,761 36,065 31,887 4,179 2,806
2005 38,164 37,236 33,058 4,178 2,795
2006 38,889 38,889 34,736 4,153 2,850
1 Payments and adjustments during the respective year but not necessarily accrued for that year.
2 Data adjusted for inflation by ASPE using the CPI-U-RS for calendar years.
Note: This table differs from earlier versions because of variations across states in reported numbers of recipients and payment amounts of SSI state-administered state supplements, information on state-administered state supplements is no longer published by SSA.
Source: Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, SSI Annual Statistical Supplement, 2006 (available online at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2006/index.html).

Table SSI 4.
Average Monthly Federally Administered SSI Benefits: 1975 – 2006
1
[In millions of dollars]
Calendar
Year
Total Benefits Federal
Payments
State
Supplementation
2006 2 Dollars Current Dollars
1975 $354 $106 $91 $62
1976 352 112 96 65
1977 346 117 101 67
1978 349 122 107 67
1979 398 149 119 111
1980 397 162 138 95
1981 395 176 155 94
1982 393 189 168 92
1983 402 204 182 91
1984 396 211 189 94
1985 392 218 194 99
1986 402 233 205 109
1987 397 238 208 116
1988 392 245 215 114
1989 395 257 224 121
1990 407 276 242 128
1991 412 292 260 120
1992 413 302 275 105
1993 420 315 290 100
1994 423 325 302 94
1995 426 335 313 99
1996 426 344 322 99
1997 425 351 328 102
1998 426 359 336 102
1999 428 369 342 111
2000 430 379 351 113
2001 436 394 366 114
2002 441 407 377 128
2003 445 417 384 138
2004 448 428 395 138
2005 450 439 407 156
2006 455 455 423 156
1 Payments and adjustments during the respective year but not necessarily accrued for that year.
2 Data adjusted for inflation by ASPE using the CPI-U-RS for calendar years.
Note:  This table differs from earlier versions because of variations across states in reported numbers of recipients and payment amounts of SSI state-administered state supplements, information on state-administered state supplements is no longer published by SSA.
Source:  Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, SSI Annual Statistical Supplement, 2006 (available online at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2007/index.html#table7.a5).

Table SSI 5.
Number of Persons Receiving Federally Administered SSI Payments by Eligibility Category

[In thousands]
Month and year Total 1 Federal SSI Federally Administered State Supplementation State Supplementation Only
Jan 1974 3,216 2,956 1,480 260
Dec 1975 4,314 3,893 1,684 421
Dec 1980 4,236 3,799 1,638 437
Dec 1984 4,238 3,778 1,658 460
Dec 1985 4,217 3,755 1,681 462
Dec 1986 4,150 3,687 1,684 462
Dec 1987 4,142 3,682 1,685 460
Dec 1988 4,019 3,590 1,625 429
Dec 1989 3,858 3,473 1,550 384
Dec 1990 3,901 3,590 1,558 312
Dec 1991 4,029 3,699 1,607 331
Dec 1992 4,138 3,799 1,661 339
Dec 1993 4,269 3,922 1,723 348
Dec 1994 4,385 4,019 1,807 366
Dec 1995 4,464 4,089 1,885 375
Dec 1996 4,593 4,206 1,950 387
Dec 1997 4,817 4,412 2,058 405
Dec 1998 5,118 4,730 2,204 389
Dec 1999 5,566 5,202 2,372 364
Dec 2000 5,984 5,636 2,536 348
Dec 2001 6,296 5,965 2,628 331
Dec 2002 6,514 6,194 2,518 320
Dec 2003 6,614 6,326 2,421 288
Dec 2004 6,495 6,212 2,372 283
Dec 2005 6,566 6,289 2,412 277
Dec 2006 6,557 6,275 2,441 282
1 Total equals the sum of "Federal SSI" and "State supplementation only."
Source: Number of persons receiving payments obtained from Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2007 (available online at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2007/index.html).

Table SSI 6.
Characteristics of SSI Recipients by Selected Characteristics: Selected Years 1980-2006
  1980 1985 1990 1994 1998 2000 2003 2006
 

Total

Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
   under 18 5.5 5.5 6.4 13.4 13.5 12.8 13.9 15.0
   18-64 40.9 45.4 50.9 53.0 55.5 56.7 57.3 57.4
   65 or older 53.6 49.1 42.7 33.7 31.0 30.5 28.8 27.7
Sex
   Male 34.4 35.2 37.2 41.3 41.3 41.5 42.4 43.5
   Female 65.5 64.8 62.8 58.7 58.7 58.5 57.6 56.5
Selected Sources of Income
   Earnings 3.2 3.8 4.7 4.2 4.5 4.4 3.5 3.8
   Social Security 51.0 49.4 45.9 39.1 36.5 36.1 35.1 35.0
   No other income 34.8 34.5 36.4 43.6 47.3 54.4 55.4 55.4
Noncitizens NA 5.1 9.0 11.7 10.2 10.5 10.1 9.3
Eligibility Category
   Aged 43.6 36.4 30.2 23.3 20.3 19.5 17.9 16.7
   Blind 1.9 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0
   Disabled 54.5 61.7 68.1 75.4 78.5 79.3 81.0 82.2
 

Aged

Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
   65-69 14.0 14.9 19.4 20.5 17.6 17.6 15.2 15.1
   70-79 51.5 45.6 41.3 44.3 48.4 48.4 48.2 46.1
   80 or older 34.5 39.5 39.2 35.1 34.0 34.0 36.6 38.8
Sex
   Male 27.3 25.5 25.1 26.8 27.8 27.8 30.3 31.8
   Female 72.6 74.5 74.9 73.2 72.2 72.2 69.7 68.2
Noncitizens NA 9.7 19.4 30.0 27.0 27.0 28.9 28.0
 

Blind and Disabled

Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
   18-64 80.2 77.7 80.0 83.4 83.6 83.6 83.9 83.9
   65 or older 19.8 22.3 20.0 16.6 16.4 16.4 16.1 16.0
Sex1
   Male 39.8 40.8 42.4 41.8 41.1 41.1 45.0 41.5
   Female 60.2 59.2 57.6 58.2 58.9 58.9 55.0 58.5
Noncitizens NA 2.4 4.6 6.2 5.5 5.5 6.0 5.6
 

Children

Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
   Under 5 11.7 NA NA 15.8 15.8 15.8 16.2 15.3
   5-9 20.9 NA NA 28.5 30.2 30.2 26.7 27.9
   10-14 28.8 NA NA 32.7 34.6 34.6 36.7 34.3
   15-17 21.7 NA NA 17.3 19.4 19.4 20.4 22.5
   18-212 16.8 14.3 9.3 5.7
Sex
   Male NA NA NA 63.0 62.9 62.9 64.7 65.6
   Female NA NA NA 37.0 37.1 37.1 35.3 34.4
Note: Data are for December of the year.
1 For 1980-1992 male-female classification reflects all blind and disabled, both children and adults; thereafter, it is based on adults only.
2 In this table, students 18-21 are classified as children prior to 1998.  
Source: Social Security Administration, Social Security Bulletin, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2006 and prior years (available online at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2007/).

Table SSI 7.
Total Federally Administered SSI Payments by State: Calendar Year 2006

[In thousands]
State Total Federal Federal SSI Federally administered state supplementation
Total $38,888,961 $34,736,088 $4,152,873
Alabama 805,370 805,370
Alaska 56,455 56,455
Arizona 506,119 506,119
Arkansas 433,035 433,035
California 8,300,356 5,098,651 3,201,705
Colorado 278,569 278,569
Connecticut 271,916 271,916
Delaware 69,448 68,373 1,075
District of Columbia 119,087 114,981 4,106
Florida 2,128,009 2,128,009
Georgia 985,784 985,784
Hawaii 125,114 111,099 14,015
Idaho 113,799 113,799
Illinois 1,394,859 1,394,859
Indiana 519,364 519,364
Iowa 203,150 198,873 4,277
Kansas 194,365 194,350 15
Kentucky 901,618 901,618
Louisiana 760,132 760,132
Maine 153,051 153,051
Maryland 505,655 505,637 18
Massachusetts 952,569 785,001 167,568
Michigan 1,206,441 1,183,998 22,443
Minnesota 383,026 383,026
Mississippi 588,730 588,730
Missouri 598,130 598,130
Montana 74,296 73,355 941
Nebraska 108,092 108,092
Nevada 171,488 165,919 5,569
New Hampshire 72,064 72,064
New Jersey 799,587 715,886 83,701
New Mexico 263,305 263,305
New York 3,713,730 3,146,215 567,515
North Carolina 945,195 945,195
North Dakota 35,066 35,066
Ohio 1,346,688 1,346,688
Oklahoma 405,725 405,725
Oregon 314,433 314,433
Pennsylvania 1,757,105 1,709,630 47,475
Rhode Island 166,179 142,639 23,540
South Carolina 503,025 503,025
South Dakota 56,900 56,897 3
Tennessee 783,747 783,747
Texas 2,416,535 2,416,535
Utah 117,489 117,409 80
Vermont 66,522 57,695 8,827
Virginia 666,913 666,913
Washington 656,188 656,188
West Virginia 396,292 396,292
Wisconsin 466,399 466,399
Wyoming 27,557 27,557
Other: N. Mariana Islands 4,291 4,291
1 Columns do not added to totals since the totals include a small amount of payments not distributed by jurisdiction.
Source:  Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2007 (available online at http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/).

Table SSI 8.
SSI Recipiency Rates by State And Program Type:  1979 and 2006

[In percent]
  Total Recipiency Rate Rate for Adults 18-64 Rate for Adults 65 & Over
  Percent Change   Percent Change   Percent Change
1979 2006 1979-06 1979 2006 1979-06 1979 2006 1979-06
Alabama 3.6 3.6 1 1.8 3.6 97 21.0 5.5 -74
Alaska 0.8 1.7 121 0.5 1.6 196 14.0 6.7 -52
Arizona 1.1 1.6 44 0.9 1.5 69 5.0 3.0 -40
Arkansas 3.5 3.3 -6 1.9 3.2 71 17.1 4.7 -72
California 3.0 3.4 13 2.1 2.6 27 16.4 13.5 -18
Colorado 1.1 1.2 9 0.8 1.1 43 6.7 3.0 -55
Connecticut 0.8 1.5 100 0.6 1.5 138 2.7 2.7 0
Delaware 1.2 1.6 34 0.9 1.5 60 5.4 2.1 -61
District of Columbia 2.3 3.7 62 1.9 3.3 72 8.6 5.9 -31
Florida 1.8 2.4 35 1.1 1.8 58 6.2 4.7 -24
Georgia 2.9 2.2 -23 1.9 2.0 6 17.7 5.6 -68
Hawaii 1.1 1.8 71 0.7 1.6 132 7.6 4.8 -37
Idaho 0.8 1.6 103 0.6 1.7 166 3.8 1.9 -50
Illinois 1.1 2.0 85 1.0 2.0 111 4.3 3.8 -11
Indiana 0.8 1.6 113 0.6 1.7 179 3.3 1.6 -52
Iowa 0.9 1.5 69 0.6 1.6 158 3.5 1.6 -54
Kansas 0.9 1.4 57 0.6 1.5 138 3.5 1.8 -48
Kentucky 2.5 4.3 69 1.8 4.5 151 12.5 6.2 -51
Louisiana 3.4 3.7 10 2.0 3.5 72 20.1 6.5 -68
Maine 2.0 2.5 28 1.4 2.8 101 8.6 2.8 -67
Maryland 1.2 1.7 48 0.9 1.6 70 5.4 3.8 -30
Massachusetts 2.2 2.7 21 1.3 2.6 103 10.8 5.6 -48
Michigan 1.3 2.2 75 1.1 2.4 124 5.9 2.9 -50
Minnesota 0.8 1.5 85 0.6 1.4 155 3.7 2.7 -27
Mississippi 4.5 4.2 -6 2.4 4.0 65 26.0 8.2 -68
Missouri 1.8 2.1 19 1.1 2.2 100 7.9 2.5 -68
Montana 0.9 1.6 80 0.7 1.8 150 3.8 1.9 -50
Nebraska 0.9 1.3 48 0.6 1.4 119 3.4 1.7 -50
Nevada 0.8 1.4 67 0.5 1.2 126 5.9 3.4 -42
New Hampshire 0.6 1.1 90 0.4 1.3 195 2.5 1.1 -57
New Jersey 1.1 1.8 58 0.9 1.5 74 4.7 4.6 -2
New Mexico 2.0 2.8 42 1.4 2.6 90 12.4 6.5 -47
New York 2.1 3.3 56 1.6 2.7 70 8.3 9.1 10
North Carolina 2.4 2.3 -4 1.6 2.1 33 13.6 4.4 -68
North Dakota 1.0 1.3 31 0.6 1.3 128 5.1 1.9 -62
Ohio 1.1 2.2 98 1.0 2.4 142 4.2 2.4 -42
Oklahoma 2.3 2.3 -1 1.3 2.4 80 11.6 3.3 -72
Oregon 0.9 1.7 98 0.7 1.7 143 3.3 2.8 -15
Pennsylvania 1.4 2.6 86 1.1 2.6 132 5.0 3.2 -35
Rhode Island 1.6 2.9 82 1.1 2.8 159 6.4 4.9 -24
South Carolina 2.7 2.4 -11 1.8 2.3 29 17.0 4.4 -74
South Dakota 1.1 1.6 40 0.7 1.6 122 5.0 2.7 -46
Tennessee 2.9 2.7 -6 1.9 2.7 44 14.8 4.5 -70
Texas 1.9 2.2 16 1.0 1.8 89 12.7 7.0 -45
Utah 0.6 0.9 64 0.5 1.0 96 3.0 1.8 -41
Vermont 1.8 2.1 19 1.3 2.3 76 8.1 3.0 -63
Virginia 1.5 1.8 20 1.0 1.6 57 8.5 3.9 -54
Washington 1.2 1.9 64 1.0 1.9 94 4.8 3.7 -23
West Virginia 2.1 4.3 102 1.9 4.9 163 8.0 4.3 -46
Wisconsin 1.4 1.7 18 1.0 1.7 77 6.5 2.2 -66
Wyoming 0.4 1.1 162 0.3 1.2 314 2.7 1.3 -53
   Total 1.9 2.4 30 1.3 2.2 75 9.0 5.4 -40
Note: Recipiency rates for 2004 are the ratios of the number of SSI recipients (in the respective age groups) as of the month of December to the estimated population in the respective age group as of the month of July; calculations by DHHS.  The 1979 rates are based on the average number of recipients during the year.
Source: Social Security Administration, Supplemental Security Income, Annual Statistical Report, 2007 and U.S. Census Bureau (resident population by state available online at http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/).

Table SSI 9.
SSI Recipiency Rates by State: Selected Fiscal Years 1975 – 2006

[In Percent]
  1975 1980 1985 1990 1994 2 1998 2 2003 2 2006 2
Alabama 4.0 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.6
Alaska 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.7
Arizona 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6
Arkansas 4.1 3.4 3.1 3.2 3.8 3.5 3.2 3.3
California 3.1 3.0 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.4
Colorado 1.4 1.0 0.9 1.1 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.2
Connecticut 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5
Delaware 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.6
District of Columbia 2.2 2.4 2.5 2.7 3.5 3.8 3.6 3.7
Florida 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.4
Georgia 3.3 2.8 2.6 2.5 2.8 2.6 2.3 2.2
Hawaii 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8
Idaho 1.1 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.6
Illinois 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.6 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.0
Indiana 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6
Iowa 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.5
Kansas 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4
Kentucky 2.8 2.6 2.7 3.1 4.1 4.4 4.3 4.3
Louisiana 3.9 3.2 2.9 3.2 4.1 4.0 3.7 3.7
Maine 2.3 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.5
Maryland 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7
Massachusetts 2.3 2.2 1.9 2.0 2.6 2.7 2.6 2.7
Michigan 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.5 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2
Minnesota 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5
Mississippi 5.2 4.4 4.3 4.4 5.2 4.9 4.4 4.2
Missouri 2.1 1.7 1.6 1.7 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.1
Montana 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6
Nebraska 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3
Nevada 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4
New Hampshire 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.0 1.1
New Jersey 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.8
New Mexico 2.3 1.9 1.8 2.1 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.8
New York 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.3 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.3
North Carolina 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.6 2.3 2.3
North Dakota 1.3 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3
Ohio 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.4 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.2
Oklahoma 3.0 2.2 1.8 1.9 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.3
Oregon 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7
Pennsylvania 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.6 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.6
Rhode Island 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.7 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.9
South Carolina 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.6 3.0 2.9 2.5 2.4
South Dakota 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6
Tennessee 3.2 2.8 2.7 2.9 3.4 3.1 2.8 2.7
Texas 2.2 1.8 1.6 1.7 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2
Utah 0.8 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9
Vermont 1.9 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.1
Virginia 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.9 2.0 1.8 1.8
Washington 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9
West Virginia 2.4 2.1 2.2 2.6 3.5 3.9 4.2 4.3
Wisconsin 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.8 2.2 1.7 1.6 1.7
Wyoming 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1
      Total 1 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.9 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4
1 The number of SSI recipients used to calculate the total recipiency rate includes a certain number of recipients whose State is unknown. For 1975, 1985, and 1992, the numbers of unknown (in thousands) were 256, 14, and 71 respectively.
2 For 1975-92 the percentages are calculated as the average number of monthly SSI recipients over the total population of each State in July of that year.  For 1994-2003 the number of recipients is from the month of December; calculations by DHHS.
Source: Social Security Administration, Supplemental Security Income, Annual Statistical Report, 2007, and U.S. Census Bureau (resident population by state available online at http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/).


Endnotes

[1] In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the IFA (or a residual functional capacity assessment) that applied to adults whose condition did not meet or equal a listing of medical impairments to determine eligibility should also be applied to children whose condition did not meet or equal the medical listing of impairments.
[2] The GAO study estimated that 87,000 children were added to the SSI caseload after the IFA for children was initiated.


Where to?

Top of Page | Contents
Main Page of Report | Contents of Report

Home Pages:
Human Services Policy (HSP)
Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)