Effect of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Work Mandate among Drug Users

The present study examined the independent effects of work-activityparticipation status (whether a welfare recipient is required to work or is exempt from such requirements) on employment, receipt of cash welfare benefits known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and psychological functioning. The sample consisted of 228 female TANF recipients, 75 of whom were chronic drug users. Participants were administered self-report instruments to measure self-perceived work skills and barriers to employment, drug use, employment-related variables, TANF receipt, and psychological functioning. Contrary to the tested study hypotheses, results show that the work mandate was not significantly related to employment and was positively related to TANF receipt. The work mandate showed no effect on psychological distress. Aside from initial psychological functioning, selfperceived employment barriers had the only significant impact on change in psychological functioning. Self-perceived office skills was a significant predictor of higher wages earned and less time to employment. It is concluded that training recipient in office skills training while continuing to address other barriers may be the best approach to accomplishing the goals of welfare reform. INTRODUCTION The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) established a new welfare cash assistance program known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF. PRWORA was enacted in order to curb welfare dependency by setting a five-year lifetime maximum on *This study was supported by grant #R01-DA-11414 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author. 177 2005, Baywood Publishing Co., Inc. recipients’ eligibility for federally funded benefits. In conjunction with this federal time limit, states have been given the responsibility of requiring able-boded recipients of TANF to participate in “work activities,” such as paid employment, volunteer work, classroom training, and on-the-job training, in exchange for cash benefits. Recipients face financial sanctions for non-compliance. Whereas the first wave of welfare reform in 1996 required 50% of TANF families to be engaged in work activities by 2002, a newly proposed policy may require as many as 70% of TANF families to participate in work activities by the year 2007 [1]. The number of qualifying work activities would also be decreased, and the number of hours recipients are required to participate in work activities would increase. In light of these proposed changes, it is crucial to examine the effects of the TANF work mandate to this point. Understandably, studies of the work mandate and welfare reform in general have largely focused on employment rates and welfare receipt. These studies have generally found that welfare reform and the work mandate have been successful in moving welfare recipients into employment, though studies of specific outcomes have produced mixed results. Because TANF requires all able-bodied recipients to participate in work activities, only studies conducted prior to TANF were able to randomly assign recipients to workand non-work-required groups. One such study randomly assigned Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC, the cash assistance program prior to TANF) recipients to mandated and nonmandated welfare-to-work programs with sanctions and work requirements similar to those of current TANF programs [2]. This study was conducted in two cities, Grand Rapids, Michigan and Riverside, California. Analysis of the Grand Rapids sample revealed that those who were mandated to participate in the program reported similar rates of employment and welfare receipt but significantly higher earnings than those who were not mandated. However, results from the Riverside sample suggest that, for single parents, the welfare-to-work mandate may have no apparent effect on employment, wages, or welfare receipt (mandated two-parent families in Riverside did report increased employment and earnings). The authors suggest that differences in outcome may have been due to differences in labor markets and the rigor of enforcement policies. Another study of work mandates under AFDC was a random-assignment, two-year study of 21,000 recipients’ responses to “Jobs-First GAIN” in Los Angeles County [3]. Results revealed that participants in this welfare-to-work program were 10% more likely to have been employed for any amount of time during the two-year period. Additionally, the two-year earnings of recipients exposed to Jobs-First GAIN were significantly higher than those not exposed to the program; single parents’ earnings were an average of 26% higher, and two-parent families’ earnings were an average of 31% higher. Despite these promising findings, it was found that the average total income of those enrolled in Jobs-First GAIN was only 2% higher than those not required to work, making 178 / MONTOYA