Indicators of Welfare Dependence: Annual Report to Congress, 2002

The Welfare Indicators Act of 1994 requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to prepare an annual report to Congress on indicators welfare dependence. The Indicators of Welfare Dependence report is prepared within the Office of Human Services Policy and delivered to Congress each spring. As mandated under the Congressional act, the report addresses the rate of welfare dependency, the degree and duration of welfare recipiency and dependence, and predictors of welfare dependence. Further, analyses of means-tested assistance in the report include benefits under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program; the Food Stamp Program, and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. The report also includes risk factors related to economic security, employment, and non-marital births, as well an appendix with data related to the above programs.

"

Executive Summary

The Welfare Indicators Act of 1994 requires the Department of Health and Human Services to prepare annual reports to Congress on indicators and predictors of welfare dependence. The 2002 Indicators of Welfare Dependence, the fifth annual report, provides welfare dependence indicators through 1999, reflecting changes that have taken place since enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in August 1996. As directed by the Welfare Indicators Act, the report focuses on benefits under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, now the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program; the Food Stamp Program; and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program.

Welfare dependence, like poverty, is a continuum, with variations in degree and in duration. Families may be more or less dependent if larger or smaller shares of their total resources are derived from welfare programs. The amount of time over which families depend on welfare might also be considered in assessing their degree of dependence. Although recognizing the difficulties inherent in defining and measuring dependence, the bipartisan Advisory Board on Welfare Indicators proposed the following definition, as one measure to examine in concert with other key indicators of dependence and deprivation:

A family is dependent on welfare if more than 50 percent of its total income in a one-year period comes from AFDC/TANF, food stamps and/or SSI, and this welfare income is not associated with work activities. Welfare dependence is the proportion of all families who are dependent on welfare.

The proposed definition is difficult to measure because of limitations with existing data collection efforts. Most importantly, the available data do not distinguish between cash benefits associated with work activities and non-work-related cash benefits. In addition, there are time lags in the availability of the national data from the detailed surveys that may be best suited to measure dependence. This 2002 report uses data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) and administrative data to provide updated measures through 1999 for several dependence indicators. Other measures are based on the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), and other data sources. Drawing on these various data sources, this report provides a number of key indicators of welfare recipiency, dependence, and labor force attachment. Selected highlights from the many findings in the report include the following:

• In 1999, 3.3 percent of the total population was dependent in the sense of receiving more than half of total family income from TANF, food stamps, and/or SSI (see Indicator 1). This rate has fallen considerably from the 5.2 percent rate measured in 1996. Rates of dependence would be lower if they could be adjusted to exclude welfare income associated with work required to obtain benefits.
• The drop in dependence parallels the more well-known drop in AFDC/TANF and food stamp caseloads. The percentage of individuals receiving AFDC/TANF, for example, fell from 4.7 percent to 2.1 percent between 1996 and 2000 (see Indicator 3). Food stamp recipiency rates dropped from 9.6 percent to 6.2 percent over the same time period. Recipiency rates for TANF and food stamps fell again between 1999 and 2000, suggesting that dependency rates will continue to fall in 2000 (though the data are not yet available).
• In an average month in 1999, more than half (59 percent) of TANF recipients lived in families with at least one family member in the labor force. Comparable figures for food stamp and SSI recipients were 58 and 38 percent, respectively (see Indicator 2). Labor force participation, particularly full-time employment, increased considerably among AFDC/TANF families in the last several years.
• Long-term dependence is relatively rare. Among individuals receiving AFDC at some point over the ten years ending in 1996, 14 percent were dependent on AFDC and food stamps for six or more years of that period (SSI income is excluded from this particular measure of dependency). This represents 1.7 percent of the total population. Another 40 percent of recipients were dependent for one to five of the ten years and 47 percent were not dependent in any year (see Indicator 9).

Since the causes of welfare receipt and dependence are not clearly known, the report also includes a larger set of risk factors associated with welfare receipt. The risk factors are loosely organized into three categories: economic security measures, measures related to employment and barriers to employment, and measures of nonmarital childbearing. The economic security risk factors include measures of poverty and deprivation that are important not only as predictors of dependence, but also as a supplement to the dependence indicators, ensuring that dependence measures are not assessed in isolation. It is important to examine whether decreases in dependency are accompanied by improvements in family economic status or by reductions in family material circumstances. The report includes data on the official poverty rate, one of the most common measures of deprivation:

• As the dependency rate fell between 1996 and 1999, the poverty rate for all individuals fell also, from 13.7 percent in 1996 to 11.8 percent in 1999. The poverty rate fell again in 2000, declining to 11.3 percent, the lowest rate since 1979 (see Economic Security Risk Factor 1, Figure ECON 1a).

Finally, the report has three appendices that provide additional program data on major welfare programs, as well as alternative measures of dependence and additional data on non-marital births.

Chapter I: Introduction and Overview

The Welfare Indicators Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-432) directed the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to publish an annual report on welfare dependency. This 2002 report, the fifth annual indicators report, gives updated data on the measures of welfare recipiency, dependency, and predictors of welfare dependence developed for previous reports. It reflects changes that have taken place since enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in August 1996.

The purpose of this report is to address questions concerning the extent to which American families depend on income from welfare programs. Under the Welfare Indicators Act, HHS was directed to address the rate of welfare dependency, the degree and duration of welfare recipiency and dependence, and predictors of welfare dependence. The Act further specified that analyses of means-tested assistance should include benefits under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, now the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program; the Food Stamp Program; and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program.

The first annual report was produced under the oversight of a bipartisan Advisory Board on Welfare Indicators, which assisted the Secretary in defining welfare dependence, developing indicators of welfare dependence, and choosing appropriate data. Under the terms of the original authorizing legislation, the Advisory Board was terminated in October 1997, prior to the submission of the first annual report. Subsequent annual reports have provided updates for the measures developed for the first report. In recent years, the report has been shortened, in keeping with Congressional interest in a smaller set of indicators and predictors of dependency.

This 2002 report provides updated measures through 1999 for several dependency measures. It has become possible to update these measures annually because of a change made last year in the data source for several indicators, from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to the Current Population Survey (CPS). Whereas the SIPP data have only been analyzed through 1995, the CPS data are available for more recent years, allowing examination of indicators and predictors of dependency since the enactment of welfare reform in 1996. Those measures that can be updated annually are presented at the front of each chapter, followed by the figures that are derived from data sources that are updated less frequently.

Organization of Report

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the specific summary measures of welfare dependence proposed by the Advisory Board. It also discusses summary measures of poverty, following the Board’s recommendation that dependence measures not be assessed in isolation from measures of deprivation. Analysis of both measures is important because changes in dependence measures could result either from increases in work activity and other factors that would raise family incomes, or from sanctions or other changes in welfare programs that would reduce welfare program participation but might not improve the material circumstances of these families. The introduction concludes with a discussion of data sources used for the report.

Chapter II of the report, Indicators of Dependence, presents eleven indicators of welfare dependence and recipiency. These indicators include dependence measures based on total income from all three programs — AFDC/TANF, SSI, and food stamps — as well as measures of recipiency for each of the three programs considered separately. The labor force participation among families receiving welfare and multiple receipt across programs are also shown. The second half of the chapter also includes longitudinal data on transitions on and off welfare programs and spells of dependence and recipiency.

Chapter III, Predictors and Risk Factors Associated with Welfare Receipt, focuses on predictors of welfare dependence — risk factors believed to be associated with welfare receipt in some way. These predictors are shown in three different groups:

1. Economic security — including various measures of poverty, receipt of child support, food insecurity, and health insurance coverage — is important in predicting dependence in the sense that families with fewer economic resources are more likely to rely on welfare programs for their support.
2. Measures of the work status and barriers to employment of adult family members also are critical, because families must generally receive an adequate income from employment in order to avoid dependence without severe deprivation.
3. Finally, data on non-marital births are important since a high proportion of long-term welfare recipients first became parents outside of marriage, frequently as teenagers.

Additional data are presented in three appendices. Appendix A provides basic program data on each of the main welfare programs and their recipients; Appendix B shows how dependence is affected by the inclusion of benefits from the SSI program; and Appendix C includes additional data on non-marital childbearing. The main welfare programs included in Appendix A are:

• The Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, the largest cash assistance program, provided monthly cash benefits to families with children, until its replacement by the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, which is run directly by the states. Data on the AFDC and TANF programs are provided in Appendix A, with AFDC data provided from 1977 through June 1997, and TANF data from July 1997 through 2000, or where available, 2001.
• The Food Stamp Program provides monthly food stamp coupons to all individuals, whether they are living in families or alone, provided their income and assets are below limits set in Federal law. It reaches more poor people over the course of a year than any other means-tested public assistance program. Appendix A provides historical data from 1970 to 2000, or where available, 2001.
• The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program provides monthly cash payments to elderly, blind, or disabled individuals or couples whose income and assets are below levels set in Federal law. Though the majority of recipients are adults, disabled children also are eligible. Historical data from 1974 through 2000 are provided in Appendix A.

Measuring Welfare Dependence

As suggested by its title, this report focuses on welfare “dependence” as well as welfare “recipiency.” While recipiency can be defined fairly easily, based on the presence of benefits from AFDC/TANF, SSI or food stamps, dependence is a more complex concept.

Welfare dependence, like poverty, is a continuum, with variations in degree and in duration. Families may be more or less dependent if larger or smaller shares of their total resources are derived from welfare programs. The amount of time over which a family depends on welfare might also be considered in assessing its degree of dependence. Nevertheless, a summary measure of dependence to be used as an indicator for policy purposes must have some fixed parameters that allow one to determine which families should be counted as dependent, just as the poverty line defines who is poor under the official standard. The definition of dependence proposed by the Advisory Board for this purpose is as follows:

A family is dependent on welfare if more than 50 percent of its total income in a one-year period comes from AFDC, food stamps and/or SSI, and this welfare income is not associated with work activities. Welfare dependence is the proportion of all families who are dependent on welfare.

This measure is not without its limitations. The Advisory Board recognized that no single measure could fully capture all aspects of dependence and that the proposed measure should be examined in concert with other key indicators of dependence and deprivation. In addition, while the proposed definition would count unsubsidized and subsidized employment and work required to obtain benefits as work activities, existing data sources do not permit distinguishing between welfare income associated with work activities and non-work-related welfare benefits. As a result, the data shown in this report overstate the incidence of dependence (as defined above) because welfare income associated with work required to obtain benefits is classified as welfare and not as income from work. This issue may be growing in importance under the increased work requirements of the TANF program. In 2000, the percentage of welfare recipients who were working (including employment, work experience, and community service) reached an all-time high of 33 percent, compared to the 7 percent recorded in 1992.¹

This proposed definition also represents an essentially arbitrary choice of a percentage (50 percent) of income from welfare beyond which families will be considered dependent. However, it is relatively easy to measure and to track over time, and is likely to be associated with any very large changes in total dependence, however defined. For example, dependence under this definition has declined as policy changes under welfare reform have moved more recipients into employment or work-related activities.

As shown in Figure SUM 1, 3.3 percent of the population would be considered “dependent” on welfare in 1999 under the above definition. This is about one-quarter of the percentage (13.3 percent) that lived in a family receiving at least some TANF, food stamp or SSI benefits during the year.

Figure SUM 1.Recipiency and Dependency Rates: 1996-1999

Note:  Recipiency is defined as living in a family with receipt of any amount of AFDC/TANF, SSI, or food stamps during year. Dependency is defined as having more than 50 percent of annual income from AFDC/TANF, SSI and/or food stamps. Dependency rates would be lower if adjusted to exclude welfare assistance associated with working

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Both dependency and recipiency rates fell between 1996 and 1999: dependence rates fell from 5.2 to 3.3 percent, while recipiency rates fell from 16.0 to 13.3 percent. The drop in recipiency rates is consistent with administrative data showing declining TANF and food stamp caseloads from 1996 to 1999. What is not apparent from administrative records, but is shown in these national survey data, is that the dependency rate also declined sharply between 1996 and 1999.

Recipiency and dependency rates are higher for non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics than for non-Hispanic whites, as shown in Table SUM 1, which shows these rates for various racial/ethnic and age categories. Recipiency and dependence also are higher for young children than for adults. However, both recipiency and dependency rates decreased across all racial/ethnic and age categories between 1996 and 1999.

Dependency on assistance also varies depending upon which programs are counted as “welfare programs.” Dependency would be much lower — 1.7 percent — if only AFDC/TANF and food stamp benefits were counted (as shown in Appendix B and as is done in some measures in this report). Whereas the inclusion or exclusion of individuals receiving only SSI benefits had a relatively small effect on dependence indicators several years ago, in 1999 over one-third of dependent individuals are dependent on SSI income only.

Another factor affecting dependence is the time period observed. The summary measures shown in Figure and Table SUM 1 focus on recipiency and dependency rates over a one-year time period. Long-term recipiency and dependency are more rare, as shown in the longitudinal measures in the second half of Chapter II. Indicator 9, for example, shows that among individuals receiving AFDC at some point over the ten years ending in 1996, 14 percent were dependent on AFDC and/or food stamps for six or more years (SSI income is excluded from this particular measure of dependency). This represents about 1.7 percent of the total population. Another 30 percent of recipients were dependent for one to five of the ten years, and 47 percent were not dependent in any year.

Table SUM 1. Recipiency and Dependency Rates: 1996-1999

	1996	1997	1998	1999
Recipiency Rates (Rates of Any Amount of AFDC/TANF, Food Stamps, or SSI)
All Persons	16.0	14.8	13.5	13.3
Racial/Ethnic Categories
Non-Hispanic White	9.9	9.7	8.6	8.4
Non-Hispanic Black	35.6	30.2	29.6	29.8
Hispanic	32.0	28.0	24.5	23.4
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-5	28.2	25.1	22.4	21.5
Children Ages 6-10	24.2	21.2	20.0	19.8
Children Ages 11-15	21.1	19.4	17.0	17.3
Women Ages 16-64	16.0	14.7	13.6	13.6
Men Ages 16-64	11.7	11.1	10.0	9.6
Adults Age 65 and over	10.3	10.2	9.9	10.0
Dependency Rates (More than 50 Percent of Income from Means-Tested Assistance)
All Persons	5.2	4.5	3.8	3.3
Racial/Ethnic Categories
Non-Hispanic White	2.6	2.5	2.1	1.8
Non-Hispanic Black	13.8	11.4	10.5	9.1
Hispanic	10.9	9.1	6.6	5.4
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-5	11.2	9.3	7.8	6.2
Children Ages 6-10	9.5	8.4	6.7	6.1
Children Ages 11-15	8.1	7.4	5.7	4.5
Women Ages 16-64	5.2	4.6	3.9	3.5
Men Ages 16-64	2.7	2.5	2.1	1.9
Adults Age 65 and over	2.4	2.1	2.1	2.0

Note:  Recipiency is defined as living in a family with receipt of any amount of AFDC/TANF, SSI, or food stamps during the year. Dependency is defined as having more than 50 percent of annual family income from AFDC/TANF, SSI and/or food stamps. Dependency rates would be lower if adjusted to exclude welfare assistance associated with working.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

---

¹ The earnings of those in unsubsidized employment would be correctly captured as income from work in national surveys. Any welfare benefits associated with work experience, community service programs or other work activities, however, would be counted as income from welfare in most national surveys, a classification incompatible with the proposed definition

Measuring Deprivation

Changes in dependence may or may not be associated with changes in the level of deprivation, depending on the alternative sources of support found by families who might otherwise be dependent on welfare. To assess the social impacts of any change in dependence, changes in the level of poverty or deprivation also should be considered. This chapter focuses on the poverty rate, the most common measure of deprivation; additional measures of poverty and need are also included under the Economic Risk Factors found in Chapter III.

As shown in Figure SUM 2, poverty rates for all individuals have declined between 1996 and 2000, under both the official poverty rate and other measures that adjust income to take into account cash benefits, non-cash benefits and taxes. The three measures in the graph are based on analyzing three different concepts of income against the poverty threshold:

The bold line shows the official poverty rate, based on total cash income, including earned and unearned income. The official poverty rate was 11.3 percent in 2000.

The dotted line with unfilled circles shows what poverty would be if means-tested cash assistance (primarily AFDC/TANF and SSI) were excluded from cash income. This measure includes earnings and other private cash income, plus social security, workers’ compensation, and other social insurance programs, as income. Poverty under this measure would be higher than the official measure, or 12.0 percent in 2000.

The lowest line shows that poverty would be lower if the cash value of selected non-cash benefits (food and housing) and taxes, including refunds under the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), were counted as income.² Under this definition, poverty rates in 2000 would be nearly two percentage points lower than the official measure, or 9.5 percent.

Figure SUM 2. Percentage of Total Population in Poverty with Various Means-Tested Benefits Added to Total Cash Income: 1979-2000

Source: Congressional Budget Office tabulations of March CPS data. Additional calculations by DHHS. See ECON 4 in Chapter III for underlying table and further notes.

Using any of the three alternative measures, poverty rates decreased between 1996 and 2000. Furthermore, a comparison of Figures SUM 1 and SUM 2 suggests that economic deprivation decreased at the same time as the large decline in caseloads and welfare dependence. Between 1996 and 2000, the “after non-cash benefits and taxes” measure of poverty fell by two percentage points, from 11.5 to 9.5 percent. Over the same time period, the dependence measure also declined, from 5.2 percent to 3.3 percent. The combined effect of welfare reform and the strong economy has been to reduce dependence on welfare at the same time as reducing poverty.

---

² The effects of selected non-cash benefits (food and housing) and taxes are shown separately in Figure ECON 4 in Chapter III. Prior to 1993, taxes increased poverty. Since 1993, taxes, including the refunds through the Earned Income Tax Credit, have caused reductions in poverty.

Data Sources

The primary data sources for this report are the Current Population Survey (CPS), the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), the Panel Study on Income Dynamics (PSID), and administrative data for the AFDC/TANF, Food Stamp, and SSI programs. Beginning with the 2001 report on dependence, there was a shift to using CPS rather than SIPP data for several indicators and predictors of welfare recipiency and dependence. This change was necessary because the Census Bureau has been unable to update the SIPP data analyses beyond the 1995 data presented in prior reports.

If it were not for the lags in data availability, the SIPP would be considered the most useful national survey for measuring welfare dependency. It was used most extensively in the first three annual dependence reports. Its strengths are its longitudinal design, system of monthly accounting, and detail concerning employment, income and participation in federal income-support and related programs. These features make the SIPP particularly effective for capturing the complexities of program dynamics and it continues to be an important source of data in this report, particularly for measures related to AFDC spell duration and transitions in and out of AFDC recipiency, dependency and poverty. More recent SIPP data will be available for next year’s report, allowing examination of program dynamics under the TANF program.

For measures of receipt, dependency, and poverty at a single point in time, however, the report primarily uses the Annual March Demographic Supplement to the CPS, which measures income and poverty over an annual accounting period. The CPS data are available on a more timely basis than the SIPP, and have been widely used to measure trends since the welfare reform legislation of 1996. However, because the CPS does not collect income in the same detail as the SIPP, it has been subject to criticism for underreporting of income, particularly welfare income. To address this concern, some of the indicators in this report are based on CPS data that have been analyzed by the Transfer Income Model (TRIM3), a microsimulation model developed by the Urban Institute under contract to the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. Although its primary purpose is to simulate program eligibility and the impact of policy proposals, the TRIM model has also been used to correct for underreporting of welfare receipt and benefits. Welfare caseloads in TRIM3 are based on CPS data, adjusted upward to ensure that total estimates of recipients equal the total counts from administrative data. Even with these adjustments, some measurement differences between the CPS/TRIM data and SIPP data remain.

As shown in Figure SUM 3, the overall measures of dependency and recipiency have not been greatly affected by the change in data sources. Both data sources show a decline in dependence between 1993 and 1995, from 5.9 to 5.1 percent under the SIPP data, and from 5.9 to 5.3 percent under the TRIM-adjusted CPS data. Still, readers are cautioned against comparing measures for 1987-1995 from the SIPP data in the first three annual reports with the measures for 1996-1999 from the TRIM-adjusted CPS data. In Chapter II, indicators using the CPS data have been analyzed for every year since 1993 (the first year for which TRIM-adjusted CPS data are available), providing a new time series of how the indicators are changing over time from a consistent data source.

Figure SUM 3. Recipiency and Dependency Rates from Two Data Sources: 1987-1999

Note:  Recipiency is defined as receipt of any amount of AFDC/TANF, SSI, or food stamps during year. Dependency is defined as having more than 50 percent of annual family income from AFDC/TANF, SSI and/or food stamps. Dependency rates would be lower if adjusted to exclude welfare assistance associated with working.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

The Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) is another source of data used in this report. Like the SIPP it provides longitudinal data, but over a much longer time period than the approximate three-year time period of the SIPP. The PSID has collected annual income data, including transfer income, since 1968, providing vital data for indicators of long-term welfare receipt, dependence, and deprivation. As with the SIPP data, there have been lags in obtaining updated PSID data. This 2002 report provides the first updated analysis of PSID data since the initial Indicators of Welfare Dependence report issued several years ago. The PSID data are now reported for the ten-year time period ending in 1996, as well as for two earlier ten-year time periods.

Finally, the report also draws upon administrative data for the AFDC/TANF, Food Stamp and SSI programs. These data are largely reported in Appendix A. Like the CPS data, administrative data are generally available with little time lags; these data are generally available through fiscal year 2000 (or, for some aggregate caseload statistics, fiscal year 2001). To the extent possible, TANF administrative data are reported in a consistent manner with data from the earlier AFDC program, as noted in the footnotes to the tables in Appendix A. The fact remains that assistance under locally designed TANF programs encompasses a diverse set of cash and non-cash benefits designed to support families in making a transition to work, and so direct comparisons between AFDC receipt and TANF receipt must be made with caution. This issue also affects reported data on TANF receipt in national data sets such as the CPS and SIPP.

Most of the data sources allow analysis of the indicators and predictors of welfare dependence across several age and racial/ethnic categories. Where the data are available, statistics are shown for three racial/ethnic groups — non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics.³ In some instances, however, there are not sufficient data on individuals of Hispanic origin, and so the measures are shown for only two racial/ethnic categories.

Three other technical notes, and technical changes to two work-related predictors of dependence, concern the unit of analysis and the difference between annual and monthly measures. The individual, rather than the family or household, is the unit of analysis for most of the statistics in this report. The individual’s dependency status, however, is generally based on total family income, taking into account means-tested assistance, earnings and other sources of income for all individuals in the family. ⁴This chapter, for example, has reported the percentage of individuals that are dependent (in SUM 1) or poor (in SUM 2) according to annual total family income. Recipiency status is also based on total annual family income in some instances; in SUM 1, for example, recipients are individuals in families receiving assistance at some point in the year. In most other indicators, recipiency is measured as the direct receipt of a benefit by an individual in a month. The difference between an individual and a family measure of recipiency is largest in the SSI program, which provides benefits to individuals and couples, not to families.

There also are differences between monthly and annual observation of benefit receipt. For example, the measures of annual recipiency (that is, any receipt over the course of a year) shown in Figure and Table SUM 1 are higher than the more traditional measures of recipiency in an average month, as shown in several other indicators.

Finally, data sources for two work-related risk factors have been modified this year to allow for their annual update in future reports. The data source for WORK 6, dealing with alcohol and substance abuse among adults, is still the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA). However, as a result of a change in methodology in the NHSDA, the data from 1999 and 2000 are not comparable to earlier data. Thus, while the 2002 report includes only the 1999 and 2000 data, this risk factor can be updated in the future. In addition, past versions of work-related risk factor WORK 7, which deals with disability in adults and children, have used unpublished data from a 1994 disability supplement to the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). As this was a one-time supplement, this risk factor has not been updated since the first indicators report in 1997. The 2002 report uses data from the annual NHIS, specifically the 2000 survey, to provide similar data that will be updated in future reports; however, these data should not be compared with disability risk factors from previous reports.

---

³Due to small sample size, American Indians/Alaska natives and Asian/Pacific Islanders are included in the totals but are not shown separately.

⁴Family is generally defined as following the broad Census Bureau definition of family — all persons residing together that are related by birth, marriage, or adoption.

Chapter II: Indicators of Dependence

Following the format of the previous annual reports to Congress, Chapter II presents summary data related to indicators of dependence. These indicators differ from other welfare statistics because of their emphasis on welfare dependence, rather than simple welfare receipt. As discussed in Chapter I, the Advisory Board on Welfare Indicators suggested measuring dependence as the proportion of families with more than 50 percent of their total income in a one-year period coming from AFDC (now TANF), food stamps and/or SSI. Furthermore, this welfare income was not to be associated with work activities.

The indicators in Chapter II were selected to provide information about dependence, following, to the extent feasible, the definition of dependence proposed by the Advisory Board. Existing data from administrative records and national surveys, however, do not generally distinguish welfare benefits received in conjunction with work from benefits received without work. Thus, it was not possible to construct one single indicator of dependence; that is, one indicator that measures both percentage of income from means-tested assistance and presence of work activities.

Instead, this chapter includes some indicators that focus on the percentage of recipients’ income from means-tested assistance, while other indicators focus on presence of work activities at the same time as welfare receipt. Still other indicators present summary data and characteristics on all recipients, not limited to those with more than 50 percent of total income from welfare programs or those without work activities.

Overall, the indicators of dependency were selected to reflect both the range and depth of dependence. This chapter focuses on recipients of three major means-tested cash and nutritional assistance programs: cash assistance through the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for elderly and disabled recipients, and the Food Stamp Program.

Here is a brief summary of each of the eleven indicators:

Indicator 1: Degree of Dependence. This indicator focuses most closely on those individuals who meet the Advisory Board’s proposed definition of “dependence.” In addition to examining individuals with more than 50 percent of their annual family income from AFDC/TANF, food stamps and/or SSI, it shows various levels of dependence by examining those with more than 0 percent, 25 percent, and 75 percent of their income from these sources (Indicators 1a and 1b). This indicator also shows the average percentage of income from means-tested assistance and earnings received by families with various levels of income relative to the poverty level (Indicators 1c and 1d).

Indicator 2: Receipt of Means-Tested Assistance and Labor Force Attachment. This indicator looks further at the relationship between receipt of means-tested assistance and participation in the labor force. This is an important issue because of the significant number of low-income individuals who use a combination of means-tested assistance and earnings from the labor force to get by each month.

Indicator 3: Rates of Receipt of Means-Tested Assistance. This indicator paints yet another picture of dependence by measuring recipiency rates, that is, the percentage of the population that receives AFDC/TANF, food stamps, or SSI in an average month. Program administrative data make these figures readily available over time, allowing a better sense of historical trends than is available from the more specialized indicators of dependence.

Indicator 4: Rates of Participation in Means-Tested Assistance Programs. While means-tested public assistance programs are open to all that meet their requirements, not all eligible households participate in the programs. This indicator uses administrative data and microsimulation models to reflect “take up rates” — the number of families that actually participate in the programs as a percentage of those who are legally eligible.

Indicator 5: Multiple Program Receipt. Depending on their circumstances, individuals may choose a variety of different means-tested assistance “packages.” This indicator looks at the percentage of individuals receiving AFDC/TANF, food stamps, and SSI in a month, examining how many rely on just one of these programs, and how many rely on a combination of two programs.

Indicator 6: Dependence Transitions. This indicator uses data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to look at the ability of individuals who are dependent on welfare in one year to make the transition out of dependence in the following year.

Indicator 7: Dependence Spell Duration. Like Indicator 6, this indicator is concerned with dynamics of welfare receipt and welfare dependence. It shows the proportion of individuals with short, medium, and long spells, or episodes, of AFDC receipt. The focus is on individuals in AFDC families with no labor force participants.

Indicator 8: Program Spell Duration. One critical aspect of dependence is how long individuals receive means-tested assistance. Like Indicator 7, this indicator provides information on short, medium, and long spells of welfare receipt. It differs from Indicator 7 in looking at all recipients, regardless of attachment to the labor force, and in analyzing recipients of each of the three major means-tested programs — AFDC, food stamps, and SSI.

Indicator 9: Long-Term Dependency. This indicator uses data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) to examine dependency over three separate ten-year time periods. It measures dependency as individuals with more than 50 percent of their income from AFDC and food stamps, not counting SSI.

Indicator 10: Long-Term Receipt. Many individuals who leave welfare programs cycle back on after an absence of several months. Thus it is important to look beyond individual program spells, measured in Indicator 8, to examine the cumulative amount of time individuals receive assistance over a period of several years. The issue of long-term receipt is particularly important in light of time limits that have been enacted under state TANF programs.

Indicator 11: Events Associated with the Beginning and Ending of Program Spells. To gain a better understanding of welfare dynamics, it is important to go beyond measures of spell duration and examine information regarding the major events in people’s lives that are correlated with the beginnings or endings of program spells. This measure focuses on receipt of AFDC.

Indicator 1. Degree of Dependence

Figure IND 1a.Percentage of Total Income from Means-Tested Assistance Programs: 1999

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

• About 3.3 percent of the total population in 1999 received more than half of their total family income from TANF, food stamps and SSI. As shown in Table IND1b, the percentage of families dependent on public assistance steadily decreased over the past several years.
• A total of 13.3 percent of the overall population received at least one dollar in means-tested assistance in 1999. However, for over half of these individuals (7.7 percent of the total population), such assistance represented 25 percent or less of annual family income. The vast majority (87 percent) of the population received no means-tested assistance in 1999.
• Very young children (birth to five years) were more likely than children of other ages to be in families receiving some amount of public assistance. As shown in Table IND 1a, 6 percent of very young children were dependent on public assistance in 1999.
• In 1999, only one out of four of individuals receiving some public assistance reported that TANF, food stamps, and SSI accounted for more than half of their total family income. This number showed a decline in dependence since 1996, when nearly one in three individuals receiving public assistance were dependent on it.

Table IND 1a. Percentage of Total Annual Family Income from Means-Tested Assistance Programs, by Race/Ethnicity and Age: 1999

Note:  Means-tested assistance includes AFDC/TANF, SSI, and food stamps. Total >50% includes all persons with more than 50 percent of their total annual family income from these means-tested programs. Income includes cash income and the value of food stamps.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Table IND 1b. Percentage of Total Income from Means-Tested Assistance Programs: 1993-1999

Note:  Means-tested assistance includes AFDC/TANF, SSI, and food stamps. Total >50% includes all persons with more than 50 percent of their total annual family income from these means-tested programs. Income includes cash income and the value of food stamps.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Figure IND 1c.  Percentage of Total Income from Various Sources, by Poverty Status: 1999

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

• Those in families with incomes below the poverty level received nearly half (49 percent) of their total family income from earnings and 30 percent of their total family income from means-tested assistance programs (AFDC/TANF, SSI, and food stamps) in 1999. In contrast, those with family incomes over 200 percent of the poverty level received the majority (85 percent) of their incomes from earnings and less than one percent of their income from means-tested assistance (a percentage so small as to not be visible in Figure IND 1c).
• The percentage of family income received from earnings is inversely proportional to overall family income relative to the poverty line. For example, the percentage of income received from earnings for those living in deep poverty (below 50 percent of poverty) was only 30 percent, compared to 49 percent for all poor individuals in 1999.
• On average, children were more likely than the elderly to live in families receiving a higher percentage of their income from means-tested assistance programs, as shown by Table IND 1c. The elderly received more income from other sources, such as Social Security benefits and private pensions.
• The percentage of income received from earnings for families with incomes below the poverty level has increased over time, as shown in Table IND 1d. In 1995, poor families received 40 percent of their incomes from earnings; this percentage rose to 49 percent in 1999.

Table IND 1c. Percentage of Total Income from Various Sources, by Poverty Status, Race/Ethnicity, and Age: 1999

Note:  Total income is total annual family income, including the value of food stamps. Other income is non means-tested, non-earnings income such as child support, alimony, pensions, Social Security benefits, interest, and dividends. Poverty status categories are not mutually exclusive.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Table IND 1d. Percentage of Total Income from Various Sources: Selected Years

Note:  Total income is total annual family income, including the value of food stamps. Other income is non means-tested, non-earnings income such as child support, alimony, pensions, Social Security benefits, interest, and dividends. Poverty status categories are not mutually exclusive.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Indicator 2. Receipt of Means-tested Assistance and Labor Force Attachment

Figure IND 2. Percentage of Recipients in Families with Labor Force Participants, by Program: 1999

• In 1999, 59 percent of individuals who received TANF, 58 percent of individuals who received food stamps, and 39 percent of individuals who received SSI were in families with at least one person in the labor force, either part-time or full-time.
• Over one-third of TANF and food stamp recipients lived in families with at least one full-time worker in 1999, while slightly less than one-fourth had a part-time labor force participant. In contrast, SSI recipients were more likely to live in families with no labor force participant.
• As shown in Table IND 2a, among recipients of TANF, food stamps, and SSI, a larger percentage of children under age 6 were in families with at least one full-time worker than children ages 6 to 15.
• The percentage of AFDC/TANF recipients living in families with at least one full-time worker increased from 24 percent in 1996 to 36 percent in 1999, as shown in Table IND 2b.

Table IND 2a. Percentage of Recipients in Families with Labor Force Participants, by Program, Race/Ethnicity, and Age: 1999

	No one in LF	At least one in LF,  No one FT	At least one FT worker
TANF
All Persons	40.8	24.1	35.1
Non-Hispanic White	36.7	26.1	37.2
Non-Hispanic Black	47.9	27.1	24.9
Hispanic	42.2	17.0	40.8
Children Ages 0-5	39.7	21.6	38.7
Children Ages 6-10	47.1	24.6	28.3
Children Ages 11-15	43.8	21.8	34.4
Women Ages 16-64	40.1	25.6	34.3
Men Ages 16-64	29.9	30.1	40.0
Adults Age 65 and over	33.6	2.7	63.7
SSI
All Persons	61.5	9.5	29.1
Non-Hispanic White	68.0	7.8	24.2
Non-Hispanic Black	61.9	12.2	25.9
Hispanic	47.6	10.5	41.9
Children Ages 0-5	26.4	15.9	57.7
Children Ages 6-10	36.2	20.0	43.8
Children Ages 11-15	31.2	18.8	50.1
Women Ages 16-64	68.7	9.4	21.9
Men Ages 16-64	64.7	8.7	26.6
Adults Age 65 and over	63.7	6.6	29.7
Food Stamps
All Persons	42.5	22.5	35.0
Non-Hispanic White	44.5	21.2	34.2
Non-Hispanic Black	43.0	25.2	31.8
Hispanic	39.0	18.8	42.3
Children Ages 0-5	34.9	22.8	42.3
Children Ages 6-10	36.0	25.2	38.8
Children Ages 11-15	36.6	23.1	40.4
Women Ages 16-64	42.6	24.4	33.0
Men Ages 16-64	40.8	22.8	36.4
Adults Age 65 and over	88.4	6.2	5.4

Note:  Recipients are limited to those individuals or family members directly receiving benefits in a month. Full-time workers are those who usually work 35 hours or more per week. Part-time labor force participation includes part-time workers and those who are unemployed, laid off, and/or looking for work. This indicator measures, on an average monthly basis, the combination of individual benefit receipt and labor force participation by any family member in the same month.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Table IND 2b. Percentage of AFDC/TANF Recipients in Families with Labor Force Participants: 1993-1999

Note:  Recipients are limited to those individuals or family members directly receiving benefits in a month. Full-time workers are those who usually work 35 hours or more per week. Part-time labor force participation includes those who are unemployed, laid off, and/or looking for work. This indicator measures, on an average monthly basis, the combination of individual benefit receipt and labor force participation by any family member in the same month.

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Indicator 3. Rates of Receipt of Means-tested Assistance

Figure IND 3a. Percentage of the Total Population Receiving AFDC/TANF, by Age: 1970-2000

Source:  U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, and U.S. Bureau of the Census, United States Census 2000, (Available online at http://www.census.gov).

• Although the survey data needed to examine overall welfare receipt and dependency are not yet available past 1999, administrative data for AFDC/TANF, food stamps, and SSI provide measures of recipiency for each of these three programs through 2000, as shown in Figures IND 3a, IND 3b, and IND 3c. Additional administrative data are shown in Appendix A.
• Just over 2 percent of the population received TANF in 2000. This is the lowest rate of AFDC/TANF receipt in the 30 years shown in Table IND 3a. The percentage of the total population receiving AFDC/TANF has dropped significantly since 1994, when it was at a 25-year high of over 5 percent.
• AFDC/TANF recipiency rates have been much higher over time for children than for adults, with the child recipiency rates also showing more pronounced changes over time. Between 1996 and 2000, the receipt of AFDC/TANF receipt among children was cut in half (from 12 to 6 percent), the most rapid decline in a generation.

Table IND 3a. Number and Percentage of the Total Population Receiving AFDC/TANF, by Age: 1970-2000

Notes: See Appendix A, Tables TANF 2, TANF 12, and TANF 14, for more detailed data on recipiency rates, including recipiency rates by calendar year. Recipients are expressed as the fiscal year average of monthly caseloads from administrative data, excluding recipients in the territories. Child recipients include a small number of dependents ages 18 and older who are students. The average number of adult and child recipients in 1998 and 1999 is estimated using data from the Emergency TANF Data Report.

Source:  U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, and U.S. Bureau of the Census, United States Census 2000, (Available online at http://www.census.gov).

Figure IND 3b. Percentage of the Total Population Receiving Food Stamps, by Age: 1975-2000

Source:  USDA, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation, Characteristics of Food Stamp Households, Fiscal Year 2000, and earlier reports, and U.S. Bureau of the Census, United States Census 2000, (Available online at http://www.census.gov).

Table IND 3b. Number and Percentage of the Total Population Receiving Food Stamps, by Age: 1975-2000

Note:  See Appendix A, Tables FSP 1 and FSP 6 for more detailed data on recipiency rates. Recipients are expressed as the fiscal year average of monthly caseloads from administrative data, excluding recipients in the territories.

Source:  USDA, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation, Characteristics of Food Stamp Households, Fiscal Year 2000, and earlier reports, and U.S. Bureau of the Census, United States Census 2000, (Available online at http://www.census.gov).

Figure IND 3c. Percentage of the Total Population Receiving SSI, by Age: 1975-2000

Source:  Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001 (Data available online at http://www.ssa.gov/statistics), and U.S. Bureau of the Census, United States Census 2000, (Available online at http://www.census.gov).

• Unlike the recipiency rates for AFDC/TANF and food stamps, which have been influenced by outside factors such as the economy and welfare reform, overall recipiency rates for SSI show less variation over time. After trending downward slightly from 1975 to the early 1980s, the proportion of the total population that receives SSI has risen from 1.7 percent in 1983 to 2.5 percent in 1996 and subsequently declined slightly to 2.3 percent. As shown in Table IND 3c, the total number of recipients has grown by 70Unlike the recipiency rates for AFDC/TANF and food stamps, which have be
• Elderly adults (age 65 and older) have much higher recipiency rates than any other age group. The gap has narrowed, however, as the percentage of adults age 65 and older receiving SSI has been cut nearly in half, declining from 10.9 percent in 1975 to 5.7 percent in 2000.
• The proportion of children receiving SSI increased gradually between 1975 and 1990, and grew more rapidly in the early-to-mid 1990s, reaching a high of 1.4 percent in 1996. The rate has since fallen slightly, with 1.2 percent of children receiving SSI in 2000.

Table IND 3c. Number and Percentage of the Total Population Receiving SSI, by Age: 1975-2000

Note:  December population figures used as the denominators are obtained by averaging the Census Bureau's July 1 population estimates for the current and the following year (the December population estimates for the year 2000 are extrapolations of April 1, 2000 population figures). See Appendix A, Tables SSI 2, SSI 8, and SSI 9 for more detailed data on SSI recipiency rates. In this report the categories of children under 18 and adults 18-64 differ from those in previous editions where the category of children included a small number of dependents 18 and older who were students.

Source:  Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001 (Data available online at http://www.ssa.gov/statistics), and U.S. Bureau of the Census, United States Census 2000, (Available online at http://www.census.gov).

Indicator 4. Rates of Participation in Means-tested Assistance Programs

Figure IND 4. Participation Rates in the AFDC/TANF, Food Stamp and SSI Programs: Selected Years

Source:  AFDC and SSI participation rates are tabulated using TRIM3 microsimulation model, while food stamp participation rates are from a Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. model. See Tables IND 4a, IND 4b, and IND 4c for details.

• Whereas Indicator 3 examined participants as a percentage of the total population (recipiency rates), this indicator examines participating families or households as a percentage of the estimated eligible population (participation rates, also known as “take up” rates).
• Participation rates for both AFDC/TANF and the Food Stamp Program fell significantly between 1995 and 1999, with the sharpest decline between 1996 and 1998.
• Only 52 percent of the families estimated as eligible for TANF actually enrolled and received benefits in an average month in 1999. This was significantly lower than AFDC participation rates, which ranged from 77 percent to 86 percent between 1981 and 1996. The food stamp participation rate in 1999 was also 52 percent, its lowest level since 1990.
• In contrast to the declines in AFDC/TANF and Food Stamp Program participation, the SSI participation rate rose by more than 9 percentage points between 1993 and 1999. In 1999, the SSI participation rate was 74 percent, well above the rates for the other two programs.
• Simulations of the AFDC/TANF eligible population show relatively small changes in the number of families eligible for benefits between 1995 and 1998. These data suggest that the large caseload declines between 1995 and 1998 were largely a result of declining participation or “take up” rates among the eligible populations. Between 1998 and 1999, however, the eligible population dropped by roughly 600,000 families, to the lowest level since 1990.

Table IND 4a. Number and Percentage of Eligible Families Participating in AFDC/TANF: Selected Years

Notes: Participation rates are estimated by an Urban Institute model (TRIM3) which uses CPS data to simulate AFDC/TANF eligibility and participation for an average month, by calendar year. There have been small changes in estimating methodology over time, due to model improvements and revisions to the CPS. Most notably, since 1994, the model has been revised to more accurately estimate SSI participation among children, and since 1997 the model was adjusted to more accurately exclude ineligible immigrants. The numbers of eligible and participating families shown above include the territories and pregnant women without children, even though these two small groups are excluded from the TRIM model. The numbers shown here implicitly assume that participation rates for the territories and for pregnant women with no other children are the same as for all other eligibles.

Source: DHHS, Administration for Children and Families caseload tabulations, and unpublished data from the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Table IND 4b. Number and Percentage of Eligible Households Participating in the Food Stamp Program: Selected Years

	Eligible Households (in millions)	Participating Households  (in millions)	Participation Rate  (percent)
September 76	16.3	5.3	33
February 78	14.0	5.3	38
August 80	14.0	7.4	52
August 82	14.5	7.5	51
August 84	14.2	7.3	52
August 86	15.3	7.1	47
August 88	14.9	7.0	47
August 90	14.5	8.0	55
August 91	15.6	9.2	59
August 92	16.7	10.2	62
August 93	17.0	10.9	64
August 94 (o)	17.0	11.0	65
September 94 (r)	15.5	10.7	69
September 95	15.1	10.4	69
September 96	15.5	9.9	64
September 97	14.8	8.4	57
September 98	14.2	7.6	54
September 99	13.9	7.3	52

Note:  Eligible households estimated from a Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. model that uses CPS data to simulate the Food Stamp Program. Caseload data are from USDA, FNS program operations caseload data. There have been small changes in estimating methodology over time, due to model improvements and revisions to the CPS. Most notably, the model was revised in 1994 to produce more accurate (and lower) estimates of eligible households. The original 1994 estimate and estimates for previous years show higher estimates of eligibles and lower participation rates relative to the revised estimate for 1994 and estimates for subsequent years.

Source:  U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Trends in Food Stamp Program Participation Rates: 1994 to 1999.

• The proportion of eligible households who participated in the Food Stamp program fell from 64 percent in 1996 to 52 percent in 1999, a drop of 12 percentage points. This is the fourth year in a row that there has been a decline in Food Stamp participation rates.
• In addition, there was a decline in the number of households eligible for the Food Stamp program, from 15.5 million in September 1996 to just under 14 million in September 1999. This decline was driven by new eligibility restrictions on aliens and able-bodied adults without dependent children, growth in the economy, changes in the TANF program, and other factors.
• The significant drop in participating households, from just under 10 million households in September 1996 to 7.3 million households in September 1999, reflects the combined effect of a decline in the eligible population and lower participation rates.

Table IND 4c. Percentage of Eligible Adult Units Participating in the SSI Program, by Type: 1993-1999

Notes: Participation rates estimated using the TRIM3 microsimulation model, which uses CPS data to simulate SSI eligibility for an average month, by calendar year. There have been small changes in estimating methodology over time, due to model improvements and revisions to the CPS. In particular, the model was revised in 1997 to more accurately exclude ineligible immigrants. Thus the increased participation rate in 1997 is partly due to a revision in estimating methodology. Also note that the figure for married-couple units is based on very small sample sizes — married couple units were only about 7.5 percent of the eligible adults units and 5.1 percent of the units receiving SSI in the average month of 1998.

Source:  Unpublished data from the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

• In contrast to the declining participation rates for the AFDC/TANF and Food Stamp programs, the participation rate for adult units in the SSI Program has been increasing, from 62 percent in 1993, to 74 percent in 1999. Note, however, that some of the apparent growth between 1996 and 1997 may be due to a revision in estimating methodology, as noted above.
• In 1999, as in past years, disabled adults in one-person units had a higher participation rate (83 percent) than both aged adults in one-person units (66 percent) and adults in married-couple units (48 percent).

Indicator 5. Multiple Program Receipt

Figure IND 5. Percentage of Population Receiving Assistance from Multiple Programs (TANF, Food Stamps, & SSI), Among Those Receiving Assistance: 1999

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

• Of the 9 percent of the population in families receiving TANF, food stamps, or SSI benefits in an average month in 1998, nearly two-thirds (65 percent) received assistance from only one program. Most of these received food stamps or SSI benefits only. Another common pattern of benefit receipt, found in 24 percent of those with any receipt, was TANF and food stamps.
• Children are more likely than others to live in families receiving TANF and/or food stamps. For example, 16 percent of children under six lived in families receiving any public assistance in an average month in 1999, and 6 percent of children under six lived in families receiving both TANF and food stamps, as shown in Table IND 5a.
• The percentage of individuals receiving assistance from at least one program among AFDC/TANF, food stamps, and SSI in an average month decreased during the mid-to-late 1990s (from 12 percent in 1996 to less than 9 percent in 1999), as shown in Table IND 5b. The decline was most dramatic for those families receiving a combination of AFDC/TANF and food stamps.

Table IND 5a. Percentage of Population Receiving Assistance from Multiple Programs (TANF, Food Stamps, SSI), by Race/Ethnicity and Age: 1999

Table IND 5b. Percentage of Population Receiving Assistance from Multiple Programs (AFDC/TANF, Food Stamps, SSI): 1993-1999

	Any Receipt	One Program Only			Two Programs
		AFDC/ TANF	FS	SSI	AFDC/TANF & FS	FS & SSI
1993	12.6	0.6	5.2	1.1	4.8	1.0
1994	12.8	0.5	5.3	1.2	4.6	1.1
1995	12.3	0.4	5.0	1.2	4.5	1.1
1996	12.0	0.3	5.3	1.2	4.0	1.1
1997	10.2	0.4	4.3	1.3	3.1	1.0
1998	9.0	0.4	3.9	1.4	2.4	0.9
1999	8.5	0.4	3.8	1.3	2.0	1.0

Note:  Categories are mutually exclusive. SSI receipt based on individual receipt; AFDC/TANF and food stamp receipt based on full recipient unit. By definition, individuals may not receive both AFDC/TANF and SSI; hence, no individual receives benefits from all three programs. The percentage of individuals receiving assistance from any one program in an average month (shown here) is lower than the percentage residing in families receiving assistance over the course of a year (shown in Table SUM 1 in Chapter I and Table IND 1a in Chapter II).

Source:  March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

Indicator 6. Dependence Transitions

Figure IND 6. Dependency Status in 1995 of Persons Who Received More than 50 Percent of Income from Means-Tested Assistance in 1994, by Race/Ethnicity

Source:  Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 panel.

• Nearly four-fifths (79 percent) of all recipients who received more than 50 percent of their total income from means-tested assistance programs in 1994 also received more than 50 percent of their total income from these same programs in 1995.
• Of recipients who received more than 50 percent of their total income from AFDC, food stamps and SSI in 1994, a larger percentage of non-Hispanic whites became “less dependent” in 1995 (received 50 percent or less of their total income from means-tested assistance programs) compared to Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks.
• As shown in Table IND 6, a slightly larger percentage of women who received more than half of their total income from means-tested assistance programs in 1994 remained “dependent” in 1995 compared to the same percentage for men (79 percent compared to 73 percent).

Table IND 6. Dependency Status in 1995 of Persons Who Received More than 50 Percent of Income from Means-Tested Assistance in 1994, by Race/Ethnicity and Age

Individuals Receiving more than 50% of Income from Assistance in 1994	Total (000's)	Percentage of Persons Receiving
		No Aid in 1995	Up to 50% in 1995	Over 50% in 1995
All Persons	13,986	2.7	18.8	78.5
Racial/Ethnic Categories
Non-Hispanic White	4,804	3.1	26.2	70.7
Non-Hispanic Black	4,710	2.3	19.2	78.5
Hispanic	3,418	2.9	11.6	85.5
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-5	3,185	2.0	18.6	79.4
Children Ages 6-10	2,102	0.6	17.8	81.6
Children Ages 11-15	1,724	1.6	19.5	78.9
Men Ages 16-64	1,866	2.5	18.7	72.6
Women Ages 16-64	4,472	7.1	20.4	78.8
Adults Age 65 and over	636	4.6	17.9	77.5

Note:  Means-tested assistance is defined as AFDC, food stamps, and SSI. While only affecting a small number of cases, general assistance income is included within AFDC income. Individuals are defined as dependent if they reside in families with more than 50 percent of total annual family income from these means-tested programs. Because full calendar year data for 1995 were not available for all SIPP respondents, some transitions were based on twelve-month periods that did not correspond exactly to calendar years.

Source:  Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 panel.

Indicator 7. Dependence Spell Duration

Figure IND 7. Percentage of AFDC Spells of Individuals in Families with No Labor Force Participants for Individuals Entering Programs During the 1993 SIPP Panel, by Length of Spell

Source:  Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 panel.

• Forty-three percent of AFDC spells for individuals in families with no one in the labor force ended within a year. This measure is for individuals entering AFDC in 1993-1995, prior to enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA).
• Over one-quarter (27 percent) of AFDC spells for individuals in families where no one participated in the labor force lasted four months or less.
• As shown in Table IND 7, a smaller percentage of AFDC spells to children in families with no labor force participants ended in four months or less compared to their adult counterparts (25 percent compared to 31 percent).
• Spells shown in Figure IND 7 are limited to spells of recipients in families without any labor force participation. Spell lengths are shorter in Figure IND 8, which shows spells for all recipients, including those in families with labor force participants. For example, whereas only half (50 percent) of spells shown in Figure IND 7 end in 20 months or less, over two-thirds (69 percent) of all AFDC spells last 20 months or less, as shown in Figure IND 8.

Table IND 7. Percentage of AFDC Spells of Individuals in Families with No Labor Force Participants for Individuals Entering Programs During the 1993 SIPP Panel, by Length of Spell, Race/Ethnicity, and Age

	Spells <=4 months	Spells <=12 months	Spells <=20 months	Spells >20 months
All Persons	27.2	43.4	50.3	49.7
Racial/Ethnic Categories
Non-Hispanic White	30.2	40.7	43.0	57.0
Non-Hispanic Black	17.4	45.6	N/A	N/A
Hispanic	33.2	N/A	N/A	N/A
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-15	24.7	41.9	49.1	50.9
Adults Ages 16-64	30.6	45.8	51.9	48.1

Note:  Spell length categories are not mutually exclusive. Spells separated by only 1 month are not considered separate spells. Due to the length of the observation period, actual spell lengths for spells that lasted more than 20 months cannot be observed. AFDC spells are defined as those spells starting during the 1993 SIPP panel for individuals in families with no labor force participants. For certain racial/ethnic categories, data are not available (N/A) due to insufficient sample size.

Source:  Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 panel.

Indicator 8. Program Spell Duration

Figure IND 8. Percentage of AFDC, Food Stamp, and SSI Spells for Individuals Entering Programs During the 1993 SIPP Panel, by Length of Spell

Source:  Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 Panel.

• Between the years 1993 and 1995, short spells lasting 4 months or less accounted for 31 percent of AFDC spells, 24 percent of SSI spells, and 33 percent of food stamp spells.
• Over one-half of all AFDC and food stamp spells lasted one year or less (56 percent and 60 percent, respectively). In contrast, only 32 percent of SSI spells ended within one year. The percentage of SSI spells that lasted more than 20 months is twice the percentage of AFDC and food stamp spells that lasted this long (see Table IND 5).
• As shown in Table IND 8, for AFDC spells, a larger percentage of short spells (lasting 4 months or less) and a smaller percentage of long spells (lasting more than 20 months) occurred among non-Hispanic whites compared to non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics.
• A larger percentage of AFDC and food stamp spells among adults ages 16 to 64 ended within 4 months compared to spells among children.
• Short spells are less common among recipients in families without labor force participants, as shown previously in Figure and Table IND 7.

Table IND 8. Percentage of AFDC, Food Stamp and SSI Spells for Individuals Entering Programs During the 1993 SIPP Panel, by Length of Spell, Race/Ethnicity, and Age

Note:  Spell length categories are not mutually exclusive. Spells separated by only 1 month are not considered separate spells. Due to the length of the observation period, actual spell lengths for spells that lasted more than 20 months cannot be observed. AFDC spells are defined as those starting during the 1993 SIPP Panel. For certain age and racial/etnic categories, data are not available (N/A) because of insufficient sample size. Data on SSI recipiency for children are not available (N/A).

Source:  Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 Panel.

Indicator 9. Long-term Dependency

Figure IND 9.Percentage of AFDC Recipients with More than 50 Percent of Income from AFDC and Food Stamps Between 1987 and 1996, by Years of Dependency

Source:  Unpublished data from the PSID, 1988-1997.

• Almost half (47 percent) of all persons who received AFDC at some point in the ten-year period ending in 1996 were not dependent on welfare in any of these years. Specifically, they did not receive more than 50 percent of their income from AFDC and/or food stamps in any of the ten years (SSI receipt is excluded from this measure of dependency). This was also true for recipients in the two earlier ten-year time periods, as shown in Table IND 9.
• About 14 percent of recipients in the most recent ten-year period were dependent (received more than 50 percent of annual income from AFDC and food stamps) for more than five years between 1987 and 1996. The 14 percent of recipients who were dependent for six or more years represent 1.7 percent of the total population. In addition, 16 percent of AFDC recipients were dependent for three to five years, and 24 percent were dependent for one or two years.
• As shown in Table IND 9, young children (ages 0-5 in 1987) are more likely to experience long-term dependency than other individuals. About one-fourth (26 percent) of such children receiving AFDC at least once between 1987 and 1996 were dependent on AFDC and food stamp income for six or more years. Another 45 percent were dependent for one to five years, and only 28 percent were not dependent in any year.

Table IND 9. Percentage of AFDC Recipients with More than 50 Percent of Income from AFDC and Food Stamps Across Three Ten-Year Time Periods, by Years of Dependency, Race, and Age

Between 1967 and 1976:
	All Recipients			Child Recipients 0-5 in 1967
Years Dependent:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
0 Years	47.9	33.0	56.2	37.1	25.0	44.3
1-2 Years	23.2	25.6	21.9	26.6	23.6	28.4
3-5 Years	17.5	22.3	14.8	22.2	27.0	19.3
6-8 Years	8.0	12.3	5.7	9.4	15.5	5.8
9-10 Years	3.3	6.8	1.4	4.7	8.9	2.2
Between 1977 and 1986:
	All Recipients			Child Recipients 0-5 in 1977
Years Dependent:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
0 Years	49.5	38.8	56.2	32.0	18.9	40
1-2 Years	23.7	24.0	23.5	26.6	25.1	27.6
3-5 Years	12.4	15.4	10.5	14.1	19.4	10.9
6-8 Years	9.0	12.0	7.1	15.0	15.0	15.0
9-10 Years	5.5	9.9	2.8	12.2	21.7	6.5
Between 1987 and 1996:
	All Recipients			Child Recipients 0-5 in 1987
Years Dependent:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
0 Years	46.5	35.5	54.5	28.2	18.8	37.9
1-2 Years	23.6	22.7	24.2	22.4	21.1	23.8
3-5 Years	16.2	17.9	14.9	23.0	21.8	24.2
6-8 Years	8.0	14.1	3.5	15.3	23.0	7.3
9-10 Years	5.8	9.8	2.9	11.0	15.3	6.8

Note:  The base for the percentages consists of individuals receiving at least $1 of AFDC in any year in the ten-year period. Footnotes in previous reports erroneously defined the base for these percentages as individuals receiving at least $1 of AFDC in the first year of the ten-year period. The current table is based on the same methodology used to compute estimates for earlier reports. Child recipients are defined by age in the first year of the 10-year period. This measures years of dependency over the specified ten-year time periods and does not take into account years of dependency that may have occurred before or after the ten-year period.

Source:  Unpublished data from the PSID 1968-93 final release files and 1994-1997 unreleased preliminary data as of January, 2002.

Indicator 10. Long-term Receipt

Figure IND 10. Percentage of AFDC Recipients, by Years of Receipt Between 1987 and 1996

Source:  Unpublished data from the PSID, 1988-1997.

• Among all persons receiving AFDC at some point in the ten-year period ending in 1996, about half (51 percent) received assistance for only one or two of these years. About one quarter (27 percent) received AFDC for three to five years, and close to one quarter (22 percent) received AFDC for more than five years.
• As shown in Table IND 10, compared to non-black recipients, a large percentage of black recipients received AFDC for more than five years in all three ten-year time periods.
• A larger percentage of child recipients experienced long-term receipt and a smaller percentage experienced short-term receipt in all three time periods relative to the percentages for all recipients, as shown in Table IND 10.
• The percentage of AFDC recipients with long-term assistance (at least six years) is somewhat lower in the most recent ten-year time period — 22 percent — than in the earlier two time periods (28 and 26 percent).
• Whereas nearly one-quarter (22 percent) of recipients received at least some AFDC for six or more years between 1987 and 1996 (as shown in Figure IND 10), only 14 percent of recipients received more than 50 percent of their income from AFDC and food stamps for six or more years over the same time period (as previously shown in Figure IND 9).

Table IND 10: Percentage of AFDC Recipients Across Three Ten-Year Time Periods by Years of Receipt, Race, and Age 

Between 1967 and 1976:
	All Recipients			Child Recipients 0-5 in 1967
Years received AFDC:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
1-2 Years	46.8	32.2	54.9	39.6	24.6	48.6
3-5 Years	27.1	32.4	24.1	30.7	38.5	26.0
6-8 Years	17.9	22.3	15.4	18.3	19.9	17.3
9-10 Years	8.2	13.2	5.5	11.4	17.0	8.0

Between 1977 and 1986:
	All Recipients			Child Recipients 0-5 in 1967
Years received AFDC:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
1-2 Years	46.1	32.1	54.9	35.5	17.0	46.7
3-5 Years	26.0	29.3	24.0	23.1	31.5	18.0
6-8 Years	17.4	22.9	13.9	19.7	22.7	17.8
9-10 Years	10.5	15.7	7.3	21.7	28.8	17.4

Between 1987 and 1996:
	All Recipients			Child Recipients 0-5 in 1967
Years received AFDC:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
1-2 Years	51.0	39.2	59.7	34.6	18.8	51.1
3-5 Years	26.6	27.6	25.9	29.6	33.5	25.6
6-8 Years	13.5	18.2	10.0	20.6	25.2	15.9
9-10 Years	8.8	15.0	4.3	15.1	22.5	7.4

Note:  As in Table IND 9, the base for the percentages consists of individuals receiving at least $1 of AFDC in any year in the ten-year period. Footnotes in previous reports erroneously defined the base for these percentages as individuals receiving at least $1 of AFDC in the first year of the ten-year period. The current table is based on the same methodology used to compute estimates for earlier reports. Child recipients are defined by age in the first year of the 10-year period. This measures years of recipiency over the specified ten-year time periods and does not take into account years of recipiency that may have occurred before or after the ten-year period.

Source:  Unpublished data from the PSID 1968-93 final release files and 1994-1997 unreleased preliminary data as of January, 2002.

Indicator 11. Events Associated with the Beginning and Ending of Program Spells

Table IND 11a. Percentage of First AFDC Spell Beginnings Associated with Specific Events: Selected Periods

Note:  Events are defined to be neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive. Work limitation is defined as a self-reported physical or nervous condition that limits the type of work or the amount of work the respondent can do.

Source:  Unpublished data from the PSID, 1974 – 1992.

• Between 1986 and 1991, the most common events associated with the beginnings of a first AFDC spell were work-related: a decrease in mother’s work hours (26 percent), a decrease in work hours of another adult (22 percent), and acquisition of a work limitation (24 percent).
• The percentage of first AFDC episode beginnings associated with a householder acquiring a work limitation was higher for spells that began between 1986 and 1991 (24 percent) than for spells that began between 1973 and 1979 (16 percent) or 1980 to 1985 (18 percent).
• Between 1973 and 1979, first births to an unmarried, non-cohabiting mother were associated with 28 percent of first AFDC episodes. In contrast, such births were associated with 21 percent of first spells beginning between 1980 and 1985, and 22 percent of spells beginning between 1986 and 1991.

Table IND 11b. Percentage of First AFDC Spell Endings Associated with Specific Events: Selected Periods

	Spell Ended
	1973-1979	1980-1985	1986-1991
Mother married or acquired cohabitor	16.1	17.1	21.7
Children under 18 no longer present	4.4	4.1	4.8
Mother's work hours increased by more than 500 hours per year	15.4	25.0	27.1
Other adults' work hours increased by more than 500 hours, but no change in family structure	21.8	16.8	16.7
Other adults' work hours increased by more than 500 hours, and a change in family structure	6.5	10.3	5.8
Householder no longer reports work limitation	13.0	19.2	15.8
Other transfer income increased by $1,000 or more (in 1996$)	5.0	5.5	5.8
Changed state of residence	5.9	11.0	5.9

Note:  Events are defined to be neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive. Work limitation is defined as a self-reported physical or nervous condition that limits the type of work or the amount of work the respondent can do.

Source:  Unpublished data from the PSID, 1974-1992.

• During the 1986 to 1991 time period, over one-fourth (27 percent) of first AFDC spell endings were associated with increases in mother’s work hours. The corresponding percentage was smaller for spells ending between 1973 and 1979 (15 percent).
• In the period between 1973 and 1979, a greater percentage of spell endings was associated with an increase in work hours for other adults (22 percent) as compared to mothers (15 percent). In the more recent time period (1986 to 1991), a greater percentage of spell endings was associated with an increase in mother’s work hours (27 percent) compared to other adults (17 percent).

Chapter III: Predictors and Risk Factors Associated with Welfare Receipt

The Welfare Indicators Act challenges the Department of Health and Human Services to identify and set forth not only indicators of welfare dependence and welfare duration, but also predictors and causes of welfare receipt. Prior to the Act, welfare research had not established clear and definitive causes of welfare dependence. However, research has identified a number of risk factors associated with welfare utilization. For purposes of this report, the terms “predictors” and “risk factors” are used somewhat interchangeably.

Where the Advisory Board established under the Welfare Indicators Act recommended narrowing the focus of dependence indicators, it recommended an expansive view toward predictors and risk factors. The range of possible predictors is extremely wide, and until they are measured and analyzed over time as the PRWORA changes continue to be implemented, their value will not be fully known. Some of the “predictors” included in this chapter may turn out to be simply correlates of welfare receipt, some may have a causal relationship, some may be consequences, and some may have predictive value.

For purposes of this report, the predictors/risk factors included in this chapter are grouped into three categories: economic security risk factors, employment-related risk factors, and risk factors associated with non-marital childbearing.

Economic Security Risk Factors (ECON). The first group includes nine measures associated with economic security. This group encompasses six measures of poverty, as well as measures of child support receipt, food insecurity, and lack of health insurance. The tables and figures illustrating measures of economic security are labeled with the prefix ECON throughout this chapter.

Poverty measures are important predictors of dependence, because families with fewer economic resources are more likely to be dependent on means-tested assistance. In addition, poverty and other measures of deprivation, such as food insecurity, are important to assess in conjunction with the measures of dependence outlined in Chapter II.

Reductions in caseloads and dependence can reduce poverty, to the extent that such reductions are associated with greater work activity and higher economic resources for former welfare families. However, reductions in welfare caseloads can increase poverty and other deprivation measures, to the extent that former welfare families are left with fewer economic resources.

Several aspects of poverty are examined in this chapter. Those that can be updated annually using the Current Population Survey include: overall poverty rates (ECON 1); the percentage of individuals in deep poverty (ECON 2), and poverty rates using alternative definitions of income (ECON 3 and 4). The chapter also includes data on the length of poverty episodes or spells (ECON 5); and the cumulative time spent in poverty over a decade (ECON 6).

This chapter also includes data on child support collections (ECON 7), which can play an important role in reducing dependence on government assistance and thus serve as a predictor of dependence. Household food insecurity (ECON 8) is an important measure of deprivation that, although correlated with general income poverty, provides an alternative measure of tracking the incidence of material hardship and need, and how it may change over time. Finally, health insurance (ECON 9) is both tied to the income level of the family, and may be a precursor to future health problems among both adults and children.

Employment and Work-Related Risk Factors (WORK). The second grouping, labeled with the WORK prefix, includes nine factors related to employment and barriers to employment. These measures include data on overall labor force attachment and the employment and earnings for low-skilled workers, as well as data on barriers to work. The latter category includes incidence of adult disabilities and children with chronic health conditions, adult substance abuse, levels of educational attainment and school drop-out rates, and child care costs.

Employment and earnings provide many families with an escape from dependence. It is important, therefore, to look both at overall labor force attachment (WORK 1), and at employment and earnings levels for those with low education levels (WORK 2 and WORK 3). The economic condition of the low-skill labor market is a key predictor of the ability of young adult men and women to support families without receiving means-tested assistance.

The next two measures in this group (WORK 4 and WORK 5) focus on educational attainment. Individuals with less than a high school education have the lowest amount of human capital and are at the greatest risk of becoming poor, despite their work effort.

Measures of barriers to employment provide indicators of potential work limitations, which may be predictors of greater dependence. Substance abuse (WORK 6), disabling conditions (WORK 7), and chronic child health conditions (WORK 8) all have the potential of limiting the ability of the adults in the household to work. In addition, debilitating health conditions and high medical expenditures can place a strain on a family’s economic resources.

Non-Marital Birth Risk Factors (BIRTH). The final group of risk factors addresses out-of-wedlock childbearing. The tables and figures in this subsection are labeled with the BIRTH prefix. This category includes long-term time trends in births to unmarried women (BIRTH 1), births to unmarried teens (BIRTH 2 and BIRTH 3), and children living in families with never-married parents (BIRTH 4). Children living in families with never-married mothers are at high risk of dependence, and it is therefore important to track changes in the size of this vulnerable population.

As noted above, the predictors/risk factors included in this chapter do not represent an exhaustive list of measures. They are merely a sampling of available data that address in some way the question of how a family is faring on the scale of deprivation and well-being. Such questions are a necessary part of the dependence discussion as researchers assess the effects of the major changes that have occurred in the laws governing public assistance programs.

Economic Security Risk Factor 1. Poverty Rates

Figure ECON 1. Percentage of Persons in Poverty, by Age: 1959-2000

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2000,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-214 and data published online athttp://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html.

• The percentage of persons living in poverty fell to 11 percent in 2000, the lowest level since 1973.
• While the poverty rate for children has declined along with the overall rate in the past several years, children, particularly young children, continue to have higher poverty rates than the overall population. For example, in 2000, the poverty rate for related children ages 0 to 5 was about 17 percent, compared to about 11 percent for the overall population.
• The poverty rate for blacks declined by 6 percentage points between 1996 and 2000, from 28 percent to 22 percent, as shown in Table ECON 1. The gap between black and white poverty rates was at an historic low of 13 percentage points in 2000; the gap has narrowed by a third since the early 1990s, when it exceeded 21 percentage points. The poverty rate among Hispanics reached 21 percent in 2000, the lowest level recorded.
• The poverty rate for the elderly (persons ages 65 and over) reached historic lows of less than 10 percent in 1999 and just over 10 percent in 2000. This was a lower poverty rate than the rate for children under 18 (16 percent) and slightly above adults ages 18-64 (9.4 percent).

Table ECON 1. Percentage of Persons in Poverty, by Race/Ethnicity and Age: Selected Years

Calendar Year	Related Children		All Persons
	Ages 0-5	Ages 6-17	Total	Under 18	18 to 64	65 & over	White	Black	Hispanic Origin
1959	N/A	N/A	22.4	27.3	17.0	35.2	18.1	55.1	N/A
1963	N/A	N/A	19.5	23.1	N/A	N/A	15.3	N/A	N/A
1966	N/A	N/A	14.7	17.6	10.5	28.5	11.3	41.8	N/A
1969	15.3	13.1	12.1	14.0	8.7	25.3	9.5	32.2	N/A
1973	15.7	13.6	11.1	14.4	8.3	16.3	8.4	31.4	21.9
1976	17.7	15.1	11.8	16.0	9.0	15.0	9.1	31.1	24.7
1979	17.9	15.1	11.7	16.4	8.9	15.2	9.0	31.0	21.8
1980	20.3	16.8	13.0	18.3	10.1	15.7	10.2	32.5	25.7
1981	22.0	18.4	14.0	20.0	11.1	15.3	11.1	34.2	26.5
1982	23.3	20.4	15.0	21.9	12.0	14.6	12.0	35.6	29.9
1983	24.6	20.4	15.2	22.3	12.4	13.8	12.1	35.7	28.0
1984	23.4	19.7	14.4	21.5	11.7	12.4	11.5	33.8	28.4
1985	22.6	18.8	14.0	20.7	11.3	12.6	11.4	31.3	29.0
1986	21.6	18.8	13.6	20.5	10.8	12.4	11.0	31.1	27.3
1987	22.3	18.9	13.4	20.3	10.6	12.5	10.4	32.4	28.0
1988	21.8	17.5	13.0	19.5	10.5	12.0	10.1	31.3	26.7
1989	21.9	17.4	12.8	19.6	10.2	11.4	10.0	30.7	26.2
1990	23.0	18.2	13.5	20.6	10.7	12.2	10.7	31.9	28.1
1991	24.0	19.5	14.2	21.8	11.4	12.4	11.3	32.7	28.7
1992	25.7	19.4	14.8	22.3	11.9	12.9	11.9	33.4	29.6
1993	25.6	20.0	15.1	22.7	12.4	12.2	12.2	33.1	30.6
1994	24.5	19.5	14.5	21.8	11.9	11.7	11.7	30.6	30.7
1995	23.7	18.3	13.8	20.8	11.4	10.5	11.2	29.3	30.3
1996	22.7	18.3	13.7	20.5	11.4	10.8	11.2	28.4	29.4
1997	21.6	18.0	13.3	19.9	10.9	10.5	11.0	26.5	27.1
1998	20.6	17.1	12.7	18.9	10.5	10.5	10.5	26.1	25.6
1999	18.0	15.5	11.8	16.9	10.0	9.7	9.8	23.6	22.8
2000	16.9	15.1	11.3	16.2	9.4	10.2	9.4	22.1	21.2

Notes: Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race All persons under 18 include related children (own children, including stepchildren and adopted children, plus all other children in the household who are related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption), unrelated individuals under 18 (persons who are not living with any relatives), and householders or spouses under age 18.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2000,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-214 and data published online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html.

Economic Security Risk Factor 2. Deep Poverty Rates

Figure ECON 2. Percentage of Total Population Below 50 and 100 Percent of Poverty: 1975-2000

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2000,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-214 and unpublished tables available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html.

• Between 1996 and 2000, the percentage of the population in “deep poverty” (with incomes below 50 percent of the federal poverty level), decreased a full percentage point (from 5.4 percent in 1996 to 4.4 percent in 2000).
• In general, the percentage of the population with incomes below 50 percent of the poverty threshold has followed a pattern that reflects the trend in the overall poverty rate, as shown in Figure ECON 2. The percentage of people below 50 percent of poverty rose in the late 1970s and early 1980s, then, after falling slightly, rose to a second peak in 1993. The overall poverty rate followed a somewhat similar pattern, with more pronounced peaks and valleys.
• Over the past two decades, there has been an overall increase in the proportion of the poverty population in deep poverty and a decrease in the proportion between 50 and 100 percent of the poverty threshold. In 2000, 39 percent of poor persons had incomes that fell below 50 percent of the poverty level (4.4 percent out of 11.3 percent), whereas in 1976, only 28 percent of the poverty population was in deep poverty.

Table ECON 2. Number and Percentage of Total Population Below 50, 75, 100, and 125 Percent of Poverty: Selected Years

Year	Total Population	Below 50 percent		Below 75 percent		Below 100 percent		Below 125 percent
	(thousands)	Number (thousands)	Percent	Number (thousands)	Percent	Number (thousands)	Percent	Number (thousands)	Percent
1959	176,600	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	39,500	22.4	54,900	31.1
1961	181,300	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	39,600	21.9	54,300	30.0
1963	187,300	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	36,400	19.5	50,800	27.1
1965	191,400	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	33,200	17.3	46,200	24.1
1967	195,700	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	27,800	14.2	39,200	20.0
1969	199,500	9,600	4.8	16,400	8.2	24,100	12.1	34,700	17.4
1971	204,600	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	25,600	12.5	36,500	17.8
1973	208,500	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	23,000	11.1	32,800	15.8
1975	210,900	7,700	3.7	15,400	7.3	25,900	12.3	37,100	17.6
1976	212,300	7,000	3.3	14,900	7.0	25,000	11.8	35,500	16.7
1977	213,900	7,500	3.5	15,000	7.0	24,700	11.6	35,700	16.7
1978	215,700	7,700	3.6	14,900	6.9	24,500	11.4	34,100	15.8
1979	222,900	8,600	3.8	16,300	7.3	26,100	11.7	36,600	16.4
1980	225,000	9,800	4.4	18,700	8.3	29,300	13.0	40,700	18.1
1981	227,200	11,200	4.9	20,700	9.1	31,800	14.0	43,800	19.3
1982	229,400	12,800	5.6	23,200	10.1	34,400	15.0	46,600	20.3
1983	231,700	13,600	5.9	23,600	10.2	35,300	15.2	47,000	20.3
1984	233,800	12,800	5.5	22,700	9.7	33,700	14.4	45,400	19.4
1985	236,600	12,400	5.2	22,200	9.4	33,100	13.6	44,200	18.7
1986	238,600	12,700	5.3	22,400	9.4	32,400	14.0	44,600	18.7
1987	241,000	12,500	5.2	21,700	9.0	32,200	13.4	43,100	17.9
1988	243,500	12,700	5.2	21,400	8.8	31,700	13.0	42,600	17.5
1989	246,000	12,000	4.9	20,700	8.4	31,500	12.8	42,600	17.3
1990	248,600	12,900	5.2	22,600	9.1	33,600	13.5	44,800	18.0
1991	251,200	14,100	5.6	24,400	9.7	35,700	14.2	47,500	18.9
1992	256,500	15,500	6.1	26,200	10.2	38,000	14.8	50,500	19.7
1993	259,300	16,000	6.2	27,200	10.5	39,300	15.1	51,900	20.0
1994	261,600	15,400	5.9	26,400	10.1	38,100	14.5	50,500	19.3
1995	263,700	13,900	5.3	24,500	9.3	36,400	13.8	48,800	18.5
1996	266,200	14,400	5.4	24,800	9.3	36,500	13.7	49,300	18.5
1997	268,500	14,600	5.4	24,200	9.0	35,600	13.3	47,800	17.8
1998	271,100	13,900	5.1	23,000	8.5	34,500	12.7	46,000	17.0
1999	273,500	12,700	4.6	21,600	7.9	32,300	11.8	44,300	16.2
2000	275,900	12,200	4.4	20,500	7.4	31,100	11.3	43,500	15.8

Note: The number of persons below 50 percent and 75 percent of poverty for 1969 are estimated based on the distribution of persons below 50 percent and 75 percent for 1969 taken from the 1970 decennial census.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2000,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-214, unpublished tables available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty, and 1970 Census of Population, Volume 1, Social and Economic Characteristics, Table 259.

Economic Security Risk Factor 3. Experimental Poverty Measures

Figure ECON 3. Percentage of Persons in Poverty Using Various Experimental Poverty Measures, by Age: 2000

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March 2001.

• Four experimental measures of poverty developed by the Census Bureau in response to the recommendation of a 1995 panel of the National Academy of Sciences yield poverty rates that are similar to the official poverty measure overall, but differ by age and other characteristics.
• Experimental measures generally show lower poverty rates among children than the official measure, partly because they take into account non-cash benefits that many children receive. Conversely, experimental measures show higher rates of poverty among the elderly than the official measure, in part due to the inclusion of certain out-of-pocket health costs in these measures.
• The percentage of all persons in poverty dropped steadily between 1996 and 2000 under each of the four experimental poverty measures, as well as under the official rate, as shown in Table ECON 3b.

Table ECON 3a. Percentage of Persons in Poverty Using Various Experimental Poverty Measures, by Race/Ethnicity and Age: 2000

	Official Poverty Measure	National Academy of Sciences	Different Child Care Method	Different Equiv-alency Scale	No Geographic Adjustment
All Persons	11.3	11.5	11.7	11.4	11.3
Racial/Ethnic Categories
White	9.4	10.0	10.2	10.0	9.9
Black	22.1	19.5	20.2	19.6	19.4
Hispanic Origin	21.2	21.8	22.3	21.4	19.9
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-17	16.2	14.3	15.1	14.0	14.2
Adults Ages 18-64	9.4	9.7	9.8	9.8	9.5
Adults Age 65 and over	10.2	14.5	14.1	14.6	14.6

Table ECON 3b. Percentage of Persons in Poverty Using Various Experimental Poverty Measures: 1990-2000

Year	Official Poverty Measure	National Academy of Sciences	Different Child Care Method	Different Equiv- alency Scale	No Geographic Adjustment
1990	13.5	13.7	13.6	13.6	13.8
1991	14.2	14.5	14.3	14.4	14.6
1992	14.8	15.1	15.0	15.1	15.2
1993	15.1	15.8	15.7	15.8	15.8
1994	14.5	14.6	14.5	14.6	14.6
1995	13.8	13.8	13.8	13.8	13.9
1996	13.7	13.6	13.7	13.6	13.5
1997	13.3	13.3	13.3	13.3	13.3
1998	12.7	12.5	12.5	12.5	12.3
1999	11.8	11.7	11.8	11.8	11.7
2000	11.3	11.5	11.7	11.4	11.3

Note: Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race. The National Academy of Sciences experimental poverty measure most closely implements changes recommended by a 1995 NAS panel, including: counting non-cash income as benefits; subtracting from income certain work-related, health, and child care expenses; and adjusting poverty thresholds for family size and geographic differences in housing costs. The other three measures are similar, except for the treatment of child care expenses (Different Child Care Method), the family size adjustment (Difference Equivalency Scale), and the geographic adjustment (No Geographic Adjustment).

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March 1991 to 2001; U.S. Census Bureau, “Selected Experimental Poverty Measures: 1990 to 1999”, available at www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povmeas/exppov/ suexxpov.html. Further explanations of each of the alternative poverty measures may be found in: U.S. Census Bureau “Experimental Poverty Measure: 1990 to 1997”, Current Population Reports, Series P60-205, June 1999.

Economic Security Risk Factor 4. Poverty Rates with Various Means-tested Benefits Included

Figure ECON 4. Percentage of Total Population in Poverty with Various Means-Tested Benefits Added to Total Cash Income: 1979-2000

Source: Congressional Budget Office tabulations of March CPS data. Additional calculations by DHHS.

• The official definition of poverty – which includes means-tested cash assistance (primarily TANF and SSI) in addition to pre-tax cash income and social insurance – was 11.3 percent in 2000, as shown in the bold line in Figure ECON 4. Without cash welfare, the 2000 poverty rate would be 12.0 percent, as shown by the top line in the figure above.
• Adding other, non-cash, public assistance benefits to this definition has the effect of lowering the percentage of people who have incomes below the official poverty rate. Adding in the value of food and housing benefits reduces the poverty rate to 10.1 percent in 2000.
• When income is defined as including benefits from the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and federal taxes, the percentage of the total population in poverty decreases to 9.5 percent in 2000. Taxes have had a net effect of reducing poverty rates since the significant increases in the size of the EITC in 1993 and 1995.
• The combined effect of means-tested cash assistance, food and housing benefits, EITC and taxes was to reduce the poverty rate in 2000 by 2.5 percentage points, as shown in Table ECON 4. Net reductions in poverty rates were somewhat lower during the recession of the early 1980s, and somewhat higher in the mid-1990s, following expansions in the EITC.

Table ECON 4.
Percentage of Total Population in Poverty with Various Means-Tested Benefits Added to Total Cash Income: Selected Years

	1979	1983	1986	1989	1993	1995	1996	1998	2000
Cash Income Plus All Social Insurance	12.8	16.0	14.5	13.7	16.3	14.9	14.8	13.5	12.0
Plus Means-Tested Cash Assistance	11.6	15.2	13.6	12.8	15.1	13.8	13.7	12.7	11.3
Plus Food and Housing Benefits	9.7	13.7	12.2	11.2	13.4	12.0	12.1	11.3	10.1
Plus EITC and Federal Taxes	10.0	14.7	13.1	11.7	13.3	11.5	11.5	10.4	9.5
Reduction in Poverty Rate	2.8	1.3	1.4	2.0	3.0	3.4	3.3	3.1	2.5

Note: Whereas ECON 3 used experimental measures that adjust both poverty thresholds and income, the measures in ECON 4 illustrate the effect of analyzing different measures of income against the official poverty threshold. The four measures of income in ECON 4 are as follows: 1) “Cash Income plus All Social Insurance” is earnings and other private cash income, plus social security, workers’ compensation, and other social insurance programs. It does not include means-tested cash transfers; (2) “Plus Means-Tested Assistance” shows the official poverty rate, which takes into account means-tested assistance, primarily AFDC/TANF and SSI; (3) “Plus Food and Housing Benefits” shows how poverty would be lower if the cash value of food and housing benefits were counted as income; and (4); “Plus EITC and Federal Taxes” is the most comprehensive poverty rate shown. EITC refers to the refundable Earned Income Tax Credit, which is always a positive adjustment to income whereas Federal payroll and income taxes are a negative adjustment. The fungible value of Medicare and Medicaid is not included.

Source: Congressional Budget Office tabulations of March CPS data. Additional calculations by DHHS.

Economic Security Risk Factor 5. Poverty Spells

Figure ECON 5. Percentage of Poverty Spells for Individuals Entering Poverty During the 1993 SIPP Panel, by Length of Spell

Source: Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 panel.

• Nearly half (47 percent) of all poverty spells that began during the 1993 SIPP panel ended within 4 months and three-fourths ended within one year. Only 16 percent of all such spells were longer than 20 months.
• Spells of poverty among adults age 65 and older tend to last longer than poverty spells among younger individuals. As shown in Table ECON 5, only 65 percent of poverty spells among adults age 65 and older ended within one year compared to 80 percent for women ages 16 to 64, 75 percent for men ages 16 to 64, and 73 percent for children ages 0 to 15.
• A larger percentage of poverty spells among non-Hispanic blacks were longer than 20 months (23 percent) than was the case for spells among non-Hispanic whites (14 percent) and among Hispanics (15 percent).
• In general, poverty spells between and 1993 and 1995 were shorter than spells of welfare receipt begun in the same time period, as can be seen by comparing Figure ECON 5 to Figure IND 8 in Chapter II. That is, there was more movement in and out of poverty than movement on and off welfare. For example, 75 percent of poverty spells lasted a year or less, whereas only 60 percent of food stamp spells and 56 percent of AFDC spells lasted a year or less.
•  

Table ECON 5.Percentage of Poverty Spells for Individuals Entering Poverty During the 1993 SIPP Panel, by Length of Spell, Race/Ethnicity, and Age

	Spells <=4 months	Spells <=12 months	Spells <=20 months	Spells >20 months
All Persons	47.3	75.4	84.3	15.7
Racial/Ethnic Categories
Non-Hispanic White	47.3	78.8	86.3	13.7
Non-Hispanic Black	39.9	64.1	76.7	23.3
Hispanic	42.5	74.4	84.7	15.3
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-15	43.8	73.0	82.2	17.8
Women Ages 16-64	47.6	79.9	88.9	11.1
Men Ages 16-64	51.6	75.2	84.2	15.8
Adults Age 65 and over	40.7	65.4	73.0	27.0

Note: Spell length categories are not mutually exclusive. Spells separated by only 1 month are not considered separate spells. Due to the length of the observation period, actual spell lengths for spells that lasted more than 20 months cannot be observed.

Source: Unpublished data from the SIPP, 1993 panel.

Economic Security Risk Factor 6. Long-term Poverty

Figure ECON 6. Percentage of Children Ages 0 to 5 in 1987 Living in Poverty Between 1987 and 1996, by Years in Poverty and Race

Source: Unpublished data from the PSID, 1987-1996.

• Among children who were ages 0 to 5 in 1987, two-thirds (66 percent) never lived in poverty for any year over the next ten years. Nearly one-quarter (23 percent) lived in poverty for one to five years and 10 percent were poor for six to ten years.
• During the 1987-1996 period, one-third (33 percent) of black children experienced longer-term poverty of six to ten years, a percentage much higher than that for non-black children during the same ten-year period (5 percent). Similar patterns existed in the earlier two ten-year time periods, as shown in Table ECON 6.
• For all three time periods, the percentages of all individuals who were poor for only one to two years were much larger than the percentages of all individuals who experienced longer-term poverty. For example, while 15 percent of all individuals were poor for only one to two years between 1987 and 1996, only 5 percent were poor for six to ten years during the same time period.
• Long-term poverty of six or more years decreased for blacks more than for non-blacks across the three ten-year time periods. As shown in Table ECON 6, the percentage of persons experiencing long-term poverty decreased from 27 percent in the earliest period to 22 percent in the most recent period among blacks, but remained essentially unchanged for non-blacks. The percentage of black children experiencing long-term poverty was steady across the periods, while the percentage for non-black children increased Long-term poverty of six or more.

Table ECON 6: Percentage of Individuals Living in Poverty Across Three Ten-Year Time Periods, by Years in Poverty, Race, and Age

Between 1967 and 1976:	All Persons			Children 0-5 in 1967
Cumulative Years in Poverty:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
0 Years	75.3	37.3	80.2	70.0	26.7	76.5
1-2 Years	13.1	18.9	12.3	14.4	19.8	13.6
3-5 Years	6.2	16.6	5.0	9.1	20.5	7.4
6-8 Years	3.5	15.8	1.9	3.5	15.8	1.8
9-10 Years	1.9	11.5	0.7	2.9	17.9	0.7

Between 1977 and 1986:	All Persons			Children 0-5 in 1977
Cumulative Years in Poverty:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
0 Years	77.9	46.3	82.2	73.7	36.7	80.0
1-2 Years	11.6	15.7	11.0	11.9	16.7	11.0
3-5 Years	5.3	14.5	4.1	5.6	12.5	4.4
6-8 Years	3.4	14.0	1.9	5.1	16.5	3.2
9-10 Years	1.9	9.5	0.8	3.7	17.6	1.3

Between 1987 and 1996:	All Persons			Children 0-5 in 1987
Cumulative Years in Poverty:	All	Black	Non-Black	All	Black	Non-Black
0 Years	74.7	44.7	79.3	66.4	30.7	75.1
1-2 Years	14.6	18.7	14.0	15.8	17.2	15.5
3-5 Years	5.5	14.3	4.1	7.6	18.8	4.8
6-8 Years	3.1	10.3	2.0	5.6	12.5	4.0
9-10 Years	2.2	12.0	0.7	4.6	20.9	0.7

Note: The base for the percentages consists of individuals in the PSID family units for all the ten-year period. Child recipients are defined by age in the first year of the 10-year period. This measures years of poverty over the specified ten-year time periods and does not take into account years of poverty that may have occurred before or after the ten-year time period.

Source: Unpublished data from the PSID 1968-93 final release files and 1994-1997 unreleased preliminary data as of January, 2002.

Economic Security Risk Factor 7. Child SUPPORT

Figure ECON 7. Total, Non-AFDC/TANF, and AFDC/TANF Title IV-D Child Support Collections: 1978-2000

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Support Enforcement, Preliminary Child Support Enforcement FY 1999 Data Report, 2000 (and earlier years), Washington, DC.

• Collections paid through the Child Support Enforcement system (Title IV-D of the Social Security Act) totaled $17.9 billion in 2000, nearly $2 billion more than in 1999. During the 1990s, child support collections grew rapidly, at an average rate of almost $1.1 billion a year.
• Non-TANF collections as a percentage of overall collections by the IV-D program have rapidly increased in recent years. Non-TANF collections increased by nearly $1.6 billion between 1999 and 2000, while TANF collections increased by nearly $111 million. However, this 4.5 percent increase in TANF collections between 1999 and 2000 occurred despite the 15 percent drop in the number of TANF recipient families over the same time period.
• The amount of TANF collections paid to AFDC/TANF families has decreased since FY 1996, when the first $50 of each month’s child support collection were “passed through” to families that were receiving cash benefits. The $50 pass-through was repealed by the 1996 welfare reform law, although a number of states have opted to pass through some or all of collections to the custodial TANF family, despite the loss of revenues to the state.
• In 2000, nearly 79 percent of TANF collections (collections on behalf of TANF recipients and for past due support assigned to the state by former TANF recipients) was retained to reimburse the state and federal governments for the cost of welfare benefits, as shown in Table ECON 7.

Table ECON 7. Total, Non-AFDC/TANF, and AFDC/TANF Title IV-D Child Support Collections: 1978-2000 Total Collections (in millions)

Fiscal Year	Total Collections		AFDC/TANF Collections
	Current Dollars	Constant '00 Dollars	Total	Payments to AFDC/TANF Families	Federal & State Share of Collections	Non-AFDC/TANF Collections	Total IV-D Administrative Expenditures
1978	$1,047	$2,701	$472	$13	$459	$575	$312
1979	1,333	3,157	597	12	584	736	383
1980	1,478	3,139	603	10	593	874	466
1981	1,629	3,151	671	12	659	958	526
1982	1,771	3,198	786	15	771	985	612
1983	2,024	3,510	880	15	865	1,144	691
1984	2,378	3,951	1,000	17	983	1,378	723
1985	2,694	4,316	1,090	189	901	1,604	814
1986	3,249	5,070	1,225	275	955	2,019	941
1987	3,917	5,953	1,349	278	1,070	2,569	1,066
1988	4,605	6,735	1,486	289	1,188	3,128	1,171
1989	5,241	7,301	1,593	307	1,286	3,648	1,363
1990	6,010	7,976	1,750	334	1,416	4,260	1,606
1991	6,886	8,699	1,984	381	1,603	4,902	1,804
1992	7,964	9,765	2,259	435	1,824	5,705	1,995
1993	8,907	10,602	2,416	446	1,971	6,491	2,241
1994	9,850	11,422	2,550	457	2,093	7,300	2,556
1995	10,827	12,215	2,689	474	2,215	8,138	3,012
1996	12,020	13,194	2,855	480	2,375	9,165	3,049
1997	13,364	14,284	2,843	157	2,685	10,521	3,428
1998	14,348	15,090	2,650	152	2,498	11,698	3,585
1999	15,901	16,410	2,482	113	2,368	13,699	4,039
2000	17,854	17,854	2,593	165	2,048	15,261	4,526

Note: Not all states report current child support collections in all years. Constant dollar adjustments to the 2000 level were made using a CPI-U-X1 fiscal year average price index. Data for fiscal years 1999 and 2000 may not be exactly comparable to that of previous years due to changes in data reporting forms.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Support Enforcement, Child Support Collections: 2001 TANF Report to Congress (and earlier years), Washington, DC. 

Economic Security Risk Factor 8. Food Insecurity

Figure ECON 8. Percentage of Households Classified by Food Security Status: 2000

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Household Food Security in the United States, 2000.

• A large majority (90 percent) of American households was food secure in 2000 – that is, showed little or no evidence of concern about food supply or reduction in food intake.
• Approximately 10 percent of households experienced food insecurity (not being able to afford enough food) at some level during the twelve months ending in September 2000. More than two-thirds of the food insecure households were without hunger, meaning that although food insecurity was evident in their concerns and in adjustments to household food management, little or no reduction in food intake was reported.
• The prevalence of food insecurity with hunger in 2000 was estimated to be 3 percent. One or more members of these households experienced reduced food intake and hunger as a result of financial constraints.
• Poor households have a higher rate of food insecurity (37 percent) than the 10 percent rate among the general population, as shown in Table ECON 8a. Only 5 percent of families with incomes at or above 185 percent of the poverty level showed evidence of food insecurity.
• Changes in survey administration make it difficult to examine time trends in food security. In general, there was a downward trend in food insecurity from 1995-1999, followed by a slight upward tick in 2000. Higher food insecurity in even years may reflect the difference between data collection in the spring (odd years) and fall (even years).

Table ECON 8a. Percentage of Households Classified by Food Security Status and Selected Characteristics: 2000

	Food Secure	Food Insecure Total	Food Insecure Without Hunger	Food Insecure With Hunger
All Households	89.5	10.4	7.3	3.1
Racial/Ethnic Categories
Non-Hispanic White	92.4	7.6	5.2	2.4
Non-Hispanic Black	79.5	20.5	14.1	6.5
Hispanic	78.6	21.4	16.5	4.8
Other Non-Hispanic	90.5	9.5	6.7	2.8
Households, by Age
Households with Children Under 6	83.8	16.2	12.5	3.7
Households with Children Under 18	82.4	17.6	13.9	3.7
Households with Elderly but No Children	94.1	5.9	4.4	1.5
Household Income-to-Poverty Ratio
Under 1.00	63.2	36.8	24.0	12.7
Under 1.30	67.0	33.0	22.1	10.9
Under 1.85	72.7	27.3	18.7	8.6
1.85 and over	95.4	4.6	3.4	1.2

Table ECON 8b.Percentage of Households Classified by Food Security Status: 1995-2000

	Food Secure	Food Insecure  Total	Food Insecure  Without Hunger	Food Insecure With Hunger
Old Series
1995	89.7	10.3	6.4	3.9
1996	89.6	10.4	6.3	4.1
1997	91.3	8.7	5.6	3.1
1998	89.8	10.2	6.6	3.6
1999	91.3	8.7	5.9	2.8
New Series
1998	88.2	11.8	8.1	3.7
1999	89.9	10.1	7.1	3.0
2000	89.5	10.5	7.3	3.1

Note: Food secure households show little or no evidence of concern about food supply or reduction in food intake. Households classified as food insecure without hunger report food-related concerns, adjustments to household food management, and reduced variety and desirability of diet but report little or no reduction in food intake. Households classified as food insecure with hunger report reduced food intake and hunger. Because of changes in survey administration, food insecurity statistics in Table ECON 8b are shown in two separate series. The “new series” (1998-2000) provides the best estimates of food security for 1998 and 1999; in the “old series” (1995-1999), data for 1998 and 1999 were adjusted to be comparable to 1995-1997.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Household Food Security in the United States, 2000.

Economic Security Risk Factor 9. Lack of Health Insurance

Figure ECON 9. Percentage of Persons without Health Insurance, by Income: 2000

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, March 2001.

Table ECON 9. Percentage of Persons without Health Insurance, by Income and Selected Characteristics: 2000

	All Persons	Poor Persons
All Persons	14.0	29.5
Male	14.9	32.3
Female	13.1	27.5
Ethnic Origin
White	12.9	31.0
Black	18.5	24.5
Hispanic	32.0	43.0
Education
No H.S. Diploma	26.6	36.5
H.S. Graduate, no college	16.4	33.4
College Graduate	7.1	31.2
Age
Age 18 and under	11.6	21.5
Ages 18-24	27.3	46.6
Ages 25-34	21.2	46.3
Ages 35-44	15.5	42.1
Ages 45-64	12.6	31.0
Age 65 and over	0.7	2.4

Note: "Poor persons" are defined as those with total family incomes at or below the poverty rate. Persons of Hispanic ethnicity may be of any race.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, “Health Insurance Coverage: 2000,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-215, 2001.

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 1. Labor Force Attachment

Figure WORK 1. Percentage of Individuals in Families with Labor Force Participants, by Race/Ethnicity: 2000

Source: Unpublished tabulations of March CPS data.

• In 2000, 73 percent of the total population lived in families with at least one person working on a full-time, full-year basis, as shown in Table WORK 1a. Full-time full-year work was higher in 2000 than during the 1990s, as shown in Table WORK 1b.
• Overall, 13 percent of the population lived in families with no labor force participants and 14 percent lived in families with part-time and/or part-year labor force participants in 2000.
• Persons of Hispanic origin were less likely than non-Hispanic whites or non-Hispanic blacks to live in families with no one in the labor force in 1999 (9 percent compared to 14 and 15 percent, respectively).
• Working-age women were more likely than working-age men to live in families with no one in the labor force (8 percent compared to 6 percent). Men were more likely than women to live in families with at least one full-time, full-year worker (82 percent compared to 78 percent).

Table WORK 1a. Percentage of Individuals in Families with Labor Force Participants, by Race/Ethnicity and Age: 2000

Table WORK 1b. Percentage of Individuals in Families with Labor Force Participants: 1990-2000

	No one in LF During Year	At least one in LF No one FT/FY	At least one FT/FY  LF participant
1990	13.7	18.1	68.3
1991	14.3	18.7	67.0
1992	14.3	18.6	67.1
1993	14.2	18.6	67.3
1994	14.0	17.7	68.3
1995	13.8	17.0	69.2
1996	13.6	16.7	69.7
1997	13.5	16.3	70.2
1998	13.3	15.3	71.4
1999	13.1	14.6	72.3
2000	13.1	13.9	73.0

Note: Full-time, full-year workers are defined as those who usually worked for 35 or more hours per week, for at least 50 weeks in a given year. Part-time and part-year labor force participation includes part-time workers and individuals who are unemployed, laid off, and/or looking for work for part or all of the year. This indicator represents annual measures of labor force participation, and thus cannot be compared to monthly measures of labor force participation in Indicator 2.

Source: Unpublished tabulations of March CPS data.

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 2. Employment Among the Low-skilled

Figure WORK 2. Percentage of All Persons Ages 18 to 65 with No More than a High School Education Who Were Employed: 1969-2001

Source: ASPE tabulations of March CPS data.

• Between 1996 and 2001, employment rates of black and Hispanic women with a high school education or less rose significantly, to 67 percent and 61 percent, respectively. Low-skilled white women experienced less of an increase in employment over this time period but still had the highest employment level in 2001 (69 percent) among the three racial/ethnic groups.
• Employment levels for white and Hispanic men with no more than a high school education have hovered close to 85 percent for close to two decades. In contrast, employment levels for low-skilled black men have varied over the same period. Between 1969 and 1984, employment rates for black men with no more than high school education fell by 20 percentage points. Since 1984, these rates have fluctuated, with the most recent five years showing a slight increase from 70 to 73 percent.
• As shown in Figure and Table WORK 2, employment levels for black men with a high school education or less were 6 percentage points higher than those of similarly educated black women in 2001. In contrast, there was a 16-percentage point difference in employment levels of white men and white women with a high school education or less, and a 26-percentage point difference between similarly educated Hispanic men and Hispanic women.

Table WORK 2. Percentage of All Persons Ages 18 to 65 with No More than a High School Education Who Were Employed: 1969-2001

	Men			Women
	White	Black	Hispanic	White	Black	Hispanic
1969	92.8	89.9	N/A	55.8	65.8	N/A
1970	92.1	89.2	N/A	56.1	64.9	N/A
1972	90.9	86.1	N/A	55.2	59.4	N/A
1973	91.1	84.3	N/A	55.6	58.1	N/A
1976	88.2	78.8	86.2	58.3	57.2	49.7
1978	88.3	78.6	89.8	59.8	57.4	51.4
1980	88.6	78.5	89.4	62.3	58.7	55.0
1981	88.0	75.3	87.4	62.3	57.4	53.0
1982	87.3	74.4	87.9	62.3	57.7	52.1
1983	85.4	71.3	85.4	60.7	56.2	50.6
1984	84.8	69.9	84.6	61.4	55.3	50.8
1985	86.1	71.6	83.9	62.9	58.4	53.1
1986	85.7	74.5	84.1	63.7	59.4	52.4
1987	86.3	74.2	86.7	64.4	60.3	53.0
1988	86.6	73.9	85.6	65.8	59.9	54.0
1989	86.5	74.1	87.8	66.4	61.3	54.6
1990	86.6	74.0	86.2	67.2	60.9	55.8
1991	87.4	75.6	85.4	66.8	60.4	55.0
1992	86.2	73.9	85.0	66.5	60.7	54.6
1993	85.5	71.4	83.7	65.9	57.8	53.3
1994	84.4	71.1	83.5	66.1	59.9	52.2
1995	84.7	69.3	83.2	66.6	60.7	53.3
1996	85.5	70.2	83.3	67.0	59.7	53.9
1997	85.6	70.0	84.0	67.7	63.6	55.4
1998	85.3	71.8	85.0	67.7	66.1	56.9
1999	85.4	71.9	85.5	67.9	66.8	57.1
2000	85.0	72.2	86.4	68.9	68.3	58.8
2001	85.1	72.9	86.5	68.6	67.4	61.0

Note: All data reflect employment rates for March of the given year. White and Black includes those of Hispanic origin for all years. Hispanic was not available until 1975.

Source: ASPE tabulations of March CPS data.

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 3. Earnings of Low-skilled Workers

Figure WORK 3. Mean Weekly Wages of Men Working Full-Time, Full-Year with No More than a High School Education, by Race (2000 Dollars): Selected Years

Source: ASPE tabulations of March CPS data.

• Mean weekly wages for full-time work by men with no more than a high school diploma have decreased in real terms for much of the past quarter century, with some recovery in the late 1990s. In 1970, the mean weekly wage for low-skilled men working full-time was $683 (in 2000 dollars); the comparable wage in 1995 was $617, a decrease of 10 percent.
• In recent years, this pattern has changed; weekly wages for low-skilled men have risen, even after taking inflation into account. The mean weekly wage for low-skilled full-time workers was $650 in 2000 – a rise above the 1995 level, but still not as high as wages for this group in 1970 (in 2000 dollars).
• The gap between mean weekly wages for white and black men with low education levels has narrowed significantly over time, but expanded slightly in 2000. In 1970, the mean weekly wage for low-skilled black men working full-time was $497 (in 2000 dollars), or 70 percent of the $706 average for white men. However, full-time working black men with no more than a high school education received 88 percent of the mean weekly wages of white men in 1999 ($573 compared to $654). In 2000, the wages of low-skilled black men were 85 percent of those of white men with a similar level of education ($565 compared to $667). The gap between mean weekly wages for white and black men with low education levels has narrowed significantly.

Table WORK 3: Mean Weekly Wages of Men Working Full-Time, Full-Year with No More than a High-School Education, by Race (2000 Dollars): Selected Years

	1970	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999	2000
All Men	$683	$694	$693	$669	$625	$617	$629	$640	$628	$639	$650
White Men	$706	$712	$712	$690	$643	$635	$646	$657	$644	$654	$667
Black Men	$497	$547	$539	$524	$516	$509	$529	$530	$536	$573	$565

Note: Full-time, full-year workers work at least 48 weeks per year and 35 hours per week. White and black include those of Hispanic origin for all years.

Source: ASPE tabulations of March CPS data.

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 4. Educational Attainment

Figure WORK 4. Percentage of Adults Age 25 and Over, by Level of Educational Attainment: 1960-2001

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Educational Attainment in the United States: March 2001,” Current Population Reports, Series PPL-157, February 2002, and earlier reports.

• There has been a marked decline over the past forty years in the percentage of the population who has not earned a high school diploma. This percentage fell from 59 percent in 1960 to a little under 16 percent in 2001.
• The percentage of the population receiving a high school education only (with no subsequent college) was 25 percent in 1960 and rose to 39 percent in 1988. Since then this figure has fallen to 33 percent, although some of this decline is a result of a change in the survey methodology in 1992 (see note to Table WORK 4).
• Between 1960 and 1990, the percentage of the population with some college (one to three years) doubled, from 9 percent to 18 percent. The apparent jump in 1992 is a result of a change in the survey methodology (see note to Table WORK 4), but the trend continued upward, reaching nearly 26 percent in 2001.
• The percentage of the population completing four or more years of college more than tripled from 1960 to 2001, rising steadily from 8 percent to a little over 26 percent.

Table WORK 4. Percentage of Adults Age 25 and Over, by Level of Educational Attainment: Selected Years

	Not a High School Graduate	Finished High School, No College	One to Three Years of College	Four or More Years of College
1940	76	14	5	5
1950	67	20	7	6
1960	59	25	9	8
1965	51	31	9	9
1970	45	34	10	11
1975	37	36	12	14
1980	31	37	15	17
1981	30	38	15	17
1982	29	38	15	18
1983	28	38	16	19
1984	27	38	16	19
1985	26	38	16	19
1986	25	38	17	19
1987	24	39	17	20
1988	24	39	17	20
1989	23	38	17	21
1990	22	38	18	21
1991	22	39	18	21
1992	21	36	22	21
1993	20	35	23	22
1994	19	34	24	22
1995	18	34	25	23
1996	18	34	25	24
1997	18	34	24	24
1998	17	34	25	24
1999	17	33	25	25
2000	16	33	25	26
2001	16	33	26	26

Note: Completing the GED is not considered completing high school within this table. Beginning with data for 1992, a new survey question results in different categories than for prior years. Data shown as Finished High School, No College was previously from the category “High School, 4 years” and is now from the category “High School Graduate.” Data shown as One to Three Years of College was previously from the category “College 1 to 3 years” and is now the sum of the categories: “Some College” and two separate “Associate Degree” categories. Data shown as Four or more Years of College was previously from the category “College 4 years or more,” and is now the sum of the categories: “Bachelor's Degree,” “Master's Degree,” “Doctorate Degree,” and “Professional Degree.”

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Educational Attainment in the United States: March 2001,” Current Population Reports, Series PPL-157, February 2002, and earlier reports.

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 5. High-school Dropout Rates

Figure WORK 5. Percentage of Students Enrolled in Grades 10 to 12 in the Previous Year Who Were Not Enrolled and Had Not Graduated in the Survey Year, by Race/Ethnicity: Selected Years

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Dropout Rates in the United States: 2000 and earlier years (based on Current Population Survey data from the October supplement).

• With the exception of a small upward movement in 1988, the dropout rates for teens in grades 10 to 12 declined steadily from 1979 to 1991. From a low of 4 percent, the rate began rising to a peak of 5.7 percent in 1995. Following this upturn, the overall rate again declined to 4.6 percent in 1997; since then it has fluctuated, moving up to 5.0 percent in 1999 and then back down again to 4.8 percent in 2000.
• Dropout rates among Hispanic and black teens have fluctuated considerably over time. Still, dropout rates are generally highest for Hispanic teens and lowest for white teens. In 2000, the dropout rate was 7.4 percent for Hispanic teens, compared to 6.1 percent for black teens and 4.1 percent for white teens.

Table WORK 5. Percentage of Students Enrolled in Grades 10 to 12 in the Previous Year Who Were Not Enrolled and Had Not Graduated in the Survey Year, by Race/Ethnicity: Selected Years

	Total	Non-Hispanic White	Non-Hispanic Black	Hispanic Origin
1972	6.1	5.3	9.5	11.2
1973	6.3	5.5	9.9	10.0
1974	6.7	5.8	11.6	9.9
1975	5.8	5.0	8.7	10.9
1976	5.9	5.6	7.4	7.3
1977	6.5	6.1	8.6	7.8
1978	6.7	5.8	10.2	12.3
1979	6.7	6.0	9.9	9.8
1980	6.1	5.2	8.2	11.7
1981	5.9	4.8	9.7	10.7
1982	5.5	4.7	7.8	9.2
1983	5.2	4.4	7.0	10.1
1984	5.1	4.4	5.7	11.1
1985	5.2	4.3	7.8	9.8
1986	4.7	3.7	5.4	11.9
1987	4.1	3.5	6.4	5.4
1988	4.8	4.2	5.9	10.4
1989	4.5	3.5	7.8	7.8
1990	4.0	3.3	5.0	7.9
1991	4.0	3.2	6.0	7.3
1992	4.4	3.7	5.0	8.2
1993	4.5	3.9	5.8	6.7
1994	5.3	4.2	6.6	10.0
1995	5.7	4.5	6.4	12.3
1996	5.0	4.1	6.7	9.0
1997	4.6	3.6	5.0	9.5
1998	4.8	3.9	5.2	9.4
1999	5.0	4.0	6.5	7.8
2000	4.8	4.1	6.1	7.4

Note: Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race. Due to small sample size, American Indians/Alaska Natives and Asian/Pacific Islanders are included in the total but are not shown separately. Beginning in 1987, the Bureau of the Census instituted new editing procedures for cases with missing data on school enrollment. Beginning in 1992, the data reflect new wording of the educational attainment item in the CPS.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Dropout Rates in the United States: 2000 and earlier years (based on Current Population Survey data from the October supplement).

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 6. Adult Alcohol and Substance Abuse

Figure WORK 6. Percentage of Adults Who Used Cocaine or Marijuana or Abused Alcohol, by Age: 2000

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.

• In 2000, young adults (ages 18 to 25) were more likely than older adults to report alcohol abuse, marijuana use, or cocaine use in the past month. About one in seven (14 percent) of adults 18 to 25 reported using marijuana in the past month during 2000, compared with 6 percent of adults 26 to 34 and 2 percent of adults 35 and older. Young adults were also significantly more likely to abuse alcohol than older adults.
• The percentages of persons reporting binge alcohol use in 1999 and 2000 were significantly larger than the percentages for all other reported behaviors across all age groups, as shown in Table WORK 6.

Table WORK 6. Percentage of Adults Who Used Cocaine or Marijuana or Abused Alcohol, by Age: 1999 & 2000

	1999	2000
Cocaine
Ages 18-25	1.7	1.4
Ages 26-34	1.2	0.8
Age 35 and Over	0.4	0.3
Marijuana
Ages 18-25	14.2	13.6
Ages 26-34	5.4	5.9
Age 35 and Over	2.2	2.3
Binge Alcohol Use
Ages 18-25	37.9	37.8
Ages 26-34	29.3	30.3
Age 35 and Over	16.0	16.4
Heavy Alcohol Use
Ages 18-25	13.3	12.8
Ages 26-34	7.5	7.6
Age 35 and Over	4.2	4.1

Note: Cocaine and marijuana use is defined as use during the past month. “Binge" Alcohol Use is defined as drinking five or more drinks on the same occasion on at least one day in the past 30 days. "Occasion" means at the same time or within a couple hours of each other. Heavy Alcohol Use is defined as drinking five or more drinks on the same occasion on each of five or more days in the past 30 days; all Heavy Alcohol Users are also "Binge" Alcohol Users. Due to a change in NHSDA methodology in 1999, the 1999 and 2000 estimates cannot be compared to estimates from 1998 and earlier years for trend purposes.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse.

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 7. ADULT/CHILD Disability

Figure WORK 7.Percentage of the Total Population Reporting a Disability, by Age: 2000

Source: Provisional data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey.

• In 2000, 12 percent of all Americans had an activity-limiting disability. In addition, activity-limiting disabilities were reported by 6 percent of children, 10 percent of adults under the age of 65, and 36 percent of elderly adults in 2000.
• Among the non-elderly population, rates of activity limitation were very similar for non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks in 2000 (9 percent and 10 percent, respectively), but lower for Hispanics (6 percent), as shown in Table WORK 7.
• While adults were more likely than children to report an activity limitation, a higher percentage of children than adults were actually recipients of disability program benefits in 2000 (5.5 percent compared to 3.8 percent), as shown in Table WORK 7.
• Elderly adults were far more likely than adults under the age of 65 to have activity limitations, work disabilities, or long-term care needs in 2000.

Table WORK 7. Percentage of the Total Population Reporting a Disability, by Race/Ethnicity and Age: 2000

	Activity Limitation	Work Disability	Long-Term Care Needs	Disability Program Recipient
All Persons, All Ages	11.9
All Persons under 65 Years	8.7
Racial/Ethnic Categories (Persons under 65 Years)
Non-Hispanic White	9.1
Non-Hispanic Black	9.7
Hispanic	5.9
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-17	6.4	N/A	N/A	5.5
Adults Ages 18-64	9.6	7.8	1.8	3.8
Adults Age 65 and over	35.5	30.4	13.8	N/A

Note: Alternative measures of disability (work disability, long-term care needs, and disability program recipient) are not available by race/ethnicity or across the entire population because different alternative measures are not applicable to certain age groups. Respondents were defined as having an activity limitation if they answered positively to any of the questions regarding: (1) work disability (see definition below); (2) long-term care needs (see definition below); (3) difficulty walking; (4) difficulty remembering; (5) for children under 5, limitations in the amount of play activities they can participate in because of physical, mental, or emotional problems; (6) for children 3 and over, receipt of Special Educational or Early Intervention Services; and, (7) any other limitations due to physical, mental, or emotional problems. Work disability is defined as limitations in or the inability to work as a result of a physical, mental or emotional health condition. Individuals are identified as having long-term care needs if they need the help of others in handling either personal care needs (eating, bathing, dressing, getting around the home) or routine needs (household chores, shopping, getting around for business or other purposes). Disability program recipients include persons covered by Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI), Special Education Services, Early Intervention Services, and/or disability pensions.

Source: Provisional data from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey.

Employment and Work-related Risk Factor 8. Children's Health Conditions

Figure WORK 8. Selected Chronic Health Conditions per 1,000 Children Ages 0 to 17: Selected Years

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Trends in the Well-Being of America’s Children and Youth: 1998. Table HC 2.5.

• Respiratory conditions, especially chronic sinusitis and asthma, were the most prevalent chronic health conditions experienced in recent years by children.
• Rates for asthma show some year-to-year variation, but were higher in the mid-1990s (62 to 75 children per thousand) than in the mid-1980s (43 to 53 children per thousand). Like rates for asthma, the prevalence of chronic sinusitis has both increased and showed considerable year-to-year variation.
• In 1996, 26 children per thousand had a deformity or orthopedic impairment, down from a high of 36 children per thousand in 1987, as shown in Table WORK 8.
• The rate for heart disease among children has ranged from a low of 18 cases per thousand in 1994 to a high of 24 cases per thousand in 1996, with no clear trend.

Table WORK 8. Selected Chronic Health Conditions per 1,000 Children Ages 0 to 17: Selected Years

	1984	1987	1990	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996
Respiratory Conditions
Chronic Bronchitis	50	62	53	54	59	55	54	57
Chronic Sinusitis	47	58	57	69	80	65	76	64
Asthma	43	53	58	63	72	69	75	62
Chronic Diseases of Tonsils or Adenoids	34	30	23	28	26	23	19	20
Impairments
Deformity or Orthopedic Impairment	35	36	29	33	29	28	30	26
Speech Impairment	16	19	14	21	20	21	18	16
Hearing Impairment	24	16	21	15	17	18	15	13
Visual Impairment	9	10	9	10	7	9	7	6
Other Conditions
Heart Disease	23	22	19	19	20	18	19	24
Anemia	11	8	10	11	9	12	7	5
Epilepsy	7	4	4	3	5	5	4	5

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, Trends in the Well-Being of America’s Children and Youth: 1998. Table HC 2.5. 

Non-marital Birth Risk Factor 1. Births to Unmarried Women

Figure BIRTH 1. Births to Unmarried Women as a Percentage of All Births, by Age Group: 1940-2000

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States, 1940 - 1999,” National Vital Health Statistics Reports, Vol. 48 (16), 2000; “Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 50 (5), February 2002.

• The percentage of children born outside of marriage to women of all ages has increased over the past half-century, from 4 percent in 1940 to 33 percent in 2000. This increase reflects changes in several factors: the rate at which unmarried women have children, the rate at which married women have children, and the rate at which women marry.
• The percentage of children born outside of marriage is especially high among teen women. Close to four-fifths (79 percent) of all births to teens took place outside of marriage in 2000.
• After fifty years of growth, the percentage of unmarried births to all women has almost leveled off since 1994. Growth in the percentage of unmarried births to teen mothers has also slowed since 1994, but it is still rising (from 76 percent in 1994 to 79 percent in 2000).
• Recently, the percentage of out-of-wedlock births has leveled off among black teens and all black women. Among white teens and all white women, the trend continues upward (see Table C-1 in Appendix C for non-marital birth data by age and race).

Table BIRTH 1. Births to Unmarried Women as a Percentage of All Births, by Age Group: 1940-2000

	Under 15	15-17 Years	18-19 Years	All Teens	All Women
1940	64.5	N/A	N/A	14.0	3.8
1941	64.1	N/A	N/A	14.2	3.8
1942	64.5	N/A	N/A	13.2	3.4
1943	64.2	N/A	N/A	13.4	3.3
1944	64.5	N/A	N/A	15.7	3.8
1945	70.0	N/A	N/A	18.2	4.3
1946	66.4	N/A	N/A	15.7	3.8
1947	65.1	N/A	N/A	13.0	3.6
1948	61.4	20.8	8.5	12.7	3.7
1949	61.8	21.1	8.6	12.9	3.7
1950	63.7	22.6	9.4	13.9	4.0
1951	62.9	21.8	9.1	13.5	3.9
1952	63.6	22.8	9.2	14.0	3.9
1953	64.0	22.3	9.6	14.1	4.1
1954	64.4	23.2	10.1	14.7	4.4
1955	66.3	23.2	10.3	14.9	4.5
1956	66.1	23.0	10.0	14.6	4.6
1957	66.1	23.1	9.8	14.5	4.7
1958	66.2	23.3	10.3	14.9	5.0
1959	67.9	24.2	10.6	15.4	5.2
1960	67.8	24.0	10.7	15.4	5.3
1961	69.7	25.3	11.3	16.2	5.6
1962	69.5	26.7	11.3	16.4	5.9
1963	71.1	28.2	12.5	18.0	6.3
1964	74.2	29.9	13.5	19.7	6.8
1965	78.5	32.8	15.3	21.6	7.7
1966	76.3	35.3	16.1	22.6	8.4
1967	80.3	37.7	18.0	25.0	9.0
1968	81.0	40.4	20.1	27.6	9.7
1969	79.3	41.3	21.1	28.7	10.0
1970	80.8	43.0	22.4	30.5	10.7
1971	82.1	44.5	23.2	31.8	11.3
1972	81.9	45.9	24.7	33.8	12.4
1973	84.8	46.7	25.6	35.0	13.0
1974	84.6	48.3	27.0	36.4	13.2
1975	87.0	51.4	29.8	39.3	14.2
1976	86.4	54.0	31.6	41.2	14.8
1977	88.2	56.6	34.4	43.8	15.5
1978	87.3	57.5	36.2	44.9	16.3
1979	88.8	60.0	38.1	46.9	17.1
1980	88.7	61.5	39.8	48.3	18.4
1981	89.2	63.3	41.4	49.9	18.9
1982	89.2	65.0	43.0	51.4	19.4
1983	90.4	67.5	45.7	54.1	20.3
1984	91.1	69.2	48.1	56.3	21.0
1985	91.8	70.9	50.7	58.7	22.0
1986	92.5	73.3	53.6	61.5	23.4
1987	92.9	75.8	56.0	64.0	24.5
1988	93.6	77.1	58.5	65.9	25.7
1989	92.4	77.7	60.4	67.2	27.1
1990	91.6	77.7	61.3	67.6	28.0
1991	91.3	78.7	63.2	69.3	29.5
1992	91.3	79.2	64.6	70.5	30.1
1993	91.3	79.9	66.1	71.8	31.0
1994	94.5	84.1	70.0	75.9	32.6
1995	93.5	83.7	69.8	75.6	32.2
1996	93.8	84.4	70.8	76.3	32.4
1997	95.7	86.7	72.5	78.2	32.4
1998	96.6	87.5	73.6	78.9	32.8
1999	96.5	87.7	74.0	79.0	33.0
2000	96.5	87.7	74.3	79.1	33.2

Note: Trends in non-marital births may be affected by changes in the reporting of marital status on birth certificates and in procedures for inferring non-marital births when marital status is not reported.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States, 1940 - 1999,” National Vital Health Statistics Reports, Vol. 48 (16), 2000; “Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 50 (5), February 2002.

Non-marital Birth Risk Factor 2. Births to Unmarried Teens

Figure BIRTH 2. Percentage of All Births to Unmarried Teens Ages 15 to 19, by Race: 1940-2000

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States, 1940 - 1999,” National Vital Health Statistics Reports, Vol. 48 (16), 2000; “Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 50 (5), February 2002.

• In contrast to Figure BIRTH 1, which showed births to unmarried teens as a percentage of all teen births, Figure BIRTH 2 shows births to unmarried teens as a percentage of births to all women. This percentage rose from just under 2 percent in 1940 to just under 10 percent in 1994 and saw a modest decline in 1999 and 2000. It may be affected by several factors: the age distribution of women, the marriage rate among teens, the birth rate among unmarried teens, and the birth rate among all other women.
• Between 1960 and 2000, the percentage of all births that were to unmarried teens trended upward among white women, from less than 1 percent in 1960 to nearly 8 percent in 2000.
• Among black women, the percentage of all births that were to unmarried teens varied greatly during the same period, rising sharply to a peak of 24 percent in 1975, and showing a gradual decline in most years since then. The rate fell to just under 19 percent in 2000, the lowest percentage since 1970. The sharp increase in the late 1960s and early 1970s reflects a large increase in non-marital births to black teenagers at a time when overall births to black women were declining.

Table BIRTH 2. Births to Unmarried Teens Ages 15 to 19 as a Percentage of All Births, by Race: 1940-2000

Note: Trends in non-marital births may be affected by changes in the reporting of marital status on birth certificates and in procedures for inferring non-marital births when marital status is not reported. Beginning in 1980, data are tabulated by the race of the mother. Prior to 1980, data are tabulated by the race of the child. White and black include those of Hispanic origin for all years. Rates for 1981-1989 have been revised and differ, therefore, from rates published in Vital Statistics in the United States, Vol. 1, Natality, for 1991 and earlier years.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States, 1940 - 1999,” National Vital Health Statistics Reports, Vol. 48 (16), 2000; “Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 50 (5), February 2002.

Non-marital Birth Risk Factor 3. Unmarried Teen Birth Rates Within Age Groups

Figure BIRTH 3a. Births per 1,000 Unmarried Teens Ages 15 to 17, by Race: 1960-2000

Figure BIRTH 3b. Births per 1,000 Unmarried Teens Ages 18 and 19, by Race: 1960-2000

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States, 1940 - 1999,” National Vital Health Statistics Reports, Vol. 48 (16), 2000; “Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 50 (5), February 2002.

• The birth rate per 1,000 unmarried teens fell between 1994 and 2000 for both black and white teens and for both younger (15 to 17 years) and older age groups (18 and 19 years). The rate for black teens 18 and 19, for example, fell from 142 per 1,000 to 117 per 1,000. Declines were larger among black teens than among white teens.
• Prior to 1994, birth rates among unmarried white teens in both age groups rose steadily for nearly three decades (4 to 24 percent among 15 to 17 year-olds and 11 to 57 percent among 18 and 19 year-olds).
• Among unmarried black teens in both age groups, birth rates varied greatly over the period, reaching peaks in both the early 1970s and early 1990s. Rates for both age groups were lower in 2000 than in 1969 (31 percent lower for 15 to 17 year-olds and 11 percent lower for 18 to 19 year-olds). While birth rates among unmarried black teens remain high compared to rates for unmarried white teens, the gap been black and white teens narrowed considerably during the 1990s.

Table BIRTH 3. Births per 1,000 Unmarried Teen Women Within Age Groups, by Race: 1960-2000

	Ages 15-17			Ages 18 and 19
	All Races	White	Black	All Races	White	Black
1960	11.1	4.4	N/A	24.3	11.4	N/A
1961	11.7	4.6	N/A	24.6	12.1	N/A
1962	10.7	4.1	N/A	23.8	11.7	N/A
1963	10.9	4.5	N/A	25.8	13.0	N/A
1964	11.6	4.9	N/A	26.5	13.6	N/A
1965	12.5	5.0	N/A	25.8	13.9	N/A
1966	13.1	5.4	N/A	25.6	14.1	N/A
1967	13.8	5.6	N/A	27.6	15.3	N/A
1968	14.7	6.2	N/A	29.6	16.6	N/A
1969	15.2	6.6	72.0	30.8	16.6	128.4
1970	17.1	7.5	77.9	32.9	17.6	136.4
1971	17.5	7.4	80.7	31.7	15.8	135.2
1972	18.5	8.0	82.8	30.9	15.1	128.2
1973	18.7	8.4	81.2	30.4	14.9	120.5
1974	18.8	8.8	78.6	31.2	15.3	122.2
1975	19.3	9.6	76.8	32.5	16.5	123.8
1976	19.0	9.7	73.5	32.1	16.9	117.9
1977	19.8	10.5	73.0	34.6	18.7	121.7
1978	19.1	10.3	68.8	35.1	19.3	119.6
1979	19.9	10.8	71.0	37.2	21.0	123.3
1980	20.6	12.0	68.8	39.0	24.1	118.2
1981	20.9	12.6	65.9	39.0	24.6	114.2
1982	21.5	13.1	66.3	39.6	25.3	112.7
1983	22.0	13.6	66.8	40.7	26.4	111.9
1984	21.9	13.7	66.5	42.5	27.9	113.6
1985	22.4	14.5	66.8	45.9	31.2	117.9
1986	22.8	14.9	67.0	48.0	33.5	121.1
1987	24.5	16.2	69.9	48.9	34.5	123.0
1988	26.4	17.6	73.5	51.5	36.8	130.5
1989	28.7	19.3	78.9	56.0	40.2	140.9
1990	29.6	20.4	78.8	60.7	44.9	143.7
1991	30.9	21.8	80.4	65.7	49.6	148.7
1992	30.4	21.6	78.0	67.3	51.5	147.8
1993	30.6	22.1	76.8	66.9	52.4	141.6
1994	32.0	24.1	75.1	70.1	56.4	141.6
1995	30.5	23.6	68.6	67.6	55.4	131.2
1996	29.0	22.7	64.0	65.9	54.1	129.2
1997	28.2	22.4	60.6	65.2	53.6	127.2
1998	27.0	21.8	56.5	64.2	53.5	123.5
1999	25.5	21.0	51.5	63.3	53.3	117.9
2000	24.4	20.0	49.9	62.9	53.2	116.9

Note: Rates are per 1,000 unmarried women in specified group. Trends in non-marital births may be affected by changes in the reporting of marital status on birth certificates and in procedures for inferring non-marital births when marital status is not reported. Beginning in 1980, data are tabulated by the race of the mother. Prior to 1980, data are tabulated by the race of the child. White and black include those of Hispanic origin for all years. Rates for 1981-1989 have been revised and differ, therefore, from rates published in Vital Statistics in the United States, Vol. 1, Natality, for 1991 and earlier years.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States, 1940 - 1999,” National Vital Health Statistics Reports, Vol. 48 (16), 2000; “Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 50 (5), February 2002.

Non-marital Birth Risk Factor 4. Never-married Family Status

Figure BIRTH 4. Percentage of All Children Living in Families with a Never-Married Female Head, by Race/Ethnicity: 1982-2001

Source of CPS data: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Marital Status and Living Arrangements,” Current Population Reports, Series P20-212, 287, 365, 380, 399, 418, 423, 433, 445, 450, 461, 468, 478, 484, 491, 496, 506, 514, 537 various years, and ASPE tabulations of the 2001 CPS.

Source of 1960 data: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1960 Census of Population, PC(2)-4B, “Persons by Family Characteristics,” tables 1 and 19.

• The percentage of children living in families with never-married female heads increased from under 5 percent in 1982 to nearly 10 percent in 2001.
• The percentage of white children living in families headed by never-married women has continued to rise over the past twenty years, from less than 2 percent in 1982 to 5.5 percent in 2001.
• Among Hispanics, the percentage of children living with never-married female heads more than doubled over the past sixteen years, going from less than 6 percent in 1982 to 12 percent in 1996. Since then it has fluctuated up and down by about one-half a percentage point.
• The percentage of black children living in families headed by never-married women was much higher than the percentages for other groups throughout the time period. However, the percentage dropped nearly three percentage points in the past two years.

Table BIRTH 4. Number and Percentage of All Children Living in Families with a Never-Married Female Head, by Race/Ethnicity: Selected Years

Note: Data are for all children under 18 who are not family heads (excludes householders, subfamily reference persons, and their spouses). Also excludes inmates of institutions; children who are living with neither of their parents are excluded from the denominator. Based on Current Population Survey (CPS) except 1960, 1970, and 1980, which are based on decennial census data. Nonwhite data are shown for Black in 1960. In 1982, improved data collection and processing procedures helped to identify parent-child subfamilies. (See Current Population Reports, P-20, 399, Marital Status and Living Arrangements: March 1984.)

Source of CPS data: U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Marital Status and Living Arrangements,” Current Population Reports, Series P20-212, 287, 365, 380, 399, 418, 423, 433, 445, 450, 461, 468, 478, 484, 491, 496, 506, 514, 537, various years, and ASPE tabulations of the 2001 CPS.

Source of 1960 data: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1960 Census of Population, PC(2)-4B, “Persons by Family Characteristics,” tables 1 and 19.

Appendix A: Program Data

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: the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program authorized under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (replaced with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program by the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996), the Food Stamp Program under the Food Stamp Act of 1977, as amended, and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program under title XVI of the Social Security Act. 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 on each program and information on the characteristics of participants in each program.

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

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) 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 father or mother is 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 which 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.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) replaced AFDC, the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) program and the Emergency Assistance (EA) program with a cash welfare block grant called the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Key elements of TANF include a lifetime limit of five years (60 months) on the amount of time a family with an adult can receive assistance funded with federal funds, increasing work participation rate requirements which 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 fiscal year 1995 federal expenditures for the four component programs. States must also 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.

Data Issues Relating to 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 reflects 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 will be spent on activities other than cash payments to families. When tracking overall expenditure trends, the tables in this Appendix (e.g., Table TANF 3) include 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, have now been 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. One program change is that there is no longer a separate “Unemployed Parent” program under TANF. While a separate work participation rate is calculated for two-parent families, this population is not identical to the UP caseload under AFDC. Another change under TANF is that some states provide cash and other forms of assistance to specific categories of families (e.g., two-parent families) under Separate State Programs; the TANF caseload figures do not include these families. Finally, it is possible that a limited number of families will be considered recipients of TANF assistance, even if they do not receive a monthly cash benefit. At present, the vast majority of families receiving “assistance”¹ are, in fact, receiving cash payments; however, this may change over time.

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 Figure TANF 1 and the first set of tables (Tables TANF 1-6). These are followed by information on characteristics of AFDC/TANF families (Table TANF 7) and a series of tables presenting state-by-state data on trends in the AFDC/TANF program (Tables TANF 8-13). These data complement the data on trends in AFDC recipiency and participation rates shown in Tables IND 4a and IND 5a in Chapter II.

AFDC/TANF Caseload Trends (Figure TANF 1, Tables TANF 1-2). Welfare caseloads have declined dramatically during the past several years. In fiscal year 2000, the average monthly number of TANF recipients was 6.0 million persons, 53 percent lower than the average monthly AFDC caseload in fiscal year 1996 and the smallest number of people on welfare since 1968. From the peak of 14.4 million in March 1994, the number of AFDC/TANF recipients dropped by 63 percent to 5.3 million in September 2001. Over three-fourths of the reduction in the caseload since March 1994 has occurred following the implementation of TANF. These are the largest welfare caseload declines in the history of U.S. welfare programs.

As shown in Figure TANF 1, AFDC caseloads generally tended to increase in times of economic recession and decline in times of economic growth. The recent decline, however, has far outstripped that experienced in any previous period.

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, because PRWORA was enacted at a time when the economy was expanding dramatically, offering a uniquely conducive environment within which to move many welfare recipients off the 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 Advisors (1999) of the post-PRWORA period finds that just over one-third of caseload decline can be explained by welfare reform policy, while 8 to 10 percent is due to the economy. In addition to general labor market conditions, the effects of economic policy post-1996 (namely increases in the minimum wage) explain another 10 to 16 percent of the caseload drop. In both periods, a large portion of the welfare decline is not explained by the examined variables. Possible factors that could account for this additional decline include the expansions of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and changing cultural perceptions of welfare receipt.

AFDC/TANF Expenditures (Tables TANF 3-6 and Figure TANF 2). Tables TANF 3, 4 and 5 show trends in expenditures on AFDC and TANF. Table TANF 3 tracks both programs, breaking out the costs of benefits and administrative expenses. It also shows the division between federal and state spending. Table TANF 4 breaks out the benefits paid under the single parent or “basic” program and the Unemployed Parent (UP) program, and also nets out the value of child support collected on behalf of recipient children, but retained by the state to reimburse welfare expenditures. This table presents data through 1996 only, because the TANF data reporting requirements do not require that caseload data be separated into “basic” and “UP” components. Table TANF 5 shows the variety of activities funded under the TANF program.

Figure TANF 2 and Table TANF 6 shows that inflation has had a significant effect in eroding the value of the average monthly AFDC/TANF benefit. In real dollars, the average monthly benefit per recipient in 2000 was 75 percent of what it was at its peak in the late 1970s. This level was $14 higher than in 1998, but still below the real value of benefits in the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s.

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 child-only cases and in employment among adult recipients.

One of the most dramatic trends is the recent jump in the proportion of adult recipients who are working. In FY 2000, 26 percent of TANF adult recipients were employed, 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 at an all-time high of 33 percent in FY 2000 (data not shown). Similar upward trends are shown in data on income from earnings. These trends likely reflect positive effects of welfare-to-work programs, the strong economy, and the fact that, with larger earnings disregards, families with earnings do not exit welfare as rapidly. In addition, the increased employment of welfare recipients is consistent with broader trends in labor force participation among mothers with young children. Among single mothers with children under six and family income below 200 percent of the Federal poverty level, for example, the employment rate increased from 35 percent in 1992 to 59 percent in 2000. In addition, employment rates for white, black, and Hispanic women ages 18 to 65 with no more than a high school education were at all-time highs in 1999, with some leveling off among white and black women in 2000 (as shown in WORK 2 in Chapter III).

Another dramatic change in the caseload is the increasing fraction of child-only cases. Child only cases have climbed from 11.6 percent of the caseload in FY 1990 to 34.5 percent in FY 2000. This dramatic growth has been due to both the overall decline in the number of adult-present cases as well as an increase in the number of child-only cases. Child-only cases are generally not subject to the work requirements or time limits under TANF.

In other areas, the 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 decline 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 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 have also found that the effects of these barriers are interactive; while any one barrier to employment can often be overcome, 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 8-14). 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 1993, the percentage change between the state’s caseload peak and June 2001 ranges from 93 percent (Wyoming) to 35 percent (Rhode Island). Seven 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 May 1995 (Maryland).

Figure TANF 1. AFDC/TANF Families Receiving Income Assistance

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. Last data point plotted is June 2001.

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 Dollars

Note: See Table TANF 6 for underlying data.

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 unpublished data.

Table TANF 1. Trends in AFDC/TANF Caseloads, 1962 – 2000

Fiscal Year	Average Monthly Number (In thousands)					Children as a Percent of Total Recipients	Average1Number of Children per Family
	Total Families1	Total Recipients	Unemployed Parent Families	Unemployed Parent Recipients	Total Children
1962	924	3,593	49	224	2,778	77.3	3.0
1963	950	3,834	54	291	2,896	75.5	3.0
1964	984	4,059	60	343	3,043	75.0	3.1
1965	1,037	4,323	69	400	3,242	75.0	3.1
1966	1,074	4,472	62	361	3,369	75.3	3.1
1967	1,141	4,718	58	340	3,561	75.5	3.1
1968	1,307	5,348	67	377	4,011	75.0	3.1
1969	1,538	6,147	66	361	4,591	74.7	3.0
1970	1,909	7,429	78	420	5,494	74.0	2.9
1971	2,532	9,556	143	726	6,963	72.9	2.8
1972	2,918	10,632	134	639	7,698	72.4	2.6
1973	3,124	11,038	120	557	7,965	72.2	2.5
1974	3,170	10,845	95	434	7,824	72.1	2.5
1975	3,357	11,067	101	451	7,928	71.6	2.4
1976	3,575	11,339	135	593	8,156	71.9	2.3
1977	3,593	11,108	149	659	7,818	70.4	2.2
1978	3,539	10,663	128	567	7,475	70.1	2.1
1979	3,496	10,311	114	506	7,193	69.8	2.1
1980	3,642	10,597	141	612	7,320	69.1	2.0
1981	3,871	11,160	209	881	7,615	68.2	2.0
1982	3,569	10,431	232	976	6,975	66.9	2.0
1983	3,651	10,659	272	1,144	7,051	66.1	1.9
1984	3,725	10,866	287	1,222	7,153	65.8	1.9
1985	3,692	10,813	261	1,131	7,165	66.3	1.9
1986	3,748	10,997	254	1,102	7,300	66.4	1.9
1987	3,784	11,065	236	1,035	7,381	66.7	2.0
1988	3,748	10,920	210	929	7,325	67.1	2.0
1989	3,771	10,934	193	856	7,370	67.4	2.0
1990	3,974	11,460	204	899	7,755	67.7	2.0
1991	4,374	12,592	268	1,148	8,513	67.6	1.9
1992	4,768	13,625	322	1,348	9,226	67.7	1.9
1993	4,981	14,143	359	1,489	9,560	67.6	1.9
1994	5,046	14,226	363	1,510	9,611	67.6	1.9
1995	4,879	13,659	335	1,384	9,280	67.9	1.9
1996	4,543	12,645	301	1,241	8,671	68.6	1.9
19972	3,937	10,935	2753	1,1583	7,7813	71.23	2.03
1998	3,200	8,796	179	753 4	6,273	71.3	2.0
1999	2,674	7,188	NA	NA	5,319	74.0	2.0
2000	2,269	5,961	NA	NA	4,385	73.6	1.9

Footnotes:

¹Includes unemployed parent families and child-only cases.

²The 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 to Needy Families (TANF) program.

³Based on data from the old AFDC reporting system which was available only for the first 9 months of the fiscal year.

⁴Estimated based on the ratio of Unemployed Parent recipients to Unemployed Parent families in 1997.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, (Available online at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/).

Table TANF 2. Number of AFDC/TANF Recipients, and Recipients as a Percentage of Various Population Groups, 1970 – 2000

Calendar Year1	Total Recipients in the States & DC (in thousands)	Child Recipients in the States & DC (in thousands)	Recipients as a Percent of Total Population2	Recipients as a Percent of Poverty Population3	Recipients as a Percent of Pretransfer Poverty Population4	Child Recipients as a Percent of Total Child Population2	Child Recipients as a Percent of Children in Poverty3
1970	8,303	6,104	4.1	32.7	NA	8.8	58.5
1971	10,043	7,303	4.9	39.3	NA	10.5	69.2
1972	10,736	7,766	5.1	43.9	NA	11.2	75.5
1973	10,738	7,763	5.1	46.7	NA	11.3	80.5
1974	10,621	7,637	5.0	45.4	NA	11.3	75.2
1975	11,131	7,928	5.2	43.0	NA	11.8	71.4
1976	11,098	7,850	5.1	44.4	NA	11.8	76.4
1977	10,856	7,632	4.9	43.9	NA	11.7	74.2
1978	10,387	7,270	4.7	42.4	NA	11.2	73.2
1979	10,140	7,057	4.5	38.9	53.1	11.0	68.0
1980	10,599	7,295	4.7	36.2	49.2	11.4	63.2
1981	10,893	7,397	4.7	34.2	47.1	11.7	59.2
1982	10,161	6,767	4.4	29.5	40.6	10.8	49.6
1983	10,569	6,967	4.5	29.9	41.9	11.1	50.1
1984	10,643	7,017	4.5	31.6	43.6	11.2	52.3
1985	10,672	7,073	4.5	32.3	45.0	11.3	54.4
1986	10,850	7,206	4.5	33.5	46.6	11.5	56.0
1987	10,841	7,240	4.5	33.6	46.7	11.5	55.9
1988	10,728	7,201	4.4	33.8	47.7	11.4	57.8
1989	10,798	7,286	4.4	34.3	47.6	11.5	57.9
1990	11,497	7,781	4.6	34.2	47.1	12.1	57.9
1991	12,728	8,601	5.0	35.6	49.1	13.2	60.0
1992	13,571	9,189	5.3	35.7	50.8	13.9	60.1
1993	14,007	9,460	5.4	35.7	48.5	14.1	60.2
1994	13,970	9,448	5.4	36.7	50.0	13.9	61.8
1995	13,241	9,013	5.0	36.4	50.1	13.1	61.5
1996	12,156	8,355	4.6	33.3	46.4	12.1	57.8
1997	10,224	7,340 5	3.8	28.7	40.7	10.5	52.0
1998	8,221	5,770	3.0	23.8	34.7	8.3	42.8
1999	6,715	4,841	2.5	20.8	31.0	6.9	40.0
2000	5,700	4,197	2.0	18.3	28.0	5.8	36.1

Footnotes:

¹Total 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. See Table IND 3a for fiscal year recipiency rates.

²Population numbers used as denominators are resident population. See Current Population Reports, Series P25-1106.

³For poverty population data see Current Population Reports, Series P60-210 and Resident Population Estimates of the United States by Age and Sex, April 1, 1990 to July 1, 2000, Internet release date January 2, 2001.

⁴The pretransfer poverty population used as denominator is the number of all persons in families with related children under 18 years of age whose income (cash income plus social insurance plus Social Security but before taxes and means-tested transfers) falls below the appropriate poverty threshold. See Appendix J, Table 20,1992 Green Book; data for subsequent years are unpublished Congressional Budget Office tabulations.

⁵Average 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. Bureau of the Census, Poverty in the United States: 2000, Current Population Reports, Series P60-214 and earlier years, (Available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).

Table TANF 3. Total AFDC/TANF Expenditures on Cash Benefits and Administration, 1970 – 2000 [In millions of dollars]

Fiscal Year	Federal Funds (Current Dollars)		State Funds (Current Dollars)		Total  (Current Dollars)		Total (Constant ’00 Dollars1)
	Benefits	Adminis- trative	Benefits	Adminis- trative	Benefits	Adminis- trative	Benefits	Adminis- trative
1970	$2,187	$5722	$1,895	$309	$4,082	$8812	$17,258	$3,725
1971	3,008	271	2,469	254	5,477	525	22,168	2,125
1972	3,612	2403	2,942	241	6,554	4813	25,616	NA
1973..	3,865	313	3,138	296	7,003	610	26,288	2,290
1974	4,071	379	3,300	362	7,371	740	25,485	2,559
1975	4,625	552	3,787	529	8,412	1,082	26,509	3,410
1976	5,258	541	4,418	527	9,676	1,069	28,543	3,154
1977	5,626	595	4,762	583	10,388	1,177	28,525	3,232
1978	5,724	631	4,898	617	10,621	1,248	27,362	3,215
1979	5,825	683	4,954	668	10,779	1,350	25,535	3,198
1980	6,448	750	5,508	729	11,956	1,479	25,462	3,150
1981	6,928	835	5,917	814	12,845	1,648	24,874	3,191
1982	6,922	878	5,934	878	12,857	1,756	23,263	3,177
1983	7,332	915	6,275	915	13,607	1,830	23,547	3,167
1984	7,707	876	6,664	822	14,371	1,698	23,854	2,818
1985	7,817	890	6,763	889	14,580	1,779	23,361	2,850
1986	8,239	993	6,996	967	15,235	1,960	23,807	3,063
1987	8,914	1,081	7,409	1,052	16,323	2,133	24,804	3,241
1988	9,125	1,194	7,538	1,159	16,663	2,353	24,325	3,435
1989	9,433	1,211	7,807	1,206	17,240	2,417	24,018	3,367
1990	10,149	1,358	8,390	1,303	18,539	2,661	24,603	3,532
1991	11,165	1,373	9,191	1,300	20,356	2,673	25,716	3,377
1992	12,258	1,459	9,993	1,378	22,250	2,837	27,281	3,479
1993	12,270	1,518	10,016	1,438	22,286	2,956	26,526	3,518
1994	12,512	1,680	10,285	1,621	22,797	3,301	26,434	3,828
1995	12,019	1,770	10,014	1,751	22,032	3,521	24,855	3,973
1996	11,065	1,633	9,346	1,633	20,411	3,266	22,404	3,585
19974	9,748	1,273	7,799	1,098	17,547	2,371	18,755	2,534
1998	7,518	1,231	7,096	1,028	14,614	2,259	15,370	2,376
1999	6,475	1,407	6,975	884	13,449	2,291	13,880	2,364
2000	5,096	1,506	6,386	899	11,481	2,405	11,481	2,405

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. 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.

Footnotes:

¹Constant dollar adjustments to 2000 level were made using a CPI-U-X1 fiscal year price index.

²Includes expenditures for services.

³Administrative expenditures only.

⁴The 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 to 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 4. Federal and State AFDC Benefit Payments Under the Single Parent and Unemployed Parent Programs, Fiscal Years 1970 to 1996 [In millions of current and 1996 dollars]

Fiscal Year	[1]	[2]	[3]	[4]	[5]
	Single Parent1	Unemployed Parent	Child Support Collections2	Net Benefits3 [1] + [2] minus [3]	Net Benefits (1996 dollars)4
1970	3,851	231	0	4,082	15,722
1971	4,993	412	0	5,405	19,882
1972	5,972	422	0	6,394	22,715
1973	6,459	414	0	6,873	22,504
1974	6,881	324	0	7,205	22,740
1975	7,791	362	0	8,153	23,363
1976	8,825	525	245	9,105	24,469
1977	9,420	617	395	9,642	24,121
1978	9,624	565	459	9,730	22,870
1979	9,865	522	584	9,803	21,156
1980	10,847	693	593	10,947	21,186
1981	11,769	1,075	659	12,185	21,472
1982	11,601	1,256	771	12,086	19,879
1983	12,136	1,471	865	12,742	20,128
1984	12,759	1,612	983	13,388	20,264
1985	13,024	1,556	901	13,679	19,967
1986	13,672	1,563	951	14,284	20,335
1987	14,807	1,516	1,070	15,252	21,115
1988	15,243	1,420	1,196	15,466	20,569
1989	15,889	1,350	1,286	15,952	20,246
1990	17,059	1,480	1,416	17,123	20,702
1991	18,529	1,827	1,603	18,753	21,583
1992	20,130	2,121	1,824	20,426	22,816
1993	19,988	2,298	1,971	20,315	22,028
1994	20,393	2,404	2,093	20,704	21,871
1995	19,820	2,212	2,215	19,817	20,367
1996	18,438	1,973	2,374	18,037	18,037

Footnotes:

¹Includes payments to two-parent families where one adult is incapacitated.

²Total AFDC collections (including collections on behalf of foster care children) less payments to AFDC families.

³Net AFDC benefits Gross benefits less those reimbursed by child support collections.

⁴Constant dollar adjustments to 1996 level were made using a CPI-U-XI fiscal year price index.

Note:Data are not available after 1996 because the TANF data reporting requirements do not require that caseload data be separated into single parent and unemployed parent components.

Source:U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Financial Management.

Table TANF 5. Federal and State TANF Program and Other Related Spending, Fiscal Years: 1997 to 2000 (Millions)

Fiscal Year	Cash & Work-Based Assistance	Work Activities	Child Care	Trans- portation	Adminis- tration	Systems	Transitional Services	Other Expenditures	Total Expendi- tures
Federal TANF Grants
1997	7,708	467	14	–	872	109	0	862	10,032
1998	7,518	958	252	–	987	247	11	1,306	11,279
1999	6,475	1,225	604	–	1,070	337	17	1,595	11,323
2000	5,096	1,515	1,411	460	1,265	240	–	2,496	12,483
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	5,774	743	1,701	126	805	81	–	903	10,132
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	611	14	29	8	13	0	–	298	975
Total Expenditures
1997	13,731	790	877	–	1,577	211	9	1,805	19,000
1998	14,614	1,481	1,280	–	1,877	385	22	2,635	22,294
1999	13,449	1,754	1,995	–	1,835	456	40	3,055	22,585
2000	11,481	2,272	3,142	594	2,083	321	–	3,697	22,996

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

Table TANF 6. Trends in AFDC/TANF Average Monthly Payments, 1962 – 2000

Fiscal Year	Monthly Benefit per Recipient		Average Number of Persons per Family	Monthly Benefit per Family (not reduced by Child Support)		Weighted Average1Maximum Benefit (per 3-person Family)
	Current Dollars	2000 Dollars		Current Dollars	1999 Dollars	Current Dollars	2000 Dollars
1962	$31	$163	3.9	$121	$634	NA	NA
1963	31	161	4.0	126	650	NA	NA
1964	32	162	4.1	131	670	NA	NA
1965	34	169	4.2	140	705	NA	NA
1966	35	172	4.2	146	716	NA	NA
1967	36	173	4.1	150	716	NA	NA
1968	40	182	4.1	162	746	NA	NA
1969	43	192	4.0	173	766	$1862	$827
1970	46	194	3.9	178	753	1942	822
1971	48	193	3.8	180	730	2012	814
1972	51	201	3.6	187	732	2052	803
1973	53	198	3.5	187	701	2132	799
1974	57	196	3.4	194	670	2292	791
1975	63	199	3.3	209	658	243	766
1976	71	209	3.2	226	665	257	757
1977	78	214	3.1	241	662	271	744
1978	83	214	3.0	249	644	284	732
1979	87	206	2.9	257	609	301	713
1980	94	200	2.9	274	583	320	682
1981	96	186	2.9	277	536	326	631
1982	103	186	2.9	300	543	331	598
1983	106	184	2.9	311	537	336	582
1984	110	183	2.9	321	534	352	584
1985	112	180	2.9	329	527	369	591
1986	115	180	2.9	339	529	383	599
1987	123	187	2.9	359	546	393	598
1988	127	186	2.9	370	541	404	590
1989	131	183	2.9	381	531	412	575
1990	135	179	2.9	389	516	421	559
1991	135	170	2.9	388	490	425	537
1992	136	167	2.9	389	477	419	513
1993	131	156	2.8	373	444	414	493
1994	134	155	2.8	376	437	420	482
1995	134	152	2.8	376	425	418	472
1996	135	148	2.8	374	410	422	463
19973	136	146	2.8	379	405	420	449
1998	141	148	2.7	386	406	432	454
1999	159	164	2.7	426	439	452	466
2000	163	163	2.6	428	428	447	447

Footnotes:

¹The maximum benefit for a 3-person family in each state is weighted by that states share of total AFDC families.

²Estimated based on the weighted average benefit for a 4-person family.

³The 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 to Needy Families (TANF) program.

Note: AFDC benefit amounts have not been reduced by child support collections. Constant dollar adjustments to 2000 level were made using a CPI-U-X1 fiscal year price index.

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 – 2000

	May	May	March	Fiscal year1
	1969	1975	1979	1983	1988	1990	1992	1996	1998	2000
Avg. Family Size (persons)	4.0	3.2	3.0	3.0	3.0	2.9	2.9	2.8	2.8	2.6
Number of Child Recipients
One	26.6	37.9	42.3	43.4	42.5	42.2	42.5	43.9	42.4	44.2
Two	23.0	26.0	28.1	29.8	30.2	30.3	30.2	29.9	29.6	28.4
Three	17.7	16.1	15.6	15.2	15.8	15.8	15.5	15.0	15.7	15.3
Four or More	32.5	20.0	13.9	10.1	9.9	9.9	10.1	9.2	10.6	10.1
Unknown	NA	NA	NA	1.5	1.7	1.4	0.7	1.3	1.8	2.0
Child-Only Families	10.1	12.5	14.6	8.3	9.6	11.6	14.8	21.5	23.4	34.5
Families with Non-Recipients	33.1	34.8	NA	36.9	36.8	37.7	38.9	49.9	–	–
Median Months on AFDC/TANF
Since Most Recent Opening	23.0	31.0	29.0	26.0	26.3	23.0	22.5	23.6	–	–
Presence of Assistance
Living in Public Housing	12.8	14.6	NA	10.0	9.6	9.6	9.2	8.8	NA	17.7
Participating in Food Stamp
Or Donated Food Program	52.9	75.1	75.1	83.0	84.6	85.6	87.3	89.3	83.5	79.9
Presence of Income
With Earnings	NA	14.6	12.8	5.7	8.4	8.2	7.4	11.1	20.64	23.64
No Non-AFDC/TANF Income	56.0	71.1	80.6	86.8	79.6	80.1	78.9	76.0	73.04	71.64
Adult Employment Status (percent of adults)
Employed	–	–	–	–	–	7.0	6.6	11.3	22.8	26.4
Unemployed	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	45.0	49.2
Not in Labor Force	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	28.3	24.3
Unknown	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	4.0	–
Adult Women's employment status (percent of adult female recipients):3
Full-time job	8.2	10.4	8.7	1.5	2.2	2.5	2.2	4.7	–	–
Part-time job	6.3	5.7	5.4	3.4	4.2	4.2	4.2	5.4	–	–
Marital Status (percent of adults)
Single	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	52.5	65.3
Married	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	16.4	12.4
Separated	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	11.7	13.1
Widowed	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	0.7	0.7
Divorced	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	8.8	8.5
Unknown	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	9.9	–
Basis for Child's Eligibility (percent children):
Incapacitated	11.72	7.7	5.3	3.4	3.7	3.6	4.1	4.3	–	–
Unemployed	4.62	3.7	4.1	8.7	6.5	6.4	8.2	8.3	–	–
Death	5.52	3.7	2.2	1.8	1.8	1.6	1.6	1.6	–	–
Divorce or Separation	43.32	48.3	44.7	38.5	34.6	32.9	30.0	24.3	–	–
Absent, No Marriage Tie	27.92	31.0	37.8	44.3	51.9	54.0	53.1	58.6	–	–
Absent, Other Reason	3.5 2	4.0	5.9	1.4	1.6	1.9	2.0	2.4	–	–
Unknown	–	–	–	1.7	–	–	0.9	0.6	–	–

Note: Figures are percentages of families/cases unless noted otherwise.

¹Percentages are based on the average monthly caseload during the year. Hawaii and the territories are not included in 1983. Data after 1986 include the territories and Hawaii.

²Calculated on the basis of total number of families.

³For years prior to 1983, data are for mothers only.

⁴Presence of income is measured as a percentage of adult recipients, not families, in 1998 and subsequent years.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics and Financial Circumstances of TANF Recipients: 2001 TANF Annual Report to Congress and earlier years.

Table TANF 8. AFDC/TANF Benefits by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1978 – 2000 [Millions of dollars]

	1978	1982	1984	1986	1988	1990	1994	1996	1998	2000
United States	$10,621	$12,857	$14,371	$15,236	$16,663	$18,543	$22,798	$20,411	$14,614	$11,481
Alabama	$78	$72	$74	$68	$62	$62	$92	$75	$44	$37
Alaska	17	32	37	46	54	60	113	107	77	55
Arizona	30	49	67	79	103	138	266	228	145	110
Arkansas	51	34	39	48	53	57	57	52	26	31
California	1,813	2,734	3,207	3,574	4,091	4,955	6,088	5,908	4,128	4,021
Colorado	74	87	107	107	125	137	158	129	80	48
Connecticut	168	210	226	223	218	295	397	323	305	166
Delaware	28	28	28	25	24	29	40	35	24	20
Dist. of Columbia	91	86	75	77	76	84	126	121	97	72
Florida	145	207	251	261	318	418	806	680	357	234
Georgia	103	172	149	223	266	321	428	385	313	135
Guam	3	4	5	4	3	5	12	14	UA	UA
Hawaii	83	88	83	73	77	99	163	173	153	141
Idaho	21	20	21	19	19	20	30	30	6	3
Illinois	699	802	845	886	815	839	914	833	771	269
Indiana	118	139	153	148	167	170	228	153	104	87
Iowa	107	127	159	170	155	152	169	131	104	79
Kansas	73	81	87	91	97	105	123	98	41	43
Kentucky	122	123	135	104	143	179	198	191	147	104
Louisiana	97	127	145	162	182	188	168	130	103	70
Maine	51	59	69	84	80	101	108	99	80	73
Maryland	166	213	229	250	250	296	314	285	192	196
Massachusetts	476	468	406	471	558	630	730	560	442	237
Michigan	780	1,064	1,214	1,248	1,231	1,211	1,132	779	589	334
Minnesota	164	235	287	322	338	355	379	333	276	193
Mississippi	33	55	58	74	85	86	82	68	60	21
Missouri	152	175	196	209	215	228	287	254	180	139
Montana	15	19	27	37	41	40	49	45	30	21
Nebraska	38	49	56	62	56	59	62	54	41	41
Nevada	8	12	10	16	20	27	48	48	39	18
New Hampshire	21	25	16	20	21	32	62	50	39	32
New Jersey	489	513	485	509	459	451	531	462	372	222
New Mexico	32	45	49	51	56	61	144	153	104	113
New York	1,689	1,641	1,916	2,099	2,140	2,259	2,913	2,929	2,149	1,832
North Carolina	138	143	149	138	206	247	353	300	211	140
North Dakota	14	14	16	20	22	24	26	21	22	12
Ohio	441	606	725	804	805	877	1,016	763	546	368
Oklahoma	74	74	85	100	119	132	165	122	72	65
Oregon	148	100	101	120	128	145	197	155	141	76
Pennsylvania	726	740	724	389	747	798	935	822	523	485
Puerto Rico	25	65	38	33	67	72	74	63	UA	UA
Rhode Island	59	70	71	79	82	99	136	125	117	100
South Carolina	52	76	75	103	91	96	115	101	52	27
South Dakota	18	17	17	15	21	22	25	22	14	10
Tennessee	77	74	83	100	125	168	215	190	108	137
Texas	122	118	229	281	344	416	544	496	315	264
Utah	41	47	52	55	61	64	77	64	50	40
Vermont	21	38	40	40	40	48	65	56	47	36
Virgin Islands	2	3	2	2	2	3	4	4	UA	UA
Virginia	136	166	165	179	169	177	253	199	123	100
Washington	175	240	294	375	401	438	610	585	450	311
West Virginia	53	56	75	109	107	110	126	101	52	49
Wisconsin	260	406	519	444	506	440	425	291	145	60
Wyoming	6	9	13	16	19	19	21	17	7	4

Note: Benefits refers to total cash benefits paid (see Table TANF 3) but does not include emergency assistance payments. UA denotes data unavailable.

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 2000 Family Assistance Grants Awarded Under PRWORA [In millions]

State	FY 1996 Grants for AFDC, EA & JOBS1	FY 2000 State Family Assistance Grant2	Increase from FY 1996 Level	Percent Increase from FY 1996 Level
United States	$15,067	$17,007	$1,940	13
Alabama	$79.0	$121.5	$43	54
Alaska	60.7	65.7	5	8
Arizona	200.6	258.7	58	29
Arkansas	54.3	61.3	7	13
California	3,545.6	3,775.6	230	6
Colorado	138.9	146.1	7	5
Connecticut	221.1	269.2	48	22
Delaware	30.2	33.9	4	12
Dist of Columbia	77.1	112.6	35	46
Florida	504.7	613.9	109	22
Georgia	301.2	358.4	57	19
Hawaii	98.4	99.8	1	1
Idaho	31.3	33.1	2	6
Illinois	593.8	626.6	33	6
Indiana	121.4	215.6	94	78
Iowa	129.3	132.7	3	3
Kansas	86.9	101.9	15	17
Kentucky	171.6	181.3	10	6
Louisiana	122.4	180.4	58	47
Maine	73.2	78.1	5	7
Maryland	207.6	229.1	21	10
Massachusetts	372.0	469.9	98	26
Michigan	581.5	797.9	216	37
Minnesota	239.3	276.6	37	16
Mississippi	68.6	93.5	25	36
Missouri	207.9	217.1	9	4
Montana	39.2	45.1	6	15
Nebraska	56.2	58.0	2	3
Nevada	41.2	48.9	8	19
New Hampshire	36.0	38.5	2	7
New Jersey	353.4	404.0	51	14
New Mexico	129.9	132.7	3	2
New York	2,332.7	2,450.9	118	5
North Carolina	311.9	329.0	17	5
North Dakota	24.5	27.3	3	11
Ohio	564.5	728.0	164	29
Oklahoma	125.1	151.0	26	21
Oregon	146.4	166.8	20	14
Pennsylvania	780.1	743.7	-36	-5
Rhode Island	82.9	97.5	15	18
South Carolina	99.4	101.2	2	2
South Dakota	19.7	21.8	2	11
Tennessee	178.9	213.9	35	20
Texas	437.1	541.6	105	24
Utah	68.0	85.9	18	26
Vermont	42.4	47.4	5	12
Virginia	134.6	158.3	24	18
Washington	393.2	413.9	21	5
West Virginia	95.1	112.7	18	18
Wisconsin	241.6	317.0	75	31
Wyoming	14.4	21.7	7	51

Footnotes:

¹Includes 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.

²The FY 2000 awards include State Family Assistance Grants, Supplemental Grants for Population Increases, Out of Wedlock Bonus and High Performance Bonus. Totals for AZ, CA, OK, OR, SD WI, and WY include funds for Tribes operating TANF within the State.

Source: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Financial Services.

Table TANF 10. AFDC/TANF Caseload by State, October 1989 to June 2001 Peak [In thousands]

State	Peak Caseload Oct '89 to June 2001	Date Peak Occurred Oct '89 to June 2001	August '96 Caseload	June 2001 Caseload	Percent Decline August '96 to June 20011	Percent Decline Peak to June 2001
United States	5,098	Mar-94	4,409	2,088	53	59
Alabama	52.3	Mar-93	41.0	18.0	56	66
Alaska	13.4	Apr-94	12.2	6.0	51	55
Arizona	72.8	Dec-93	62.4	33.4	46	54
Arkansas	27.1	Mar-92	22.1	12.1	45	55
California	933.1	Mar-95	880.4	462.2	47	50
Colorado	43.7	Dec-93	34.5	10.7	69	76
Connecticut	61.9	Mar-95	57.3	25.4	56	59
Delaware	11.8	Apr-94	10.6	5.5	48	53
Dist. Of Columbia	27.5	Apr-94	25.4	16.1	36	41
Florida	259.9	Nov-92	200.9	56.1	72	78
Georgia	142.8	Nov-93	123.3	49.7	60	65
Guam	3.0	Jun-00	2.2	3.0	-32	0
Hawaii	23.4	Jun-97	21.9	12.6	42	46
Idaho	9.5	Mar-95	8.6	1.3	85	86
Illinois	243.1	Aug-94	220.3	58.9	73	76
Indiana	76.1	Sep-93	51.4	42.4	18	44
Iowa	40.7	Apr-94	31.6	20.4	35	50
Kansas	30.8	Aug-93	23.8	13.1	45	57
Kentucky	84.0	Mar-93	71.3	35.4	50	58
Louisiana	94.7	May-90	67.5	24.1	64	75
Maine	24.4	Aug-93	20.0	9.6	52	61
Maryland	81.8	May-95	70.7	27.4	61	67
Massachusetts	115.7	Aug-93	84.7	41.5	51	64
Michigan	233.6	Apr-91	170.0	72.1	58	69
Minnesota	66.2	Jun-92	57.7	39.2	32	41
Mississippi	61.8	Nov-91	46.4	15.9	66	74
Missouri	93.7	Mar-94	80.1	44.9	44	52
Montana	12.3	Mar-94	10.1	5.1	50	59
Nebraska	17.2	Mar-93	14.4	9.5	34	44
Nevada	16.3	Mar-95	13.7	7.7	44	53
New Hampshire	11.8	Apr-94	9.1	5.7	37	52
New Jersey	132.6	Nov-92	101.7	44.4	56	66
New Mexico	34.9	Nov-94	33.4	18.2	45	48
New York	463.7	Dec-94	418.3	221.8	47	52
North Carolina	134.1	Mar-94	110.1	41.3	63	69
North Dakota	6.6	Apr-93	4.8	3.0	36	54
Ohio	269.8	Mar-92	204.2	82.2	60	70
Oklahoma	51.3	Mar-93	36.0	13.5	62	74
Oregon	43.8	Apr-93	29.9	19.2	36	56
Pennsylvania	212.5	Sep-94	186.3	81.5	56	62
Puerto Rico	61.7	Jan-92	49.9	25.6	49	59
Rhode Island	22.9	Apr-94	20.7	14.9	28	35
South Carolina	54.6	Jan-93	44.1	16.9	62	69
South Dakota	7.4	Apr-93	5.8	2.7	54	64
Tennessee	112.6	Nov-93	97.2	59.9	38	47
Texas	287.5	Dec-93	243.5	127.5	48	56
Utah	18.7	Mar-93	14.2	7.7	46	59
Vermont	10.3	Apr-92	8.8	5.5	37	46
Virgin Islands	1.4	Dec-95	1.4	0.7	50	53
Virginia	76.0	Apr-94	61.9	28.8	53	62
Washington	104.8	Feb-95	97.5	54.1	45	48
West Virginia	41.9	Apr-93	37.0	15.0	60	64
Wisconsin	82.9	Jan-92	51.9	18.1	65	78
Wyoming	7.1	Aug-92	4.3	0.5	89	93

Note:

¹Negative values denote percent increase.

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

Table TANF 11. Average Monthly AFDC/TANF Recipients by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1965 –2000 [In thousands]

	1965	1970	1975	1980	1985	1989	1994	2000	Percent Change
									1989-94	1994-00
United States	4,323	7,415	11,094	10,597	10,813	10,935	14,226	5,961	30	-58
Alabama	78	123	160	180	151	129	132	56	2	-57
Alaska	5	8	12	15	16	19	38	24	96	-37
Arizona	40	51	71	51	72	105	201	87	91	-57
Arkansas	30	45	101	85	64	70	69	29	-0	-58
California	528	1,148	1,362	1,387	1,619	1,763	2,639	1,308	50	-50
Colorado	42	66	96	77	79	97	119	29	22	-76
Connecticut	59	83	125	139	122	106	166	66	56	-60
Delaware	12	20	31	32	24	19	27	13	43	-53
Dist. of Columbia	20	40	103	85	58	48	74	47	55	-37
Florida	106	204	265	256	271	327	669	153	105	-77
Georgia	71	198	354	221	239	266	393	129	48	-67
Guam	1	2	3	5	6	4	7	10	67	46
Hawaii	14	25	47	60	51	43	62	44	45	-28
Idaho	10	16	19	21	17	17	23	2	38	-90
Illinois	262	368	777	672	735	632	712	254	13	-64
Indiana	48	73	162	157	165	147	216	99	47	-54
Iowa	44	64	85	104	123	98	110	53	13	-52
Kansas	36	53	67	68	67	74	87	32	17	-64
Kentucky	81	129	159	167	160	156	208	89	34	-57
Louisiana	104	202	235	213	230	277	248	75	-10	-70
Maine	19	36	80	60	57	51	64	28	27	-56
Maryland	80	131	216	212	195	176	222	73	26	-67
Massachusetts	94	208	347	350	235	242	307	101	27	-67
Michigan	162	253	641	685	691	640	666	207	4	-69
Minnesota	51	76	124	135	152	164	187	116	14	-38
Mississippi	83	115	186	173	155	179	159	34	-11	-79
Missouri	107	140	260	199	197	203	263	125	30	-53
Montana	7	13	22	19	22	28	35	13	26	-63
Nebraska	16	30	38	35	44	41	45	24	10	-47
Nevada	5	12	14	12	14	20	38	16	89	-58
New Hampshire	4	9	26	22	14	13	30	14	139	-54
New Jersey	104	286	440	459	367	298	335	130	13	-61
New Mexico	30	51	61	53	51	59	102	72	74	-29
New York	517	1,052	1,210	1,100	1,112	979	1,255	724	28	-42
North Carolina	111	124	170	198	166	200	333	100	66	-70
North Dakota	8	11	14	13	12	15	16	9	8	-47
Ohio	183	266	535	513	673	629	685	245	9	-64
Oklahoma	73	95	97	89	82	103	131	35	27	-73
Oregon	31	75	99	102	74	87	114	42	31	-63
Pennsylvania	303	426	627	629	561	523	620	239	19	-61
Puerto Rico	202	223	232	168	173	185	183	92	-2	-49
Rhode Island	24	38	52	52	44	42	63	45	50	-28
South Carolina	30	52	135	153	120	107	140	37	30	-73
South Dakota	11	16	25	20	16	19	19	7	1	-65
Tennessee	76	129	201	162	155	195	300	151	53	-49
Texas	91	214	394	308	363	540	788	342	46	-57
Utah	22	33	34	37	38	44	50	22	14	-55
Vermont	5	12	21	23	22	20	28	16	41	-42
Virgin Islands	1	2	4	3	4	3	4	3	11	-15
Virginia	46	87	174	166	154	146	195	73	34	-63
Washington	71	109	143	154	178	219	292	153	33	-47
West Virginia	116	93	69	77	106	109	114	32	5	-72
Wisconsin	45	79	161	213	288	245	226	38	-8	-83
Wyoming	4	5	7	7	10	14	16	1	19	-93

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 2001 TANF Report to Congress.

Table TANF 12. AFDC/TANF Recipiency Rates for Total Population by State Selected Fiscal Years 1965 – 2000 [In percent]

	1965	1970	1975	1980	1985	1989	1994	2000	Percent Change
									1989-94	1994-00
United States	2.1	3.5	5.0	4.6	4.5	4.4	5.4	2.1	24	-61
Alabama	2.2	3.6	4.3	4.6	3.8	3.2	3.1	1.3	-3	-59
Alaska	1.8	2.6	3.1	3.7	3.0	3.5	6.3	3.8	78	-40
Arizona	2.6	2.9	3.1	1.9	2.3	2.9	4.8	1.7	66	-65
Arkansas	1.5	2.3	4.7	3.7	2.8	3.0	2.8	1.1	-5	-61
California	2.9	5.7	6.3	5.8	6.1	6.0	8.4	3.8	40	-54
Colorado	2.2	3.0	3.7	2.6	2.5	3.0	3.3	0.7	10	-80
Connecticut	2.1	2.7	4.1	4.5	3.8	3.2	5.1	1.9	57	-62
Delaware	2.4	3.6	5.4	5.4	3.9	2.9	3.9	1.6	33	-58
Dist. of Columbia	2.5	5.3	14.6	13.3	9.2	7.7	13.1	8.2	71	-37
Florida	1.8	3.0	3.1	2.6	2.4	2.6	4.8	1.0	85	-80
Georgia	1.6	4.3	7.0	4.0	4.0	4.1	5.6	1.6	35	-72
Hawaii	1.9	3.2	5.4	6.2	4.9	3.9	5.3	3.7	35	-31
Idaho	1.4	2.2	2.3	2.2	1.7	1.7	2.0	0.2	21	-91
Illinois	2.5	3.3	6.9	5.9	6.4	5.5	6.0	2.0	9	-66
Indiana	1.0	1.4	3.0	2.9	3.0	2.7	3.8	1.6	41	-57
Iowa	1.6	2.3	3.0	3.6	4.3	3.5	3.9	1.8	11	-53
Kansas	1.6	2.4	2.9	2.9	2.8	3.0	3.4	1.2	13	-65
Kentucky	2.5	4.0	4.6	4.6	4.3	4.2	5.4	2.2	28	-60
Louisiana	2.9	5.6	6.1	5.0	5.2	6.5	5.8	1.7	-11	-71
Maine	1.9	3.6	7.5	5.4	4.9	4.2	5.2	2.2	25	-58
Maryland	2.2	3.3	5.2	5.0	4.4	3.7	4.4	1.4	19	-69
Massachusetts	1.8	3.7	6.0	6.1	4.0	4.0	5.1	1.6	27	-69
Michigan	2.0	2.9	7.0	7.4	7.6	6.9	6.9	2.1	0	-70
Minnesota	1.4	2.0	3.2	3.3	3.6	3.8	4.1	2.3	9	-43
Mississippi	3.6	5.2	7.8	6.9	6.0	6.9	6.0	1.2	-14	-80
Missouri	2.4	3.0	5.4	4.0	3.9	4.0	5.0	2.2	25	-55
Montana	1.0	1.9	2.9	2.4	2.7	3.5	4.1	1.4	18	-65
Nebraska	1.1	2.0	2.5	2.2	2.8	2.6	2.8	1.4	7	-50
Nevada	1.2	2.4	2.3	1.5	1.4	1.8	2.6	0.8	48	-70
New Hampshire	0.7	1.2	3.1	2.4	1.4	1.2	2.7	1.1	133	-58
New Jersey	1.5	4.0	6.0	6.2	4.9	3.9	4.2	1.5	10	-63
New Mexico	3.0	5.0	5.3	4.1	3.5	3.9	6.2	4.0	59	-36
New York	2.9	5.8	6.7	6.3	6.2	5.4	6.9	3.8	27	-45
North Carolina	2.2	2.4	3.1	3.4	2.6	3.1	4.7	1.2	54	-74
North Dakota	1.2	1.7	2.1	2.0	1.8	2.4	2.6	1.4	9	-47
Ohio	1.8	2.5	5.0	4.8	6.3	5.8	6.2	2.2	6	-65
Oklahoma	3.0	3.7	3.5	2.9	2.5	3.3	4.0	1.0	24	-75
Oregon	1.6	3.6	4.3	3.9	2.8	3.1	3.7	1.2	18	-67
Pennsylvania	2.6	3.6	5.3	5.3	4.8	4.4	5.1	1.9	17	-62
Rhode Island	2.7	4.0	5.5	5.5	4.5	4.2	6.3	4.3	51	-32
South Carolina	1.2	2.0	4.6	4.9	3.6	3.1	3.8	0.9	23	-76
South Dakota	1.6	2.4	3.6	2.9	2.3	2.7	2.6	0.9	-3	-66
Tennessee	2.0	3.3	4.7	3.5	3.3	4.0	5.8	2.7	44	-54
Texas	0.9	1.9	3.1	2.1	2.2	3.2	4.3	1.6	34	-62
Utah	2.2	3.1	2.8	2.5	2.3	2.6	2.6	1.0	1	-62
Vermont	1.4	2.6	4.4	4.4	4.2	3.5	4.8	2.6	36	-45
Virginia	1.0	1.9	3.4	3.1	2.7	2.4	3.0	1.0	25	-66
Washington	2.4	3.2	4.0	3.7	4.0	4.6	5.5	2.6	18	-53
West Virginia	6.4	5.3	3.7	4.0	5.5	6.0	6.3	1.8	4	-72
Wisconsin	1.1	1.8	3.5	4.5	6.1	5.0	4.4	0.7	-12	-84
Wyoming	1.1	1.5	1.8	1.4	2.0	3.0	3.4	0.2	15	-93

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. Bureau of the Census, (Resident population by state available on line at http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/).

Table TANF 13. Average Number of AFDC/TANF Child Recipients By State, Selected Fiscal Years 1965 – 2000 [In thousands]

	1965	1970	1975	1980	1985	1989	1994	2000	Percent Change
									1989-94	1994-00
United States	3,242	5,483	7,952	7,320	7,165	7,370	9,611	4,385	30	-54
Alabama	62	96	119	129	105	92	96	43	4	-55
Alaska	4	6	9	10	10	13	24	15	90	-38
Arizona	31	39	54	38	50	74	136	63	85	-53
Arkansas	23	34	75	62	45	50	49	20	-0	-59
California	391	816	943	932	1,070	1,186	1,804	1,009	52	-44
Colorado	33	50	68	53	53	66	80	22	22	-73
Connecticut	43	62	92	97	82	71	111	47	56	-58
Delaware	9	15	23	22	16	13	19	10	41	-44
Dist. of Columbia	16	31	75	59	43	38	51	35	33	-32
Florida	85	160	200	184	191	235	463	120	97	-74
Georgia	54	150	261	161	166	187	274	101	47	-63
Guam	1	1	2	4	4	3	5	NA	63	NA
Hawaii	10	18	33	40	33	28	41	29	45	-29
Idaho	7	11	14	14	11	11	16	2	36	-88
Illinois	202	283	562	473	493	432	486	200	12	-59
Indiana	36	55	119	111	111	100	145	69	45	-53
Iowa	32	46	59	69	77	63	72	35	13	-51
Kansas	28	41	50	49	45	50	59	23	17	-61
Kentucky	58	93	113	118	107	105	137	63	31	-54
Louisiana	79	157	177	156	163	195	180	56	-8	-69
Maine	14	26	56	40	36	32	40	19	25	-52
Maryland	61	100	157	145	126	117	151	53	28	-65
Massachusetts	71	153	242	228	152	154	197	71	28	-64
Michigan	119	190	454	460	441	414	439	151	6	-65
Minnesota	39	58	89	91	95	105	124	81	18	-35
Mississippi	66	93	144	128	112	129	116	29	-10	-75
Missouri	82	106	193	135	129	134	176	88	31	-50
Montana	6	10	16	13	15	18	23	9	28	-62
Nebraska	12	23	28	25	29	28	31	18	10	-43
Nevada	4	9	10	8	9	14	27	11	89	-58
New Hampshire	3	7	18	15	9	8	19	9	130	-51
New Jersey	79	209	316	318	247	205	228	97	11	-57
New Mexico	23	39	45	35	34	41	66	47	64	-28
New York	380	759	862	759	729	648	813	493	26	-39
North Carolina	83	94	125	141	113	136	223	87	63	-61
North Dakota	6	8	10	9	8	10	11	5	6	-50
Ohio	136	198	373	348	424	411	455	180	11	-60
Oklahoma	55	71	74	65	57	71	90	28	27	-69
Oregon	23	52	67	65	49	58	76	30	30	-60
Pennsylvania	217	307	430	432	369	348	417	182	20	-56
Puerto Rico	161	166	170	118	116	126	124	65	-2	-47
Rhode Island	18	27	37	36	28	28	41	31	50	-25
South Carolina	24	40	100	109	84	77	102	29	33	-72
South Dakota	8	12	18	15	11	13	14	6	3	-59
Tennessee	58	99	150	115	105	133	203	100	53	-51
Texas	68	162	292	225	256	378	549	260	45	-53
Utah	16	23	23	24	24	28	33	16	17	-52
Vermont	4	8	14	14	14	12	17	10	39	-41
Virgin Islands	1	2	3	2	3	3	3	3	9	-4
Virginia	35	66	125	116	103	100	134	52	34	-61
Washington	50	76	95	97	113	141	187	105	32	-44
West Virginia	80	65	47	58	64	67	72	21	7	-70
Wisconsin	34	60	116	142	181	161	153	33	-5	-78
Wyoming	3	4	5	5	7	9	11	1	22	-91

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, 2001 TANF Report to Congress.

Table TANF 14. AFDC/TANF Recipiency Rates for Children by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1965 – 2000 [In percent]

	1965	1970	1975	1980	1985	1989	1994	2000	Percent Change
									1989-94	1994-00
United States	4.4	7.6	11.6	11.3	11.2	11.4	14.0	5.9	22	-57
Alabama	4.6	7.7	9.9	11.1	9.7	8.6	8.9	3.9	4	-56
Alaska	3.1	5.0	6.2	8.0	5.9	7.3	12.8	7.5	76	-41
Arizona	4.8	6.0	7.2	4.8	5.9	7.6	12.1	4.4	60	-64
Arkansas	3.1	5.2	10.9	9.3	7.1	7.9	7.7	2.9	-3	-62
California	6.0	12.3	14.6	14.6	15.6	15.6	20.8	11.0	33	-47
Colorado	4.4	6.4	8.4	6.5	6.1	7.6	8.3	1.9	10	-77
Connecticut	4.4	6.1	9.8	11.8	10.8	9.5	14.2	5.5	49	-61
Delaware	4.7	7.5	12.3	13.4	10.2	8.1	10.5	5.5	30	-48
Dist. of Columbia	6.0	13.8	41.1	40.9	33.9	30.7	44.5	33.1	45	-26
Florida	4.3	7.6	8.4	7.8	7.6	8.4	14.1	3.2	68	-78
Georgia	3.2	9.1	15.5	9.8	10.1	10.8	14.6	4.7	35	-68
Hawaii	3.6	6.5	11.7	14.5	11.6	10.1	13.6	9.8	35	-27
Idaho	2.7	4.2	4.8	4.7	3.6	3.7	4.6	0.5	22	-89
Illinois	5.3	7.5	16.0	14.6	16.1	14.5	15.7	6.1	8	-61
Indiana	2.0	3.0	6.9	6.9	7.5	6.9	9.8	4.4	43	-55
Iowa	3.2	4.7	6.6	8.4	10.2	8.8	9.9	4.7	12	-52
Kansas	3.5	5.4	7.3	7.5	6.9	7.6	8.5	3.3	12	-62
Kentucky	4.9	8.3	10.2	10.9	10.5	10.9	14.1	6.4	29	-54
Louisiana	5.5	11.3	13.2	11.8	12.2	15.5	14.6	4.6	-6	-69
Maine	3.9	7.7	16.4	12.5	11.7	10.4	13.1	6.5	26	-50
Maryland	4.6	7.3	11.9	12.4	11.4	10.2	12.0	4.0	18	-67
Massachusetts	3.8	8.1	14.2	15.3	11.2	11.4	13.9	4.7	22	-66
Michigan	3.7	5.8	15.0	16.7	17.7	16.9	17.4	5.9	3	-66
Minnesota	2.9	4.2	7.0	7.7	8.5	9.2	10.1	6.2	10	-39
Mississippi	7.0	11.1	17.3	15.7	14.0	17.1	15.3	3.7	-10	-76
Missouri	5.2	6.9	13.2	9.9	9.8	10.2	12.9	6.1	26	-52
Montana	2.0	4.0	6.6	5.7	6.1	7.9	9.7	3.8	22	-61
Nebraska	2.3	4.4	5.8	5.5	6.8	6.5	7.0	3.9	8	-45
Nevada	2.5	5.2	5.4	3.8	3.9	5.0	7.1	2.0	40	-71
New Hampshire	1.4	2.6	6.9	5.8	3.7	3.1	6.6	3.0	118	-55
New Jersey	3.4	8.8	14.1	16.0	13.5	11.3	11.7	4.7	3	-60
New Mexico	5.2	9.5	10.9	8.5	7.8	9.0	13.5	9.2	50	-32
New York	6.3	13.0	16.3	16.2	16.7	15.1	18.0	10.6	19	-41
North Carolina	4.4	5.3	7.2	8.5	7.1	8.5	12.6	4.2	49	-67
North Dakota	2.3	3.6	4.9	4.7	4.3	5.7	6.3	3.3	12	-48
Ohio	3.6	5.3	10.9	11.2	14.7	14.6	16.0	6.3	9	-61
Oklahoma	6.4	8.5	8.7	7.6	6.3	8.3	10.4	3.0	24	-71
Oregon	3.3	7.4	9.6	9.0	6.9	8.2	9.7	3.5	18	-64
Pennsylvania	5.5	8.0	12.3	13.8	12.9	12.4	14.4	6.2	16	-57
Rhode Island	5.9	9.1	13.3	14.7	12.6	12.1	17.5	12.2	44	-30
South Carolina	2.3	4.2	10.4	11.6	9.1	8.3	10.8	2.9	30	-73
South Dakota	3.1	5.0	8.2	7.1	5.7	6.7	6.6	2.7	-1	-59
Tennessee	4.2	7.5	11.3	8.9	8.6	10.9	15.7	7.2	44	-54
Texas	1.7	4.1	7.1	5.2	5.4	7.9	10.4	4.4	32	-58
Utah	3.7	5.4	5.0	4.4	4.0	4.5	4.9	2.1	9	-57
Vermont	2.7	5.4	9.3	9.9	9.9	8.8	11.7	7.1	33	-39
Virginia	2.2	4.1	7.9	7.9	7.1	6.7	8.4	3.0	26	-64
Washington	4.7	6.5	8.5	8.5	9.7	11.5	13.3	6.9	16	-48
West Virginia	12.2	11.2	8.4	10.4	12.6	14.8	16.8	5.3	13	-68
Wisconsin	2.2	3.8	7.8	10.5	14.2	12.6	11.4	2.4	-9	-79
Wyoming	2.1	3.2	4.1	3.4	4.1	6.6	8.1	0.7	24	-91

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. Bureau of the Census, (Resident population by state available on line at http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/).

---

¹States are allowed to use TANF funds on a variety of services, including employment and training services, domestic violence services, and child care, transportation, and other support services. Families receiving such services, however, should generally not be counted as recipients of TANF “assistance”. Under the final regulations for TANF, “assistance” includes primarily 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 to cash assistance, the definition also includes certain child care and transportation benefits (provided the 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.

Food Stamp Program

The Food Stamp Program, 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, the Food Stamp Program 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 increase the food purchasing power of eligible low-income households to the point where 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, had an average of 1.1 million participants in 2000, funded under a federal block grant of $1.27 billion. Unless noted otherwise, the food stamp caseload and expenditure data in this Appendix include costs for the Nutrition Assistance Program in Puerto Rico. Prior to 1982, the regular Food Stamp Program operated in Puerto Rico, under modified eligibility and benefit rules.

The Food Stamp Program has financial, employment/training-related and “categorical” tests for eligibility. The basic food stamp beneficiary unit is the “household.” Generally, individuals living together constitute a single food stamp household if they customarily purchase food and prepare meals together. Members of the same household must apply together, and their income, expenses, and assets normally are aggregated in determining food stamp eligibility and benefits. Except for households composed entirely of TANF, SSI, or general assistance recipients (who generally are automatically eligible for food stamps), monthly cash income is the primary food stamp eligibility determinant. Unless exempt, adult applicants for food stamps must register for work, typically with the welfare agency or a state employment service office. To maintain eligibility, they must accept a suitable job if offered one and fulfill any work, job search, or training requirements established by the administering welfare agencies.

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.

Recent Legislative and Regulatory Changes

Title IV and Subtitle A of title VIII of the PRWORA contain major and extensive revisions to the Food Stamp Program, including strong work requirements on able-bodied adults without dependent children, restricted benefits for 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 new work requirement was added for able-bodied adult food stamp recipients without dependents (ABAWDs). Unless exempt, ABAWDs between the ages of 18 and 50 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 is 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 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. Specifically, the ban on food stamp eligibility was lifted for children, the disabled and people who were 65 on August 22, 1996.

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 noncustodial parents, from food stamps when they do not cooperate with child support agencies or are in arrears in their child support.

Recent regulatory and legislative changes have been made to increase access to food stamps among working poor families. Regulatory changes announced in July 1999 and expanded in November 2000 allow states to reduce reporting requirements and make it easier for working families to report income changes on a semiannual basis. Under the November 2000 regulations, states also have the option of providing a three-month transitional food stamp benefit to most families leaving TANF. In addition, the Agriculture Appropriations Bill for 2001 (P.L. 106-387) provides 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.

Food Stamp Program Data

The following six tables and accompanying figure provide information about the Food Stamp Program, including information about the Nutrition Assistance Program in Puerto Rico:

• Tables FSP 1-2 and Figure FSP 1 present national caseload and expenditure trend data on the Food Stamp Program, as discussed below;
• Table FSP 3 presents some demographic characteristics of the food stamp caseload; and
• Tables FSP 4-6 present some state-by-state trend data on the Food Stamp Program through fiscal year 2000.

Food Stamp Caseload Trends (Tables FSP 1-2). Average monthly food stamp participation (including participants in Puerto Rico’s block grant) has continued to fall from its peak of 28.9 million in an average month in 1994 to an average of 18.3 million persons in 2000. Both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the population, food stamp recipiency is lower than at any point in the past twenty years. See also Table IND 3b and Table IND 4b in Chapter II for further data on the recent decline in 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. A congressionally mandated study in 1990 concluded that a variety of factors contributed to this caseload growth, including expansions in Medicaid eligibility and changes in immigration laws, particularly the legalization of undocumented aliens, as well as a rise in unemployment (McConnell, 1991). Longer spells of participation also contributed to the caseload increase, according to an analysis of longitudinal data from the Survey on Income and Program Participation (Gleason, 1998).

Economic conditions were a significant factor in explaining the drop in food stamp caseload since 1994, according to an Economic Research Service review of recent research (ERS, 2000). Several econometric models suggest that economic variables explain between 25 and 44 percent of the decline in caseload. The full effect of the economy may be even higher, to the extent that some of the unexplained variation in the models reflects local economic conditions not captured in state-level economic variables.

Policy changes, most notably the enactment of the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, have also contributed to the recent decline in food stamp caseload. The most direct impact was the elimination of eligibility for most legal immigrants and for many childless adults aged 18-50. Participation for these two groups fell sharply between 1994 and 1998 (Genser, 1999). In addition, changes in TANF policy may have affected food stamp participation, although these effects are less certain. Many studies of families leaving TANF cash assistance have found that many of these families leave the Food Stamp Program as well, despite appearing eligible for food stamp benefits. Econometric studies of the effects of specific changes in TANF policy, however, have found that only a small share of the decline in state food stamp caseloads was associated with waivers to AFDC policies. Increased stigma about welfare use and unintentional diversion from the Food Stamp Program may be additional factors affecting food stamp participation. Finally, a study of trends in Food Stamp Program participation rates (USDA, 2000) found that the program is reaching a smaller percentage of eligible individuals in 1998 than it did during the three previous years.

Food Stamp Expenditures. Total program costs, shown in Table FSP 2, have declined in recent years, along with the decline in caseloads. In fiscal year 2000, total program costs (including Puerto Rico) were $18.4 billion, reaching their lowest levels since 1980, after adjusting for inflation. (Average monthly participation in fiscal year 2000 was 18.3 million). Average monthly benefits per person have also declined in recent years after adjusting for inflation. Benefits were $73 per person in fiscal year 2000, considerably lower than the $85 per person benefit (in constant dollars) paid in 1992, but higher than the $70 per person paid in 1987.

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 27 percent in 2000. At the same time, the proportion of households with income from AFDC/TANF has declined, from 42 percent in 1984 to 26 percent in 2000, following the dramatic decline in AFDC/TANF caseloads. Over half of all food stamp households have children, although the proportion has declined somewhat from over 60 percent in most of the 1980s and early 1990s to 54 percent in 2000. The vast majority (89 percent) of households have incomes below the federal poverty guidelines.

Figure FSP 1. Persons Receiving Food Stamps

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

Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, National Data Bank.

Table FSP 1. Trends in Food Stamp Caseloads, Selected Years 1962 – 2000

Fiscal Year	Food Stamp Participants1			Participants as a Percent of:			Child Participants As a Percent of:
	Including Territories2 (in thousands)	Excluding Territories (in thousands)	Children Excld. Terr. (in thousands)	Total Population3	All Poor Persons3	Pre-transfer Poverty Population4	Total Child Population3	Children in Poverty3
1962	6,554	6,554	NA	3.5	17.0	NA	NA	NA
1965	5,166	5,166	NA	2.7	15.5	NA	NA	NA
1970	8,277	8,277	NA	4.1	32.6	NA	NA	NA
1971	13,042	13,042	NA	6.3	51.0	NA	NA	NA
1972	14,102	14,102	NA	6.7	57.7	NA	NA	NA
1973	14,641	14,641	NA	6.9	63.7	NA	NA	NA
1974	14,784	14,765	NA	6.9	63.2	NA	NA	NA
19755	18,308	17,217	NA	8.0	66.2	NA	NA	NA
1976	18,240	16,733	9,126	7.7	66.7	NA	13.8	88.8
1977	17,014	15,579	NA	7.1	62.7	NA	NA	NA
1978	15,988	14,503	NA	6.5	58.9	NA	NA	NA
19796	17,682	15,976	NA	7.1	60.9	57.1	NA	NA
1980	21,082	19,253	9,876	8.5	65.5	60.7	15.5	85.6
1981	22,430	20,654	9,803	9.0	64.6	60.8	15.5	78.4
1982	22,055	20,392	9,591	8.8	59.0	56.3	15.3	70.3
1983	23,195	21,667	10,910	9.3	61.1	58.5	17.4	78.4
1984	22,384	20,796	10,492	8.8	61.7	58.5	16.8	78.2
1985	21,379	19,847	9,906	8.3	60.0	56.6	15.8	76.1
1986	20,909	19,381	9,844	8.1	59.9	56.2	15.7	76.5
1987	20,583	19,072	9,771	7.9	59.2	55.6	15.5	75.4
1988	20,095	18,613	9,351	7.6	58.6	55.2	14.8	75.1
1989	20,266	18,778	9,429	7.6	59.6	55.6	14.9	74.9
1990	21,547	20,038	10,127	8.0	59.7	55.7	15.8	75.4
1991	24,115	22,599	11,952	9.0	63.3	59.3	18.4	83.3
1992	26,886	25,369	13,349	9.9	66.7	64.0	20.2	87.3
1993	28,422	26,952	14,196	10.5	68.6	63.8	21.2	90.3
1994	28,879	27,434	14,391	10.5	72.1	66.8	21.2	94.1
1995	27,989	26,579	13,860	10.1	73.0	67.6	20.2	94.5
1996	26,872	25,494	13,189	9.6	69.8	64.6	19.1	91.2
1997	24,148	22,820	11,847	8.5	64.1	59.9	17.0	83.9
1998	20,970	19,746	10,524	7.3	57.3	53.8	15.1	78.1
1999	19,325	18,146	9,354	6.7	56.3	52.5	13.3	77.2
2000	18,267	17,120	8,765	6.1	55.0	51.7	12.1	75.3

¹Total participants includes all participating states, the District of Columbia, and the territories (including Puerto Rico). The number of child participants includes only the participating states and D.C. (the territories are not included). From 1962 to 1983 the number of participants includes the Family Food Assistance Program (FFAP) which was largely replaced by the Food Stamp Program 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. The monthly average number of participants for 1970-76 is computed as an average from October of the prior calendar year to September, the span of the fiscal year since 1977.

²Participation figures in column 1 from 1982 on include enrollment in Puerto Rico’s Nutrition Assistance Program (averaging 1.1 to 1.5 million persons a month under the nutrition assistance grant and higher figures in earlier years under Food Stamps, as shown in Table FSP 5).

³Includes 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 — see Current Population Reports, Series P25-1106. For the persons living in poverty used as denominators, see Current Population Reports, Series P60-210.

⁴The pretransfer 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 appropriate poverty threshold. See Appendix J, Table 20, 1992 Green Book; data for subsequent years are unpublished Congressional Budget Office tabulations.

⁵The first fiscal year in which food stamps were available nationwide.

⁶The fiscal year in which the food stamp purchase requirement was eliminated, on a phased-in basis.

Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, National Data Bank, the 1996 Green Book, and U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2000," Current Population Reports, Series P60-214 and earlier years.

Table FSP 2. Trends in Food Stamp Expenditures, Selected Years 1975 – 2000

Fiscal Year	Total Federal Cost (Benefits + Administration)		Benefits2(Federal)  [In millions]	Administration1		Total Program Cost [In millions]	Average Monthly Benefit per Person
	Current Dollars [In millions]	2000 Dollars3 [In millions]		Federal [In millions]	State & Local [In millions]		Current Dollars	2000 Dollars3
1975	$5,037	$15,946	$4,798	$238	$180	$5,217	$21.50	$68.10
1976	5,641	16,718	5,276	365	275	5,934	23.50	69.60
1977	5,463	15,072	5,061	402	300	5,775	24.00	66.20
1978	5,546	14,354	5,112	434	325	5,883	25.70	66.50
19794	6,965	16,577	6,450	515	388	7,388	29.90	71.20
1980	9,224	19,736	8,721	503	375	9,633	34.20	73.20
1981	11,308	22,000	10,630	678	504	11,906	39.40	76.70
1982	11,117	20,209	10,408	709	557	11,697	39.00	70.90
1983	12,708	22,094	11,930	778	612	13,343	43.00	74.80
1984	12,446	20,755	11,475	9715	805	13,251	42.70	71.20
1985	12,573	20,239	11,530	1,043	871	13,444	45.00	72.40
1986	12,510	19,641	11,397	1,113	935	13,445	45.50	71.40
1987	12,512	19,102	11,317	1,195	996	13,508	45.80	69.90
1988	13,281	19,478	11,991	1,290	1,080	14,361	49.80	73.00
1989	13,904	19,460	12,572	1,332	1,101	15,005	51.80	72.50
1990	16,503	22,004	15,081	1,422	1,174	17,677	58.90	78.50
1991	19,790	25,118	18,274	1,516	1,247	21,037	63.90	81.10
1992	23,535	28,992	21,879	1,656	1,375	24,910	68.60	84.50
1993	24,733	29,576	23,017	1,716	1,572	26,305	68.00	81.30
1994	25,587	29,806	23,798	1,789	1,643	27,230	69.00	80.40
1995	25,776	29,220	23,859	1,917	1,748	27,524	71.30	80.80
1996	25,527	28,152	23,543	1,984	1,842	27,369	73.20	80.70
1997	22,750	24,430	20,692	2,058	1,904	24,654	71.30	76.60
1998	20,224	21,369	18,055	2,169	1,988	22,212	71.10	75.10
1999	19,045	19,747	16,945	2,100	1,874	22,919	72.20	74.90
2000	18,411	18,411	16,211	2,200	1,963	20,374	72.80	72.80

¹Amounts include the federal share of state administrative and employment and training costs (including administrative costs of Puerto Rico's block grant) 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 (including Puerto Rico).

²Benefit costs include the Food Stamp Program and Puerto Rico's nutritional assistance program and are based on unpublished data from the USDA, Food and Nutrition Service, National Data Bank (see Table FSP 4).

³Constant dollar adjustments to 2000 level were made using a CPI-U-X1 fiscal year average price index.

⁴The fiscal year in which the food stamp purchase requirement was eliminated, on a phased-in basis.

⁵Beginning 1984 USDA took over from DHHS the administrative cost of certifying public assistance households for food stamps.

Note: Total federal cost includes food stamps in Puerto Rico (1975-1981) and funding for Puerto Rico's nutrition assistance grant (1982-present). Average benefit figures, however, do not reflect the lower benefits in Puerto Rico under either the Food Stamp Program from 1975 to 1981 or its nutrition assistance program since 1982.

Source: USDA, Food and Nutrition Service unpublished data from the National Data Bank; and the 2000 Green Book.

Table FSP 3. Characteristics of Food Stamp Households, 1980 - 2000 [In percent]

	Year1
	1980	1984	1988	1990	1992	1994	1996	1998	1999	2000
With Gross Monthly Income:
Below the Federal Poverty Levels.	87	93	92	92	92	90	91	90	89	89
Between the Poverty Levels and 130 Percent of the Poverty Levels.	10	6	8	8	8	9	8	9	10	10
Above 130 Percent of Poverty	2	1	*	*	*	1	1	1	1	1
With Earnings	19	19	20	19	21	21	23	26	27	27
With Public Assistance Income2	65	71	72	73	66	69	67	65	63	63
With AFDC/TANF Income.	NA	42	42	43	40	38	37	31	27	26
With SSI Income	18	18	20	19	19	23	24	28	30	32
With Children	60	61	61	61	62	61	60	58	56	54
And Female Heads of Household	NA	47	50	51	51	51	50	47	46	44
With No Spouse Present	NA	NA	39	37	44	43	43	41	40	38
With Elderly Members3	23	22	19	18	15	16	16	18	20	21
With Elderly Female Heads of Household3	NA	16	14	11	9	11	NA	NA	NA	NA
Average Household Size	2.8	2.8	2.8	2.7	2.6	2.6	2.5	2.4	2.4	2.3

¹Data 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.

²Public assistance income includes AFDC, SSI, and general assistance.

³Elderly members and heads of household include those of age 60 or older.

* 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 2000 and earlier years.

Table FSP 4. Value of Food Stamps Issued by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1975 – 2000 [Millions of dollars]

State	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	1998	1999	2000
United States	$4,798	$8,721	$11,530	$15,081	$23,859	$18,055	$16,945	$16,211
Alabama	$108	$246	$318	$328	$441	$357	$346	$344
Alaska	7	27	25	25	50	50	49	46
Arizona	45	97	121	239	414	253	233	240
Arkansas	78	122	126	155	212	206	210	206
California	374	530	639	968	2,473	2,020	1,796	1,639
Colorado	48	71	94	156	217	157	145	127
Connecticut	38	59	62	72	169	161	150	138
Delaware	8	21	22	25	47	34	32	31
Dist. of Columbia	32	41	40	43	92	85	82	77
Florida	236	421	368	609	1,307	845	813	773
Georgia	144	264	290	382	700	538	514	489
Guam	3	15	18	15	24	34	31	36
Hawaii	26	60	93	81	177	178	180	166
Idaho	12	29	36	40	59	47	45	46
Illinois	259	394	713	835	1,056	844	767	777
Indiana	64	154	242	226	382	263	255	268
Iowa	29	54	107	109	142	109	103	100
Kansas	13	38	64	96	144	83	80	83
Kentucky	138	211	332	334	413	345	337	337
Louisiana	149	243	365	549	629	467	463	448
Maine	36	60	62	63	112	100	89	81
Maryland	79	140	171	203	365	282	237	199
Massachusetts	104	171	173	207	315	222	205	182
Michigan	132	263	541	663	806	588	515	457
Minnesota	43	62	105	165	240	181	172	165
Mississippi	115	199	264	352	383	254	232	226
Missouri	85	142	212	312	488	345	348	358
Montana	11	18	31	41	57	52	52	51
Nebraska	12	25	44	59	77	68	66	61
Nevada	11	15	22	41	91	63	56	57
New Hampshire	14	22	15	20	44	30	31	28
New Jersey	136	226	260	289	506	384	346	304
New Mexico	49	81	88	117	196	144	144	140
New York	233	726	938	1,086	2,065	1,505	1,464	1,361
North Carolina	139	234	237	282	495	421	435	403
North Dakota	5	9	16	25	32	25	26	25
Ohio	268	382	697	861	1,017	613	535	520
Oklahoma	40	73	134	186	315	231	221	208
Oregon	58	80	142	168	254	198	190	198
Pennsylvania	190	373	547	661	1,006	764	704	656
Puerto Rico	366	828	786	894	1,095	1,166	1,190	1,226
Rhode Island	19	31	35	42	82	57	61	59
South Carolina	126	181	194	240	297	264	251	249
South Dakota	8	18	26	35	40	37	37	37
Tennessee	126	282	280	372	554	437	425	415
Texas	319	514	701	1,429	2,246	1,425	1,255	1,215
Utah	13	22	40	71	90	75	73	68
Vermont	10	18	20	22	46	34	34	32
Virgin Islands	9	19	23	18	28	22	22	21
Virginia	70	158	189	247	450	307	282	263
Washington	71	90	140	229	417	308	260	241
West Virginia	57	87	159	192	253	224	208	185
Wisconsin	33	68	148	180	220	130	124	129
Wyoming	3	6	15	21	28	21	19	19

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, unpublished data from the Food Stamp National Data Bank.

Table FSP 5. Average Number of Food Stamp Recipients by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1977 – 2000 [In thousands]

State									Percent Change
	1977	1981	1985	1989	1994	1996	1998	2000	1989-94	1994-00
United States	17,014	22,430	21,379	20,266	28,879	26,872	20,970	18,267	42	-33
Alabama	316	605	588	436	545	509	427	396	25	-27
Alaska	11	32	22	26	46	46	42	38	76	-18
Arizona	140	210	206	264	512	427	296	259	94	-49
Arkansas	213	305	253	227	283	274	256	247	24	-13
California	1,345	1,605	1,615	1,776	3,155	3,143	2,259	1,832	78	-42
Colorado	147	175	170	211	268	244	191	156	27	-42
Connecticut	178	175	145	114	223	223	196	165	96	-26
Delaware	26	56	40	30	59	58	46	32	99	-46
Dist. of Columbia	98	101	72	58	91	93	85	81	55	-11
Florida	728	957	630	668	1,474	1,371	991	882	121	-40
Georgia	459	654	567	485	830	793	632	559	71	-33
Guam	22	25	20	13	15	18	25	22	21	46
Hawaii	108	104	99	78	115	130	122	118	47	3
Idaho	33	64	59	61	82	80	62	58	34	-29
Illinois	922	984	1,110	990	1,189	1,105	923	779	20	-34
Indiana	196	405	406	285	518	390	313	300	82	-42
Iowa	108	163	203	168	196	177	141	123	16	-37
Kansas	62	108	119	128	192	172	119	117	50	-39
Kentucky	394	519	560	447	522	486	412	403	17	-23
Louisiana	425	574	644	725	756	670	537	500	4	-34
Maine	101	140	114	84	136	131	115	102	61	-25
Maryland	255	346	287	249	390	375	323	219	57	-44
Massachusetts	579	437	337	314	442	374	293	232	40	-48
Michigan	635	942	985	874	1,031	935	772	603	18	-42
Minnesota	158	202	228	245	318	295	220	196	30	-38
Mississippi	333	514	495	493	511	457	329	276	4	-46
Missouri	221	378	362	404	593	554	411	423	47	-29
Montana	27	47	58	56	71	71	62	59	28	-17
Nebraska	40	75	94	92	111	102	95	82	20	-26
Nevada	18	37	32	41	97	97	72	61	134	-37
New Hampshire	44	54	28	22	62	53	40	36	182	-41
New Jersey	493	608	464	353	545	540	425	345	54	-37
New Mexico	118	183	157	151	244	235	175	169	62	-31
New York	1,646	1,851	1,834	1,463	2,154	2,099	1,627	1,439	47	-33
North Carolina	428	605	474	390	630	631	528	488	61	-22
North Dakota	15	29	33	39	45	40	34	32	17	-30
Ohio	803	976	1,133	1,068	1,245	1,045	734	610	17	-51
Oklahoma	158	206	263	261	376	354	288	253	44	-33
Oregon	153	232	228	213	286	288	238	234	34	-18
Pennsylvania	843	1,071	1,032	916	1,208	1,124	907	777	32	-36
Puerto Rico	1,472	1,805	1,480	1,460	1,410	1,330	1,181	1,109	-3	-21
Rhode Island	79	88	69	57	94	91	72	74	65	-21
South Carolina	280	443	373	272	385	358	333	295	42	-23
South Dakota	26	46	48	50	53	49	45	43	6	-20
Tennessee	392	677	518	500	735	638	538	496	47	-32
Texas	823	1,226	1,263	1,634	2,726	2,372	1,636	1,333	67	-51
Utah	36	65	75	95	128	110	92	82	34	-36
Vermont	46	48	44	34	65	56	46	41	90	-37
Virgin Islands	25	34	32	16	20	31	17	16	23	-21
Virginia	240	432	360	333	547	538	397	336	65	-39
Washington	212	271	281	321	468	478	364	295	46	-37
West Virginia	199	252	278	259	321	300	269	227	24	-29
Wisconsin	175	269	363	291	330	283	193	193	13	-41
Wyoming	9	15	27	27	34	33	25	22	25	-34

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, unpublished data from the National Data Bank.

Table FSP 6. Food Stamp Recipiency Rates by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1977 – 2000 [In percent]

State									Percent Change
	1977	1981	1985	1989	1994	1996	1998	2000	1989-94	1994-00
United States	7.1	9.0	8.3	7.6	10.5	9.6	7.3	6.1	39	-42
Alabama	8.4	15.4	14.8	10.8	12.9	11.9	9.8	8.9	19	-31
Alaska	2.7	7.7	4.1	4.8	7.6	7.6	6.9	6.0	60	-22
Arizona	5.8	7.5	6.5	7.3	12.3	9.6	6.3	5.0	69	-59
Arkansas	9.7	13.3	10.9	9.7	11.5	10.9	10.1	9.2	19	-20
California	6.0	6.6	6.1	6.1	10.1	9.9	6.9	5.4	66	-47
Colorado	5.5	5.9	5.3	6.5	7.3	6.4	4.8	3.6	14	-51
Connecticut	5.8	5.6	4.5	3.5	6.8	6.8	6.0	4.8	97	-29
Delaware	4.5	9.3	6.5	4.5	8.4	8.0	6.1	4.1	85	-51
Dist. of Columbia	14.5	15.9	11.4	9.4	16.0	17.2	16.4	14.1	71	-12
Florida	8.2	9.4	5.5	5.3	10.6	9.5	6.6	5.5	100	-48
Georgia	8.8	11.7	9.5	7.6	11.8	10.8	8.3	6.8	56	-42
Hawaii	11.8	10.6	9.5	7.1	9.8	11.0	10.3	9.7	37	-0
Idaho	3.8	6.7	5.9	6.1	7.2	6.7	5.1	4.5	17	-38
Illinois	8.1	8.6	9.7	8.7	10.1	9.3	7.6	6.3	16	-38
Indiana	3.6	7.4	7.4	5.2	9.0	6.7	5.3	4.9	75	-45
Iowa	3.7	5.6	7.2	6.1	6.9	6.2	4.9	4.2	14	-39
Kansas	2.7	4.5	4.9	5.2	7.5	6.6	4.5	4.3	44	-42
Kentucky	11.0	14.2	15.2	12.1	13.7	12.3	10.5	10.0	13	-27
Louisiana	10.6	13.4	14.6	17.0	17.6	15.4	12.3	11.2	3	-36
Maine	9.2	12.4	9.8	6.9	11.0	10.6	9.2	8.0	59	-27
Maryland	6.1	8.1	6.5	5.3	7.8	7.4	6.3	4.1	49	-47
Massachusetts	10.1	7.6	5.7	5.2	7.3	6.1	4.8	3.6	40	-50
Michigan	6.9	10.2	10.8	9.4	10.8	9.6	7.9	6.1	14	-44
Minnesota	4.0	4.9	5.5	5.7	7.0	6.3	4.6	4.0	23	-43
Mississippi	13.5	20.3	19.1	19.1	19.2	16.9	12.0	9.7	0	-49
Missouri	4.5	7.7	7.2	7.9	11.2	10.3	7.6	7.6	42	-33
Montana	3.6	5.9	7.1	7.0	8.3	8.1	7.1	6.6	20	-21
Nebraska	2.6	4.7	5.9	5.9	6.8	6.2	5.7	4.8	17	-30
Nevada	2.7	4.4	3.4	3.6	6.6	6.0	4.1	3.0	83	-55
New Hampshire	5.1	5.8	2.8	2.0	5.4	4.6	3.3	2.9	174	-46
New Jersey	6.7	8.2	6.1	4.6	6.9	6.8	5.2	4.1	51	-41
New Mexico	9.7	13.7	10.9	10.0	14.7	13.8	10.1	9.3	47	-37
New York	9.2	10.5	10.3	8.1	11.9	11.6	9.0	7.6	46	-36
North Carolina	7.5	10.2	7.6	5.9	8.9	8.6	7.0	6.0	50	-32
North Dakota	2.4	4.4	4.9	6.0	7.1	6.2	5.3	5.0	19	-30
Ohio	7.5	9.1	10.6	9.9	11.2	9.4	6.5	5.4	14	-52
Oklahoma	5.5	6.7	8.0	8.3	11.6	10.7	8.6	7.3	40	-37
Oregon	6.3	8.7	8.5	7.6	9.3	9.0	7.3	6.8	21	-26
Pennsylvania	7.1	9.0	8.8	7.7	10.0	9.3	7.6	6.3	30	-37
Rhode Island	8.3	9.3	7.2	5.7	9.4	9.2	7.3	7.1	66	-25
South Carolina	9.4	13.9	11.3	7.9	10.5	9.6	8.7	7.3	34	-30
South Dakota	3.8	6.6	6.9	7.2	7.3	6.6	6.2	5.7	2	-23
Tennessee	8.9	14.6	11.0	10.3	14.2	12.0	9.9	8.7	38	-39
Texas	6.2	8.3	7.8	9.7	14.8	12.5	8.3	6.4	53	-57
Utah	2.7	4.3	4.6	5.6	6.6	5.4	4.4	3.7	19	-45
Vermont	9.4	9.4	8.2	6.1	11.1	9.6	7.7	6.7	83	-40
Virginia	4.6	7.9	6.3	5.4	8.4	8.1	5.8	4.7	54	-43
Washington	5.6	6.4	6.4	6.8	8.8	8.6	6.4	5.0	30	-43
West Virginia	10.4	12.9	14.6	14.3	17.7	16.5	14.9	12.6	23	-29
Wisconsin	3.8	5.7	7.6	6.0	6.5	5.5	3.7	3.6	8	-44
Wyoming	2.1	3.0	5.4	6.0	7.2	6.9	5.3	4.5	20	-37

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 A-18.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, unpublished data from the National Data Bank and U.S. Bureau of the Census (resident population by state available online at http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/).

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, unmarried, 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, which were $532 for an individual and $789 for a married couple in fiscal year 2000. SSI eligibility is restricted to qualified persons who have countable resources/assets of not more than $2,000, or $3,000 for a couple.

SSI law requires that SSI applicants file for all other money benefits for which they may be entitled. Since its inception, SSI has been viewed as the “program of last resort” — after evaluating all other income, SSI pays what is necessary to bring an individual to the statutorily prescribed income “floor.” (The Social Security Administration, which administers the SSI program, works with recipients and helps them get any other benefits for which they are eligible.) As of December 2000, 36 percent of all SSI recipients also received Social Security benefits; Social Security benefits are the single highest source of income for SSI recipients.

No individual could receive both SSI payments and AFDC benefits; if eligible for both, the individual was required 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. The PRWORA does not specifically prohibit an individual’s receipt of both TANF benefits and SSI; states have complete authority to set TANF eligibility standards and benefit levels.

With the exception of California, which converted food stamp benefits to cash that is included in the State supplementary payment, SSI recipients may be eligible to receive food stamps. If all household members receive SSI, they do not need to meet the Food Stamp Program financial eligibility standards to participate in the program because they are categorically eligible. If SSI beneficiaries live in households where 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.

Recent Legislative Changes

Several legislative changes made in the 104th Congress are likely to affect Supplemental Security Income (SSI) participation and expenditures. Public Law 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996, prohibits SSI eligibility to individuals whose drug addiction and/or alcoholism (DAA) 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.

The PRWORA made several changes designed to maintain the SSI program’s goal of providing benefits for severely disabled children while preventing children without serious impairments from receiving benefits. First, the act replaced the former law “comparable severity” test with a new definition of childhood disability based on a medically determinable physical or mental impairment. Second, it discontinued use of the Individualized Functional Assessment (IFA) which authorized subjective judgment to determine children’s eligibility for SSI. Third, it eliminated references to “maladaptive behavior” in the Listings of Impairments (among medical criteria for evaluation of mental and emotional disorders in the domain of personal/behavioral function). The latter two provisions were effective for all new and pending applications upon enactment (August 22, 1996). Current beneficiaries receiving benefits due to an IFA or maladaptive behavior listing received notice no later than January 1, 1997, that their benefits might end when their case is redetermined. All those currently receiving benefits are subject to redetermination using the new eligibility criteria by February 28, 1998 (per P.L. 105-33, enacted August 5, 1997).

Title IV of PRWORA also made significant changes in the eligibility of noncitizens for SSI benefits. Essentially, qualified aliens (including legal immigrants) are barred from SSI. Some of the restrictions were subsequently moderated, 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.

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 (P. L. 106-169). Other legislation enacted in 1999 provides additional work incentives for disabled beneficiaries of SSI.

SSI Program Data

The following set of tables and figures provide SSI program data:

• Tables SSI-1 through SSI-5 present national caseload and expenditure trend data on the SSI program;
• Table SSI-6 presents demographic characteristics of the SSI caseload; and
• Tables SSI 7-9 present state-by-state trend data on the SSI program through fiscal year 2000.

From 1990 to 1995, the program increased from 4.8 million beneficiaries to 6.5 million beneficiaries, an average growth rate of over 6 percent per year. Since 1995, the number of beneficiaries has stabilized, fluctuating between 6.5 and 6.6 million persons. In December 2000, there were nearly 6.6 million beneficiaries. Table SSI 1 presents information on the number of persons receiving SSI payments in December of each year from 1974 through 2000. In addition to data on the total number of SSI recipients, Table SSI 1 also shows recipients by eligibility category (aged, blind and disabled) and by type of recipient (child, adult age 18-64, and adult age 65 or older). See also Table IND 9a and Table IND 9b in Chapter II for further data on trends in recipiency and participation rates.

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 1.3 million persons in December 2000. At the same time there has been a strong growth in disabled beneficiaries, from 1.7 million in December 1974 to 5.3 million in December 2000. Moreover, the number of disabled children has increased dramatically, particularly during the 1990s, when the number of disabled children receiving SSI increased from 340,000 in December 1990 to 955,000 in December 1996. The number of disabled children fell in the next three years, and appeared to stabilize at 847,000 in 1999 and 2000. ¹

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 General Accounting 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 case², expansion of the medical impairment category, and reduction in reviews of continuing eligibility.

To counteract this rapid growth, Congress enacted changes to the SSI program in 1996, as part of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), tightening eligibility requirements for disabled children applying to the program and reviewing eligibility of those already receiving SSI.

Figure SSI 1. SSI Recipients by Age, 1974 – 2000

Source: Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, (Data available online at http://www.ssa.gov/statistics/ores_home.html).

Table SSI 1. Number of Persons Receiving Federally Administered SSI Payments 1974 – 2000 [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	711	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	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

¹Includes students 18-21 in 1974 only.

Source: Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001, (Data available online at http://www.ssa.gov/statistics).

Table SSI 2. SSI Recipiency Rates, 1974 – 2000 [In percentages]

Date	All Recipients as a Percent of Total Population1	Adults 18-64 as a Percent of 18-64 Population1	Child Recipients as a Percent of All Children1	Elderly Recipients (Persons 65 & Older) as a Percent of
				All Persons 65 & Older1	All Elderly Poor2	Pretransfer Elderly Poor3
Dec 1974	1.9	1.2	0.1	10.8	78.5	NA
Dec 1975	2.0	1.3	0.2	10.9	75.6	NA
Dec 1976	1.9	1.3	0.2	10.2	72.4	NA
Dec 1977	1.9	1.3	0.2	9.7	74.1	NA
Dec 1978	1.9	1.3	0.3	9.3	71.5	NA
Dec 1979	1.8	1.3	0.3	8.8	61.3	66.8
Dec 1980	1.8	1.2	0.3	8.6	57.5	64.7
Dec 1981	1.7	1.2	0.3	8.0	55.0	63.3
Dec 1982	1.7	1.2	0.3	7.4	53.6	62.3
Dec 1983	1.7	1.2	0.3	7.3	55.2	61.9
Dec 1984	1.7	1.2	0.3	7.2	61.2	66.3
Dec 1985	1.7	1.3	0.4	7.1	58.7	64.5
Dec 1986	1.8	1.3	0.4	6.9	57.9	63.4
Dec 1987	1.8	1.4	0.4	6.7	56.5	64.7
Dec 1988	1.8	1.5	0.4	6.6	57.6	64.3
Dec 1989	1.9	1.5	0.4	6.5	60.3	64.6
Dec 1990	1.9	1.6	0.5	6.5	56.3	63.3
Dec 1991	2.0	1.7	0.6	6.5	55.0	61.1
Dec 1992	2.2	1.9	0.8	6.5	53.5	59.8
Dec 1993	2.3	2.0	1.1	6.4	56.3	63.3
Dec 1994	2.4	2.1	1.2	6.4	57.9	65.6
Dec 1995	2.5	2.2	1.3	6.4	63.7	71.4
Dec 1996	2.5	2.2	1.4	6.2	61.0	69.3
Dec 1997	2.4	2.2	1.3	6.0	60.8	69.1
Dec 1998	2.4	2.2	1.3	5.9	60.0	69.1
Dec 1999	2.4	2.2	1.2	5.8	63.7	72.4
Dec 2000	2.3	2.1	1.2	5.7	59.8	66.9

¹Population numbers used for the denominators are Census 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; see Current Population Reports, Series P25-1106 and Resident Population Estimates of the United States by Age and Sex, April 1, 1990 to July 1, 2000, Internet release date January 2, 2001 and the 2000 Decennial Census (Available online at http://www.census.gov).

²For the number of persons (65 years of age and older living in poverty) used as the denominator, see Current Population Reports, Series P60-214.

³The pretransfer poverty population used as the denominator is the number of all elderly persons living in elderly-only units whose income (cash income plus social insurance plus Social Security but before taxes and means-tested transfers) falls below the appropriate poverty threshold. See Appendix J, Table 20, 1992 Green Book; data for subsequent years are unpublished Congressional Budget Office tabulations.

Notes: Numerators for these ratios are from Table SSI 1. Rates computed by DHHS.

Source: 1994 Green Book and U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2000," Current Population Reports, Series P60-214, and earlier years, (Available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).

Table SSI 3. Total, Federal, and State SSI Benefits and Administration, 1974 – 2000¹ [In millions of dollars]

Calendar Year	Total Benefits		Federal Payments	State Supplementation
	20002Dollars	Current Dollars		Total	Federally Administered	State Administered	Administrative Costs (fiscal year)
1974	$17,405	$5,246	$3,833	$1,413	$1,264	$149	$285
1975	18,011	5,878	4,314	1,565	1,403	162	399
1976	17,585	6,066	4,512	1,554	1,388	166	500
1977	17,182	6,306	4,703	1,603	1,431	172	526
1978	16,715	6,552	4,881	1,671	1,491	180	539
1979	16,464	7,075	5,279	1,797	1,590	207	610
1980	16,615	7,941	5,866	2,074	1,848	226	668
1981	16,423	8,593	6,518	2,076	1,839	237	718
1982	16,177	8,981	6,907	2,074	1,798	276	779
1983	16,259	9,404	7,423	1,982	1,711	270	830
1984	17,190	10,372	8,281	2,091	1,792	299	864
1985	17,701	11,060	8,777	2,283	1,973	311	953
1986	18,981	12,081	9,498	2,583	2,243	340	1,022
1987	19,632	12,951	10,029	2,922	2,563	359	976
1988	20,067	13,786	10,734	3,052	2,671	381	975
1989	20,803	14,980	11,606	3,374	2,955	419	1,051
1990	21,869	16,599	12,894	3,705	3,239	466	1,075
1991	23,421	18,524	14,765	3,759	3,231	529	1,257
1992	27,288	22,233	18,247	3,986	3,435	550	1,538
1993	29,264	24,557	20,722	3,835	3,270	566	1,467
1994	30,067	25,877	22,175	3,701	3,116	585	1,775
1995	31,217	27,628	23,919	3,708	3,118	590	1,973
1996	31,600	28,792	25,265	3,527	2,988	539	1,949
1997	31,170	29,052	25,457	3,595	2,913	682	2,055
1998	31,922	30,216	26,405	3,812	3,003	808	2,304
1999	31,962	30,923	26,805	4,154	3,301	853	2,493
2000	31,564	31,564	27,290	4,274	3,381	893	2,401

¹Payments and adjustments during the respective year but not necessarily accrued for that year.

²Data adjusted for inflation by ASPE using the CPI-U-X1 for calendar years.

Source: Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001, (Data available online at http://www.ssa.gov/statistics).

Table SSI 4. Average Monthly SSI Benefit Payments, 1974 – 2000

Calendar Year	Total1		Federal Payments	State Supplementation
	2000 Dollars	Current Dollars		Total	Federally Administered	State Administered
1974	$475	$135	$108	$64	$71	$35
1975	338	112	92	66	69	45
1980	321	158	133	89	91	76
1984	349	211	187	93	93	93
1985	349	219	193	99	99	102
1986	365	232	202	107	108	101
1987	365	242	208	117	118	110
1988	365	253	219	118	118	118
1989	369	267	230	126	126	127
1990	368	283	244	132	131	136
1991	375	297	260	125	122	143
1992	402	328	292	124	121	147
1993	403	337	306	112	107	150
1994	393	338	310	105	99	152
1995	397	350	322	110	103	164
1996	394	359	333	108	103	145
1997	398	369	342	99	102	86
1998	402	379	350	103	104	102
1999	402	388	356	111	113	105
2000	393	393	360	113	114	109

¹Total is a weighted average of the Federal plus State average benefit, the Federal-only average benefit, and State- only average benefit.

Note: The numerators for these averages are given in Table SSI 3 and the denominators are given in Table SSI 5. Averages were computed by DHHS. Data adjusted for inflation using the monthly values of the CPI-U-X1 index.

Source: Number of persons receiving payments obtained from Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001. 

Table SSI 5. Number of Persons Receiving SSI Payments by Type of Payment, 1974 – 2000 (in thousands)

Date	Total	Federal	State Supplementation
			Total	Federally Administered	State Administered
Jan 1974	3,249	2,956	1,839	1,480	358
Dec 1975	4,360	3,893	1,987	1,684	303
Dec 1980	4,194	3,682	1,934	1,685	249
Dec 1984	4,094	3,699	1,875	1,607	268
Dec 1985	4,200	3,799	1,916	1,661	255
Dec 1986	4,347	3,922	2,003	1,723	279
Dec 1987	4,458	4,019	2,079	1,807	272
Dec 1988	4,541	4,089	2,155	1,885	270
Dec 1989	4,673	4,206	2,224	1,950	275
Dec 1990	4,888	4,412	2,344	2,058	286
Dec 1991	5,200	4,730	2,512	2,204	308
Dec 1992	5,647	5,202	2,684	2,372	313
Dec 1993	6,065	5,636	2,850	2,536	314
Dec 1994	6,377	5,965	2,950	2,628	322
Dec 1995	6,576	6,194	2,817	2,518	300
Dec 1996	6,677	6,326	2,732	2,421	310
Dec 1997	6,565	6,212	3,029	2,372	657
Dec 1998	6,649	6,289	3,072	2,412	661
Dec 1999	6,641	6,275	3,116	2,441	675
Dec 2000	6,685	6,320	3,164	2,481	683

Source: Number of persons receiving payments obtained from Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001.

Table SSI 6. Characteristics of SSI Recipients, by Age, Sex, Earnings/Income, and Citizenship: Selected Years, 1980-2000

Note: Data are for December of the year.

¹For 1980-1992 male-female classification reflects all blind and disabled, both children and adults; thereafter, it is based on adults only.

²In this table, students 18-21 are classified as children prior to 1998.

Source: Social Security Administration, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001 and prior years.

Table SSI 7. Total SSI Payments, Federal SSI Payments And State Supplementary Payments Calendar Year 2000 [In thousands]

State	Total	Total Federal	Federal SSI	State Supplementation
				Federally Administered	State Administered
Total	$31,564,439	$30,671,725	$27,290,248	$3,381,451	$892,740
Alabama	659,218	658,648	658,648	–	570
Alaska	87,927	36,717	36,717	–	51,210
Arizona	355,324	355,074	355,074	–	250
Arkansas	332,628	332,628	332,628	–	–
California	6,385,553	6,385,553	4,041,417	2,344,136	–
Colorado	302,774	228,481	228,481	–	74,293
Connecticut	303,230	215,865	215,865	–	87,365
Delaware	50,172	50,172	49,227	945	–
District of Columbia	92,673	92,673	89,376	3,297	–
Florida	1,648,742	1,620,866	1,620,862	4	27,876
Georgia	785,363	785,363	785,363	–	–
Hawaii	103,603	103,603	90,874	12,729	–
Idaho	84,444	76,065	76,065	–	8,379
Illinois	1,202,928	1,174,336	1,174,336	–	28,592
Indiana	386,363	381,786	381,786	–	4,577
Iowa	174,581	157,905	155,214	2,691	16,676
Kansas	151,084	151,084	151,084	–	–
Kentucky	757,988	740,790	740,790	–	17,198
Louisiana	715,603	715,106	715,106	–	497
Maine	125,002	115,902	115,902	–	9,100
Maryland	407,041	400,089	400,086	3	6,952
Massachusetts	807,328	807,328	641,376	165,952	–
Michigan	1,083,155	988,272	960,707	27,565	94,883
Minnesota	348,412	271,952	271,952	–	76,460
Mississippi	512,112	512,112	512,111	1	–
Missouri	496,340	470,986	470,986	–	25,354
Montana	57,334	57,334	56,523	811	–
Nebraska	91,360	85,105	85,105	–	6,255
Nevada	108,413	108,413	103,556	4,857	–
New Hampshire	60,673	48,825	48,825	–	11,848
New Jersey	672,255	672,255	593,624	78,631	–
New Mexico	193,487	193,252	193,252	–	235
New York	3,197,466	3,197,466	2,647,827	549,639	–
North Carolina	855,219	731,568	731,568	–	123,651
North Dakota	32,022	29,797	29,797	–	2,225
Ohio	1,114,044	1,114,044	1,114,042	2	–
Oklahoma	339,486	302,057	302,057	–	37,429
Oregon	248,551	228,109	228,109	–	20,442
Pennsylvania	1,367,077	1,367,077	1,237,548	129,529	–
Rhode Island	130,379	130,379	106,976	23,403	–
South Carolina	442,810	428,933	428,933	–	13,877
South Dakota	50,516	48,363	48,358	5	2,153
Tennessee	664,461	664,461	664,459	2	–
Texas	1,574,945	1,574,945	1,574,945	–	–
Utah	87,074	87,074	87,023	51	–
Vermont	51,487	51,487	42,478	9,009	–
Virginia	555,450	535,180	535,180	–	20,270
Washington	484,655	484,345	456,107	28,238	310
West Virginia	318,198	318,198	318,198	–	–
Wisconsin	480,216	357,084	357,084	–	123,132
Wyoming	24,125	23,444	23,444	–	681
Other: N. Mariana Islands	3,174	3,174	3,174	–	–

Source: Number of persons receiving payments obtained from Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001.

Table SSI 8. SSI Recipiency Rates by State And Program Type for 1979 and 2000 [In percentages]

State	Total Recipiency Rate			Rate for Adults 18-64			Rate for Adults 65 & Over
	1979	2000	Percent Change 1979-00	1979	2000	Percent Change 1979-00	1979	2000	Percent Change 1979-00
Total	1.9	2.3	24	1.3	2.2	75	9.0	5.7	-37
Alabama	3.6	3.6	1	1.8	3.3	80	21.0	7.7	-63
Alaska	0.8	1.4	82	0.5	1.4	159	14.0	5.9	-58
Arizona	1.1	1.6	44	0.9	1.5	69	5.0	3.3	-34
Arkansas	3.5	3.2	-9	1.9	2.9	55	17.1	6.6	-61
California	3.0	3.2	6	2.1	2.5	22	16.4	13.2	-20
Colorado	1.1	1.2	9	0.8	1.2	56	6.7	3.3	-51
Connecticut	0.8	1.4	87	0.6	1.5	138	2.7	2.6	-4
Delaware	1.2	1.5	26	0.9	1.4	49	5.4	2.4	-56
District of Columbia	2.3	3.5	54	1.9	3.1	61	8.6	7.1	-17
Florida	1.8	2.4	35	1.1	1.9	67	6.2	4.7	-24
Georgia	2.9	2.4	-16	1.9	2.1	11	17.7	7.5	-58
Hawaii	1.1	1.7	62	0.7	1.4	103	7.6	5.5	-27
Idaho	0.8	1.4	77	0.6	1.6	150	3.8	2.1	-44
Illinois	1.1	2.0	85	1.0	2.0	111	4.3	3.8	-11
Indiana	0.8	1.4	87	0.6	1.5	146	3.3	1.8	-46
Iowa	0.9	1.4	57	0.6	1.5	142	3.5	1.8	-49
Kansas	0.9	1.3	46	0.6	1.4	122	3.5	1.9	-45
Kentucky	2.5	4.3	69	1.8	4.5	151	12.5	7.4	-41
Louisiana	3.4	3.7	10	2.0	3.5	72	20.1	8.4	-58
Maine	2.0	2.3	18	1.4	2.6	87	8.6	3.3	-62
Maryland	1.2	1.7	48	0.9	1.5	60	5.4	4.1	-24
Massachusetts	2.2	2.6	16	1.3	2.6	103	10.8	5.8	-46
Michigan	1.3	2.1	67	1.1	2.3	115	5.9	3.1	-47
Minnesota	0.8	1.3	60	0.6	1.3	136	3.7	2.6	-30
Mississippi	4.5	4.5	0	2.4	4.1	69	26.0	11.4	-56
Missouri	1.8	2.0	14	1.1	2.1	91	7.9	3.1	-61
Montana	0.9	1.5	69	0.7	1.7	136	3.8	2.1	-45
Nebraska	0.9	1.2	36	0.6	1.3	103	3.4	1.8	-47
Nevada	0.8	1.3	55	0.5	1.1	108	5.9	3.3	-44
New Hampshire	0.6	0.9	55	0.4	1.0	127	2.5	1.3	-49
New Jersey	1.1	1.7	49	0.9	1.5	74	4.7	4.5	-4
New Mexico	2.0	2.6	32	1.4	2.4	75	12.4	7.1	-43
New York	2.1	3.3	56	1.6	2.8	76	8.3	9.0	9
North Carolina	2.4	2.4	0	1.6	2.0	27	13.6	6.0	-56
North Dakota	1.0	1.3	31	0.6	1.3	128	5.1	2.4	-52
Ohio	1.1	2.1	89	1.0	2.3	132	4.2	2.5	-40
Oklahoma	2.3	2.1	-9	1.3	2.1	58	11.6	4.2	-64
Oregon	0.9	1.5	74	0.7	1.6	129	3.3	2.6	-21
Pennsylvania	1.4	2.3	64	1.1	2.4	114	5.0	3.4	-31
Rhode Island	1.6	2.6	64	1.1	2.6	141	6.4	5.0	-22
South Carolina	2.7	2.7	0	1.8	2.4	35	17.0	6.3	-63
South Dakota	1.1	1.7	49	0.7	1.7	136	5.0	3.1	-38
Tennessee	2.9	2.9	1	1.9	2.8	50	14.8	6.2	-58
Texas	1.9	2.0	6	1.0	1.5	58	12.7	7.8	-39
Utah	0.6	0.9	64	0.5	1.0	96	3.0	1.9	-37
Vermont	1.8	2.1	19	1.3	2.2	68	8.1	3.9	-52
Virginia	1.5	1.9	27	1.0	1.6	57	8.5	4.9	-42
Washington	1.2	1.7	47	1.0	1.8	84	4.8	3.6	-25
West Virginia	2.1	3.9	83	1.9	4.5	142	8.0	4.7	-41
Wisconsin	1.4	1.6	11	1.0	1.6	67	6.5	2.4	-63
Wyoming	0.4	1.2	186	0.3	1.3	348	2.7	1.6	-42

Note: Recipiency rates for 2000 are the ratios of the number of SSI recipients (in the respective age groups) as of the month of December to the population in the respective age group as of the month of April; calculations by DHHS. The 1979 rates are based on the average number of recipients during the year.

Source: Social Security Administration, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001, and U.S. Bureau of the Census, (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 – 2000 [In percentages]

State	1975	1980	1985	1990	1992	19942	19962	20002
Total1	2.0	1.8	1.7	1.9	2.1	2.4	2.5	2.3
Alabama	4.0	3.4	3.3	3.3	3.4	3.8	3.9	3.6
Alaska	0.8	0.8	0.7	0.8	0.9	1.1	1.2	1.4
Arizona	1.2	1.1	1.0	1.2	1.4	1.7	1.7	1.6
Arkansas	4.1	3.4	3.1	3.2	3.5	3.8	3.8	3.2
California	3.1	3.0	2.6	2.9	3.1	3.2	3.3	3.2
Colorado	1.4	1.0	0.9	1.1	1.3	1.5	1.5	1.2
Connecticut	0.8	0.8	0.8	1.0	1.1	1.3	1.4	1.4
Delaware	1.2	1.2	1.2	1.2	1.3	1.5	1.6	1.5
District of Columbia	2.2	2.4	2.5	2.7	3.0	3.5	3.7	3.5
Florida	1.9	1.8	1.6	1.7	1.9	2.3	2.4	2.4
Georgia	3.3	2.8	2.6	2.5	2.6	2.8	2.7	2.4
Hawaii	1.1	1.1	1.1	1.3	1.3	1.5	1.6	1.7
Idaho	1.1	0.8	0.8	1.0	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.4
Illinois	1.2	1.1	1.2	1.6	1.8	2.2	2.3	2.0
Indiana	0.8	0.8	0.9	1.1	1.3	1.5	1.6	1.4
Iowa	1.0	0.9	1.0	1.2	1.3	1.4	1.5	1.4
Kansas	1.1	0.9	0.9	1.0	1.1	1.4	1.5	1.3
Kentucky	2.8	2.6	2.7	3.1	3.4	4.1	4.4	4.3
Louisiana	3.9	3.2	2.9	3.2	3.5	4.1	4.2	3.7
Maine	2.3	1.9	1.9	1.9	2.0	2.4	2.2	2.3
Maryland	1.2	1.1	1.2	1.3	1.4	1.6	1.7	1.7
Massachusetts	2.3	2.2	1.9	2.0	2.2	2.6	2.7	2.6
Michigan	1.3	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.7	2.2	2.2	2.1
Minnesota	1.0	0.8	0.8	0.9	1.1	1.3	1.4	1.3
Mississippi	5.2	4.4	4.3	4.4	4.7	5.2	5.2	4.5
Missouri	2.1	1.7	1.6	1.7	1.8	2.1	2.2	2.0
Montana	1.1	0.9	0.9	1.3	1.4	1.6	1.6	1.5
Nebraska	1.1	0.9	0.9	1.0	1.1	1.3	1.3	1.2
Nevada	1.0	0.8	0.9	1.0	1.0	1.3	1.4	1.3
New Hampshire	0.7	0.6	0.6	0.6	0.7	0.8	0.9	0.9
New Jersey	1.1	1.2	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.8	1.8	1.7
New Mexico	2.3	1.9	1.8	2.1	2.3	2.6	2.7	2.6
New York	2.2	2.1	2.0	2.3	2.6	3.1	3.3	3.3
North Carolina	2.7	2.4	2.2	2.2	2.4	2.6	2.7	2.4
North Dakota	1.3	1.0	1.0	1.2	1.3	1.4	1.4	1.3
Ohio	1.2	1.1	1.2	1.4	1.6	2.1	2.3	2.1
Oklahoma	3.0	2.2	1.8	1.9	2.0	2.2	2.3	2.1
Oregon	1.1	0.8	1.0	1.1	1.2	1.5	1.5	1.5
Pennsylvania	1.2	1.4	1.4	1.6	1.8	2.1	2.2	2.3
Rhode Island	1.7	1.6	1.6	1.7	1.9	2.3	2.6	2.6
South Carolina	2.8	2.7	2.6	2.6	2.7	3.0	3.0	2.7
South Dakota	1.3	1.2	1.2	1.5	1.6	1.8	1.9	1.7
Tennessee	3.2	2.8	2.7	2.9	3.1	3.4	3.4	2.9
Texas	2.2	1.8	1.6	1.7	1.9	2.1	2.2	2.0
Utah	0.8	0.5	0.5	0.7	0.8	1.0	1.1	0.9
Vermont	1.9	1.7	1.8	1.8	2.0	2.2	2.2	2.1
Virginia	1.5	1.5	1.5	1.5	1.7	1.9	2.0	1.9
Washington	1.5	1.1	1.1	1.3	1.4	1.6	1.7	1.7
West Virginia	2.4	2.1	2.2	2.6	2.9	3.5	3.8	3.9
Wisconsin	1.4	1.4	1.5	1.8	1.9	2.2	1.8	1.6
Wyoming	0.7	0.4	0.5	0.8	0.9	1.2	1.2	1.2

¹The 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.

²For 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 except for 2000 when the April 1 population figures are used. For 1994-2000 the number of recipients is from the month of December; calculations by DHHS.

Source: Social Security Administration, Social Security Bulletin · Annual Statistical Supplement · 2001, and Bureau of the Census, (Resident population by state available online at http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/).

---

¹Earlier editions of Indicators of Welfare Dependence included students 18-21 in the count of children and so reported about 50 thousand more disabled children.

²On February 20, 1990, the Supreme Court ruled that the individual functional assessment (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. The GAO study estimated that 87,000 children were added to the SSI caseload after the individual functional assessments for children were initiated.

Appendix B: Alternative Definition of Dependence Based on Income from TANF and Food Stamps

As directed by the Welfare Indicators Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-432), this annual report on Indicators of Welfare Dependence focuses on dependence on three programs: the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, now Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF); the Food Stamp Program; and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. The summary measure of dependence proposed by the Advisory Board includes income from all three programs in its definition:

A family is dependent on welfare if more than 50 percent of its total income in a one-year period comes from AFDC, food stamps and/or SSI, and this welfare income is not associated with work activities.

This appendix examines an alternative definition of dependence that considers TANF and food stamps alone, excluding SSI. One indicator in this report, Indicator 9, measuring long-term dependence, is based on this alternative definition.

As shown in Table B-1, the rate of dependency would have been only 1.7 percent in 1999 if based on income from TANF and food stamps, as opposed to 3.3 percent when counting income from all three programs (TANF, food stamps, and SSI). In general, about half of individuals who are dependent under the standard definition also are dependent under the alternative definition that considers TANF and food stamps alone.¹ There is significant variation across the age groups, however. The elderly depend more on SSI than on TANF and food stamps; whereas 2.1 percent of elderly persons are dependent when counting the three major types of means-tested assistance, very few, 0.2 percent, are dependent when the definition is limited to TANF and food stamps. In contrast, children are primarily dependent on TANF and food stamps.

Table B-1. Percentage of the Total Population with More than 50 Percent of Income from Various Means-Tested Assistance Programs, by Race and Age: 1999

	TANF, SSI, & Food Stamps	TANF & Food Stamps	SSI only
All Persons	3.3	1.7	1.2
Racial Categories
Non-Hispanic White	1.8	0.8	0.8
Non-Hispanic Black	9.1	4.9	2.8
Hispanic	5.4	3.3	1.4
Age Categories
Children Ages 0-5	6.2	4.4	1.0
Children Ages 6-10	6.1	4.2	1.0
Children Ages 11-15	4.5	2.8	0.8
Women Ages 16-64	3.5	1.7	1.3
Men Ages 16-64	1.9	0.7	1.0
Adults Age 65 and over	2.0	0.2	1.6

Note: Income is measured as total family annual income.

Source: March CPS data, analyzed using the TRIM3 microsimulation model.

---

¹In the early- to mid-1990s, 70 to 75 percent of individuals who were dependent under the standard definition were also dependent under the alternative definition.

Appendix C: Additional Nonmarital Birth Data

Table C-1. Percentage of Births that are to Unmarried Women Within Age Groups by Race: 1940-2000

Year	White					Black
	Under Age 15	Age 15 - 17	Age 18 - 19	All Teens	All Women	Under  Age 15	Age 15 - 17	Age 18 - 19	All  Teens	All Women
1940	44.4	NA	NA	7.2	1.9	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1941	44.9	NA	NA	7.0	1.9	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1942	40.5	NA	NA	6.4	1.7	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1943	45.2	NA	NA	6.5	1.6	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1944	41.3	NA	NA	8.4	2.0	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1945	50.7	NA	NA	10.0	2.4	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1946	52.4	NA	NA	8.4	2.1	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1947	45.1	NA	NA	6.6	1.8	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1948	39.9	10.3	4.6	6.3	1.8	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1949	40.4	10.0	4.5	6.1	1.7	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1950	41.9	10.2	4.8	6.4	1.7	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1951	34.9	9.7	4.4	5.9	1.6	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1952	40.4	9.6	4.4	6.0	1.6	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1953	43.1	9.6	4.5	6.1	1.7	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1954	36.8	10.2	4.9	6.5	1.8	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1955	42.1	10.2	4.9	6.6	1.9	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1956	42.6	10.2	4.8	6.5	1.9	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1957	41.5	10.4	4.7	6.5	2.0	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1958	45.3	10.8	4.9	6.8	2.1	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1959	46.7	11.4	5.2	7.2	2.2	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1960	47.5	11.7	5.4	7.4	2.3	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1961	49.9	12.4	6.0	7.9	2.5	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1962	48.3	13.4	6.1	8.2	2.8	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1963	50.3	15.1	7.0	9.4	3.1	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1964	52.3	16.0	7.6	10.4	3.4	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1965	57.3	17.3	9.1	11.7	4.0	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1966	52.5	19.5	9.9	12.6	4.4	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1967	61.6	21.0	11.2	14.2	4.9	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1968	61.0	23.4	12.7	16.1	5.3	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
1969	57.0	24.0	12.9	16.6	5.5	91.7	72.1	48.3	60.0	34.9
1970	57.9	25.2	13.5	17.5	5.7	93.5	76.0	52.1	64.0	37.6
1971	60.5	25.2	13.2	17.4	5.6	95.0	79.6	56.0	68.1	40.5
1972	59.0	26.4	13.7	18.5	6.0	96.4	81.0	59.0	70.7	43.9
1973	65.2	27.6	14.3	19.6	6.4	96.4	82.6	60.4	72.1	45.7
1974	65.3	29.4	15.0	20.8	6.5	97.4	84.8	63.8	74.7	47.1
1975	71.0	33.0	17.2	23.5	7.3	98.4	87.4	67.6	77.8	48.8
1976	69.3	35.7	18.8	25.4	7.7	99.1	89.7	70.9	80.5	50.3
1977	72.8	38.9	21.0	27.8	8.2	98.8	90.6	74.6	82.6	51.7
1978	73.1	40.1	22.5	29.1	8.7	97.2	90.9	76.5	83.5	53.2
1979	75.0	42.4	24.3	30.8	9.4	99.4	92.9	78.9	85.7	54.7
1980	75.4	45.4	27.1	33.6	11.2	98.6	93.1	79.9	86.2	56.1
1981	76.5	48.0	28.7	35.5	11.8	98.9	93.9	81.3	87.2	56.9
1982	77.7	50.1	30.3	37.2	12.3	98.4	94.2	82.4	87.9	57.7
1983	79.9	53.1	32.7	39.8	12.9	98.5	95.1	84.4	89.4	59.2
1984	80.8	55.4	35.1	42.2	13.6	98.6	95.3	85.4	90.0	60.3
1985	82.4	58.0	38.2	45.3	14.7	98.8	95.6	86.2	90.6	61.2
1986	83.6	61.3	41.7	48.8	15.9	99.0	95.7	86.9	91.1	62.4
1987	84.6	64.6	44.4	51.8	16.9	99.1	96.1	87.6	91.7	63.4
1988	86.5	66.2	47.3	54.1	18.0	98.9	96.4	88.5	92.3	64.7
1989	84.7	67.2	49.5	55.7	19.2	98.4	96.1	89.0	92.3	59.2
1990	83.6	67.9	50.8	56.8	20.4	98.5	95.6	89.4	92.2	59.8
1991	75.5	69.7	53.2	59.0	21.8	98.1	95.7	89.8	92.5	60.3
1992	76.2	70.6	54.9	60.6	22.6	97.6	95.6	90.4	92.8	68.1
1993	83.2	71.7	57.2	62.7	23.6	98.1	95.7	90.8	93.1	68.7
1994	90.4	77.5	61.9	68.0	25.4	99.1	97.8	93.4	95.5	70.4
1995	88.8	77.4	62.1	68.0	25.3	99.1	97.7	93.2	95.3	69.9
1996	90.1	78.8	63.3	69.2	25.7	99.1	97.9	93.6	95.6	69.8
1997	92.2	81.6	65.3	71.4	25.8	99.4	98.3	93.8	95.8	69.2
1998	94.0	82.7	66.5	72.4	26.3	99.6	98.3	93.9	95.7	69.1
1999	93.9	83.2	67.3	72.9	26.7	99.5	98.3	93.7	95.6	68.8
2000	94.0	83.4	67.8	73.1	27.1	99.4	98.2	94.0	95.7	68.5

Notes: Births to unmarried women in the United States for 1940 – 1979 are estimated from data for registration areas in which marital status of the mother was reported; see sources below. Beginning in 1980, births to unmarried women in the United States are based on data from states reporting marital status directly and data from non-reporting states for which marital status was inferred from other information on the birth certificate; see sources below. Data for 1998 are preliminary.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, “Nonmarital Childbearing in the United States, 1940 - 1999,” National Vital Health Statistics Reports, Vol. 48 (16), 2000; “Births: Final Data for 2000,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 50 (5), February 2002.