Welfare Reform: Implications for TANF Recipients with Disabilities Webcast on Welfare and Disability January 21, 2004 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Welfare Reform: Implications for TANF Recipients with Disabilities Webcast on Welfare and Disability January 21, 2004 PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 469eb7-N2YwN



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Welfare Reform: Implications for TANF Recipients with Disabilities Webcast on Welfare and Disability January 21, 2004

Description:

Welfare Reform: Implications for TANF Recipients with Disabilities Webcast on Welfare and Disability January 21, 2004 Eileen P. Sweeney Center on Budget and Policy ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:874
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 106
Provided by: Eile81
Learn more at: http://www.ilru.org
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Welfare Reform: Implications for TANF Recipients with Disabilities Webcast on Welfare and Disability January 21, 2004


1
Welfare Reform Implications for TANF
Recipients with DisabilitiesWebcast on Welfare
and DisabilityJanuary 21, 2004
  • Eileen P. Sweeney
  • Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
  • 820 First St, NE, Suite 510
  • Washington, DC 20002
  • 202-408-1080
  • fax 202-408-1056
  • sweeney_at_cbpp.org
  • www.cbpp.org

2
  1. What we know about people with disabilities and
    TANF
  2. The ADA and Section 504 apply
  3. Whats happening in Washington?
  4. Talking about TANF and disability

3
I. What we know about people with disabilities
and TANF
  • The Urban Institutes national survey of current
    welfare recipients found
  • 48 percent had either poor general or mental
    health, with 25 reporting poor general health
    and 35 reporting poor mental health.
  • Overall, for 32 percent either their health
    limited their work or they were in very poor
    mental health, with 18 reporting that their
    health limits work and 22 reporting very poor
    mental health.

4
There is a high incidence of people with mental
impairments among parents on and off of TANF
  • National information from the Urban Institute
  • over one-third of current recipients scored low
    on a standard mental health scale while close to
    one-fourth scored in very poor mental health
  • approximately one-fifth of former recipients who
    were not working scored very poor on the mental
    health scale, placing them in the bottom 10
    percent nationwide

5
The General Accounting Office has confirmed that
high numbers of parents on TANF have disabilities
  • 44 percent of TANF recipients reported having
    physical or mental impairments, a proportion
    almost three times as high as among adults in the
    non-TANF population
  • 38 percent of TANF recipients in 1999 reported an
    impairment severe enough that the individual was
    unable or needed help to perform one or more
    activities, such as walking up a flight of stairs
    or keeping track of money and bills.

6
GAO confirmed high numbers of parents with
mental impairments on TANF
  • Considering both severe and nonsevere
    impairments, 29 percent of TANF adults reported a
    mental impairment, such as frequent depression or
    anxiety or trouble concentrating.
  • GAO notes that self-reporting probably results
    in underestimates of mental impairments and
    hidden impairments such as learning
    disabilities.

7
  • GAO report
  • Welfare Reform More Coordinated Federal Effort
    Could Help States and Localities Move TANF
    Recipients with Impairments Toward Employment,
  • GAO-02-37, October 2001, available at
    http//www.gao.gov, under November 1, 2001

8
In a second report, GAO provided some additional
information
  • Recipients with impairments are half as likely to
    exit TANF as recipients without impairments.
  • People with impairments are less likely than
    people without impairments to be employed after
    leaving TANF. Some receive SSI, while others do
    not.

9
  • Overall, 44 percent of TANF recipients had
    impairments or were caring for a child with
    impairments, compared with 15 percent of the
    non-TANF population.
  • Fifteen percent of TANF families with an adult
    recipient had a child with a disability, compared
    to three percent of the non-TANF population.
  • Eight percent of TANF families had both an adult
    and a child with disabilities. (Among non-TANF
    families, this figure is one percent.)

10
  • In their first month after leaving TANF,
  • 36 percent of leavers with impairments
    reported having no personal or household
    earnings, or SSI, compared with 23 percent of
    leavers without impairments.

11
  • GAO report
  • Welfare Reform Outcomes for TANF Recipients with
    Impairments
  • GAO-02-884, July 2002, available at
    http//www.gao.gov

12
MDRC findings
  • Based upon research in four large urban counties
    Cuyahoga County, OH Los Angeles, CA Miami-Dade,
    FL and Philadelphia, PA

13
  • MDRC Compared with national samples, women in
    the survey sample had substantially higher rates
    of personal health and mental health problems and
    childrens health problems.

14
  • On a scale indicating the number of potential
    health barriers to employment (out of eight
    specific health problems), three out of four
    women in the survey sample had at least one such
    barrier, and 40 percent had two or more health
    problems.

15
  • MDRC also found that the data do not fully
    capture the severity of the health-related
    hardships the families face.
  • In addition, about 20 percent of current welfare
    recipients in the survey sample indicated that
    they had one or more children with a health
    problem.

16
  • MDRC report
  • Denise F. Polit, Andrew S. London, John M.
    Martinez, The Health of Poor Urban Women
    Findings from the Project on Devolution and Urban
    Change, May 2001
  • http//www.mdrc.org/WelfareReform/UrbanChangepa
    ge.htm

17
  • The Urban Institute has found that perhaps the
  • strongest predictor of not participating in work
  • activity is the presence of multiple obstacles.
  • Loprest and Zedlewski, Current and Former
    Welfare Recipients How Do They Differ? Urban
    Institute, Discussion Paper 99-17, November 1999
  • http//www.urban.org/html/discussion-99-17.html

18
Some parents with disabilities have been
sanctioned off of TANF
  • As many as one-fourth to one-half of parents who
    are no longer receiving TANF due to a sanction
    for failure to comply with the states welfare
    rules indicate that they were unable to comply
    with the rules because of their disability,
    health condition, or illness.
  • The studies suggest that others who face learning
    disabilities or who have a low IQ find it
    difficult to understand and comply with the
    programs rules.

19
More from MDRC
  • Negative experiences with the welfare agency
    were more prevalent among women with health
    problems.
  • Welfare recipients with multiple health problems
    and with certain health problems (notably,
    physical abuse, risk of depression, having a
    chronically ill or disabled child) were more
    likely than other recipients to have been
    sanctioned in the prior year.

20
  • Welfare leavers with multiple health problems
    were more likely than other women who had left
    welfare to say that they had been terminated by
    the welfare agency rather than that they left of
    their own accord.

21
  • Studies in Utah and Delaware suggest that parents
    who face learning disabilities or who have low
    intelligence find it difficult to understand and
    comply with the programs rules.
  • One-third of the families who were sanctioned in
    Utah, thereby losing their familys entire cash
    benefit, cited an individual health condition as
    the reason for their failure to participate
    one-fifth cited mental problems.

22
  • In Iowa, one-fifth of parents who were placed in
    the states limited benefit plan a second time
    the plan in which families that have not complied
    with program rules receive a reduced benefit
    (akin to a sanction) said that their
    disability/health contributed to their being
    returned to the sanction status, while almost
    three out of ten cited their lack of
    understanding of program rules.
  • Chronic health conditions identified as
    contributing to being placed in the program
    included drug addiction, manic depression, and
    chronic asthma.

23
  • A study conducted by the Minnesota Department of
    Human Services found that sanctioned families
    were four times as likely as the caseload as a
    whole to have a substance abuse problem, three
    times as likely to have a family health problem,
    twice as likely to have a mental health problem,
    and twice as likely to have been a recent victim
    of domestic violence.

24
Children in sanctioned families
  • A study in three cities Boston, Chicago, and
    San Antonio found that children in sanctioned
    families are more likely to have behavior
    problems and emotional problems than children in
    other families on welfare or who never received
    welfare.

25
  • The researchers concluded
  • We need to attend much more carefully to the
    plight of families experiencing welfare
    sanctions. Sanctioned families have a number of
    characteristics that serve as markers of concern
    for the healthy development of children and
    youth. As such, state and federal governments
    should explore options for identifying and
    reaching out to the most disadvantaged and
    high-risk families involved in the welfare
    system.

26
  • Possible policy options include assistance to
    bring families into compliance with rules before
    they are sanctioned, closer monitoring of
    sanctioned families, and the provision of
    additional supports, such as mental health
    services, academic enrichment, after-school
    programs, and other family support services.

27
  • Source
  • Chase-Lansdale, Coley, Lohman, et al., Welfare
    Reform What About the Children? Welfare,
    Children and Families A Three-City Study, Policy
    Brief 02-1, Johns Hopkins University, 2002
  • http//www.jhu.edu/welfare/19382_Welfare_jan02.p
    df

28
A medical study issued in 2002 additional
information about young children in sanctioned
families.
  • Study looked at the impact of sanctions on the
    health of infants and toddlers.
  • Study was done in six US cities from 8/98 through
    12/00 Baltimore, Boston, Little Rock, Los
    Angeles, Minneapolis, and Washington, DC.

29
  • Households with children aged 36 months or
    younger whose welfare benefits had been
    terminated or reduced by sanctions had odds of
    being food insecure 1.5 times as great as
    comparable households whose benefits were not
    decreased.
  • Young children in families whose welfare benefits
    had been terminated or reduced by sanctions had
    1.3 times the odds of having been hospitalized
    since birth.

30
  • Conclusion Terminating or reducing benefits by
    sanctions, or decreasing benefits because of
    changes in income or expenses, is associated with
    greater odds that young children will experience
    food insecurity and hospitalizations.
  • Source
  • Childrens Sentinel Nutrition Assessment
    Program, The Impact of Welfare Sanctions on the
    Health of Infants and Toddlers, July 2002, Arch
    Pediatr Adolesc Med, Vol 156, 678-683, available
    at
  • http//dcc2.bumc.bu.edu/csnappublic/welfaresancti
    ons.htm

31
TANF programs serve many families with severe
disabilities policies need to be responsive to
this important fact
  • At the beginning of welfare reform, work first
    approach
  • People labeled as hard to serve welfare
    offices had simply exempted people in the past
    and then often ignored them.
  • Same folks that others particularly
    organizations that have been working with people
    with disabilities knew how to help to gain
    greater independence.

32
Over time, state TANF programs have tended to
modify their work first approaches
  • Recognize that there are many people with
    barriers, including disabilities, on TANF
  • See people cycling back onto the rolls
  • Know that many who leave TANF are not working and
    do not receive SSI
  • Realize that many who are being sanctioned do not
    understand how to comply, the consequences of
    failing to comply, or have the ability to comply

33
In addition to pre-sanction review mechanisms,
some states have been improving screening and
assessment earlier in the process
  • Those that have done this like Iowa have
    found that fewer people are out of compliance and
    fewer people are being sanctioned.

34
II. States and counties are legally obligated
to comply with the federal civil rights laws
  • Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities
    Act (ADA) apply
  • Lest there be any question, the 1996 TANF law
    specifically incorporates the key federal civil
    rights laws.

35
Common goals of TANF and ADA/504 dovetail
  • Success in complying with the ADA and Section 504
    can create exactly the types of results Congress
    hoped for in TANF

36
HHS OCR Guidance on TANF and the ADA/504
  • ? Available at
  • http//www.hhs.gov/ocr/prohibition/html
  • ? Worth reading, re-reading, and sharing
    provides helpful context for thinking about
    people with disabilities in TANF also helpful
    information about best practices

37
Two key principles
  • Individualized treatment
  • Effective and meaningful opportunity

38
Individualized treatment
  • Requires that individuals with disabilities be
    treated on a case-by-case basis consistent with
    facts and objective evidence
  • Individuals with disabilities may not be treated
    on the basis of generalizations and stereotypes.

39
Effective and meaningful opportunity
  • Individual with disabilities must be afforded the
    opportunity to benefit from TANF programs that is
    as effective as the opportunity the TANF agency
    affords to individuals who do not have
    disabilities, and must also be afforded
    meaningful access to TANF programs.

40
To implement these two principles, there are 3
key legal requirements
  • Ensure equal access through the provision of
    appropriate services
  • Modify policies, practices and procedures to
    provide such access
  • Adopt non-discriminatory methods of administration

41
  • When thinking about the rules, it is important to
    remember that they apply not only to a person
    with disabilities who is the caretaker relative,
    but also to family members with a disability.

42
These rules should be infused into
everything the TANF agency, its agents, and
contractors do.
43
These rules apply no matter what position the
person holds
  • Policy maker/policy implementer
  • Office manager/supervisor
  • Case worker
  • Receptionist
  • Security officer

44
  • The person who designs the states or countys
    notices and signage
  • Vocational specialist
  • Trainer/trainee
  • Contract procurement specialist

45
And, also more globally in how the office
functions
  • In the contents of notices
  • In the signage about rights
  • In the terms included in contracts with
    private providers or other public agencies to
    provide services
  • In how the agency thinks about each and every
    policy it has that affects the people the agency
    serves and their families.

46
The important role of reasonable accommodations
  • Must happen at different levels built into
    policies
  • Staff must have the ability to design
    accommodations on a case-by-case basis, taking
    into account the individuals disability.

47
  • Contractors must know that they can make the
    changes needed to serve the person with a
    disability and that the state or county will
    pay them.
  • Important to consult with the person to see what
    he or she thinks will work what he or she
    needs to succeed.

48
What kinds of steps are reasonable accommodations?
  • Allowing an individual to do work activities
    part-time, or during flexible hours.
  • Providing support services such as equipment, a
    job coach, or tutor.
  • Placing a person in inactive status if
    necessary to allow the individual to participate
    in health, mental health, or substance abuse
    treatment or rehabilitation services, if the
    individual chooses to do so.

49
  • Providing the individual with work activities in
    a specific work environment (including indoor
    work, work in a quiet area) that enables the
    individual to participate in work activities
  • Providing the individual with particular types of
    jobs or work activities that are consistent with
    the individuals limitations, such as work that
    requires limited standing or lifting, or that
    involves limited contact with the public.

50
  • Clients must be allowed to do things at
    different times/places or for a different amount
    of time when needed because of a disability.
    Some examples
  • If the person has a disability and cant come to
    the agency for the application interview, a home
    visit must be provided.
  • Allowing a client to reschedule a fair hearing
    when there is good cause (including a
    disability-related reason)

51
  • If a person needs longer to complete an education
    program due to his/her disability, extend the
    time to allow the person to enter into and/or
    complete the program.
  • A person can ask for an application on someone
    elses behalf (i.e., someone who cant come to
    the office for a disability-related reason) and
    the agency must give it to the person asking for
    it or mail it to the person who wants to apply.

52
  • If a client has a disability and can do some
    work, assigning the person to a particular work
    environment (i.e., indoors) is an accommodation
    to which a client may be entitled.
  • Assessment interview must be scheduled at a time
    that doesnt conflict with medical/mental health
    treatment.

53
  • Clients must be allowed to do less of
    something, or to do something for fewer hours, or
    to not do it at all, when needed because of a
    disability. Examples
  • If a client has a disability or is a caretaker
    for a household member with a disability but is
    able to do some work, part-time work is an
    accommodation to which a client may be entitled.
  • Number of job contacts during a job search must
    be determined on an individual basis
    disability, the disability of a household member,
    and LEP must be taken into account when
    determining the number.

54
  • Reduced number of job contacts is a reasonable
    modification.
  • Waiver of job search in addition to part time
    employment is a reasonable accommodation.
  • Waiver of job search or job club if it would be
    futile for a person with a disability.
  • Working less than 30 hours if needed for a
    disability-related reason.

55
Caring for a family member with a disability can
affect work
  • An individual who is needed on a substantially
    continuous basis to care for a child or other
    member of the household with a disability is not
    going to be able to work outside the home.
  • If the care needed is part-time, then the person
    may be able to do part-time work activities,
    however, it will be important to ensure that the
    hours involved are compatible with the need to
    care for the family member with a disability.

56
Agency staff must think about whether a
disability is involved at all times, but
especially whenever
  • There is an issue of intent.
  • There is an issue of non-compliance or lack of
    cooperation.
  • There is a question about failure to appear for
    an appointment.
  • Whether the person has good cause for acting or
    failing to act.

57
  • The worker has any suspicion that a person may
    have a health condition or be caring for a person
    with a health condition.
  • A person can not read or write.
  • Evidence the worker has requested has not been
    provided.
  • A person cannot complete a task in the fixed
    period generally required.

58
  • When assessing whether a family knew or should
    have known (and when they knew or should have
    known) that receipt of funds or a change in
    circumstances would affect their eligibility for
    or the amount of their benefits, staff must
    assess whether the person has a disability that
    makes it likely that the person did not
    understand the consequences of receipt of the
    payment or of failure to report the payment or
    change in circumstances.

59
  • It is important that the worker continue
    contact with the client once s/he has been
    assigned to a work activity to make sure it is
    appropriate.
  • Statements from the client that a particular
    placement is difficult because of a health
    condition should immediately raise questions.

60
  • If it is not appropriate, the worker should
    rectify the problem possible actions include
  • reassigning the client to another work
    activity
  • revising the hours, days, or times of day of
    the work activity
  • revising the conditions under which the
    activity is performed
  • determining that participation is not
    currently feasible
  • stepping back and determining that another
    assessment or a more in-depth assessment may be
    needed in order to determine what accommodations
    are needed

61
  • Much needs to be done to bring state TANF
    programs into compliance with Section 504 and the
    ADA.
  • Its only in the past few years that some states
    have started to look more seriously at the
    supports and services that parents with barriers,
    including disabilities, need.
  • Remember to refer back to the HHS/OCR Guidance
    (see slide 36)

62
III. Whats happening in Washington?
  • What is most surprising is that the
    Administration and many in Congress still dont
    think of TANF as serving people with
    disabilities.
  • As a result, they have not designed their
    proposals to address the needs of parents and
    children with disabilities in TANF.

63
It is important to share information with
Congress about the connection between TANF and
disability.
  • Help them to ensure that their policy choices
    this year help rather than harm people with
    disabilities and their families.

64
How would provisions in the Presidents welfare
proposal affect people with disabilities?
  • Because the Presidents proposals do not increase
    funding and significantly restrict states
    flexibility in how they design their TANF
    programs, people with disabilities in TANF are
    very likely to face even bigger obstacles to
    getting help in TANF than they do now.

65
Where things stand in Congress right now
  • The 1996 law had been set to expire at the end of
    Fiscal Year 2002 (September 30, 2002).
  • However, it has received short extensions since
    then while awaiting a complete reauthorization.
  • The current extension continues the program
    through March 2004.
  • Before then, Congress will either pass a TANF
    reauthorization law, another short extension, or
    something in-between.

66
House of Representatives
  • The House of Representatives passed its bill, HR
    4, on February 13, 2003. Vote was 230-192.

67
Senate Finance Committee
  • The Finance Committee marked up its bill, also
    known as HR 4, in September 2003.
  • Bill awaits consideration by the full Senate,
    likely to be early in 2004.

68
  • There are some indications that the full Senate
    may consider its welfare bill in the next few
    weeks. But, this could change.

69
Universal engagement
  • Current law
  • States must ensure that adults are engaged in
    work as determined by the state within 24
    months.
  • State option to develop Individual Responsibility
    Plans for recipients

70
  • House bill
  • States must develop self-sufficiency plans for
    all parents and caretakers receiving assistance
    within 60 days of TANF enrollment. Plan must
    detain work activities.

71
  • Senate Finance bill
  • States must develop self-sufficiency plans for
    all parents and caretakers receiving assistance
    within 60 days of TANF enrollment.
  • States must outline in TANF plan how they intend
    to require parents and caregivers to engage in
    work or other sufficiency activities.
  • Each plan must contain activities designed to
    assist the family achieve their maximum degree of
    self-sufficiency, supportive services that the
    state intends to provide, steps to promote child
    well-being, and information on work support
    assistance for which the family may be eligible.

72
Assessments
  • Current law
  • State must conduct an initial assessment of
    skills, prior work experience and employability
    within 30 days of a recipients enrollment in TANF.

73
  • House
  • Similar to current law.
  • Senate Finance Committee
  • Similar but also requires screening and assessing
    for work barriers, work supports, other
    assistance and family support services,
    well-being of children.

74
Work participation rates
  • Current 50 FY 2003 and later
  • (important role of caseload reduction credit)
  • House bill 55 FY 2005, 60 FY 2006, 65 FY
    2007, 70 FY 2008
  • Senate Finance same as House

75
Participation rate credits
  • Current caseload reduction credit (CRC)
  • House retains CRC, but bases it only on recent
    declines in caseload

76
  • Senate Finance
  • Replaces with an employment credit
  • of families employed after leaving cash
    assistance
  • larger credit, families w/higher earnings
  • state can include families who received
    short-term benefits and earned at least 1,000 in
    quarter after receiving the benefit, or
    TANF-funded child care, or transportation
    subsidies

77
  • credits are capped and can not reduce a
    states work rate by more than specified amounts
    (40 in FY2004, declining to 20 in FY 2008)

78
Hours of participation
  • Current 30 hours/week
  • ? if child under age 6 20 hours/week
  • ? no partial credit for families engaged in
    work activity, but for fewer hours
  • House bill 160 hours/month, regardless of
    childs age

79
  • Senate Finance bill 34 hours/week
  • ? if child is under age 6 24 hours
  • ? partial credit for single parents who
  • participate for 20 hours

80
Important to families with disabilities
  • What does universal engagement mean?
  • Hours
  • of hours required
  • credit for partial work?
  • what counts as work activity?

81
What counts as work?
  • Current
  • Primary work activity first 20 hours
  • ? paid or unpaid work, including OJT, work
    experience, and community service
  • ? vocational educational training (12 months)
  • ? job search (6 weeks)
  • ? providing child care for other participants

82
  • Secondary hours over 20, can be
  • ? any of the above
  • ? job skills training
  • ? education related to employment
  • ? satisfactory secondary school attendance
  • or participation in GED classes

83
  • House bill 24 hours and limits countable
    activities to
  • ? paid or unpaid work including OJT, supervised
    work experience, supervised community service
  • ? may count other qualified activities (state
    decides) for only 3 months in any 24 month period

84
  • Senate Finance primary 24 hours
  • ? primary activities under current law
  • ? certain barrier removal activities and
    education activities, up to 6 months in a 24
    month period
  • ? in months 4-6, barrier removal activities
    must be combined with some work or work readiness
    activities

85
  • After first 24 hours of work activity, can count
  • ? current law plus substance abuse
  • counseling or treatment
  • ? programs designed to remove barriers
  • ? post-secondary education
  • ? adult literacy programs or activities
  • ? programs covered under a waiver
  • approved for any state after 8/22/96

86
  • And, under Senate Finance bill, a state may deem
    a single parent caring for a child with a
    disability or adult relative with a disability to
    meet all or part of the work requirement.

87
S. 1523 The Pathways to Independence Act of 2003
  • Very important development last July
  • Bipartisan Senators Smith (R-OR), Jeffords
    (I-VT), and Conrad (D-ND)

88
S. 1523 provides
  • States can count as work activity caring for a
    child with a disability or an adult relative with
    a disability.

89
  • Rehab services count as work activity according
    to the following rules
  • ? First 3 months all
  • ? Second 3 months must do some work activity
    too

90
  • After six months
  • ? Builds on partial work credits in Senate
    Finance bill
  • ? If a person is determined to need rehab
    services beyond six months, up to ½ of required
    hours can be in rehab services so long as at
    least ½ of required hours are in work activities.

91
  • Important role of the CCD TANF Task Force of the
    Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities
  • CCD website www.c-c-d.org

92
Improvements included in the Senate Finance
bill that are important to people with
disabilities
  • Allows states to count as work the time that a
    caretaker relative spends caring for a child with
    disabilities or an adult relative with
    disabilities (amendment by Senator Conrad)

93
  • Rehab services can count as work for 6 months,
    not three (amendments by Senators Hatch and
    Jeffords)
  • There also is modest language saying that a state
    has to review the persons individual
    responsibility plan prior to imposing a sanction
    and make a good faith effort to meet with the
    person (amendments by Senators Hatch and Kerry)

94
  • So, two parts of S. 1523 are included in the
    Senate Finance bill caring for a child or adult
    relative with a disability and allowing rehab
    services to count for up to 6 months.
  • Advocates for people with disabilities are
    working to get the last piece of S. 1523 give
    states flexibility to go beyond six months on
    rehab services, where needed

95
IV. When talking about TANF and people with
disabilities, there are a few things to be aware
of
  • 1 Despite all of your work to the contrary,
    there is an assumption that if you are a person
    with a disability or represent people with
    disabilities, you just want exemptions from the
    TANF work requirements.

96
  • It is important to be clear (even if it isnt
    raised by the person you are speaking with) that
    that is not what you are about that you want
    people with disabilities to have equal and
    meaningful access to the states/countys
    services and supports and you want to make sure
    that people with disabilities get the chance to
    move to work whenever that is appropriate.

97
  • 2. Twisted logic If you really care about
    helping people with disabilities to move to work,
    you would support increasing the hours to 40
    hours per week and the work participation rate to
    70 percent. Thats the only way that states are
    going to be forced to address the needs of people
    with disabilities and help them to go to work.

98
  • Whats wrong with this?
  • A. Right now, its the flexibility that states
    have in TANF that allows them to think creatively
    about how to design programs to meet the needs of
    people with disabilities. Increasing work
    requirements for families and states will reduce
    state flexibility and result in more people with
    disabilities and other barriers being pushed out
    the door into work settings, no matter how
    inappropriate that may be.

99
  • B. Those tighter rules will increase the number
    of people with disabilities who are unable to
    comply with the rules and end up sanctioned and
    off of the program.
  • Reducing caseloads by moving low-income people
    with disabilities off TANF without jobs is not
    success for the state nor for the family.
  • Including mandatory full-family sanctions as
    the House has done will make the situation
    worse. Studies already show that parents with
    disabilities are being improperly sanctioned off
    of TANF.

100
  • 3. You really shouldnt be worried about
    states not having flexibility our bill will
    give them lots of flexibility through the
    superwaiver provision.
  • Thats not the flexibility that people with
    disabilities need their state to have. They need
    states to be able to be flexible in designing the
    programs or steps, on an individual level, that
    will help the person or family move to greater
    independence. Depending on how it is written,
    the superwaiver proposals could let states wipe
    out federal laws in programs that are important
    to low-income families including TANF, Food
    Stamps, Title XX block grant, and housing
    that could result in families no longer being
    eligible for benefits they now receive. Thats
    not the kind of flexibility needed.

101
Useful resources from CBPP about TANF
reauthorization and/or people with disabilities
and TANF
  • People with disabilities and TANF
  • Eileen Sweeney, Recent Studies Indicate that Many
    Parents Who are Current or Former Welfare
    Recipients Have Disabilities or Other Medical
    Conditions, Center on Budget and Policy
    Priorities, February 2000, http//www.cbpp.org/2-2
    9-00wel.htm
  • Eileen Sweeney, HHS Guidance Explains How Federal
    Laws Barring Discrimination Against People with
    Disabilities Apply in State and County TANF
    Programs, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,
    February 2001, http//www.cbpp.org/2-26-01wel.htm

102
  • TANF Reauthorization
  • Sharon Parrott, Heidi Goldberg, Shawn Fremstad,
    Recycling An Unwise Proposal State Concerns and
    New State Fiscal Realities Ignored in House
    Republican Welfare Bill, Center on Budget and
    Policy Priorities, February 2003,
    http//www.cbpp.org/2-7-03tanf.htm
  • Sharon Parrott, Jennifer Mezey, Bush
    Administration Projects That The Number of
    Children Receiving Child Care Subsidies Will Fall
    by 200,000 During the Next Five Years, Center on
    Budget and Policy Priorities and Center for Law
    and Social Policy, February 2003,
    http//www.cbpp.org/2-5-03tanf.htm

103
  • Martha Coven, An Introduction to TANF, Center on
    Budget and Policy Priorities, January 2003,
  • http//www.cbpp.org/1-22- 02tanf2.htm
  • Zoe Neuberger, Sharon Parrott and Wendell
    Primus, Funding Issues in TANF Reauthorization,
    Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, February
    2002, http//www.cbpp.org/1-22-02tanf5.htm
  • Heidi Goldberg, Improving TANF Program Outcomes
    for Families with Barriers to Employment, Center
    on Budget and Policy Priorities, January 2002,
    http//www.cbpp.org/1-22-02tanf3.htm
  • .

104
  • Sharon Parrott, Shawn Fremstad, The Senate
    Finance Committees TANF Reauthorization Bill,
    Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, September
    2003, http//www.cbpp.org/9-9-03tanf.pdf
  • Key Provisions in TANF Reauthorization Bills
    Passed by the Senate Finance Committee and the
    House, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and
    Center for Law and Social Policy, September 2003,
    http//www.cbpp.org/9-22-03tanf.pdf

105
  • Shawn Fremstad, Immigrants and Welfare
    Reauthorization, Center on Budget and Policy
    Priorities, January 2002, http//www.cbpp.org/1-22
    -02tanf4.htm
  • Robert Greenstein, Shawn Fremstad, Sharon
    Parrott, Superwaiver Would Grant Executive
    Branch and Governors Sweeping Authority to
    Override Federal Laws, Center on Budget and
    Policy Priorities, May 2002, http//www.cbpp.org/5
    -13-02tanf.pdf
About PowerShow.com