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 and information on the characteristics of program participants.
-
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 was absent from the home, incapacitated, deceased, or unemployed. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands operated an AFDC program. States defined “need,” set their own benefit levels, established (within federal limitations) income and resource limits, and administered the program or supervised its administration. States were entitled to unlimited federal funds for reimbursement of benefit payments, at “matching” rates that were inversely related to state per capita income. States were required to provide aid to all persons who were in classes eligible under federal law and whose income and resources were within state-set limits.
During the 1990s, the federal government increasingly used its authority under section 1115 of the Social Security Act to waive portions of the federal requirements under AFDC. This allowed states to test such changes as expanded earned income disregards, increased work requirements and stronger sanctions for failure to comply with them, time limits on benefits, and expanded access to transitional benefits such as child care and medical assistance. As a condition of receiving waivers, states were required to conduct rigorous evaluations of the impacts of these changes on the welfare receipt, employment, and earnings of participants.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) replaced AFDC, AFDC administration, the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) program and the Emergency Assistance (EA) program with a block grant called the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Key elements of TANF include a lifetime limit of five years (60 months) 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.
Recent Legislative Action
Legislative authority for the TANF block grant program expired September 2002. Since then, the program has been operated under a series of short-term extensions.
In February 2002, President Bush proposed a plan, Working Toward Independence, to strengthen welfare reform, in order to help families remaining on welfare and other low-income families move toward self-sufficiency. The House of Representatives passed bills incorporating the key elements of the President’s plan in both the 107th Congress (H.R. 4737) and the 108th Congress (H.R. 4). As of the end of 2003, a Senate version of TANF reauthorization was reported out of committee, but not yet taken up on the floor of the Senate. Final enactment of TANF reauthorization is expected in 2004.
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 reflect a combination of the AFDC and TANF programs. In some states, limited data are available for FY 1997 because states were given a transition period of six months after they implemented TANF before they were required to report data on the characteristics and work activities of TANF participants.
Because of the greatly expanded range of activities allowed under TANF, a substantial portion of TANF funds are being spent on activities other than cash payments to families. When tracking overall expenditure trends, the tables in this Appendix (e.g., Table TANF 4) 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, were transferred to the Child Care and Development Fund as part of PRWORA).
There also is potential for discontinuity between the AFDC and the TANF caseload figures. For example, under TANF there is no longer a separate “Unemployed Parent” (UP) program, as there was under AFDC. While a separate work participation rate is calculated for two-parent families, this population is not identical to the UP caseload under AFDC. It is also possible that a limited number of families will be considered recipients of TANF assistance, even if they do not receive a monthly cash benefit. At present, the vast majority of families receiving “assistance”1 are, in fact, receiving cash payments; however, this may change over time.
Once source of discontinuity has been removed in this edition of the Indicators report. Under TANF some states provide cash and other forms of assistance to specific categories of families (e.g., two-parent families) under Separate State Programs (SSPs), funded out of MOE dollars rather than federal TANF funds. This allows the states additional flexibility with regard to the time limits and work requirement. The official TANF caseload figures do not include these families. Starting with this edition, we have added recipients in SSPs into the caseload totals (the split between TANF and SSP caseloads is shown in Table TANF 3, nationally, and in Table TANF 15, by state). Expenditures for Separate State Programs are shown in Table TANF 5.
AFDC/TANF Program Data
The following tables and figures present data on caseloads, expenditures, and recipient characteristics of the AFDC and TANF programs. Trends in national caseloads and expenditures are shown in 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 1-3). Welfare caseloads have stabilized over the past few years after declining dramatically during the 1990s. In fiscal year 2002, the average monthly number of TANF recipients was 5.65 million persons, down 1.9 percent from FY 2001. Moreover, this was 55 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 61.6 percent to 5.5 million in March 2003.2 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, however, because PRWORA was enacted at a time when the economy was expanding dramatically, offering a uniquely conducive environment within which to move many recipients off the welfare rolls and into the labor market. Other policy changes, most notably expansions in the Earned Income Tax Credit, add further complexity.
In general, studies have found that both economic conditions and welfare reform policies have played important roles in the recent caseload decline. A review of a dozen studies concluded that roughly 15 to 30 percent of the caseload decline prior to 1996 was attributed by most studies to welfare policies under waivers to the AFDC rules with approximately 30 to 45 percent of the decline explained by economic conditions (Schoeni and Blank, 2000). A study by the Council of Economic Advisers (1999) of the post-PRWORA period finds that just over one-third of caseload decline can be explained by welfare reform policy, while 8 to 10 percent is due to the economy. A more recent study estimates that over half the decline in caseloads after enactment of PRWORA were attributable to welfare reform (O’Neill and Hill, 2001). The relative stability of the caseload during the recent recession further supports the argument that the economy was only one of several factors driving caseloads down.
AFDC/TANF Expenditures (Tables TANF 4-6 and Figure TANF 2). Tables TANF 4 and 5 show trends in expenditures on AFDC and TANF. Table TANF 4 tracks both programs, breaking out the costs of benefits and administrative expenses. It also shows the division between federal and state spending. Table TANF 5 shows the variety of activities funded under the TANF program.
Figure TANF 2 and Table TANF 6 show that inflation has had a significant effect in eroding the value of the average monthly AFDC/TANF benefit. In real dollars, by 2001 the average monthly benefit per recipient had declined to 64 percent of what it was at its peak in the late 1970s.
AFDC/TANF Recipient Characteristics (Table TANF 7). With the dramatic declines in the welfare rolls since the implementation of TANF, there has been a great deal of speculation regarding how the composition of the caseload has changed. Two striking trends are the increases in the proportion of families with no adult in the assistance unit and in employment among adult recipients.
One of the most dramatic trends is the recent jump in the proportion of adult recipients who are working. In FY 2002, 25 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 over 33 percent in FY 2002 (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. (For example, see Table Work 2 in Chapter III for trends in employment rates for women with no more than a high school education).
Another dramatic change in the caseload is the increasing fraction of cases without an adult recipient. Such cases occur when the adults are ineligible (because they are a caretaker relative, SSI parent, immigrant parent, or sanctioned parent). Families with no adults in the assistance unit have climbed from 11.6 percent of the caseload in FY 1990 to 39.0 percent in FY 2002. Not counting cases with a sanctioned parent, 36.6 percent of the caseload was child-only in 2002. This dramatic growth has been due to an increase in the number of child-only cases during the early 1990s, followed by a decline in the number of adult-present cases. Even though child-only cases are generally not subject to the work requirements or time limits under TANF, the number of cases without an adult in the assistance unit has fallen by about 180,000 since 1996.
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 B those with the fewest barriers to employment B 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 also have 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 8-17). 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 March 2003 ranges from 94 percent (Wyoming) to 26 percent (Indiana). Six states have experienced caseload declines of 75 percent or more. Table TANF 10 also shows that states reached their peak caseloads as early as May 1990 (Louisiana) and as late as June 1997 (Hawaii).
Three new tables have been added to the state-by-state trends in this edition. Table TANF 15 shows TANF and Separate State Program (SSP) families and recipients, by state. Tables TANF 16 and 17 use a newly available data source, the High Performance Bonus data, which links TANF administrative records with quarterly earnings records, and allows examination of patterns of TANF receipt and employment. For example, Table TANF 16 shows the range across states in employment rates among TANF recipients (where employment is measured by presence of quarterly earnings in the same calendar quarter as one or more months of TANF recipient or in the immediately subsequent quarter). Table 17 complements the data on program spell duration provided in Table IND 8 in Chapter II, by examining state-by-state variation in the percentage of TANF recipients that receive benefits over the course of one year (four quarters) after a selected calendar quarter.
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. Beginning in 2000, Total families includes TANF and SSP families. Last data point plotted is March 2003.
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 plus unpublished data and Sixth TANF Annual Report to Congress, 2004.
Table TANF 1. Trends in AFDC/TANF Caseloads, 1962 – 2002
Fiscal Year Average Monthly Number (In thousands) Children as a Percent of Total Recipients Average1 Number of Children per Family Total Familie1 Total Recipients Unemployed Parent Families Unemployed Parent Recipients Total Children 1962.......…. 924 3,593 48 224 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 3,560 75.5 3.1 1968........... 1,310 5,349 67 377 4,013 75.0 3.1 1969........... 1,539 6,146 66 360 4,591 74.7 3.0 1970........... 1,906 7,415 78 420 5,484 74.0 2.9 1971........... 2,531 9,557 143 726 6,963 72.9 2.8 1972........... 2,918 10,632 134 639 7,698 72.4 2.6 1973........... 3,123 11,038 120 557 7,967 72.2 2.6 1974........... 3,170 10,845 93 434 7,825 72.2 2.5 1975........... 3,357 11,067 100 451 7,952 71.9 2.4 1976........... 3,575 11,386 135 593 8,054 70.7 2.3 1977........... 3,593 11,130 149 659 7,846 70.5 2.2 1978........... 3,539 10,672 128 567 7,492 70.2 2.1 1979........... 3,496 10,318 114 507 7,197 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........... 4,871 13,660 335 1,384 9,280 67.9 1.9 1996........... 4,543 12,645 293 1,241 8,672 68.6 1.9 19972......... 3,937 10,935 2753 1,1583 7,7813 71.23 2.03 1998........... 3,200 8,790 179 7544 6,273 71.4 2.0 1999........... 2,674 7,188 NA NA 5,319 74.0 2.0 2000........... 2,356 6,324 NA NA 4,598 72.7 2.0 2001........... 2,200 5,761 NA NA 4,227 73.3 1.9 2002........... 2,194 5,654 NA NA 4,149 73.0 1.9 Note: Beginning in 2000, all caseload numbers include SSP families.1 Includes unemployed parent families and child-only cases.2 The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 repealed the AFDC program as of July 1, 1997 and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program.3 Based on data from the old AFDC reporting system which was available only for the first 9 months of the fiscal year.4 Estimated 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 Family Assistance, (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 – 2002
CalendarYear 1Total Recipients in the States & DC(in thousands) Child Recipients in the States & DC(in thousands) Recipients as a Percent of Total Populatio2 Recipients as a Percent of Poverty Populatio3 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 13.8 60.1 1993 14,007 9,460 5.4 35.7 48.5 14.0 60.2 1994 13,970 9,448 5.3 36.7 50.0 13.8 61.8 1995 13,242 9,013 5.0 36.4 50.1 13.0 61.5 1996 12,156 8,355 4.5 33.3 46.4 11.9 57.8 1997 10,224 7,077 5 3.7 28.7 40.7 10.0 50.1 1998 8,215 5,781 3.0 23.8 34.7 8.1 42.9 1999 6,709 4,836 2.4 20.5 30.9 6.7 39.4 2000 6,043 4,406 2.1 19.1 29.7 6.1 38.0 2001 5,633 4,138 2.0 17.1 26.8 5.7 35.3 2002 5,529 4,048 1.9 16.0 25.4 5.6 33.4 1 Total recipients are calculated here as the monthly average for the calendar year in order to compare with the calendar year counts of the poverty populations used to compute the recipiency rates. From 2000 onward, total recipients includes SSP recipients as well as TANF recipients. See Table IND 3a for fiscal year recipiency rates.2 Population numbers used as denominators are resident population. See Current Population Reports, Series P25-11063 For poverty population data see Current Population Reports, Series P60-222 (Available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).4 The 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.5 Estimated based on the ratio of children recipients to total recipients for January through June of 1997.Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance and U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2002," Current Population Reports, Series P60-222, and earlier years, (Available online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).Table TANF 3. TANF and Separate State Program (SSP) Families and Recipients, 2000 – 2002
(In thousands)
Fiscal Year TANF SSP Total Families 2000 2,265 91 2,355 2001 2,117 82 2,200 2002 2,065 128 2,194 All Recipients 2000 5,943 380 6,324 2001 5,423 338 5,761 2002 5,149 505 5,654 Child Recipients 2000 4,370 228 4,598 2001 4,025 202 4,227 2002 3,841 308 4,149 Note: Some states provide cash and other forms of assistance to specific categories of families (e.g., two-parent families) under Separate State Programs (SSPs) which are funded out of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) dollars rather than federal TANF funds. See Table TANF 15 for SSPs by state.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, (available online at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/)
Table TANF 4. Total AFDC/TANF Expenditures on Cash Benefits and Administration, 1970 – 2002[In millions of dollars]Fiscal Year Federal Funds(Current Dollars)State Funds(Current Dollars)Total(Current Dollars)Total(Constant 2002 Dollars1)Benefits Administrative Benefits Administrative Benefits Administrative Benefits Administrative 1970 $2,187 $572 2 $1,895 $309 $4,082 $881 2 18,076 3,901 1971 3,008 271 2,469 254 5,477 525 23,219 2,226 1972 3,612 240 3 2,942 241 6,554 481 3 26,831 NA 1973 3,865 313 3,138 296 7,003 610 27,535 2,398 1974 4,071 379 3,300 362 7,371 740 26,694 2,680 1975 4,625 552 3,787 529 8,412 1,082 27,766 3,571 1976 5,258 541 4,418 527 9,676 1,069 29,897 3,303 1977 5,626 595 4,762 583 10,388 1,177 29,878 3,385 1978 5,724 631 4,898 617 10,621 1,248 28,659 3,368 1979 5,825 683 4,954 668 10,779 1,350 26,746 3,350 1980 6,448 750 5,508 729 11,956 1,479 26,670 3,299 1981 6,928 835 5,917 814 12,845 1,648 26,054 3,343 1982 6,922 878 5,934 878 12,857 1,756 24,366 3,328 1983 7,332 915 6,275 915 13,607 1,830 24,664 3,317 1984 7,707 876 6,664 822 14,371 1,698 24,985 2,952 1985 7,817 890 6,763 889 14,580 1,779 24,469 2,986 1986 8,239 993 6,996 967 15,235 1,960 24,936 3,208 1987 8,914 1,081 7,409 1,052 16,323 2,133 25,980 3,395 1988 9,125 1,194 7,538 1,159 16,663 2,353 25,479 3,598 1989 9,433 1,211 7,807 1,206 17,240 2,417 25,157 3,527 1990 10,149 1,358 8,390 1,303 18,539 2,661 25,770 3,699 1991 11,165 1,373 9,191 1,300 20,356 2,673 26,936 3,537 1992 12,258 1,459 9,993 1,378 22,250 2,837 28,575 3,644 1993 12,270 1,518 10,016 1,438 22,286 2,956 27,784 3,685 1994 12,512 1,680 10,285 1,621 22,797 3,301 27,687 4,009 1995 12,019 1,770 10,014 1,751 22,032 3,521 26,033 4,161 1996 11,065 1,633 9,346 1,633 20,411 3,266 23,467 3,755 19974 9,748 1,273 7,799 1,098 17,547 2,371 19,644 2,654 1998 7,518 1,231 7,096 1,028 14,614 2,259 16,098 2,489 1999 6,475 1,407 6,975 884 13,449 2,291 14,538 2,476 2000 5,444 1,570 5,736 1,032 11,180 2,302 11,711 2,726 2001 4,772 1,598 5,390 1,042 10,163 2,639 10,313 2,678 2002 4,554 1,633 4,854 983 9,408 2,617 9,408 2,617 Note: Benefits do not include emergency assistance payments and have not been reduced by child support collections. Foster care payments are included from 1971 to 1980. State funds for benefits include benefits under Separate State Programs. Beginning in fiscal year 1984, the cost of certifying AFDC households for food stamps is shown in the food stamp program’s appropriation under the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Administrative costs include: Work Program, ADP, FAMIS, Fraud Control, Child Care administration (through 1996), SAVE and other State and local administrative expenditures.1 Constant dollar adjustments to 2002 level were made using a CPI-U-X1 fiscal year price index.2 Includes expenditures for services.3 Administrative expenditures only.4 The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 repealed the AFDC program as of July 1, 1997 and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance 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 5. Federal and State TANF Program and Other Related Spending Fiscal Years 1997 to 2002(Millions)Cash & Work-Based Assistance Work Activities Child Care Transportation Administration Systems Transitional Services Other Expenditures Total Expenditures Federal TANF Grants 1997 7,708 467 14 – 872 109 0 862 10,032 1998 7,168 763 252 – 938 224 6 1,136 10,487 1999 6,475 1,225 604 – 1,070 337 17 1,595 11,323 2000 5,444 1,606 1,553 496 1,328 242 – 2,715 13,384 2001 4,772 1,983 1,583 522 1,375 223 – 4,325 14,782 2002 4,554 2,121 1,572 339 1,339 294 – 4,368 14,588 State Maintenance of Effort Expenditures in the TANF Program 1997 5,955 311 752 – 704 101 9 926 8,758 1998 6,879 520 890 – 883 138 11 1,301 10,623 1999 6,541 503 1,135 – 743 118 23 1,334 10,397 2000 5,432 884 1,893 150 921 92 – 1,170 10,541 2001 4,887 685 1,730 113 920 83 – 1,195 9,613 2002 3,994 582 1,860 221 877 66 – 1,554 9,154 State Maintenance of Effort Expenditures in Separate State Programs 1997 69 12 111 – 0 0 – 18 210 1998 216 3 137 – 6 1 – 28 391 1999 434 26 257 – 22 0 0 126 865 2000 305 11 73 17 19 0 – 431 856 2001 503 28 34 20 38 1 – 499 1,125 2002 860 24 72 24 41 -.5 – 652 1,673 Total Expenditures 1997 13,731 790 877 – 1,577 211 9 1,805 19,000 1998 14,264 1,286 1,280 – 1,828 362 17 2,465 21,502 1999 13,449 1,754 1,995 – 1,835 456 40 3,055 22,585 2000 11,180 2,501 3,519 663 2,267 335 – 4,316 24,781 2001 10,163 2,696 3,347 655 2,333 306 – 6,019 25,520 2002 9,408 2,727 3,504 584 2,258 359 – 6,574 25,414 Note: Administration and Systems, shown separately here in Table TANF 5, can be combined to show total administrative costs, as in Table TANF 3.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Financial Services.
Table TANF 6. Trends in AFDC/TANF Average Monthly Payments, 1962 – 2002
Fiscal Year Monthly Benefit per Recipient Average Number of Persons per Family Monthly Benefitper Family(not reduced by Child Support)Weighted Average1Maximum Benefit(per 3-person Family)CurrentDollars2002DollarsCurrentDollars2002DollarsCurrentDollars2002Dollars1962 $31 $171 3.9 $121 $664 NA NA 1963 31 169 4.0 126 681 NA NA 1964 32 170 4.1 131 701 NA NA 1965 34 177 4.2 140 738 NA NA 1966 35 180 4.2 146 750 NA NA 1967 36 181 4.1 150 750 NA NA 1968 40 191 4.1 162 782 NA NA 1969 43 201 4.0 173 803 $186 2 $867 1970 46 203 3.9 178 789 194 2 861 1971 48 202 3.8 180 764 201 2 852 1972 51 210 3.6 187 766 205 2 841 1973 53 208 3.5 187 735 213 2 837 1974 57 205 3.4 194 702 229 2 828 1975 63 209 3.3 209 689 243 802 1976 71 219 3.2 226 697 257 793 1977 78 224 3.1 241 693 271 780 1978 83 224 3.0 249 675 284 767 1979 87 216 2.9 257 638 301 746 1980 94 210 2.9 274 610 320 714 1981 96 195 2.9 277 561 326 661 1982 103 195 2.9 300 569 331 626 1983 106 193 2.9 311 563 336 609 1984 110 192 2.9 321 559 352 611 1985 112 189 2.9 329 552 369 619 1986 115 189 2.9 339 555 383 627 1987 123 196 2.9 359 572 393 626 1988 127 194 2.9 370 567 404 618 1989 131 192 2.9 381 556 412 602 1990 135 187 2.9 389 540 421 585 1991 135 178 2.9 388 513 425 562 1992 136 175 2.9 389 499 419 538 1993 131 164 2.8 373 465 414 517 1994 134 162 2.8 376 457 420 505 1995 134 159 2.8 376 445 418 494 1996 135 155 2.8 374 430 422 485 19973 130 146 2.8 362 405 420 470 1998 130 144 2.7 358 394 432 476 1999 133 144 2.7 357 386 452 489 2000 133 140 2.6 349 366 453 475 2001 137 139 2.6 351 356 456 463 2002 143 143 2.5 355 355 454 454 Note: AFDC benefit amounts have not been reduced by child support collections. Constant dollar adjustments to 2002 level were made using a CPI-U-X1 fiscal-year price index.1 The maximum benefit for a 3-person family in each state is weighted by that state’s share of total AFDC families.2 Estimated based on the weighted average benefit for a 4-person family.3 The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 repealed the AFDC program as of July 1, 1997 and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program.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 – 2002
May1969 May 1975 March 1979 Fiscal year11983 1988 1992 1996 2000 2001 2002 Avg. Family Size (persons) 4.0 3.2 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.8 2.6 2.6 2.5 Number of Child Recipients One 26.6 37.9 42.3 43.4 42.5 42.5 43.9 44.2 44.8 47.0 Two 23.0 26.0 28.1 29.8 30.2 30.2 29.9 28.4 28.5 28.0 Three 17.7 16.1 15.6 15.2 15.8 15.5 15.0 15.3 14.8 14.2 Four or More 32.5 20.0 13.9 10.1 9.9 10.1 9.2 10.1 9.9 8.9 Unknown NA NA NA 1.5 1.7 0.7 1.3 2.0 2.0 1.9 Families with No Adult in Asst. Unit 10.1 12.5 14.6 8.3 9.6 14.8 21.5 34.5 37.1 39.0 Child-Only Families2 – – – – – – – 32.7 35.3 36.6 Families with Non-Recipients 33.1 34.8 NA 36.9 36.8 38.9 49.9 – – – Median Months on AFDC/TANF Since Most Recent Opening 23.0 31.0 29.0 26.0 26.3 22.5 23.6 – – – Presence of Assistance Living in Public Housing 12.8 14.6 NA 10.0 9.6 9.2 8.8 17.7 20.0 19.2 Participating in Food Stamp or Donated Food Program 52.9 75.1 75.1 83.0 84.6 87.3 89.3 79.9 80.9 80.1 Presence of Income With Earnings NA 14.6 12.8 5.7 8.4 7.4 11.1 23.63 24.33 21.83 No Non-AFDC/TANF Income 56.0 71.1 80.6 86.8 79.6 78.9 76.0 71.63 70.33 72.83 Adult Employment Status (percent of adults) Employed – – – – – 6.6 11.3 26.4 26.7 25.3 Unemployed – – – – – – – 49.2 47.5 47.2 Not in Labor Force – – – – – – – 24.3 25.8 27.5 Adult Women's employment status (percent of adult female recipients):4 Full-time job 8.2 10.4 8.7 1.5 2.2 2.2 4.7 – – – Part-time job 6.3 5.7 5.4 3.4 4.2 4.2 5.4 – – – Marital Status (percent of adults) Single – – – – – – – 65.3 66.9 66.6 Married – – – – – – – 12.4 11.7 11.5 Separated – – – – – – – 13.1 12.5 13.0 Widowed – – – – – – – 0.7 0.8 0.7 Divorced – – – – – – – 8.5 8.2 8.2 Basis for Child's Eligibility (percent children): Incapacitated 11.75 7.7 5.3 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.3 – – – Unemployed 4.65 3.7 4.1 8.7 6.5 8.2 8.3 – – – Death 5.55 3.7 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.6 – – – Divorce or Separation 43.35 48.3 44.7 38.5 34.6 30.0 24.3 – – – Absent, No Marriage Tie 27.95 31.0 37.8 44.3 51.9 53.1 58.6 – – – Absent, Other Reason 3.55 4.0 5.9 1.4 1.6 2.0 2.4 – – – Unknown – – – 1.7 – 0.9 0.6 – – – Note: Figures are percentages of families/cases unless noted otherwise.1 Percentages are based on the average monthly caseload during the year. Hawaii and the territories are not included in 1983. Data after 1986 include the territories and Hawaii.2 In this report, child-only families are those families with no adult in the assistance unit excluding those where there is no adult in the assistance unit as a result of the parent being sanctioned for non-compliance.3 Presence of income is measured as a percentage of adult recipients, not families, in 1998 and subsequent years.4 For years prior to 1983, data are for mothers only.5 Calculated on the basis of total number of families.Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Characteristics and Financial Circumstances of TANF Recipients: 2003 TANF Annual Report to Congress and earlier years.Table TANF 8. AFDC/TANF Benefits by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1978 – 2002
[Millions of dollars]1978 1984 1986 1988 1990 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 Alabama $78 $74 $68 $62 $62 $92 $75 $44 $36 $33 Alaska 17 37 46 54 60 113 107 77 55 55 Arizona 30 67 79 103 138 266 228 145 107 130 Arkansas 51 39 48 53 57 57 52 26 34 26 California 1,813 3,207 3,574 4,091 4,955 6,088 5,908 4,128 3,643 2,608 Colorado 74 107 107 125 137 158 129 80 48 53 Connecticut 168 226 223 218 295 397 323 305 166 128 Delaware 28 28 25 24 29 40 35 24 20 19 Dist. of Columbia 91 75 77 76 84 126 121 97 72 67 Florida 145 251 261 318 418 806 680 357 234 256 Georgia 103 149 223 266 321 428 385 313 180 109 Guam 3 5 4 3 5 12 14 NA NA NA Hawaii 83 83 73 77 99 163 173 153 141 85 Idaho 21 21 19 19 20 30 30 6 3 5 Illinois 699 845 886 815 839 914 833 771 269 146 Indiana 118 153 148 167 170 228 153 104 87 146 Iowa 107 159 170 155 152 169 131 104 79 76 Kansas 73 87 91 97 105 123 98 41 43 50 Kentucky 122 135 104 143 179 198 191 147 104 101 Louisiana 97 145 162 182 188 168 130 103 58 67 Maine 51 69 84 80 101 108 99 80 73 66 Maryland 166 229 250 250 296 314 285 192 196 227 Massachusetts 476 406 471 558 630 730 560 442 336 279 Michigan 780 1,214 1,248 1,231 1,211 1,132 779 589 386 326 Minnesota 164 287 322 338 355 379 333 276 193 184 Mississippi 33 58 74 85 86 82 68 60 18 37 Missouri 152 196 209 215 228 287 254 180 139 148 Montana 15 27 37 41 40 49 45 30 21 31 Nebraska 38 56 62 56 59 62 54 41 41 52 Nevada 8 10 16 20 27 48 48 39 28 48 New Hampshire 21 16 20 21 32 62 50 39 32 29 New Jersey 489 485 509 459 451 531 462 372 222 194 New Mexico 32 49 51 56 61 144 153 104 113 82 New York 1,689 1,916 2,099 2,140 2,259 2,913 2,929 2,149 1,554 1,465 North Carolina 138 149 138 206 247 353 300 211 140 139 North Dakota 14 16 20 22 24 26 21 22 12 10 Ohio 441 725 804 805 877 1,016 763 546 368 336 Oklahoma 74 85 100 119 132 165 122 72 78 45 Oregon 148 101 120 128 145 197 155 141 34 69 Pennsylvania 726 724 389 747 798 935 822 523 573 338 Puerto Rico 25 38 33 67 72 74 63 NA NA NA Rhode Island 59 71 79 82 99 136 125 117 105 89 South Carolina 52 75 103 91 96 115 101 52 91 35 South Dakota 18 17 15 21 22 25 22 14 10 11 Tennessee 77 83 100 125 168 215 190 108 146 132 Texas 122 229 281 344 416 544 496 315 248 203 Utah 41 52 55 61 64 77 64 50 40 41 Vermont 21 40 40 40 48 65 56 47 39 38 Virgin Islands 2 2 2 2 3 4 4 NA NA NA Virginia 136 165 179 169 177 253 199 123 186 101 Washington 175 294 375 401 438 610 585 450 312 295 West Virginia 53 75 109 107 110 126 101 52 49 71 Wisconsin 260 519 444 506 440 425 291 145 7 126 Wyoming 6 13 16 19 19 21 17 7 9 2 United States $10,621 $14,371 $15,236 $16,663 $18,543 $22,798 $20,411 $14,614 $11,180 $9,408 Note: Benefits refers to total cash benefits paid, (see Table TANF 4) but does not include emergency assistance payments. NA denotes data not available.
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 2002 Family Assistance Grants Awarded Under PRWORA[In millions]State FY 1996 Grants for AFDC, EA & JOBS1 FY 2002 State Family Assistance Grant2 Increase fromFY 1996 LevelPercent Increase from FY 1996 Level Alabama $79.0 $124.2 $45.2 57 Alaska 60.7 60.3 -0.4 -1 Arizona 200.6 228.7 28.0 14 Arkansas 54.3 62.9 8.6 16 California 3,545.6 3,739.8 194.3 5 Colorado 138.9 169.4 30.5 22 Connecticut 221.1 280.1 59.1 27 Delaware 30.2 32.3 2.1 7 Dist of Columbia 77.1 117.1 39.9 52 Florida 504.7 622.7 118.0 23 Georgia 301.2 368.0 66.8 22 Hawaii 98.4 103.9 5.5 6 Idaho 31.3 35.0 3.7 12 Illinois 593.8 585.1 -8.8 -1 Indiana 121.4 217.1 95.8 79 Iowa 129.3 138.1 8.8 7 Kansas 86.9 101.9 15.0 17 Kentucky 171.6 190.4 18.7 11 Louisiana 122.4 189.2 66.8 55 Maine 73.2 78.1 4.9 7 Maryland 207.6 229.1 21.5 10 Massachusetts 372.0 459.4 87.3 23 Michigan 581.5 795.2 213.7 37 Minnesota 239.3 270.2 30.8 13 Mississippi 68.6 95.8 27.2 40 Missouri 207.9 227.9 20.0 10 Montana 39.2 46.4 7.2 18 Nebraska 56.2 58.4 2.2 4 Nevada 41.2 49.9 8.7 21 New Hampshire 36.0 39.0 2.9 8 New Jersey 353.4 404.0 50.7 14 New Mexico 129.9 121.9 -8.0 -6 New York 2,332.7 2,442.9 110.2 5 North Carolina 311.9 338.3 26.5 8 North Dakota 24.5 27.7 3.2 13 Ohio 564.5 728.0 163.5 29 Oklahoma 125.1 147.6 22.5 18 Oregon 146.4 166.8 20.4 14 Pennsylvania 780.1 719.5 -60.6 -8 Rhode Island 82.9 99.8 16.9 20 South Carolina 99.4 100.0 0.5 1 South Dakota 19.7 22.0 2.3 12 Tennessee 178.9 213.1 34.2 19 Texas 437.1 583.1 146.0 33 Utah 68.0 88.2 20.2 30 Vermont 42.4 49.7 7.4 17 Virginia 134.6 158.3 23.6 18 Washington 393.2 411.4 18.3 5 West Virginia 95.1 115.7 20.5 22 Wisconsin 241.6 331.0 89.4 37 Wyoming 14.4 19.6 5.2 36 United States $15,067 $17,004 $1,937 13 1 Includes Administration and FAMIS but excludes IV-A child care. AFDC benefits include the Federal share of child support collections to be comparable to the Family Assistance Grant. The 1996 figures have been revised since earlier versions of this report, to reflect upward revisions in states' reports of expenditures on the JOBS program.2 The FY 2002 awards include State Family Assistance Grants, Supplemental Grants for Population Increases, Out of Wedlock Bonus and High Performance Bonus.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 March 2003 Peak[In thousands]State Peak Caseload Oct ‘89 toMar ’03Date Peak OccurredOct ’89 to Mar ’03Sept ’96 Caseload Mar ’03 TANF& SSP CaseloadPercent Decline 1 Sept ’96 to Mar ’03 Percent Decline Peak to Mar ’03 Alabama 52.3 Mar-93 40.7 19.5 52 63 Alaska 13.4 Apr-94 12.3 5.6 55 58 Arizona 72.8 Dec-93 61.8 48.3 22 34 Arkansas 27.1 Mar-92 22.1 10.9 51 60 California 933.1 Mar-95 870.3 496.6 43 47 Colorado 43.7 Dec-93 33.6 14.2 58 67 Connecticut 61.9 Mar-95 57.1 24.7 57 60 Delaware 11.8 Apr-94 10.5 5.7 45 51 Dist. of Columbia 27.5 Apr-94 25.1 16.8 33 39 Florida 259.9 Nov-92 200.3 58.5 71 77 Georgia 142.8 Nov-93 120.9 56.0 54 61 Guam 3.1 Oct-01 2.3 3.1 -36 0 Hawaii 23.4 Jun-97 21.9 13.5 39 42 Idaho 9.5 Mar-95 8.4 1.8 79 81 Illinois 243.1 Aug-94 217.8 37.4 83 85 Indiana 76.1 Sep-93 49.7 56.3 -13 26 Iowa 40.7 Apr-94 31.1 22.7 27 44 Kansas 30.8 Aug-93 23.4 15.4 34 50 Kentucky 84.0 Mar-93 70.4 34.8 51 59 Louisiana 94.7 May-90 66.5 22.2 67 77 Maine 24.4 Aug-93 19.7 10.3 48 58 Maryland 81.8 May-95 68.9 28.9 58 65 Massachusetts 115.7 Aug-93 84.3 49.1 42 58 Michigan 233.6 Apr-91 167.5 76.5 54 67 Minnesota 66.2 Jun-92 57.2 42.1 26 36 Mississippi 61.8 Nov-91 45.2 19.5 57 68 Missouri 93.7 Mar-94 79.1 44.4 44 53 Montana 12.3 Mar-94 9.8 6.4 34 48 Nebraska 17.2 Mar-93 14.4 11.9 17 31 Nevada 16.3 Mar-95 13.2 11.3 14 31 New Hampshire 11.8 Apr-94 8.9 6.2 31 48 New Jersey 132.6 Nov-92 100.8 44.2 56 67 New Mexico 34.9 Nov-94 33.0 16.3 51 53 New York 463.7 Dec-94 412.7 196.2 52 58 North Carolina 134.1 Mar-94 107.5 40.3 62 70 North Dakota 6.6 Apr-93 4.7 3.4 27 48 Ohio 269.8 Mar-92 201.9 84.0 58 69 Oklahoma 51.3 Mar-93 35.3 14.7 58 71 Oregon 43.8 Apr-93 28.5 19.1 33 56 Pennsylvania 212.5 Sep-94 180.1 80.3 55 62 Puerto Rico 61.7 Jan-92 49.5 19.0 62 69 Rhode Island 22.9 Apr-94 20.5 14.7 28 36 South Carolina 54.6 Jan-93 42.9 19.4 55 64 South Dakota 7.4 Apr-93 5.7 2.8 51 62 Tennessee 112.6 Nov-93 96.2 70.4 27 38 Texas 287.5 Dec-93 238.8 140.3 41 51 Utah 18.7 Mar-93 14.0 8.7 38 53 Vermont 10.3 Apr-92 8.7 5.3 39 48 Virgin Islands 1.4 Dec-95 1.3 0.5 66 68 Virginia 76.0 Apr-94 60.5 32.3 47 57 Washington 104.8 Feb-95 96.8 61.2 37 42 West Virginia 41.9 Apr-93 37.6 15.9 58 62 Wisconsin 82.9 Jan-92 49.9 21.0 58 75 Wyoming 7.1 Aug-92 4.3 0.4 91 94 United States 5,098 Mar-94 4,346 2,181 50 57 1Negative values denote percent increase.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, Division of Data Collection and Analysis.
Table TANF 11. Average Monthly AFDC/TANF Recipients by State, Selected Fiscal Years[In thousands]1965 1970 1980 1985 1990 1994 1996 2002 Percent Change 1990-96 1996-02 Alabama 78 123 180 151 130 132 105 44 -19 -59 Alaska 5 8 15 16 20 38 36 18 79 -51 Arizona 40 51 51 72 124 201 172 94 38 -45 Arkansas 30 45 85 64 71 69 58 28 -19 -52 California 528 1,148 1,387 1,619 1,902 2,639 2,626 1,382 38 -47 Colorado 42 66 77 79 102 119 99 31 -4 -68 Connecticut 59 83 139 122 120 166 162 57 35 -65 Delaware 12 20 32 24 21 27 23 13 10 -45 Dist. of Columbia 20 40 85 58 49 74 70 43 44 -39 Florida 106 204 256 271 370 669 561 132 52 -77 Georgia 71 198 221 239 293 393 353 131 20 -63 Guam 1 2 5 6 4 7 8 11 91 37 Hawaii 14 25 60 51 44 62 67 50 52 -25 Idaho 10 16 21 17 17 23 23 2 38 -90 Illinois 262 368 672 735 636 712 655 135 3 -79 Indiana 48 73 157 165 154 216 148 150 -4 1 Iowa 44 64 104 123 98 110 89 55 -9 -38 Kansas 36 53 68 67 77 87 68 36 -11 -48 Kentucky 81 129 167 160 175 208 175 78 -0 -56 Louisiana 104 202 213 230 282 248 236 61 -16 -74 Maine 19 36 60 57 56 64 56 31 -0 -45 Maryland 80 131 212 195 186 222 204 71 10 -65 Massachusetts 94 208 350 235 263 307 237 108 -10 -54 Michigan 162 253 685 691 655 666 527 202 -20 -62 Minnesota 51 76 135 152 171 187 171 113 0 -34 Mississippi 83 115 173 155 179 159 129 40 -28 -69 Missouri 107 140 199 197 211 263 232 130 10 -44 Montana 7 13 19 22 29 35 31 16 8 -47 Nebraska 16 30 35 44 43 45 40 30 -7 -24 Nevada 5 12 12 14 23 38 38 32 66 -15 New Hampshire 4 9 22 14 16 30 24 14 48 -40 New Jersey 104 286 459 367 309 335 288 110 -7 -62 New Mexico 30 51 53 51 57 102 101 47 77 -53 New York 517 1,052 1,100 1,112 981 1,255 1,184 530 21 -55 North Carolina 111 124 198 166 223 333 278 91 24 -67 North Dakota 8 11 13 12 16 16 13 8 -14 -38 Ohio 183 266 513 673 632 685 546 191 -14 -65 Oklahoma 73 95 89 82 112 131 105 37 -6 -65 Oregon 31 75 102 74 89 114 87 41 -2 -53 Pennsylvania 303 426 629 561 521 620 544 211 4 -61 Puerto Rico 202 223 168 173 190 183 155 67 -18 -56 Rhode Island 24 38 52 44 46 63 58 44 27 -25 South Carolina 30 52 153 120 111 140 119 53 7 -55 South Dakota 11 16 20 16 19 19 16 7 -14 -59 Tennessee 76 129 162 155 211 300 260 168 23 -35 Texas 91 214 308 363 611 788 684 360 12 -47 Utah 22 33 37 38 45 50 40 20 -11 -50 Vermont 5 12 23 22 22 28 25 14 15 -44 Virgin Islands 1 2 3 4 3 4 5 2 55 -53 Virginia 46 87 166 154 151 195 162 71 7 -56 Washington 71 109 154 178 228 292 274 156 20 -43 West Virginia 116 93 77 106 111 114 95 42 -14 -56 Wisconsin 45 79 213 288 237 226 170 47 -28 -73 Wyoming 4 5 7 10 14 16 13 1 -9 -93 United States 4,323 7,415 10,597 10,813 11,460 14,226 12,645 5,654 10 -55 Note: Recipients in 2002 include SSP recipients.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, 2003 TANF Report to Congress.
Table TANF 12. AFDC/TANF Recipiency Rates for Total Population by State: Selected Fiscal Years[In percent]1965 1970 1980 1985 1990 1994 1996 2002 Percent Change 1990-96 1996-02 Alabama 2.2 3.6 4.6 3.8 3.2 3.1 2.4 1.0 -24 -60 Alaska 1.8 2.6 3.7 3.0 3.7 6.3 5.9 2.7 63 -54 Arizona 2.6 2.9 1.9 2.3 3.4 4.7 3.7 1.7 11 -54 Arkansas 1.5 2.3 3.7 2.8 3.0 2.8 2.3 1.0 -25 -55 California 2.9 5.7 5.8 6.1 6.3 8.4 8.2 3.9 29 -52 Colorado 2.2 3.0 2.6 2.5 3.1 3.2 2.5 0.7 -19 -72 Connecticut 2.1 2.7 4.5 3.8 3.6 5.0 4.8 1.6 33 -66 Delaware 2.4 3.6 5.4 3.9 3.2 3.8 3.2 1.6 -0 -49 Dist. of Columbia 2.5 5.3 13.3 9.2 8.1 12.6 12.3 7.6 52 -38 Florida 1.8 3.0 2.6 2.4 2.8 4.7 3.8 0.8 33 -79 Georgia 1.6 4.3 4.0 4.0 4.5 5.5 4.7 1.5 4 -68 Hawaii 1.9 3.2 6.2 4.9 3.9 5.2 5.5 4.0 40 -27 Idaho 1.4 2.2 2.2 1.7 1.6 2.0 1.9 0.2 16 -91 Illinois 2.5 3.3 5.9 6.4 5.6 6.0 5.4 1.1 -2 -80 Indiana 1.0 1.4 2.9 3.0 2.8 3.7 2.5 2.4 -9 -3 Iowa 1.6 2.3 3.6 4.3 3.5 3.9 3.1 1.9 -12 -40 Kansas 1.6 2.4 2.9 2.8 3.1 3.4 2.6 1.3 -16 -50 Kentucky 2.5 4.0 4.6 4.3 4.7 5.4 4.5 1.9 -6 -57 Louisiana 2.9 5.6 5.0 5.2 6.7 5.7 5.4 1.4 -20 -75 Maine 1.9 3.6 5.4 4.9 4.5 5.2 4.5 2.4 -2 -47 Maryland 2.2 3.3 5.0 4.4 3.9 4.4 4.0 1.3 3 -67 Massachusetts 1.8 3.7 6.1 4.0 4.4 5.0 3.8 1.7 -12 -56 Michigan 2.0 2.9 7.4 7.6 7.0 6.9 5.4 2.0 -23 -63 Minnesota 1.4 2.0 3.3 3.6 3.9 4.1 3.6 2.2 -7 -38 Mississippi 3.6 5.2 6.9 6.0 6.9 5.9 4.7 1.4 -32 -70 Missouri 2.4 3.0 4.0 3.9 4.1 4.9 4.3 2.3 4 -46 Montana 1.0 1.9 2.4 2.7 3.6 4.0 3.5 1.8 -3 -49 Nebraska 1.1 2.0 2.2 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.4 1.7 -12 -27 Nevada 1.2 2.4 1.5 1.4 1.9 2.5 2.3 1.5 22 -34 New Hampshire 0.7 1.2 2.4 1.4 1.5 2.7 2.1 1.1 40 -45 New Jersey 1.5 4.0 6.2 4.9 4.0 4.2 3.5 1.3 -11 -64 New Mexico 3.0 5.0 4.1 3.5 3.8 6.1 5.8 2.6 53 -56 New York 2.9 5.8 6.3 6.2 5.4 6.8 6.4 2.8 17 -57 North Carolina 2.2 2.4 3.4 2.6 3.4 4.6 3.7 1.1 10 -70 North Dakota 1.2 1.7 2.0 1.8 2.4 2.6 2.1 1.3 -15 -36 Ohio 1.8 2.5 4.8 6.3 5.8 6.1 4.9 1.7 -17 -66 Oklahoma 3.0 3.7 2.9 2.5 3.6 4.0 3.1 1.1 -12 -66 Oregon 1.6 3.6 3.9 2.8 3.1 3.7 2.7 1.2 -14 -57 Pennsylvania 2.6 3.6 5.3 4.8 4.4 5.1 4.4 1.7 2 -62 Rhode Island 2.7 4.0 5.5 4.5 4.6 6.2 5.7 4.1 25 -29 South Carolina 1.2 2.0 4.9 3.6 3.2 3.8 3.1 1.2 -1 -61 South Dakota 1.6 2.4 2.9 2.3 2.7 2.6 2.2 0.9 -19 -60 Tennessee 2.0 3.3 3.5 3.3 4.3 5.7 4.8 2.9 11 -39 Texas 0.9 1.9 2.1 2.2 3.6 4.2 3.5 1.7 -1 -53 Utah 2.2 3.1 2.5 2.3 2.6 2.5 2.0 0.9 -25 -55 Vermont 1.4 2.6 4.4 4.2 3.9 4.8 4.3 2.3 10 -46 Virginia 1.0 1.9 3.1 2.7 2.4 3.0 2.4 1.0 -1 -60 Washington 2.4 3.2 3.7 4.0 4.7 5.4 4.9 2.6 6 -48 West Virginia 6.4 5.3 4.0 5.5 6.2 6.3 5.2 2.3 -16 -56 Wisconsin 1.1 1.8 4.5 6.1 4.8 4.4 3.3 0.9 -33 -74 Wyoming 1.1 1.5 1.4 2.0 3.1 3.4 2.6 0.2 -16 -94 United States 2.1 3.5 4.6 4.5 4.5 5.3 4.6 1.9 3 -58 Note: Recipiency rate refers to the average monthly number of AFDC recipients in each state during the given fiscal yearexpressed 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
[In thousands]
1965 1970 1980 1985 1990 1994 1996 2002 Percent Change 1990-96 1996-02 Alabama 62 96 129 105 93 96 79 34 -14 -57 Alaska 4 6 10 10 13 24 23 12 76 -49 Arizona 31 39 38 50 87 136 118 70 36 -40 Arkansas 23 34 62 45 51 49 42 21 -18 -51 California 391 816 932 1,070 1,294 1,804 1,805 1,043 39 -42 Colorado 33 50 53 53 69 80 68 23 -2 -66 Connecticut 43 62 97 82 81 111 108 42 33 -62 Delaware 9 15 22 16 14 19 16 10 9 -38 Dist. of Columbia 16 31 59 43 34 51 48 32 40 -34 Florida 85 160 184 191 264 463 395 104 49 -74 Georgia 54 150 161 166 206 274 251 101 22 -60 Guam 1 1 4 4 3 5 6 0 87 -100 Hawaii 10 18 40 33 29 41 44 33 51 -26 Idaho 7 11 14 11 11 16 16 2 41 -88 Illinois 202 283 473 493 436 486 456 107 5 -76 Indiana 36 55 111 111 105 145 104 105 -1 1 Iowa 32 46 69 77 64 72 59 36 -7 -39 Kansas 28 41 49 45 52 59 48 25 -8 -47 Kentucky 58 93 118 107 117 137 120 57 3 -52 Louisiana 79 157 156 163 199 180 162 48 -19 -70 Maine 14 26 40 36 35 40 35 21 0 -41 Maryland 61 100 145 126 124 151 140 52 13 -63 Massachusetts 71 153 228 152 168 197 153 77 -9 -50 Michigan 119 190 460 441 427 439 354 149 -17 -58 Minnesota 39 58 91 95 110 124 116 78 5 -32 Mississippi 66 93 128 112 129 116 96 30 -25 -68 Missouri 82 106 135 129 139 176 162 92 16 -43 Montana 6 10 13 15 19 23 21 11 10 -47 Nebraska 12 23 25 29 29 31 28 21 -5 -24 Nevada 4 9 8 9 16 27 27 23 71 -16 New Hampshire 3 7 15 9 11 19 16 10 48 -37 New Jersey 79 209 318 247 213 228 195 82 -8 -58 New Mexico 23 39 35 34 37 66 65 34 75 -48 New York 380 759 759 729 658 813 771 371 17 -52 North Carolina 83 94 141 113 152 223 191 70 26 -63 North Dakota 6 8 9 8 10 11 9 6 -12 -34 Ohio 136 198 348 424 414 455 382 142 -8 -63 Oklahoma 55 71 65 57 77 90 74 28 -4 -62 Oregon 23 52 65 49 60 76 60 30 0 -50 Pennsylvania 217 307 432 369 345 417 368 155 7 -58 Puerto Rico 161 166 118 116 130 124 105 47 -19 -55 Rhode Island 18 27 36 28 30 41 39 30 29 -24 South Carolina 24 40 109 84 80 102 89 39 12 -57 South Dakota 8 12 15 11 13 14 12 5 -11 -55 Tennessee 58 99 115 105 144 203 181 121 26 -33 Texas 68 162 225 256 428 549 484 269 13 -44 Utah 16 23 24 24 31 33 27 14 -11 -47 Vermont 4 8 14 14 14 17 16 9 15 -42 Virgin Islands 1 2 2 3 2 3 4 2 52 -52 Virginia 35 66 116 103 104 134 114 51 10 -55 Washington 50 76 97 113 148 187 177 108 20 -39 West Virginia 80 65 58 64 68 72 62 28 -10 -54 Wisconsin 34 60 142 181 158 153 123 38 -22 -69 Wyoming 3 4 5 7 9 11 9 1 -4 -92 United States 3,242 5,483 7,320 7,165 7,755 9,611 8,672 4,149 12 -52 Note: From FY 2000 onward, TANF child recipients include SSP child recipients.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, 2003 TANF Report to Congress.
Table TANF 14. AFDC/TANF Recipiency Rates for Children by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1965 – 2002[In percent]1965 1970 1980 1985 1990 1994 1996 2002 Percent Change 1990-96 1996-02 Alabama 4.6 7.7 11.1 9.7 8.8 8.9 7.3 3.3 -17 -55 Alaska 3.1 5.0 8.0 5.9 7.4 12.8 12.4 6.2 67 -50 Arizona 4.8 6.0 4.8 5.9 8.6 12.1 9.7 4.7 12 -51 Arkansas 3.1 5.2 9.3 7.1 8.2 7.7 6.4 3.0 -23 -53 California 6.0 12.3 14.6 15.6 16.2 20.8 20.3 11.0 25 -46 Colorado 4.4 6.4 6.5 6.1 7.8 8.3 6.8 2.0 -13 -70 Connecticut 4.4 6.1 11.8 10.8 10.8 14.2 13.7 4.8 27 -65 Delaware 4.7 7.5 13.4 10.2 8.7 10.5 8.9 5.1 2 -43 Dist. of Columbia 6.0 13.8 40.9 33.9 30.7 44.5 44.1 28.1 44 -36 Florida 4.3 7.6 7.8 7.6 8.8 14.1 11.6 2.6 31 -77 Georgia 3.2 9.1 9.8 10.1 11.8 14.6 12.8 4.4 9 -66 Hawaii 3.6 6.5 14.5 11.6 10.5 13.6 14.5 11.0 39 -24 Idaho 2.7 4.2 4.7 3.6 3.6 4.6 4.6 0.5 27 -88 Illinois 5.3 7.5 14.6 16.1 14.8 15.7 14.4 3.3 -3 -77 Indiana 2.0 3.0 6.9 7.5 7.3 9.8 7.0 6.5 -5 -6 Iowa 3.2 4.7 8.4 10.2 8.8 9.9 8.2 5.1 -8 -37 Kansas 3.5 5.4 7.5 6.9 7.9 8.5 7.0 3.6 -12 -48 Kentucky 4.9 8.3 10.9 10.5 12.4 14.1 12.4 6.1 -0 -51 Louisiana 5.5 11.3 11.8 12.2 16.5 14.6 13.3 4.0 -20 -70 Maine 3.9 7.7 12.5 11.7 11.5 13.1 11.8 7.4 3 -37 Maryland 4.6 7.3 12.4 11.4 10.6 12.0 11.1 3.8 5 -66 Massachusetts 3.8 8.1 15.3 11.2 12.4 13.9 10.6 5.2 -15 -51 Michigan 3.7 5.8 16.7 17.7 17.4 17.4 13.9 5.8 -20 -59 Minnesota 2.9 4.2 7.7 8.5 9.4 10.1 9.3 6.1 -0 -35 Mississippi 7.0 11.1 15.7 14.0 17.6 15.3 12.7 4.0 -28 -68 Missouri 5.2 6.9 9.9 9.8 10.6 12.9 11.6 6.4 10 -45 Montana 2.0 4.0 5.7 6.1 8.4 9.7 8.9 5.0 6 -44 Nebraska 2.3 4.4 5.5 6.8 6.8 7.0 6.1 4.7 -10 -23 Nevada 2.5 5.2 3.8 3.9 5.0 7.1 6.5 3.9 29 -40 New Hampshire 1.4 2.6 5.8 3.7 3.9 6.6 5.4 3.2 40 -41 New Jersey 3.4 8.8 16.0 13.5 11.7 11.7 9.9 3.8 -16 -61 New Mexico 5.2 9.5 8.5 7.8 8.3 13.5 13.1 6.7 59 -49 New York 6.3 13.0 16.2 16.7 15.4 18.0 17.0 8.0 11 -53 North Carolina 4.4 5.3 8.5 7.1 9.3 12.6 10.4 3.4 12 -68 North Dakota 2.3 3.6 4.7 4.3 6.0 6.3 5.4 4.0 -10 -25 Ohio 3.6 5.3 11.2 14.7 14.9 16.0 13.4 4.9 -10 -63 Oklahoma 6.4 8.5 7.6 6.3 9.1 10.4 8.5 3.1 -7 -63 Oregon 3.3 7.4 9.0 6.9 8.1 9.7 7.4 3.5 -8 -53 Pennsylvania 5.5 8.0 13.8 12.9 12.3 14.4 12.8 5.4 4 -58 Rhode Island 5.9 9.1 14.7 12.6 13.4 17.5 16.5 12.5 23 -24 South Carolina 2.3 4.2 11.6 9.1 8.7 10.8 9.4 3.8 8 -59 South Dakota 3.1 5.0 7.1 5.7 6.7 6.6 5.9 2.8 -12 -53 Tennessee 4.2 7.5 8.9 8.6 11.8 15.7 13.7 8.7 16 -37 Texas 1.7 4.1 5.2 5.4 8.7 10.4 8.8 4.4 1 -51 Utah 3.7 5.4 4.4 4.0 4.9 4.9 4.0 2.0 -19 -49 Vermont 2.7 5.4 9.9 9.9 9.5 11.7 10.8 6.5 13 -40 Virginia 2.2 4.1 7.9 7.1 6.8 8.4 7.0 2.9 3 -59 Washington 4.7 6.5 8.5 9.7 11.3 13.3 12.4 7.1 9 -43 West Virginia 12.2 11.2 10.4 12.6 15.7 16.8 14.6 7.2 -7 -51 Wisconsin 2.2 3.8 10.5 14.2 12.1 11.4 9.1 2.8 -25 -69 Wyoming 2.1 3.2 3.4 4.1 7.0 8.1 6.8 0.6 -2 -92 United States 4.4 7.6 11.3 11.2 11.9 14.0 12.4 5.6 4 -55 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/).
Table TANF 15. TANF and Separate State Program (SSP) Families and Recipients, 2002(In thousands)Families All Recipients Child Recipients TANF SSP Total TANF SSP Total TANF SSP Total Alabama 18.0 0.2 18.2 42.8 0.9 43.6 34.0 0.5 34.5 Alaska 6.0 — 6.0 17.6 — 17.6 11.9 — 11.9 Arizona 40.1 — 40.1 94.3 — 94.3 70.3 — 70.3 Arkansas 12.0 — 12.0 27.7 — 27.7 20.6 — 20.6 California 462.3 50.6 512.9 1,160.9 220.6 1,381.5 911.5 131.0 1,042.5 Colorado 12.1 — 12.1 31.5 — 31.5 23.3 — 23.3 Connecticut 23.7 0.9 24.7 53.2 3.4 56.6 37.8 3.7 41.5 Delaware 5.5 0.1 5.6 12.4 0.5 12.9 9.4 0.3 9.7 Dist. of 16.2 0.3 16.5 42.2 0.9 43.0 31.4 0.6 32.0 Florida 59.0 2.1 61.1 123.2 8.4 131.7 99.5 4.3 103.8 Georgia 53.7 0.6 54.2 128.2 2.3 130.5 99.5 1.2 100.8 Guam 3.1 — 3.1 10.8 — 10.8 — — 0.0 Hawaii 11.1 4.7 15.9 30.5 19.4 49.9 21.3 11.2 32.5 Idaho 1.4 — 1.4 2.4 — 2.4 2.0 — 2.0 Illinois 48.1 0.7 48.8 133.7 1.3 135.0 106.9 0.5 107.3 Indiana 49.3 2.5 51.8 138.9 11.2 150.1 99.1 6.4 105.4 Iowa 20.2 1.5 21.7 53.4 1.5 55.0 35.9 — 35.9 Kansas 14.0 — 14.0 35.8 — 35.8 25.3 — 25.3 Kentucky 34.9 — 34.9 77.7 — 77.7 57.4 — 57.4 Louisiana 23.7 — 23.7 60.7 — 60.7 48.5 — 48.5 Maine 9.7 1.7 11.4 26.0 4.5 30.5 17.8 3.0 20.8 Maryland 27.1 2.1 29.3 64.9 6.5 71.4 48.1 4.2 52.3 Massachusetts 47.3 0.1 47.4 108.1 0.3 108.4 76.5 0.2 76.7 Michigan 74.3 — 74.3 201.7 — 201.7 148.8 — 148.8 Minnesota 35.9 3.9 39.7 94.6 18.0 112.6 68.1 10.3 78.4 Mississippi 17.6 — 17.6 40.4 — 40.4 30.5 — 30.5 Missouri 45.0 4.1 49.1 118.8 11.0 129.7 84.4 8.1 92.5 Montana 5.8 — 5.8 16.4 — 16.4 10.8 — 10.8 Nebraska 10.3 1.0 11.3 25.5 4.4 29.9 18.5 2.4 20.9 Nevada 11.0 1.0 12.0 27.6 4.4 32.1 20.5 2.5 23.0 New Hampshire 6.0 — 6.0 14.5 — 14.5 9.9 — 9.9 New Jersey 42.0 1.7 43.7 103.1 7.2 110.3 77.6 4.0 81.6 New Mexico 17.0 — 17.0 47.3 — 47.3 33.7 — 33.7 New York 170.4 33.9 204.4 412.5 117.0 529.5 292.8 77.9 370.7 North Carolina 42.9 0.0 42.9 91.1 0.1 91.2 70.2 0.1 70.3 North Dakota 3.2 — 3.2 8.3 — 8.3 6.0 — 6.0 Ohio 84.0 — 84.0 191.0 — 191.0 142.0 — 142.0 Oklahoma 14.8 — 14.8 36.9 — 36.9 28.3 — 28.3 Oregon 17.9 — 17.9 40.9 — 40.9 30.2 — 30.2 Pennsylvania 80.6 — 80.6 210.5 — 210.5 155.0 — 155.0 Puerto Rico 23.4 — 23.4 67.4 — 67.4 47.4 — 47.4 Rhode Island 14.4 1.2 15.6 39.0 4.6 43.5 27.1 2.6 29.7 South Carolina 21.5 — 21.5 53.3 — 53.3 38.5 — 38.5 South Dakota 2.9 — 2.9 6.6 — 6.6 5.4 — 5.4 Tennessee 63.0 1.0 64.0 164.6 3.7 168.3 118.8 2.2 121.0 Texas 129.9 6.6 136.5 331.4 28.5 359.9 253.1 15.5 268.6 Utah 7.8 0.1 7.8 19.9 0.2 20.1 14.3 0.1 14.4 Vermont 5.1 0.3 5.4 13.4 0.8 14.2 8.6 0.5 9.1 Virgin Islands 0.6 — 0.6 2.3 — 2.3 1.7 — 1.7 Virginia 30.1 0.9 30.9 67.3 3.5 70.8 49.1 1.9 50.9 Washington 54.2 4.2 58.4 137.8 18.4 156.1 95.7 11.8 107.6 West Virginia 15.9 — 15.9 41.6 — 41.6 28.2 — 28.2 Wisconsin 19.0 0.4 19.4 45.2 1.5 46.8 36.7 1.0 37.7 Wyoming 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.8 0.7 0.0 0.7 U.S. Total 2,065 128 2,194 5,149 505 5,654 3,841 308 4,149 Note: Some states provide cash and other forms of assistance to specific categories of families (e.g., two-parent families) under Separate State Programs (SSPs) funded out of Maintenance of Effort (MOE) dollars rather than federal TANF funds.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, (available online at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/)
Table TANF 16. Recipients with Earnings in Current and Following Quarters, Fiscal Year 2001
State Adult TANF Recipients (Thousands) Percentage with Earnings Percentage without Earnings Total With Earnings inFollowing Quarter Total With Earnings inFollowing Quarter Alabama 10.7 39 74 61 22 Alaska 6.7 36 59 64 27 Arizona 24.5 40 73 60 20 Arkansas 8.8 45 76 55 27 California 287.9 43 83 57 14 Colorado 8.4 38 69 62 23 Connecticut 19.9 46 78 54 21 Delaware 3.6 46 74 54 24 Dist. of Columbia 12.6 37 73 63 17 Florida 36.0 42 79 58 23 Georgia 31.3 33 62 67 19 Hawaii 12.6 43 85 57 13 Idaho 0.6 47 79 53 30 Illinois 46.4 44 81 56 19 Indiana 37.5 50 80 50 22 21.6 51 78 49 24 Kansas 12.2 52 77 48 27 Kentucky 25.7 26 69 74 25 Louisiana 17.1 36 63 64 23 Maine 9.8 46 79 54 20 Maryland 20.8 37 71 63 20 Massachusetts 34.6 28 68 72 16 Michigan 61.2 36 68 64 19 Minnesota 41.0 48 77 52 21 Mississippi 10.2 36 70 64 21 Missouri 40.0 51 79 49 25 Montana 6.0 40 71 60 23 Nebraska 8.3 53 78 47 26 Nevada 6.2 48 76 52 21 New Hampshire 5.1 40 75 60 20 New Jersey 34.0 32 76 68 19 New Mexico 20.8 44 76 56 21 New York NA NA NA NA NA North Carolina 28.0 43 72 57 25 North Dakota 2.8 46 80 54 21 Ohio 65.5 44 76 56 22 Oklahoma 9.9 48 75 52 26 Oregon 11.7 30 71 70 16 Pennsylvania 69.7 29 71 71 19 Rhode Island 14.2 39 79 61 16 South Carolina 14.5 47 74 53 24 South Dakota 1.6 30 74 70 19 Tennessee 48.9 49 77 51 21 Texas 109.0 41 77 59 20 Utah 6.6 41 75 59 21 Vermont 6.2 42 77 58 19 Virginia 20.7 47 79 53 24 Washington 54.2 41 75 59 20 West Virginia 15.3 35 74 65 17 Wisconsin 8.3 39 72 61 23 Wyoming 0.3 39 65 61 27 All Reporting States 1,410 41 77 59 19 Note: “TANF adult recipients" is unduplicated roster of adults who received TANF benefits at any time during a quarter, averaged over four quarters in fiscal year. Data are not available for New York, which did not participate in the High Performance Bonus. Note also that TANF receipt and the presence of earnings may occur at different months within the quarter.
Source: Unpublished ACF calculations of High Performance Bonus data.
Table TANF 17. Patterns of TANF Receipt, Fiscal Year 2001
State Adult TANFRecipients in Qtr(t)(Thousands)Percentage of Adult TANF Recipients Also Receiving Benefits in Following Quarters Qtr(t+1) Qtr(t+2) Qtr(t+3) Qtr(t+4) Alabama 10.7 75 55 43 37 Alaska 6.7 76 62 54 48 Arizona 24.5 74 55 47 43 Arkansas 8.8 71 50 39 32 California 287.9 83 72 64 58 Colorado 8.4 72 53 43 37 Connecticut 19.9 82 67 55 46 Delaware 3.6 76 58 48 42 Dist. of Columbia 12.6 89 79 70 63 Florida 36.0 56 37 29 25 Georgia 31.3 75 57 47 41 Hawaii 12.6 84 71 62 54 Idaho 0.6 46 19 11 8 Illinois 46.4 80 65 53 43 Indiana 37.5 85 74 67 62 21.6 75 58 50 43 Kansas 12.2 72 53 44 39 Kentucky 25.7 78 61 50 42 Louisiana 17.1 72 53 41 33 Maine 9.8 78 63 55 49 Maryland 20.8 81 66 56 48 Massachusetts 34.6 79 66 58 54 Michigan 61.2 76 62 54 48 Minnesota 41.0 76 60 50 43 Mississippi 10.2 74 56 46 40 Missouri 40.0 82 69 60 54 Montana 6.0 74 59 52 48 Nebraska 8.3 72 57 50 46 Nevada 6.2 70 49 36 30 New Hampshire 5.1 77 62 52 46 New Jersey 34.0 80 66 56 50 New Mexico 20.8 69 51 43 37 New York NA NA NA NA NA North Carolina 28.0 70 51 40 33 North Dakota 2.8 76 61 54 49 Ohio 65.5 70 51 41 35 Oklahoma 9.9 70 50 40 35 Oregon 11.7 75 58 48 43 Pennsylvania 69.7 79 65 56 51 Rhode Island 14.2 87 77 70 65 South Carolina 14.5 73 52 42 35 South Dakota 1.6 67 48 40 36 Tennessee 48.9 84 72 65 60 Texas 109.0 76 58 47 40 Utah 6.6 71 51 40 33 Vermont 6.2 79 64 55 49 Virginia 20.7 77 61 51 44 Washington 54.2 75 59 50 44 West Virginia 15.3 78 61 52 45 Wisconsin 8.3 73 55 46 41 Wyoming 0.3 51 23 14 11 All Reporting States 1,410 78 63 54 47 Note: “Adult TANF Recipients in Qtr(t)" is unduplicated roster of adults who received TANF benefits at any time during a quarter, averaged over four quarters in fiscal year. Data are not available for New York, which did not participate in the High Performance Bonus. This table examines length of receipt for all recipients receiving TANF in the selected quarter, in contrast to Table IND 8 in Chapter II, which looked at new entrants to AFDC/TANF. Another difference is that in this table, a recipient is counted as a recipient each quarter in which there is at least one month of receipt, even if the recipient has a gap of non-receipt for several months.Source: Unpublished ACF calculations of High Performance Bonus data.1 States are allowed to use TANF funds on a variety of services, including employment and training services, domestic violence services, child care, transportation, and other support services. Families receiving such services, however, generally should not be counted as recipients of TANF “assistance.” Under the final regulations for TANF, “assistance” primarily includes payments directed at ongoing basic needs. It includes payments when individuals are participating in community service and work experience (or other work activities) as a condition of receiving payments (e.g., workfare). In addition 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: nonrecurrent, 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.
2 These values are slightly smaller than the usually cited figures on caseload decline, because these figures include recipients in SSPs, who are usually omitted from TANF caseload statistics.
-
-
Food Stamp Program
-
The Food Stamp Program (FSP), administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service, is the largest food assistance program in the country, reaching more poor individuals over the course of a year than any other public assistance program. Unlike many other public assistance programs, FSP has few categorical requirements for eligibility, such as the presence of children, elderly, or disabled individuals in a household. As a result, the program offers assistance to a large and diverse population of needy persons, many of whom are not eligible for other forms of assistance.
The Food Stamp Program was designed primarily to 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, was funded under a federal block grant of over $1.3 billion in 2002. Unless noted otherwise, the food stamp caseload and expenditure data in this Appendix exclude costs for the Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) in Puerto Rico. (Prior editions of this Appendix included NAP, but caseload and expenditure data in this Appendix are now limited to the Food Stamp Program, to be consistent with FSP data published by the USDA.)
The Food Stamp Program offers assistance to nearly all financially needy households. To be eligible for food stamps, a household must meet eligibility criteria for gross and net income, asset holdings, work requirements, and citizenship or immigration status. The FSP benefit unit is the household. Generally, individuals living together constitute a household if they customarily purchase and prepare meals together. The income, expenses and assets of the household members are combined to determine program eligibility and benefit allotment.
Monthly income is the most important determinant of household eligibility. Except for households composed entirely of TANF, SSI, or General Assistance recipients, gross income cannot exceed 130 percent of poverty. After certain amounts are deducted for living expenses, working expenses, dependent care expenses, excess shelter expenses, child support payment, and - for elderly/disabled households - medical expenses, net income cannot exceed 100 percent of poverty. Households also must not have more than $2,000 in cash, savings, stocks and bonds, and certain vehicles (households with an elderly or disabled member can have up to $3,000 in countable assets).
All nonexempt adult applicants for food stamps must register for work. To maintain eligibility, they must accept a suitable job, if offered one, and fulfill any work, job search, or training requirements established by the FSP office. Nondisabled adults living in households with children can receive benefits for three months only, unless they work or participate in work-related activities. Participation is restricted for certain groups, including students, strikers, and people who are institutionalized. Legal immigrants who are disabled, under age 18, or have five years of legal US residency are eligible; all other noncitizens are not.
Food stamp benefits are a function of a household’s size, its net monthly income, its assets, and maximum monthly benefit levels. Allotments are not taxable and food stamp purchases may not be charged sales taxes. Receipt of food stamps does not affect eligibility for or benefits provided by other welfare programs, although some programs use food stamp participation as a “trigger” for eligibility and others take into account the general availability of food stamps in deciding what level of benefits to provide.
Recent Legislative and Regulatory Changes
Title IV and subtitle A of title VIII of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) contain major and extensive revisions to the Food Stamp Program, including strong work requirements on able-bodied adults without dependent children, restricted eligibility of legal immigrants, and a reduction in maximum benefits. These three provisions, and subsequent amendments, are discussed below; their impact on program participation and expenditures begins to appear in food stamp administrative data for 1997, with the fuller impact shown in data for 1998 and beyond.
First, a work requirement was added for able-bodied adult food stamp recipients without dependents (ABAWDs). Unless exempt, ABAWDs between the ages of 18 and 59 are not eligible for benefits for more than 3 months in every 36-month period unless they are (1) working at least 20 hours a week; (2) participating in and complying with a work program for at least 20 hours a week; or (3) participating in and complying with a workfare program. Under the original legislation, the Department of Agriculture was authorized to waive application of the work requirement to any group of individuals at the request of the state agency, if a determination 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 and were over 65 years of age on that date or were under age 18 or disabled.
Finally, the 1996 legislation restrained growth in future program expenditures by making changes in the benefit structure for eligible participants, including a reduction in the maximum food stamp allotment. Other provisions of the 1996 act disqualified from eligibility those convicted of drug-related felonies and gave states the option to disqualify individuals, both custodial and 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.
The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 - also known as the Farm Bill - reauthorized the Food Stamp Program through fiscal year 2007. This law brought a number of significant changes to the program, including some which supercede earlier changes made through PRWORA and subsequent FSP legislation and regulations. Specifically, the Farm Bill restores food stamp eligibility to legal immigrants who have lived in the country five years and to legal immigrants receiving disability benefits, regardless of entry date. Children of legal immigrants are also eligible for food stamps regardless of entry date. Effective in fiscal year 2004, the requirement that income and resources of an immigrant’s sponsor be counted in determining the eligibility and benefit amounts for immigrant children is eliminated. Each provision became effective at different times, but all restorations were in effect by October 1, 2003.
The Farm Bill also increased the asset limit from $2,000 to $3,000 for households with a disabled member, making it consistent with the limit for households with elderly, and replaced the fixed standard deduction with a deduction that varies according to household size and is indexed to cost-of-living increases, in recognition of the higher expenses larger households incur. For households in the 48 contiguous states and DC, Alaska, Hawaii and the Virgin Islands, the deduction is set at 8.31 percent of the applicable net income limit based on household size. (Households in Guam will receive a slightly higher deduction.) No household receives an amount less than the previous fixed standard deduction or more than the standard deduction for a household of six.
Other Farm Bill changes include the authorization of $5 million per year for education and outreach grants to help inform the low-income public of their eligibility for food stamps, and increased flexibility for states in spending Employment and Training program funds to promote work. States also are now allowed to extend from three months to up to five months the period of time households may receive transitional food stamp benefits when they lose TANF cash assistance. Benefits are equal to the amount the household received prior to termination of TANF with adjustments in income for the loss of TANF. This change helps individuals moving off cash assistance to make the transition from welfare to work.
The Farm Bill also implemented a number of administrative reforms and program simplifications, including:
- changing the quality control system so that only those states with persistently high error rates will face liabilities;
- awarding bonuses to states that improve the quality and accuracy of their service;
- allowing states to exclude certain types of income and resources not counted under TANF or Medicaid, such as educational assistance, when determining food stamp eligibility;
- allowing states to deem child support payments as income exclusions rather than deductions as an incentive for parents to pay child support;
- allowing states to simplify the standard utility allowance (SUA) if the state elects to use the SUA rather than actual utility costs for all households, thus reducing administrative burden, costs and errors;
- permitting states to use a standard deduction from income of $143 per month for homeless households with some shelter expenses;
- allowing states to extend simplified reporting procedures to all households, not just households with earnings;
- eliminating the requirement that the Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system be cost-neutral to the federal government to help support the EBT conversion process;
- allowing USDA to use alternative methods for issuing food stamp benefits during times of disaster when use of EBT is impractical;
- requiring food stamp applications be made available through the Internet; and
- combining Puerto Rico and American Samoa’s block grants into one grant and indexing both with inflation.
Food Stamp Program Data
The following six tables and accompanying figure provide information about the Food Stamp Program:
- 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 demogaphic characteristics of the food stamp caseload; and
- Tables FSP 4-6 present some state-by-state trend data for the FSP through fiscal year 2002.
Food Stamp Caseload Trends (Table FSP 1). Average monthly food stamp participation was 19.1 million persons in fiscal year 2002, excluding the participants in Puerto Rico’s block grant. This represents a significant increase over the fiscal year 2000 record-low average of 17.1 million participants. It is, however, far below the peak of 27.5 million recipients in fiscal year 1994. Both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the population, food stamp recipiency in 2000 was lower than at any point in the previous twenty years. See also Table IND 3b and Table IND 4b in Chapter II for further data trends in food stamp caseload, specifically, food stamp recipiency and participation rates.
Considerable research has demonstrated that the Food Stamp Program is responsive to economic changes, with participation increasing in times of economic downturns and decreasing in times of economic growth (see Figure FSP 1). Economic conditions alone did not explain the caseload growth in the late 1980s and early 1990s, however. Studies suggest that a variety of factors contributed to this caseload growth, including a weak economy and higher rates of unemployment, expansions in Medicaid eligibility, the legalization of 3 million undocumented immigrants, and longer participation spells (McConnell, 1991; Gleason, 1998).
The decline in participation from 1994 to 2000 was caused by several factors, according to studies of this period. Part of the decline is associated with the strong economy in the second half of the 1990s. However, participation fell more sharply than expected during this period of sustained economic growth. Some of the decline reflected restrictions on the eligibility of noncitizens and time limits for unemployed nondisabled childless adults. The three groups where participation fell most rapidly included noncitizens and their US-born children, unemployed nondisabled childless adults, and persons receiving cash welfare benefits. As people left the welfare rolls, many also stopped participating in food stamps, even while remaining eligible (Genser, 1999; Wilde et al., 2000; Gleason et al., 2001; Kornfeld, 2002).
The increase in FSP participation from 2000 to 2002 occurred during a period when unemployment increased from four percent to six percent, states took advantage of opportunities to expand categorical eligibility to those receiving in-kind TANF benefits and liberalize the treatment of vehicles, and the Food and Nutrition Service was encouraging states to conduct outreach efforts.
Food Stamp Expenditures. Total program costs, shown in Table FSP 2, were considerably higher in 2002 than 2001, reflecting the increase in participation during that period as well as an increase in average benefits. Total federal program costs were $20.7 billion in 2002; the comparable 2001 cost was $18.1 billion (after adjusting for inflation). Average monthly benefits per person, also shown in Table FSP 2, were $79.60 per person in fiscal year 2002, up from $74.80 in 2001. This increase in benefits reverses a six-year decline in average monthly benefits adjusted to 2002 dollars.
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 28 percent in 2002. At the same time, the proportion of households with income from AFDC/TANF has declined, from 43 percent in 1990 to 21 percent in 2002, 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 2002. The vast majority (88 percent) of households have incomes below the federal poverty guidelines.
Figure FSP 1. Persons Receiving Food Stamps: 1962 – 2002
Note: Shaded areas are periods of recession as defined by the National Bureau of Economic Research.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, National Data Bank.Table FSP 1. Trends in Food Stamp Caseloads, Selected Years: 1962 – 2002
Fiscal Year Food Stamp Participants Participants as a Percent of: Child Participants as a Percent of: Including Territories1
(in thousands)Excluding Territories
(in thousands)Children Excld. Terr.
(in thousands)Total Population2 All Poor Persons2 Pre-transfer Poverty Population3 Total Child Population2 Children in Poverty2 1962 6,554 6,554 NA 3.5 17.0 NA NA NA 1965 5,167 5,167 NA 2.7 15.6 NA NA NA 1970 8,317 8,317 NA 4.1 32.7 NA NA NA 1971 13,010 13,010 NA 6.3 50.9 NA NA NA 1972 14,111 14,111 NA 6.7 57.7 NA NA NA 1973 14,607 14,607 NA 6.9 63.6 NA NA NA 1974 14,288 14,288 NA 6.7 61.1 NA NA NA 1975 4 17,152 16,320 NA 7.6 63.1 NA NA NA 1976 18,628 17,033 9,126 7.8 68.2 NA 13.8 88.8 1977 17,161 15,604 NA 7.1 63.1 NA NA NA 1978 16,077 14,405 NA 6.5 58.8 NA NA NA 1979 5 17,758 15,942 NA 7.1 61.1 57.1 NA NA 1980 21,173 19,253 9,876 8.5 65.8 60.7 15.5 85.6 1981 22,518 20,655 9,803 9.0 64.6 60.8 15.5 78.4 1982 21,808 20,392 9,591 8.8 59.3 56.3 15.3 70.3 1983 21,727 20,095 10,910 8.6 61.4 58.5 17.4 78.4 1984 20,854 20,796 10,492 8.8 61.7 58.5 16.8 78.2 1985 19,899 19,847 9,906 8.3 60.0 56.6 15.7 75.3 1986 19,429 19,381 9,844 8.1 59.9 56.2 15.7 76.5 1987 19,113 19,072 9,771 7.9 59.2 55.6 15.5 76.1 1988 18,645 18,613 9,351 7.6 58.6 55.2 14.8 75.1 1989 18,806 18,778 9,429 7.6 59.6 55.6 14.9 74.9 1990 20,049 20,020 10,127 8.0 59.6 55.7 15.8 75.4 1991 22,625 22,599 11,952 8.9 63.3 59.3 18.3 83.3 1992 25,406 25,370 13,349 9.9 66.7 64.0 20.1 87.3 1993 26,982 26,952 14,196 10.4 68.6 63.8 21.0 90.3 1994 27,468 27,433 14,391 10.4 72.1 66.8 21.0 94.1 1995 26,619 26,579 13,860 10.0 73.0 67.6 20.0 94.5 1996 25,542 25,494 13,189 9.5 69.8 64.6 18.8 91.2 1997 22,858 22,820 11,847 8.4 64.1 59.9 16.7 83.9 1998 19,788 19,745 10,524 7.2 57.3 53.8 14.7 78.1 1999 18,183 18,146 9,332 6.5 56.3 52.5 13.0 76.0 2000 17,139 17,101 8,743 6.1 55.0 51.6 12.1 75.5 2001 17,313 17,277 8,819 6.1 52.6 49.2 12.1 75.2 2002 19,094 19,057 9,688 6.6 55.0 52.1 13.3 79.8 1 Total participants includes all participating states, the District of Columbia, and the territories (including Puerto Rico from 1975 to 1982 —a separate Nutrition Assistance Grant for Puerto Rico was begun in July 1982). From 1962 to 1983 the number of participants includes the Family Food Assistance Program (FFAP) that was largely replaced by the FSP in 1975. The FFAP participants (as of December) for the seven years shown during the period from 1962 to 1974 were respectively: 6,411; 4,742; 3,977; 3,642; 3,002; 2,441; and 1,406 (all in thousands). From 1975 to 1983 the number of FFAP participants averaged only 88 thousand.
2 Includes all participating states and the District of Columbia only — the territories are excluded from both numerator and denominator. Population numbers used as denominators are the resident population — see Current Population Reports, Series P25-1106. For the persons living in poverty used as denominators, see Current Population Reports, Series P60-210.
3 The 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.
4 The first fiscal year in which food stamps were available nationwide.
5 The fiscal year in which the food stamp purchase requirement was eliminated, on a phased- in basis.
Source: 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: 2002,” Current Population Reports, Series P60-222 and earlier years.Table FSP 2. Trends in Food Stamp Expenditures, Selected Years: 1975 – 2002
Fiscal Year Total Federal Cost
(Benefits + Administration)Benefitsh (Federal)
[In millions]Administration1 Total Program Cost
[In millions]Average Monthly Benefit per Person Current Dollars
[In millions]2002 Dollars2
[In millions]Federal
[In millions]State & Local
[In millions]Current Dollars 2002 Dollars2 1975 $4,619 $15,245 $4,386 $233 $175 $4,794 $21.30 $70.30 1976 5,685 17,567 5,326 359 270 5,955 23.90 73.80 1977 5,461 15,707 5,067 394 295 5,756 24.80 71.30 1978 5,520 14,894 5,139 381 285 5,805 26.60 71.80 19793 6,940 17,219 6,480 460 388 7,328 30.50 75.70 1980 9,206 20,537 8,721 486 375 9,581 34.50 77.00 1981 11,225 22,769 10,630 595 504 11,729 39.50 80.10 1982 10,837 20,537 10,208 628 557 11,394 39.20 74.30 1983 11,847 21,474 11,152 695 612 12,459 43.00 77.90 19844 11,579 20,131 10,696 8835 805 12,384 42.70 74.20 1985 11,703 19,641 10,744 960 871 12,574 45.00 75.50 1986 11,638 19,049 10,605 1,033 935 12,573 45.50 74.50 1987 11,604 18,470 10,500 1,104 996 12,600 45.90 73.10 1988 12,316 18,832 11,149 1,168 1,080 13,396 49.80 76.10 1989 12,932 18,871 11,701 1,232 1,101 14,033 51.80 75.60 1990 15,491 21,534 14,187 1,305 1,174 16,665 58.90 81.90 1991 18,769 24,836 17,339 1,430 1,247 20,016 63.90 84.60 1992 22,462 28,848 20,906 1,557 1,375 23,837 68.60 88.10 1993 23,653 29,488 22,006 1,647 1,572 25,225 68.00 84.80 1994 24,490 29,744 22,746 1,744 1,643 26,133 69.00 83.80 1995 24,620 29,091 22,764 1,856 1,748 26,368 71.30 84.30 1996 24,327 27,970 22,441 1,886 1,842 26,169 73.20 84.20 1997 21,487 24,055 19,550 1,937 1,904 23,391 71.30 79.80 1998 18,893 20,812 16,889 2,004 1,988 20,881 71.10 78.30 1999 17,698 19,131 15,755 1,943 1,874 19,572 72.20 78.00 2000 17,029 17,837 14,952 2,077 2,000 19,029 72.60 76.00 2001 17,800 18,063 15,547 2,253 2,170 19,970 74.80 75.90 2002 20,686 20,686 18,257 2,429 2,340 23,026 79.60 79.60 1 Amounts include the federal share of state administrative and employment and training costs and certain direct federal administrative costs. They do not generally include approximately $60 million in food stamp- related federal administrative costs budgeted under a separate appropriation account (although estimates prior to 1989 do include estimates of food stamp related federal administrative expenses paid out of other Agriculture Department accounts). State and local costs are estimated based on the known federal shares and represent an estimate of all administrative expenses of participating states.
2 Constant dollar adjustments to 2002 level were made using a CPI-U-X1 fiscal year average price index.
3 The fiscal year in which the food stamp purchase requirement was eliminated, on a phased - in basis.
4 Beginning 1984 USDA took over from DHHS the administrative cost of certifying public assistance households for food stamps.
Note: Total federal cost includes food stamps in Puerto Rico (1975-1982). This table differs from the versions published in previous years in that it does not include the costs of the Family Food Assistance Program in the period from 1975 to 1983. The cost of benefits does include food stamps in Puerto Rico from 1975 to 1982 but (for consistency with the reporting of the Food and Nutrition Service) the total expenditures for benefits does not include the funding for the Puerto Rico nutrition assistance grant from the last quarter of FY 1982 when it replaced Puerto Rico’s food stamp program to the present (Puerto Rico’s nutrition assistance grant was $778 million in 1983 and rose to over $1.3 billion in 2002. )
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 – 2002
[In percent]Year1 1980 1984 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 With Gross Monthly Income: Below the Federal Poverty Levels 87 93 92 92 92 90 91 90 89 88 Between the Poverty Levels and
130 Percent of the Poverty
Levels10 6 8 8 8 9 8 9 10 11 Above 130 Percent of Poverty 2 1 * * * 1 1 1 1 1 With Earnings 19 19 20 19 21 21 23 26 27 28 With Public Assistance Income2 65 71 72 73 66 69 67 65 63 56 With AFDC/TANF Income NA 42 42 43 40 38 37 31 26 21 With SSI Income 18 18 20 19 19 23 24 28 32 29 With Children 60 61 61 61 62 61 60 58 54 54 And Female Heads of
HouseholdNA 47 50 51 51 51 50 47 44 44 With No Spouse Present NA NA 39 37 44 43 43 41 38 37 With Elderly Members3 23 22 19 18 15 16 16 18 21 19 With Elderly Female Heads of
Household3NA 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 2.3 2.3 1 Data were gathered in August in the years 1980-84 and during the summer in the years from 1986 to 1994. Reports from 1995 to the present are based on fiscal year averages.
2 Public assistance income includes AFDC/TANF, SSI, and general assistance.
3 Elderly members and heads of household include those of age 60 or older.
* 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 2002 and earlier years.Table FSP 4. Value of Food Stamps Issued by State, Selected Fiscal Years 1975 – 2002
[Millions of dollars]State 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1998 2000 2002 Alabama $103 $246 $318 $328 $441 $357 $344 $417 Alaska 6 27 25 25 50 50 46 59 Arizona 41 97 121 239 414 253 240 386 Arkansas 78 122 126 155 212 206 206 265 California 361 530 639 968 2,473 2,020 1,639 1,707 Colorado 44 71 94 156 217 157 127 165 Connecticut 36 59 62 72 169 161 138 146 Delaware 6 21 22 25 47 34 31 39 Dist. of Columbia 31 41 40 43 92 85 77 76 Florida 207 421 368 609 1,307 845 771 878 Georgia 129 264 290 382 700 538 489 621 Guam 2 15 18 15 24 34 36 52 Hawaii 23 60 93 81 177 178 166 152 Idaho 11 29 36 40 59 47 46 62 Illinois 238 394 713 835 1,056 844 746 923 Indiana 58 154 242 226 382 263 268 408 Iowa 28 54 107 109 142 109 100 129 Kansas 12 38 64 96 144 83 83 113 Kentucky 135 211 332 334 413 345 337 410 Louisiana 148 243 365 549 629 467 448 587 Maine 31 60 62 63 112 100 81 97 Maryland 76 140 171 203 365 282 199 215 Massachusetts 75 171 173 207 315 222 182 209 Michigan 124 263 541 663 806 588 457 645 Minnesota 40 62 105 165 240 181 165 201 Mississippi 110 199 264 352 383 254 226 298 Missouri 82 142 212 312 488 345 358 477 Montana 11 18 31 41 57 52 51 58 Nebraska 11 25 44 59 77 68 61 74 Nevada 10 15 22 41 91 63 57 96 New Hampshire 11 22 15 20 44 30 28 35 New Jersey 125 226 260 289 506 384 304 314 New Mexico 48 81 88 117 196 144 140 154 New York 209 726 938 1,086 2,065 1,505 1,361 1,479 North Carolina 122 234 237 282 495 421 403 536 North Dakota 5 9 16 25 32 25 25 31 Ohio 253 382 697 861 1,017 613 520 726 Oklahoma 38 73 134 186 315 231 208 288 Oregon 56 80 142 168 254 198 198 319 Pennsylvania 175 373 547 661 1,006 764 656 700 Rhode Island 18 31 35 42 82 57 59 64 South Carolina 121 181 194 240 297 264 249 352 South Dakota 8 18 26 35 40 37 37 45 Tennessee 115 282 280 372 554 437 415 552 Texas 314 514 701 1,429 2,246 1,425 1,215 1,522 Utah 12 22 40 71 90 75 68 80 Vermont 9 18 20 22 46 34 32 34 Virgin Islands 6 19 23 18 28 22 21 17 Virginia 63 158 189 247 450 307 263 305 Washington 70 90 140 229 417 308 241 318 West Virginia 56 87 159 192 253 224 185 198 Wisconsin 29 68 148 180 220 130 129 197 Wyoming 3 6 15 21 28 21 19 22 United States $4,386 $8,721 $10,744 $14,186 $22,764 $16,889 $14,952 $18,257 Note: The totals for 1975 and 1980 include amounts for Puerto Rico of $366 and $828 million respectively.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, unpublished data from the Food Stamp National Data Bank.Table FSP 5. Average Number of Food Stamp Recipients by State, Selected Fiscal Years
[In thousands]State 1975 1980 1985 1990 1996 2000 2001 2002 Percent Change 90-96 96-02 Alabama 365 583 588 454 509 396 411 444 12 -13 Alaska 15 29 22 25 46 38 38 46 84 -0 Arizona 143 196 206 317 427 259 291 379 35 -11 Arkansas 267 301 253 235 274 247 256 284 17 4 California 1,455 1,493 1,615 1,955 3,143 1,832 1,668 1,710 61 -46 Colorado 150 163 170 221 244 156 154 178 10 -27 Connecticut 155 170 145 133 223 165 157 169 67 -24 Delaware 26 52 40 33 58 32 32 40 74 -31 Dist. of Columbia 122 103 72 62 93 81 73 74 49 -20 Florida 647 912 630 781 1,371 882 887 985 75 -28 Georgia 498 627 567 536 793 559 574 646 48 -19 Guam 6 22 20 12 18 22 23 24 50 39 Hawaii 75 102 99 77 130 118 108 106 69 -18 Idaho 39 61 59 59 80 58 60 70 36 -12 Illinois 926 903 1,110 1,013 1,105 760 825 886 9 -20 Indiana 392 353 406 311 390 300 347 411 25 5 Iowa 115 141 203 170 177 123 126 141 4 -21 Kansas 58 90 119 142 172 117 124 140 21 -18 Kentucky 472 468 560 458 486 403 413 450 6 -7 Louisiana 510 569 644 727 670 500 518 588 -8 -12 Maine 126 139 114 94 131 102 104 111 39 -15 Maryland 261 324 287 255 375 219 208 228 47 -39 Massachusetts 365 453 337 347 374 232 219 243 8 -35 Michigan 619 813 985 917 935 603 641 750 2 -20 Minnesota 167 171 228 263 295 196 198 217 12 -26 Mississippi 376 496 495 499 457 276 298 325 -8 -29 Missouri 300 335 362 431 554 423 454 515 28 -7 Montana 38 43 58 57 71 59 62 63 25 -10 Nebraska 49 66 94 95 102 82 81 88 7 -13 Nevada 32 32 32 50 97 61 69 97 94 0 New Hampshire 44 50 28 31 53 36 36 41 73 -22 New Jersey 490 605 464 382 540 345 318 320 42 -41 New Mexico 157 185 157 157 235 169 163 170 49 -27 New York 1,291 1,759 1,834 1,548 2,099 1,439 1,354 1,347 36 -36 North Carolina 466 582 474 419 631 488 494 574 51 -9 North Dakota 19 25 33 39 40 32 38 37 2 -8 Ohio 854 865 1,133 1,089 1,045 610 641 735 -4 -30 Oklahoma 171 209 263 267 354 253 271 317 33 -10 Oregon 201 197 228 216 288 234 284 359 33 25 Pennsylvania 848 980 1,032 952 1,124 777 748 767 18 -32 Rhode Island 86 87 69 64 91 74 71 72 42 -21 South Carolina 410 426 373 299 358 295 316 379 20 6 South Dakota 33 43 48 50 49 43 45 48 -3 -2 Tennessee 397 624 518 527 638 496 522 598 21 -6 Texas 1,133 1,167 1,263 1,880 2,372 1,333 1,361 1,554 26 -34 Utah 46 54 75 99 110 82 80 90 11 -18 Vermont 44 46 44 38 56 41 39 40 47 -29 Virgin Islands 16 34 32 18 31 16 13 12 75 -59 Virginia 257 384 360 346 538 336 332 352 55 -34 Washington 253 248 281 340 478 295 309 350 41 -27 West Virginia 242 209 278 262 300 227 221 236 14 -21 Wisconsin 148 215 363 286 283 193 216 262 -1 -7 Wyoming 10 14 27 28 33 22 23 24 17 -29 United States 17,192 21,082 19,899 20,067 25,542 17,139 17,313 19,094 27 -25 Note: The totals for 1975 and 1980 include recipients in Puerto Rico of 810 thousand and 1.86 million respectively.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, unpublished data from the National Data Bank.Table FSP 6. Food Stamp Recipiency Rates by State, Selected Fiscal Years
[In percent]State 1975 1980 1985 1990 1996 2000 2001 2002 Percent Change 90-96 96-02 Alabama 9.9 14.9 14.8 11.2 11.8 8.9 9.2 9.9 5 -16 Alaska 4.0 7.1 4.1 4.5 7.6 6.0 6.0 7.2 67 -6 Arizona 6.3 7.1 6.5 8.6 9.3 5.0 5.5 6.9 8 -26 Arkansas 12.4 13.1 10.9 10.0 10.6 9.2 9.5 10.5 7 -2 California 6.8 6.3 6.1 6.5 9.8 5.4 4.8 4.9 50 -50 Colorado 5.8 5.6 5.3 6.7 6.2 3.6 3.5 4.0 -7 -36 Connecticut 5.0 5.5 4.5 4.0 6.7 4.8 4.6 4.9 65 -27 Delaware 4.5 8.7 6.5 5.0 7.8 4.1 4.0 4.9 57 -37 Dist. of Columbia 17.2 16.1 11.4 10.3 16.2 14.1 12.8 13.0 58 -20 Florida 7.6 9.3 5.5 6.0 9.2 5.5 5.4 5.9 54 -36 Georgia 9.8 11.4 9.5 8.2 10.6 6.8 6.8 7.5 28 -29 Hawaii 8.4 10.6 9.5 6.9 10.8 9.7 8.8 8.5 57 -21 Idaho 4.6 6.4 5.9 5.8 6.6 4.5 4.5 5.2 15 -21 Illinois 8.2 7.9 9.7 8.8 9.1 6.1 6.6 7.0 3 -23 Indiana 7.3 6.4 7.4 5.6 6.6 4.9 5.7 6.7 18 1 Iowa 4.0 4.8 7.2 6.1 6.2 4.2 4.3 4.8 0 -22 Kansas 2.5 3.8 4.9 5.7 6.6 4.3 4.6 5.2 15 -21 Kentucky 13.6 12.8 15.2 12.4 12.4 10.0 10.1 11.0 -0 -11 Louisiana 13.1 13.5 14.6 17.2 15.2 11.2 11.6 13.1 -12 -14 Maine 11.8 12.3 9.8 7.6 10.5 8.0 8.1 8.6 38 -18 Maryland 6.3 7.7 6.5 5.3 7.3 4.1 3.9 4.2 38 -43 Massachusetts 6.3 7.9 5.7 5.8 6.0 3.6 3.4 3.8 5 -38 Michigan 6.8 8.8 10.8 9.8 9.6 6.1 6.4 7.5 -3 -22 Minnesota 4.2 4.2 5.5 6.0 6.3 4.0 4.0 4.3 4 -31 Mississippi 15.7 19.6 19.1 19.4 16.6 9.7 10.4 11.3 -14 -32 Missouri 6.2 6.8 7.2 8.4 10.2 7.6 8.1 9.1 21 -11 Montana 5.1 5.5 7.1 7.1 8.0 6.6 6.8 7.0 13 -13 Nebraska 3.2 4.2 5.9 6.0 6.1 4.8 4.7 5.1 2 -16 Nevada 5.2 4.0 3.4 4.1 5.8 3.0 3.3 4.5 42 -23 New Hampshire 5.3 5.4 2.8 2.7 4.5 2.9 2.8 3.2 64 -28 New Jersey 6.7 8.2 6.1 4.9 6.6 4.1 3.7 3.7 35 -44 New Mexico 13.5 14.1 10.9 10.3 13.4 9.3 8.9 9.2 30 -31 New York 7.2 10.0 10.3 8.6 11.3 7.6 7.1 7.0 31 -38 North Carolina 8.4 9.9 7.6 6.3 8.4 6.0 6.0 6.9 34 -18 North Dakota 2.9 3.9 4.9 6.1 6.1 5.0 5.9 5.8 -0 -5 Ohio 7.9 8.0 10.6 10.0 9.3 5.4 5.6 6.4 -7 -31 Oklahoma 6.2 6.9 8.0 8.5 10.6 7.3 7.8 9.1 25 -14 Oregon 8.6 7.5 8.5 7.6 8.9 6.8 8.2 10.2 17 15 Pennsylvania 7.1 8.3 8.8 8.0 9.2 6.3 6.1 6.2 15 -32 Rhode Island 9.2 9.1 7.2 6.4 8.9 7.1 6.7 6.7 40 -24 South Carolina 14.1 13.6 11.3 8.5 9.4 7.3 7.8 9.2 10 -2 South Dakota 4.8 6.2 6.9 7.2 6.6 5.7 5.9 6.3 -9 -5 Tennessee 9.3 13.6 11.0 10.8 11.8 8.7 9.1 10.3 9 -12 Texas 9.0 8.1 7.8 11.0 12.3 6.4 6.4 7.1 11 -42 Utah 3.7 3.7 4.6 5.7 5.3 3.7 3.5 3.9 -7 -27 Vermont 9.1 8.9 8.2 6.8 9.5 6.7 6.3 6.5 40 -32 Virginia 5.1 7.2 6.3 5.6 8.0 4.7 4.6 4.8 43 -39 Washington 7.0 6.0 6.4 6.9 8.6 5.0 5.1 5.8 24 -33 West Virginia 13.1 10.7 14.6 14.6 16.4 12.6 12.3 13.1 13 -20 Wisconsin 3.2 4.6 7.6 5.8 5.4 3.6 4.0 4.8 -7 -11 Wyoming 2.7 3.0 5.4 6.2 6.8 4.5 4.6 4.7 8 -30 United States 7.6 8.5 8.3 8.0 9.5 6.1 6.1 6.6 18 -30 Note: Recipiency rate refers to the average monthly number of food stamp recipients in each state during the particular fiscal year expressed as a percent of the total resident population as of July 1 of that year. The numerator is from Table FSP 5.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 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).
-
-
Supplemental Security Income
-
The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Program is a means-tested, federally administered income assistance program authorized by title XVI of the Social Security Act. Established in 1972 (Public Law 92-603) and begun in 1974, SSI provides monthly cash payments in accordance with uniform, nationwide eligibility requirements to needy aged, blind and disabled persons. To qualify for SSI payments, a person must satisfy the program criteria for age, blindness or disability. Children may qualify for SSI if they are under age 18 and meet the applicable SSI disability or blindness, income and resource requirements. Individuals and married couples are eligible for SSI if their countable incomes fall below the Federal maximum monthly SSI benefit levels of $552 for an individual and $829 for a married couple in fiscal year 2003. SSI eligibility is restricted to qualified persons who have countable resources/assets of not more than $2,000, or $3,000 for a couple.
The Social Security Administration (SSA) administers the SSI program. Since its inception, SSI has been viewed as the “program of last resort.” Therefore, SSA helps recipients obtain any other public assistance that they are eligible to receive before providing SSI benefits. After evaluating all other income, SSI pays what is necessary to bring an individual to the statutorily prescribed income “floor.” As of December 2001, 36 percent of all SSI recipients also received Social Security retirement or survivor benefits, which are the single greatest source of income for SSI recipients.
Prior to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), no individual could receive both SSI payments and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) benefits. If eligible for both, the individual had to choose which benefit to receive. Generally, the AFDC agency encouraged individuals to file for SSI and, once the SSI payments had started, the individual was removed from the AFDC filing unit. Since states have the authority to set TANF eligibility standards and benefit levels under PRWORA, individuals are not prohibited from receiving both TANF benefits and SSI.
With the exception of California, which converted food stamp benefits to cash payments that are included in the State supplementary payment, SSI recipients may be eligible to receive food stamps. If all household members receive SSI, the household is categorically eligible for food stamps and does not need to meet the Food Stamp Program’s financial eligibility standards. If SSI beneficiaries live in households in which other household members do not receive SSI benefits, the household must meet the net income eligibility standard of the Food Stamp Program to be eligible for food stamp benefits.
Legislative Changes
Several legislative changes made in the 104th Congress affected SSI participation and expenditures. Public Law 104-121, the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996, prohibited 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.
PRWORA made several changes designed to maintain the SSI program’s goal of limiting benefits to severely disabled children. First, the act replaced the former “comparable severity” test with a new definition of disability specifically for children, based on a medically determinable physical or mental impairment that result in “marked and severe functional limitations.” Second, SSA discontinued use of the Individualized Functional Assessment (IFA) which it had implemented in 1991 following the Supreme Court’s decision inSullivanv.Zebley, 493 U.S. 521(1990)(3).1Third references to “maladaptive behaviors” in certain sections of the Listing of Impairments (among medical criteria for evaluation of mental and emotional disorders in the domain of personal/behavioral function) were eliminated. The latter two provisions were effective for all new and pending applications upon enactment (August 22, 1996). Beneficiaries who were receiving benefits due to an IFA or under the Listings because of limitations resulting from maladaptive behaviors received notice no later than January 1, 1997, that their benefits might end when their case was redetermined. Additional provisions of the PRWORA with impact on enrollment are the requirement that eligibility be redetermined when beneficiaries reach age 18, using the adult disability standard; that “continuing disability reviews” be done for children; and that children who were eligible due to low birth weight have their eligibility redetermined at age one.
Title IV of PRWORA also made significant changes in the eligibility of noncitizens for SSI benefits. 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. Those immigrants who entered the U.S. after August 22, 1996, may be eligible to receive SSI after having been “lawfully admitted for permanent residence.”
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 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.
- Tables SSI 7 and SSI 8 present state-by-state trend data on the SSI program through fiscal year 2002.
SSI Caseload Trends(Tables SSI 1-2 and Figure SSI 1). From 1990 to 1995, the number of SSI beneficiaries increased from 4.8 million to 6.5 million, an average growth rate of over 6 percent per year. Between 1995 and 2000, the number of beneficiaries fluctuated between 6.5 and 6.6 million persons. In December 2002, there were 6.8 million beneficiaries. Table SSI 1 presents information on the total number of persons receiving SSI payments in December of each year from 1974 through 2002, and also presents 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 4c 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 2. The number of beneficiaries eligible because of age has been declining steadily, from a high of 2.3 million persons in December 1975 to less than 1.3 million persons in December 2002. At the same time, there has been strong growth in blind and disabled beneficiaries, from 1.7 million in December 1974 to 5.5 million in December 2002. Moreover, the number of disabled children has increased dramatically, particularly during the 1990s, when the number of disabled children receiving SSI increased from 309,000 in December 1990 to 955,000 in December 1996. The number of disabled children fell in the next three years, stabilized at 847,000 in 1999 and 2000, and rose to 915,000 in 2002.
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 theZebleycase, expansion of the medical impairment category, and reduction in reviews of continuing eligibility.2
SSI Expenditures.While administrative costs increased by about 1 percent, the total amount paid out in SSI benefits increased from $33.6 billion (inflation adjusted) in 2001 to $34.6 billion in 2002, as shown in Table SSI 3. Average monthly benefits per person were $415 in 2002, up slightly from 2001 inflation adjusted benefit level of $413. For more details see Table SSI 4.
SSI Recipient Characteristics.Over the last 20 years, the percentage of aged SSI recipients has dramatically decreased, while the percentage of disabled recipients has increased substantially. As shown in Table SSI 6, the proportion of SSI recipients aged 65 or older has decreased dramatically, from 54 percent in 1980 to 29 percent in 2002.
Figure SSI 1.SSI Recipients by Age, 1974– 2002
Source:Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics,Social Security Bulletin· Annual Statistical Supplement· 2003(Data available online athttp://www.ssa.gov/statistics).Table SSI 1. Number of Persons Receiving Federally Administered SSI Payments 1974– 2002
[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 Dec 2001 6,688 1,264 5,424 78 5,346 882 3,811 1,995 Dec 2002 6,788 1,252 5,537 78 5,537 915 3,878 1,995 1Includes students 18-21 in 1974 only.
Source:Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics,Social Security Bulletin· Annual Statistical Supplement· 2003(Data available online athttp://www.ssa.gov/statistics).Table SSI 2. SSI Recipiency Rates, 1974– 2002
[In percent]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 6.4 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 6.3 57.9 65.6 Dec 1995 2.4 2.2 1.3 6.2 63.7 71.4 Dec 1996 2.4 2.2 1.4 6.1 61.0 69.3 Dec 1997 2.4 2.2 1.2 6.0 60.8 69.1 Dec 1998 2.4 2.2 1.2 5.9 60.0 69.1 Dec 1999 2.3 2.2 1.2 5.8 62.6 72.4 Dec 2000 2.3 2.1 1.2 5.7 60.5 66.9 Dec 2001 2.3 2.1 1.2 5.6 58.4 67.6 Dec 2002 2.3 2.1 1.2 5.6 55.8 64.5 1Population numbers used for the denominators are Census Bureau resident population estimates adjusted to the December date by averaging the July 1 population of the current year with the July 1 population of the following year (resident population estimates by age are available online athttp://www.census.gov).
2For the number of persons (65 years of age and older living in poverty) used as the denominator, seeCurrent Population Reports, Series P60-222.
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 Bookand U.S. Bureau of the Census, “Poverty in the United States: 2002”Current Population Reports, Series P60-222 and earlier years, (Available online athttp://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html).Table SSI 3. Total, Federal, and State SSI Benefits and Administration, 1974– 20021
[In millions of dollars]Calendar
YearTotal Benefits Federal
PaymentsState Supplementation Administrative Costs
(fiscal year)2002 2 Dollars Current Dollars Total Federally
AdministeredState
Administered1974 $8,183 $5,246 $3,833 $1,413 $1,264 $149 $285 1975 18,817 5,878 4,314 1,565 1,403 162 399 1976 18,372 6,066 4,512 1,554 1,388 166 500 1977 17,950 6,306 4,703 1,603 1,431 172 526 1978 17,462 6,552 4,881 1,671 1,491 180 539 1979 17,200 7,075 5,279 1,797 1,590 207 610 1980 17,358 7,941 5,866 2,074 1,848 226 668 1981 17,157 8,593 6,518 2,076 1,839 237 718 1982 16,900 8,981 6,907 2,074 1,798 276 779 1983 16,986 9,404 7,423 1,982 1,711 270 830 1984 17,958 10,372 8,281 2,091 1,792 299 864 1985 18,492 11,060 8,777 2,283 1,973 311 953 1986 19,830 12,081 9,498 2,583 2,243 340 1,022 1987 20,510 12,951 10,029 2,922 2,563 359 976 1988 20,965 13,786 10,734 3,052 2,671 381 975 1989 21,733 14,980 11,606 3,374 2,955 419 1,051 1990 22,847 16,599 12,894 3,705 3,239 466 1,075 1991 24,468 18,524 14,765 3,759 3,231 529 1,257 1992 28,508 22,233 18,247 3,986 3,435 550 1,538 1993 30,573 24,557 20,722 3,835 3,270 566 1,467 1994 31,412 25,877 22,175 3,701 3,116 585 1,775 1995 32,613 27,628 23,919 3,708 3,118 590 1,973 1996 33,013 28,792 25,265 3,527 2,988 539 1,949 1997 32,564 29,052 25,457 3,595 2,913 682 2,055 1998 33,349 30,216 26,405 3,812 3,003 808 2,304 1999 33,392 30,923 26,805 4,154 3,301 853 2,493 2000 32,976 31,564 27,290 4,274 3,381 893 2,401 2001 33,584 33,061 28,706 4,355 3,460 895 2,498 2002 34,567 34,567 29,899 4,668 3,820 848 2,522 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· 2003, (Data available online at http://wwwssagov/statistics).Table SSI 4. Average Monthly SSI Benefit Payments, 1974– 2002
Calendar
YearTotal1 Federal
PaymentsState Supplementation 2002
DollarsCurrent
DollarsTotal Federally
AdministeredState
Administered1974 $466 $135 $108 $64 $71 $35 1975 360 112 92 66 69 45 1976 357 118 99 68 71 50 1977 349 123 104 69 72 53 1978 341 128 108 72 74 56 1979 341 140 119 77 79 67 1980 345 158 133 89 91 76 1981 352 176 151 92 94 79 1982 360 191 166 96 97 93 1983 358 198 172 91 92 89 1984 366 211 187 93 93 93 1985 367 219 193 99 99 102 1986 380 232 202 107 108 101 1987 383 242 208 117 118 110 1988 385 253 219 118 118 118 1989 388 267 230 126 126 127 1990 389 283 244 132 131 136 1991 392 297 260 125 122 143 1992 421 328 292 124 121 147 1993 420 337 306 112 107 150 1994 411 338 310 105 99 152 1995 413 350 322 110 103 164 1996 412 359 333 108 103 145 1997 413 369 342 99 102 86 1998 418 379 350 103 104 102 1999 419 388 356 111 113 105 2000 411 393 360 113 114 109 2001 413 407 373 113 114 108 2002 415 415 383 129 129 128 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 a calendar-year average 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· 2003.Table SSI 5. Number of Persons Receiving SSI Payments by Type of Payment, 1974– 2002
(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 Dec 2001 6,776 6,410 3,209 2,520 689 Dec 2002 6,940 6,505 3,014 2,462 553 Source:Number of persons receiving payments obtained from Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics,Social Security Bulletin· Annual Statistical Supplement· 2003.
Table SSI 6. Characteristics of SSI Recipients, by Age, Sex, Earnings/Income,and Citizenship: Selected Years, 1980-2002
1980 1985 1990 1992 1994 1997 2000 2002 Total Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 under 18 5.5 5.5 6.4 10.0 13.4 13.5 12.8 13.5 18-64 40.9 45.4 50.9 52.3 53.0 54.8 56.7 57.2 65 or older 53.6 49.1 42.7 37.7 33.7 31.6 30.5 29.3 Sex Male 34.4 35.2 37.2 39.0 41.3 41.3 41.5 42.0 Female 65.5 64.8 62.8 61.0 58.7 58.7 58.5 58.0 Selected Sources of Income Earnings 3.2 3.8 4.7 4.4 4.2 4.5 4.4 4.1 Social Security 51.0 49.4 45.9 42.1 39.1 37.1 36.1 35.5 No other income 34.8 34.5 36.4 38.7 43.6 46.5 54.4 55.1 Noncitizens NA 5.1 9.0 10.8 11.7 10.0 10.5 10.4 Eligibility Category Aged 43.6 36.4 30.2 26.4 23.3 21.0 19.5 18.4 Blind 1.9 2.0 1.7 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.1 Disabled 54.5 61.7 68.1 72.0 75.4 77.8 79.3 80.4 Aged Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 65-69 14.0 14.9 19.4 20.7 20.5 17.6 15.6 15.3 70-79 51.5 45.6 41.3 42.5 44.3 48.4 50.0 49.1 80 or older 34.5 39.5 39.2 36.8 35.1 34.0 34.5 35.7 Sex Male 27.3 25.5 25.1 25.6 26.8 27.8 29.0 29.9 Female 72.6 74.5 74.9 74.4 73.2 72.2 71.0 70.1 Noncitizens NA 9.7 19.4 25.4 30.0 27.0 28.5 29.2 Blind and Disabled Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 18-64 80.2 77.7 80.0 82.0 83.4 83.6 83.8 83.8 65 or older 19.8 22.3 20.0 18.0 16.6 16.4 16.2 16.1 Sex1 Male 39.8 40.8 42.4 43.9 41.8 41.1 44.5 44.8 Female 60.2 59.2 57.6 56.1 58.2 58.9 55.5 55.2 Noncitizens NA 2.4 4.6 5.6 6.2 5.5 6.1 7.2 Children Ages 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Under 5 11.7 NA NA 16.0 15.8 15.8 15.5 16.1 5-9 20.9 NA NA 26.9 28.5 30.2 28.5 26.8 10-14 28.8 NA NA 30.6 32.7 34.6 36.2 36.9 15-17 21.7 NA NA 15.7 17.3 19.4 19.8 20.2 18-212 16.8 14.3 9.3 10.8 5.7 – – – Sex Male NA NA NA 62.0 63.0 62.9 63.8 64.3 Female NA NA NA 38.0 37.0 37.1 36.2 35.7 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.
Note:Data are for December of the year.
Source:Social Security Administration,Social Security Bulletin· Annual Statistical Supplement· 2003and prior years.Table SSI 7. Total SSI Payments, Federal SSI Payments and State Supplementary Payments,Calendar Year 2002
(In thousands)State Total Total Federal Federal SSI State Supplementation Federally Administered State Administered Total $34,566,844 $33,720,491 $29,898,765 $3,820,234 $847,845 Alabama 730,105 729,691 729,691 – 414 Alaska 99,520 43,872 43,872 – 55,648 Arizona 406,848 406,474 406,474 – 374 Arkansas 354,418 354,418 354,412 6 – California 7,230,494 7,230,494 4,460,666 2,769,828 – Colorado 331,543 243,234 243,234 – 88,309 Connecticut 319,446 236,055 236,055 – 83,391 Delaware 56,374 56,374 55,350 1,024 – District of Columbia 102,083 102,082 98,518 3,564 – Florida 1,824,115 1,814,407 1,814,392 15 9,707 Georgia 854,414 854,414 854,411 3 – Hawaii 110,657 110,658 98,495 12,163 – Idaho 94,024 86,514 86,514 – 7,510 Illinois 1,275,885 1,246,787 1,246,787 – 29,098 Indiana 427,283 423,503 423,503 – 3,780 Iowa 191,069 175,290 172,391 2,899 15,779 Kansas 164,412 164,412 164,412 – – Kentucky 821,504 802,898 802,898 – 18,606 Louisiana 761,420 760,944 760,944 – 476 Maine 138,104 130,762 130,762 – 7,342 Maryland 442,285 434,761 434,752 9 7,524 Massachusetts 849,101 849,101 683,294 165,807 – Michigan 1,097,109 1,065,066 1,039,390 25,676 32,043 Minnesota 389,321 303,434 303,424 10 85,888 Mississippi 542,847 542,847 542,845 2 – Missouri 541,328 515,040 515,040 – 26,288 Montana 62,959 62,959 62,136 823 – Nebraska 99,177 92,870 92,870 – 6,307 Nevada 132,907 132,908 127,780 5,128 – New Hampshire 67,382 55,785 55,785 – 11,597 New Jersey 721,272 721,272 640,486 80,786 – New Mexico 217,053 216,882 216,882 – 171 New York 3,407,767 3,407,767 2,849,925 557,842 – North Carolina 937,938 797,987 797,987 – 139,951 North Dakota 33,716 31,784 31,784 – 1,932 Ohio 1,189,946 1,189,946 1,189,936 10 – Oklahoma 365,295 327,859 327,859 – 37,436 Oregon 282,957 262,681 262,681 – 20,276 Pennsylvania 1,550,661 1,550,660 1,406,743 143,917 – Rhode Island 146,253 146,253 121,290 24,963 – South Carolina 465,841 454,062 454,062 – 11,779 South Dakota 54,751 52,251 52,246 5 2,501 Tennessee 705,106 705,106 705,106 0.286 – Texas 1,799,263 1,797,304 1,797,304 – 1,959 Utah 97,817 97,816 97,756 60 – Vermont 55,462 55,462 46,161 9,301 – Virginia 593,731 574,659 574,659 – 19,072 Washington 539,989 539,761 523,340 16,421 228 West Virginia 348,553 348,553 348,553 – – Wisconsin 508,120 386,334 386,334 – 121,786 Wyoming 25,353 24,680 24,680 – 673 Other: N. Mariana Islands 3,358 3,358 3,358 – – Source:Number of persons receiving payments obtained from Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics,Social Security Bulletin· Annual Statistical Supplement· 2003.
Table SSI 8. SSI Recipiency Rates by State And Program Type for 1979 and 2002
[In percent]State Total Recipiency Rate Rate for Adults 18-64 Rate for Adults 65 & Over 1979 2002 Percent Change 1979-02 1979 2002 Percent Change 1979-02 1979 2002 Percent Change 1979-02 Alabama 3.6 3.6 1 1.8 3.5 91 21.0 6.9 -67 Alaska 0.8 1.5 95 0.5 1.5 178 14.0 6.0 -57 Arizona 1.1 1.6 44 0.9 1.6 80 5.0 3.2 -36 Arkansas 3.5 3.1 -11 1.9 3.0 60 17.1 5.8 -66 California 3.0 3.2 6 2.1 2.5 22 16.4 13.3 -19 Colorado 1.1 1.2 9 0.8 1.1 43 6.7 3.2 -52 Connecticut 0.8 1.5 100 0.6 1.5 138 2.7 2.6 -4 Delaware 1.2 1.6 34 0.9 1.4 49 5.4 2.3 -58 District of Columbia 2.3 3.5 54 1.9 3.1 61 8.6 6.7 -22 Florida 1.8 2.4 35 1.1 1.9 67 6.2 4.8 -23 Georgia 2.9 2.3 -20 1.9 2.1 11 17.7 6.8 -62 Hawaii 1.1 1.7 62 0.7 1.5 117 7.6 5.1 -33 Idaho 0.8 1.4 77 0.6 1.6 150 3.8 2.0 -47 Illinois 1.1 2.0 85 1.0 2.0 111 4.3 3.8 -11 Indiana 0.8 1.5 100 0.6 1.6 162 3.3 1.7 -49 Iowa 0.9 1.4 57 0.6 1.6 158 3.5 1.7 -51 Kansas 0.9 1.4 57 0.6 1.4 122 3.5 1.9 -45 Kentucky 2.5 4.3 69 1.8 4.4 146 12.5 7.0 -44 Louisiana 3.4 3.7 10 2.0 3.5 72 20.1 7.8 -61 Maine 2.0 2.4 23 1.4 2.7 94 8.6 3.1 -64 Maryland 1.2 1.6 39 0.9 1.5 60 5.4 4.0 -26 Massachusetts 2.2 2.6 16 1.3 2.5 95 10.8 5.6 -48 Michigan 1.3 2.1 67 1.1 2.3 115 5.9 3.0 -49 Minnesota 0.8 1.3 60 0.6 1.3 136 3.7 2.6 -30 Mississippi 4.5 4.4 -2 2.4 4.0 65 26.0 10.3 -60 Missouri 1.8 2.0 14 1.1 2.1 91 7.9 2.9 -63 Montana 0.9 1.6 80 0.7 1.7 136 3.8 2.0 -47 Nebraska 0.9 1.3 48 0.6 1.3 103 3.4 1.7 -50 Nevada 0.8 1.3 55 0.5 1.2 126 5.9 3.3 -44 New Hampshire 0.6 1.0 72 0.4 1.1 150 2.5 1.2 -53 New Jersey 1.1 1.7 49 0.9 1.4 63 4.7 4.5 -4 New Mexico 2.0 2.6 32 1.4 2.4 75 12.4 6.9 -44 New York 2.1 3.3 56 1.6 2.8 76 8.3 9.0 9 North Carolina 2.4 2.3 -4 1.6 2.0 27 13.6 5.4 -60 North Dakota 1.0 1.3 31 0.6 1.3 128 5.1 2.2 -56 Ohio 1.1 2.1 89 1.0 2.3 132 4.2 2.4 -42 Oklahoma 2.3 2.1 -9 1.3 2.1 58 11.6 3.8 -67 Oregon 0.9 1.6 86 0.7 1.7 143 3.3 2.8 -15 Pennsylvania 1.4 2.4 71 1.1 2.5 123 5.0 3.4 -31 Rhode Island 1.6 2.7 70 1.1 2.6 141 6.4 4.9 -24 South Carolina 2.7 2.6 -3 1.8 2.3 29 17.0 5.6 -67 South Dakota 1.1 1.7 49 0.7 1.6 122 5.0 3.0 -40 Tennessee 2.9 2.8 -2 1.9 2.7 44 14.8 5.5 -63 Texas 1.9 2.0 6 1.0 1.6 68 12.7 7.5 -41 Utah 0.6 0.9 64 0.5 1.0 96 3.0 1.9 -37 Vermont 1.8 2.1 19 1.3 2.1 60 8.1 3.6 -55 Virginia 1.5 1.8 20 1.0 1.6 57 8.5 4.6 -46 Washington 1.2 1.7 47 1.0 1.8 84 4.8 3.6 -25 West Virginia 2.1 4.1 92 1.9 4.7 153 8.0 4.6 -42 Wisconsin 1.4 1.6 11 1.0 1.6 67 6.5 2.3 -65 Wyoming 0.4 1.1 162 0.3 1.2 314 2.7 1.6 -42 Total 1.9 2.4 30 1.3 2.2 75 9.0 5.6 -38 Note:Recipiency rates for 2002 are the ratios of the number of SSI recipients (in the respective age groups) as of the month of December to the estimated population in the respective age group as of the month of July; calculations by DHHS. The 1979 rates are based on the average number of recipients during the year.
Source:Social Security Administration,Social Security Bulletin· Annual Statistical Supplement· 2003and U.S. Bureau of the Census, (Resident population by state available online athttp://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/).Table SSI 9. SSI Recipiency Rates by State, Selected Fiscal Years, 1975– 2002
[In percent]State 1975 1980 1985 1990 1992 19942 19962 20022 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 1.5 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 3.1 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 1.5 Delaware 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.6 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 2.3 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 1.5 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 1.4 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 2.4 Maryland 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.6 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 4.4 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 1.6 Nebraska 1.1 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.3 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 1.0 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 2.3 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 1.6 Pennsylvania 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.4 Rhode Island 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.3 2.6 2.7 South Carolina 2.8 2.7 2.6 2.6 2.7 3.0 3.0 2.6 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 2.8 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 1.8 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 4.1 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 1.1 Total1 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.4 2.5 2.4 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. For 1994-2002 the number of recipients is from the month of December; calculations by DHHS.
Source:Social Security Administration,Social Security Bulletin· Annual Statistical Supplement· 2003, and Bureau of the Census, (Resident population by state available online athttp://www.census.gov/population/estimates/state/)1In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the IFA (or a residual functional capacity assessment) that applied to adults whose condition did not meet or equal a listing of medical impairments to determine eligibility should also be applied to children whose condition did not meet or equal the medical listing of impairments.
2The GAO study estimated that 87,000 children were added to the SSI caseload after the IFA for children was initiated.
-
View full report
"title-TOC.pdf" (pdf, 275.93Kb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®
View full report
"ch1.pdf" (pdf, 273.62Kb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®
View full report
"ch2.pdf" (pdf, 1.6Mb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®
View full report
"ch3.pdf" (pdf, 2.21Mb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®
View full report
"apa.pdf" (pdf, 7.09Mb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®
View full report
"apb.pdf" (pdf, 124.96Kb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®
View full report
"apc.pdf" (pdf, 1.63Mb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®
View full report
"apd.pdf" (pdf, 104.39Kb)
Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®