This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-977 
entitled 'Welfare Reform: Information on Changing Labor Market and 
State Fiscal Conditions' which was released on July 15, 2003.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately.

Report to the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member, Committee on 
Finance, U. S. Senate:

United States General Accounting Office:

GAO:

July 2003:

Welfare Reform:

Information on Changing Labor Market and State Fiscal Conditions:

GAO-03-977:

Contents:

Letter:

Appendix I: Briefing Slides:

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:

GAO Contacts:

Staff Acknowledgments:

Related GAO Products:

Abbreviations:

AFDC: Aid to Families with Dependent Children:

HHS: Department of Health and Human Services:

TANF: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families:

United States General Accounting Office:

Washington, DC 20548:

July 15, 2003:

The Honorable Charles E. Grassley 
Chairman 
The Honorable Max Baucus 
Ranking Minority Member 
Committee on Finance 
United States Senate:

With the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), the Congress made sweeping changes 
to federal policy for needy families. PRWORA ended the Aid to Families 
with Dependent Children (AFDC) program and created the Temporary 
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant to states.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) oversees the TANF 
block grant program, which provides grants to states totaling up to 
$16.5 billion each year and requires states to maintain a historical 
level of state spending on welfare reform programs. Under TANF, states 
have greater flexibility and face greater uncertainty than they did 
under AFDC. States have greater flexibility to design, finance, and 
implement programs for low-income families, including determining who 
is to be served and what services to provide. TANF also emphasizes the 
transitional nature of assistance and the importance of employment for 
welfare recipients. Because the amount of the TANF block grant is 
fixed, as caseloads decline--as they did in all states through the late 
1990s--states have had additional resources that they have used to 
expand their programs, achieve some budgetary savings, and create 
reserves; however, states bear most of their TANF program's fiscal 
risks if their programs' costs rise as a result of higher caseloads or 
other factors.

Welfare reform was initially implemented in a time of economic growth, 
when there was a strong demand for labor and the fiscal situation of 
the states was favorable. More recently, the economy has slowed and 
welfare reform is being implemented in less favorable economic 
conditions. To obtain information on welfare reform under changing 
labor market and fiscal conditions, you asked us to determine (1) how 
labor market conditions have changed in recent years; (2) how cash 
public assistance caseloads and the employment activities of current 
and former welfare recipients have changed in recent years; (3) how the 
fiscal situation of states has changed in recent years; and (4) to what 
extent states have made changes to their welfare programs as a result 
of fiscal changes.

To address your first and second questions, we obtained data on 
national and state unemployment rates and the national labor force 
participation rate, as well as qualitative information on recent 
economic conditions for five states, selected judgmentally to reflect 
variation in geographic location and welfare-to-work approaches 
(Arizona, Iowa, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin). We also obtained 
data on cash public assistance caseload changes for the nation and the 
selected states, as well as qualitative information on caseload 
patterns and the ability of TANF recipients to enter employment from 
the selected states and three nongovernmental welfare-to-work 
organizations. To address your third and fourth questions, we obtained 
publicly available information on the current fiscal situation of the 
states from national organizations representing states and publicly 
available budget documents on state TANF programs and on proposals for 
changes to their TANF programs. In addition, we obtained information 
from budget officials in the selected states as well as TANF financial 
data submitted by states to HHS. We conducted our work from February to 
May 2003 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 
standards. Data used in this analysis were those readily available as 
of April 30, 2003.

On May 13, 2003, we presented your staff with this descriptive 
information on changing economic conditions and welfare reform. This 
report formally conveys the information provided during that briefing. 
In summary, we reported:

The recent economic downturn is reflected in key national and state 
labor market statistics and in the reports of state officials. The 
national unemployment rate, for example, increased from 4.0 percent in 
January 2000 to 5.8 percent in March 2003. Although changes in 
unemployment rates have varied across industrial sectors and for 
workers of different levels of educational attainment, unemployment 
rates have generally increased across sectors and education levels in 
recent years. Unemployment rates varied across the five selected 
states, ranging from 4.0 percent in Iowa and Montana to 6.2 percent in 
Pennsylvania in February 2003. Despite these differences, officials in 
each state felt that their state has experienced an economic downturn. 
While the loss of jobs in manufacturing and the continued importance of 
service sector employment for TANF recipients were common features of 
the downturn across the five states, other important characteristics of 
the downturn differed.

Changes in cash public assistance caseloads and the employment 
activities of welfare recipients also varied across the five states. 
Although the national welfare caseload declined from December 2000 to 
December 2002, only one of the five states (Pennsylvania) experienced 
caseload declines in both years of this time period. Caseload patterns 
differed across the five states in terms of any geographic 
concentration of caseload changes or the length of time recipients 
stayed on cash assistance. Information on how the downturn has affected 
the employment prospects of TANF recipients also differed across the 
states and by the type of organization interviewed. Some reported that 
TANF recipients had greater difficulty finding jobs as a result of 
changing economic conditions, while others said that entry-level jobs-
-those most likely to employ TANF recipients--were still generally 
available. State officials in the five states reported that changes had 
not been made to state welfare-to-work programs in response to recent 
economic changes, but some states have had to curtail, or expect to 
curtail, services and/or cut cash benefits because of fiscal 
difficulties.

States are facing one of their most challenging fiscal situations in 
years, in part, due to the economic downturn and state fiscal responses 
to this downturn. Most states are required to balance their budgets and 
since their revenues have been much lower than forecast, state 
officials have struggled to bring expenditures in line with available 
resources. A state's need to cut spending or increase revenues during a 
downturn can be mitigated if it has accumulated surplus balances in 
reserve and states accumulated unprecedented reserves during the late 
1990s. However, these reserves have dropped appreciably as states 
address their fiscal crises.

For the TANF program specifically, we found that each of the five 
states in our review planned to use their reserves of unspent federal 
TANF funds[Footnote 1] to maintain their TANF programs and they also 
planned to use the program's flexibility to reallocate some resources 
to higher priority TANF needs. Nationwide, states reported that over 
$5.8 billion in federal TANF funds remained unspent at the end of 
federal fiscal year 2002. However, the levels of TANF reserves vary 
considerably among the 50 states. For example, 3 states' reserves of 
unspent funds are equal to or greater than their annual grant amount 
whereas 3 other states have no reported reserves. Many states began to 
draw down some of their reserves in federal fiscal years 2001 and 2002, 
in part due to concerns that accumulating unspent balances might signal 
that these funds were not needed.[Footnote 2]

In using reserve funds to augment the annual block grant, states 
assumed some risks. Because the amount of federal funding is fixed and 
does not vary based on the number of people served or changing program 
costs, states that used their reserves to augment their annual block 
grant would face challenges maintaining this level of funding if 
program costs rose as a result of higher caseloads or other factors. 
These risks are compounded by the current fiscal situations in the 
states that make it difficult for them to increase their own funding 
for these programs. Four of the 5 states we reviewed faced difficult 
budget challenges in their TANF programs this year. In Montana, for 
example, program budget officials said the state used most of its TANF 
reserves to fund short-term projects. When the fiscal situation 
worsened this year, program officials worked to terminate these 
programs early and reallocated the program funds to address shortfalls 
in other higher priority TANF-funded programs. In Pennsylvania, on the 
other hand, program budget officials said that the state's TANF program 
is relatively well protected from the state budget crisis and that 
based on current expenditure rates the state's TANF reserves could last 
through 2006.

We provided a draft of this briefing to officials at HHS for their 
technical comments and incorporated their comments where appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to relevant congressional 
committees and other interested parties and will make copies available 
to others upon request. This report will also be available on GAO's Web 
site at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any questions 
about this:

report, please contact Cynthia M. Fagnoni at (202) 512-7215 or Paul L. 
Posner at (202) 512-9573. Additional GAO contacts and acknowledgments 
are listed in appendix II.

Cynthia M. Fagnoni, Managing Director 
Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:

Paul L. Posner, Managing Director 
Federal Budget Issues and Intergovernmental Relations:

Signed by Cynthia M. Fagnoni and Paul L. Posner: 

[End of section]

Appendix I: Briefing Slides:

[See PDF for images]

[End of figures]

[End of section]

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:

GAO Contacts:

Gale Harris (202) 512-7235 or harrisg@gao.gov Tom James (202) 512-2996 
or Jamest@gao.gov:

Staff Acknowledgments:

In addition to those named above, Elspeth Grindstaff, Bill Keller, Leah 
Nash, and Janice Peterson made key contributions to this report.

[End of section]

Related GAO Products:

Child Care: Recent State Policy Changes Affecting the Availability of 
Assistance for Low-Income Families. GAO-03-588. Washington, D.C.: May 
5, 2003.

Welfare Reform: Former TANF Recipients with Impairments Less Likely to 
Be Employed and More Likely to Receive Federal Supports. GAO-03-210. 
Washington, D.C.: December 6, 2002.

Welfare Reform: With TANF Flexibility, States Vary in How They 
Implement Work Requirements and Time Limits. GAO-02-770. Washington, 
D.C.: July 5, 2002.

Welfare Reform: Federal Oversight of State and Local Contracting Can Be 
Strengthened. GAO-02-661. Washington, D.C.: June 11, 2002.

Welfare Reform: States Provide TANF-Funded Work Support Services to 
Many Low-Income Families Who Do Not Receive Cash Assistance. GAO-02-
615T. Washington, D.C.: April 10, 2002.

Welfare Reform: States Are Using TANF Flexibility to Adapt Work 
Requirements and Time Limits to Meet State and Local Needs. GAO-02-
501T. Washington, D.C.: March 7, 2002.

Welfare Reform: Moving Hard-to-Employ Recipients Into the Workforce. 
GAO-01-368. Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2001.

Welfare Reform: Challenges in Maintaining a Federal-State Fiscal 
Partnership. GAO-01-828. Washington, D.C.: August 10, 2001.

Welfare Reform: Challenges in Saving for a Rainy Day. GAO-01-674T. 
Washington, D.C.: April 26, 2001.

Welfare Reform: Early Fiscal Effects of the TANF Block Grant. AIMD-98-
137. Washington, D.C.: August 18, 1998.


FOOTNOTES

[1] States are allowed to keep unspent TANF funds without fiscal year 
limitation. They are required to report unspent balances as either an 
unobligated balance or an unliquidated obligation. While the latter 
implies that there is an underlying commitment on these funds, we 
reported in 2001 that it is difficult to tell from the states' reports 
whether these funds have actually been committed or whether they might 
be available to use in the future. See U.S. General Accounting Office, 
Welfare Reform: Challenges Maintaining a Federal-State Fiscal 
Partnership, GAO-01-828 (Washington D.C.: Aug. 10, 2001).

[2] For more information, see U.S. General Accounting Office, Welfare 
Reform: Challenges in Saving for a "Rainy Day," GAO-01-674T 
(Washington, D.C.: Apr. 26, 2001).

GAO's Mission:

The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, 
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability 
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use 
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides 
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make 
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to 
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 
integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 
graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its 
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order 
GAO Products" heading.

Order by Mail or Phone:

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to:

U.S. General Accounting Office

441 G Street NW,

Room LM Washington,

D.C. 20548:

To order by Phone: 	

	Voice: (202) 512-6000:

	TDD: (202) 512-2537:

	Fax: (202) 512-6061:

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

Public Affairs:

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 U.S.

General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.C.

20548: