Evaluating Welfare Reform Waivers Under Section 1115

Harvey, Carol; Camasso, Michael J.; Jagannathan, Radha

doi:10.1257/jep.14.4.165

Cited by 39 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Blank's (2002) summary also concludes that state evaluations have generated inconsistent findings regarding the effects of waiver programs on marriage. See also the surveys by Grogger et al (2001), Harvey et al (2000), and Bitler, Gelback and Hoynes (2002). Experimental studies have the virtue of a clean design with no policy endogeneity, but observational studies can examine broader populations under more varied environments.…”

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Transitions in welfare participation and female headship

Fitzgerald

Ribar

2004

Population Research and Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.

show abstract

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Transitions in welfare participation and female headship

Fitzgerald

Ribar

2004

Population Research and Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 Several waivers were granted in the early 1980s, but it was not until the early to mid-1990s that the major, statewide waivers that are a focus of this paper were approved and implemented. See Harvey et al (2000) and Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) (1999). 6 See Blank (2001), CEA (1997, Levine and Whitmore (1998), Ziliak and Figlio (1999), and Wallace and Blank (1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We address these specifically later in the paper. 23 Harvey et. al (2000) report that 30 states have relaxed at least one of the three main restrictions on two-parent families.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

AFDC, SSI, and Welfare Reform Aggressiveness: Caseload Reductions versus Caseload Shifting

Schmidt¹,

Sevak²

2004

The Journal of Human Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Welfare reform has made receipt of cash benefits more difficult and less attractive for single mothers. We examine whether reforms of AFDC affected caseloads of another programSupplemental Security Income (SSI). We exploit state variation in welfare reform over time, and find that female-headed households in states aggressively pursuing welfare reform were 21.6 percent more likely to receive SSI. This implies that a decrease in caseloads in one program cannot be interpreted as an equal-sized decrease in the number of families receiving public assistance. In addition, our results have policy implications for the well-being of families affected by welfare reform time limits. * We are grateful to

show abstract

“…The increased emphasis on work requirements was often accompanied as well by a reduction of marginal tax rates on earnings to provide financial incentives to work, for the federal rules still required 100 percent rates. Many other features also began to be introduced in state waiver programs, including (1) 6 See U.S. DHHS (1997) and Harvey et al (2000) for a summary of the provisions of the state waiver programs in this period. 11 the provision of time limits on benefits, stipulating that recipients could not receive benefits for more than a certain number of years (2 to 5, for example), at least within a given calendar period;…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the largest volume of data analysis conducted on TANF is descriptive in nature and does not seek to estimate the effect of the 1996 legislation in a causal sense, i.e., the effect of the legislation on A number of studies are excluded from the table, including those conducted on a single state but which were not random assignment, and a number of random assigment studies which were discontinued or which have not produced results (Harvey et al, 2000, has a comprehensive list).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program

Moffitt¹

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program was created in 1996 from what was previously named the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. The TANF program is intended to serve low-income families, primarily those with only a single parent present, as did the AFDC program. The TANF program is distinguished from AFDC by strong work requirements, time limits on receipt, options for the provision of noncash assistance, and by a block grant financing structure. This paper reviews the rules of the TANF program and the research that has been conducted on it and on the AFDC program. financing through block grants, to the individual states; (2) the imposition of strict work requirements in order to qualify for federal aid; and (3) lifetime limits on the number of years of benefit receipt which could be paid out of federal funds. This paper reviews the rules and structure of the TANF program and compares them with the historical AFDC program. In addition, it reviews the caseloads, costs, and participation rates of the TANF and AFDC programs. Finally, it reviews the research that has been conducted on both programs. Given the relative youth of the former, relatively little scholarly research has been conducted on it to date. Consequently, the bulk of the research will be reviewed for the AFDC program. Some discussion will also be provided of the extent to which the results of the AFDC research can be expected to apply to the TANF program.The first section reviews the rules and history of the programs. The second section reviews the trends in caseloads and expenditures and other program characteristics, followed by a section on the research results. A final section discusses reforms of the financial incentives in the program. A short, but more detailed, history of the major developments in the AFDC program can be found in Garfinkel and McLanahan (1986, Chapter 4). That discussion also includes an account of the history of income support programs prior to AFDC. I. History, Rules, and GoalsHistory and Rules of the AFDC Program. Table 1 shows the major pieces of legislation creating and altering the AFDC program over its history, 1935-1996. 1 The program was created by the Social Security Act of 1935 along with the Old-Age Social Security and Unemployment Insurance programs. AFDC provided cash financial support to families with "dependent" children, defined as those who were deprived of the support or care of one natural (i.e., biological) parent by reason of death, disability, or absence from the home, and were under the care of the other parent or another relative. Although the language of the legislation was genderneutral, in practice the vast majority of families of this type consisted of a mother and her children, or what are today called single-mother families. Although the presence of the father was possible if he was the single parent or if he was disabled, the overwhelming majority of participating families were initially, and have continued to be, those where the father is...

show abstract

Evaluating Welfare Reform Waivers Under Section 1115

Cited by 39 publications

References 16 publications

Transitions in welfare participation and female headship

Transitions in welfare participation and female headship

AFDC, SSI, and Welfare Reform Aggressiveness: Caseload Reductions versus Caseload Shifting

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About