Policy Briefs: Fast Facts on Welfare Policy

Over half of all states help families' weather short-term financial crisis with diversion payments. This fast fact illustrates how, as of 2002, the payment amount varies greatly across states, as does the number of times a family can receive such support. Accepting a diversion payment generally bars the family from applying for monthly TANF benefits for a specific period of time.

As of 2002, 26 states adopted the 60-month time limit on receipt of cash assistance established by the 1996 federal welfare reform law. This fast fact shows that seven states adopted shorter lifetime limits; six continue payments after recipients hit the 60 months. Further, states vary on how benefits may be interrupted or limited prior to reaching the time limit.

States vary widely in the maximum monthly cash benefit an eligible family can receive, this fast fact documents. As of July 2002, the nation average maximum benefits for a family of three was $413.

Most legal immigrants must wait 5 years before receiving federally funded cash assistance. This fast fact provides details on the 26 states that do provide state-funded assistance to non-citizens.

A wide variation exists across states in the maximum amount of earnings that a family can have and still be eligible for cash assistance. States' "initial eligibility thresholds" are shown in this fast fact. Nationally, the initial earned income thresholds for a family of three as of July 2002 averaged $768 a month.

TANF permits states to rescind eligibility rules that penalize marriage. As of July 2002, 37 states have removed these penalties. This fast fact maps out the eligibility standards used by the different states.

State sanction policies for failure to comply with work-related requirements reduce or eliminate the amount of a family's benefit. These policies, detailed in this fast fact, vary in the length of sanction and in the amount of the cash benefit they eliminate.

This fast fact depicts how food stamp participation among families with children who have recent welfare experience compares with those who have no welfare experience. This suggests that the new food stamp program rules are only making a difference for families with experience in the cash welfare system.

This fast fact depicts how access to paid leave for working parents with incomes below the poverty line contrasts with access for higher-income working parents. Paid leave protects working parents if personal illness or a sick child forces them to stay home.

With the end of the school year fast approaching, millions of working parents are considering their summer child care alternatives. What options are parents choosing? Are children spending more time home alone? How much are parents spending on their summer child care? How so the choices parents make and the amount they spend vary by income? By the age of their child? [View the corresponding report]