Department of Health and Human Services 

OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

JANET REHNQUIST 

INSPECTOR GENERAL 

JULY 2002 

OEI-02-00-00630 

State Strategies For Working With 

Hard-To-Employ TANF Recipients 
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

http://www.oig.hhs.gov/ 

The mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, as amended, 

is to protect the integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) programs, as well as 

the health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. This statutory mission is carried out 

through a nationwide network of audits, investigations, and inspections conducted by the following 

operating components: 

Office of Audit Services 

The OIG's Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides all auditing services for HHS, either by conducting 

audits with its own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Audits examine the 

performance of HHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in carrying out their respective 

responsibilities and are intended to provide independent assessments of HHS programs and operations in 

order to reduce waste, abuse, and mismanagement and to promote economy and efficiency throughout the 

Department. 

Office of Evaluation and Inspections 

The OIG's Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts short-term management and program 

evaluations (called inspections) that focus on issues of concern to the Department, the Congress, and the 

public. The findings and recommendations contained in the inspections reports generate rapid, accurate, 

and up-to-date information on the efficiency, vulnerability, and effectiveness of departmental programs. 

Office of Investigations 

The OIG's Office of Investigations (OI) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations of 

allegations of wrongdoing in HHS programs or to HHS beneficiaries and of unjust enrichment by 

providers. The investigative efforts of OI lead to criminal convictions, administrative sanctions, or civil 

monetary penalties. The OI also oversees State Medicaid fraud control units which investigate and 

prosecute fraud and patient abuse in the Medicaid program. 

Office of Counsel to the Inspector General 

The Office of Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG) provides general legal services to OIG, rendering 

advice and opinions on HHS programs and operations and providing all legal support in OIG’s internal 

operations. The OCIG imposes program exclusions and civil monetary penalties on health care providers 

and litigates those actions within the Department. The OCIG also represents OIG in the global settlement 

of cases arising under the Civil False Claims Act, develops and monitors corporate integrity agreements, 

develops model compliance plans, renders advisory opinions on OIG sanctions to the health care 

community, and issues fraud alerts and other industry guidance. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

OBJECTIVE 

To identify strategies States use to work with hard-to-employ TANF recipients, who have 

significant barriers to employment, transition into the workforce. 

BACKGROUND 

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA, P.L. 104-

193) of 1996 replaced the Federal entitlement program Aid to Families with Dependent 

Children (AFDC) with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant 

program. The legislation imposes strict work requirements, limits Federal assistance to five 

years, and establishes minimum work participation rates. Within these limits, States have broad 

flexibility to design their own programs to promote work and self-sufficiency. 

Individuals on the welfare caseload may have significant barriers to employment and difficultly 

finding and sustaining work. These recipients are often referred to as hard-to-employ. Many 

of these individuals had been exempted from work participation under the former AFDC 

program but are now subject to work requirements under PRWORA. Further, they are the 

part of the caseload that may reach the five-year time limit and no longer qualify for Federal 

assistance. 

This inspection identifies State strategies for helping hard-to-employ recipients who have 

significant barriers to employment. Based on discussions with researchers and practitioners, we 

focused on the following eight barriers: 

Substance abuse Physical disabilities 

Domestic violence Learning disabilities 

Mental health issues Language barriers 

Chronic health problems Multiple barriers 

This inspection is based on a review of each State’s TANF plan and a telephone survey of 

TANF officials from each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients i OEI-02-00-00630 
FINDINGS 

States rely on a number of strategies to identify barriers to 

employment 

States most commonly screen all recipients for domestic violence issues, substance abuse, 

physical disabilities, and chronic health problems. At least 26 States use some type of formal 

tool or instrument to identify recipients with each of the barriers we addressed, with the 

exception of language barriers. States also rely on recipients to disclose information about 

barriers they face. At least six States train staff to observe behaviors or other clues that help 

identify recipients with each of the barriers addressed in this inspection. 

Thirty-seven States rely on non-TANF agencies and organizations 

to provide services to recipients with all of these barriers 

All States form partnerships with other agencies and organizations to help recipients with 

barriers. Thirty-seven States refer to or have some arrangement with non-TANF agencies or 

organizations to provide services to recipients with all of the barriers addressed in this 

inspection. Services may include drug treatment, mental health treatment, shelters for domestic 

violence victims, English as a Second Language classes, or vocational rehabilitation. 

Thirty-one States have expanded their case management services 

to better meet the needs of recipients with barriers 

States commonly report that they provide more intensive case management or use 

interdisciplinary teams or multiple agencies to help coordinate and broker services for these 

recipients. As many as 16 States employ specialized staff to provide targeted assistance to 

recipients with each of the barriers we addressed in this inspection. 

States have structured their TANF policies to provide additional 

flexibility for recipients with barriers 

Forty-one States report that they give or plan to give extensions to at least some hard-toemploy recipients who have barriers when they reach the State or Federal time limit. Thirtyseven States also report that they do not anticipate exceeding the 20 percent extension limit in 

the near future. Nearly all say that they will not have difficulty meeting 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients ii OEI-02-00-00630 
the work participation requirement for one-parent families. 

The PRWORA further mandates that a certain percentage of the annual caseload in each State 

must participate in defined work-related activities. Though more broadly defined activities do 

not count toward Federal work participation requirements, 38 States report that they have 

expanded this definition to include such activities as substance abuse and mental health 

treatment, domestic violence counseling, and physical rehabilitation in order to better serve 

hard-to-employ recipients with barriers. 

States Are Still Facing Challenges 

States report facing several challenges in addressing recipients with barriers to employment. At 

least 13 States report they do not have the capacity to serve all recipients with some of the 

barriers we addressed. Forty-one States do not have any specific strategies to help recipients 

who face multiple barriers. Only nine States report using pilot programs to implement new 

approaches for any of these populations. Additionally, few States have information about the 

barriers faced by recipients who have been sanctioned or have strong evidence about the 

effectiveness of their strategies to help recipients with the barriers we addressed in this 

inspection. 

Next Steps 

This inspection suggests several opportunities to improve the TANF program to better serve 

hard-to-employ recipients. They are for Congress to consider when re-authorizing TANF, the 

Administration for Children and Families (ACF) to address when focusing its technical 

assistance efforts, States to examine when developing their strategies for this population, and 

researchers to review in planning their work. These opportunities include: 

C Encouraging States to create and expand innovative programs to better serve recipients 

with barriers, particularly those facing multiple barriers; and 

C Expanding States’ capacity to track recipients who have barriers to employment in 

order to increase capacity to evaluate States’ initiatives that address these populations 

and the effects of States’ sanction policies. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients iii OEI-02-00-00630 
Agency Comments 

We received comments from the Administration for Children and Families (ACF). The ACF is 

in general agreement with the background, findings, and next steps of the inspection. We 

concur with ACF that the Administration’s proposed re-authorization legislation is consistent 

with our findings and next steps. We further recognize that ACF’s past and on-going technical 

assistance efforts continue to assist States in implementing initiatives to better serve hard-toemploy populations. However, we urge ACF to consider more targeted efforts regarding the 

next steps that we outlined. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients iv OEI-02-00-00630 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................... i

INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 1

FINDINGS

States rely on a number of strategies ........................................... 7

Partnerships are key to helping States .......................................... 9

States rely on non-TANF agencies ........................................... 10

States have expanded their case management services ............................. 11

States structure their TANF policies to provide additional flexibility ................... 12

Several challenges exist for States ............................................ 14

NEXT STEPS .............................................................. 17

AGENCY COMMENTS ...................................................... 18

APPENDICES

A: Profile of Programs and Services .......................................... 19

B: Agency Comments ..................................................... 20

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................... 25

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients v OEI-02-00-00630 
INTRODUCTION 

OBJECTIVE 

To identify strategies States use to work with hard-to-employ TANF recipients, who have 

significant barriers to employment, transition into the workforce. 

BACKGROUND 

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA, P.L. 104-

193) of 1996 replaced the Federal entitlement program Aid to Families with Dependent 

Children (AFDC) with the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant 

program. The legislation imposes strict work requirements, limits Federal assistance to five 

years, and establishes minimum work participation rates. Within these limits, States have broad 

flexibility to design their own programs to promote work and self-sufficiency. 

Individuals on the welfare caseload may have significant barriers to employment and difficultly 

finding and sustaining work. These recipients are often referred to as hard-to-employ. They 

commonly have one or more employment barriers such as substance abuse, domestic violence, 

mental health issues, chronic health problems, physical disabilities, learning disabilities, and 

language barriers, among others. Many of these individuals had been exempted from work 

participation under the former AFDC program and are now subject to work requirements 

under PRWORA. In addition, they are the part of the caseload that may reach the five-year 

time limit and no longer qualify for Federal assistance. 

Strategies to help recipients with significant barriers are important for a number of reasons. 

Time limits make it important for States to work with all recipients before they reach the end of 

the Federal five-year time limit. Further, States are aiming to further reduce their caseloads and 

decreasing welfare rolls have left some with resources that they can invest in such programs. In 

addition, policymakers are focusing on the re-authorization of TANF in 2002. As part of this 

process, Congress is likely to focus on individuals remaining on assistance who face barriers to 

employment and on any policy changes needed to better serve this population. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 1 OEI-02-00-00630 
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act 

There are several key provisions of PRWORA that have important implications for hard-toemploy individuals. The decisions States make in these policy areas define, in part, their 

strategy for working with recipients with significant barriers to work. A brief description of 

these provisions follows. 

Time Limits: One of the most distinguishing provisions of PRWORA is the limit on how long 

families may receive Federally-funded assistance. The law sets a 60-month lifetime limit on 

Federal cash assistance and allows States the discretion to impose shorter time limits. States 

may use their own funds to provide income assistance or services to individuals once they have 

reached the 60-month Federal time limit. 

Participation/Work Requirements: The PRWORA imposes strict work requirements for 

welfare recipients. The Act requires non-exempt adult recipients to participate in work or 

work-related activities within two years after they start receiving assistance. The law also 

establishes minimum work participation rate standards each year for all families receiving 

TANF. For example, in Fiscal Year 2002, States must have adults in 50 percent of all families 

who are receiving assistance engaged in work activities at least 30 hours per week. 

Activities that are allowed to count toward the Federal work participation rate requirement 

include subsidized and unsubsidized work, job search or job readiness activities, work 

experience if private sector employment is not available, community service, on-the-job 

training, vocational education training, job skills training, education related to employment, 

satisfactory school attendance, and providing child care. States have the flexibility to tailor their 

work requirements to permit or require recipients to engage in other types of activities that 

address potential employment barriers such as counseling or substance abuse treatment. 

Exemptions: The PRWORA allows for States to exclude months of receiving cash assistance 

when calculating the Federal 60-month time limit. States must exempt the months spent on 

TANF when a recipient is a minor or when a case does not have a head of household, 

commonly referred to as a “child-only” case. States have the flexibility to exempt specific 

categories of recipients from State time limits; however, Federal time limits still include these 

months. 

The PRWORA also allows States to exempt certain recipients from work requirements. Single 

parents of children under the age of six who are unable to obtain child care are exempt from the 

two-year work requirement. All families are included in the calculation 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 2 OEI-02-00-00630 
of a State’s work participation rate with the exception of single parents with children under the 

age of one, the disabled or are those caring for a family member. 

Extensions: Recognizing that some recipients may not move off welfare before reaching the 

time limit, PRWORA allows States to exclude up to 20 percent of the average monthly 

caseload and extend benefits for these families beyond the 60-month limit by reason of 

hardship. The definition of what constitutes a hardship or under what circumstances a recipient 

may be granted a temporary extension to a shorter State-imposed time limit is left up to each 

State. Additionally, the Family Violence Provision (42 USC 602(a)(7)) allows States that 

adopt the Family Violence Option to screen for domestic violence and waive those recipients 

from Federal time limits for as long as necessary. States are not penalized for exceeding the 20 

percent cap for extending benefits to victims of domestic violence. States can also provide 

unlimited extensions using State-only funds. 

Sanctions: Under certain circumstances, welfare recipients may be sanctioned from receiving 

cash assistance. The law mandates that States sanction welfare recipients for failure to comply 

with specific requirements of the program such as not cooperating with child support 

enforcement efforts or not participating in work requirements. States have discretion in 

sanctioning for other offenses such as testing positive for controlled substances or refusing to 

work toward attaining a high school diploma or its equivalent. Although States can determine 

the duration and the nature of sanctions, they are required to reduce benefits pro-rata if a 

recipient is non-compliant with the program. Sanctions can range from reductions in cash 

assistance to lifetime ineligibility. 

Recipients with Barriers to Employment 

Under TANF, many States have implemented a “work first” approach. This approach aims at 

moving recipients as quickly as possible into jobs by first offering job search assistance. This 

strategy has helped to contribute to a 56 percent decline in the number of individuals receiving 

welfare since 1996. However, this approach may not work for all recipients and some 

individuals may need additional assistance to help transition to work. These individuals often 

face a variety of personal and family barriers that may need to be addressed in order for them 

to find and sustain a job. 

Estimates of the prevalence of individuals on the welfare caseload who have these types of 

potential barriers to employment vary widely. One study estimates that 54 percent of the 

caseload has at least one serious barrier to employment, and this increases to 89 percent 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 3 OEI-02-00-00630 
when a moderate barrier is also taken into account.1 Another survey found that 78 percent of 

welfare recipients experienced at least one barrier to employment.2 

Estimates of the prevalence of recipients with specific barriers to employment also differ 

markedly. A review of recent research found that between one-fourth and one-third of current 

TANF recipients have a serious mental health problem. It also showed that at least one-fifth of 

current recipients have physical impairments that limit their ability to work.3 Based on data 

from three States, recipients who have learning disabilities range between one-fifth and one-half 

of the caseload. The extent of substance abuse problems is further estimated to be between 2 

and 20 percent.4 The prevalence of recipients with more than one barrier to employment also 

ranges widely. One survey found that 44 percent of welfare recipients experienced two or 

more barriers to employment and 12 percent experienced three or more barriers.5 

It should be further noted that recent research has shown that most caseload characteristics 

have not changed substantially since welfare reform. Specifically, one study compared data 

from the National Survey of America’s Families in 1997 and 1999. It found that the percent of 

adults with certain barriers did not change significantly and that adults on TANF in 1999 were 

not significantly more disadvantaged than those on TANF in 1997.6 

Finally, while having a barrier to employment decreases the probability of finding work, many 

individuals with barriers are able to find and sustain jobs. A synthesis of recent research shows 

that those with more barriers are less likely to work than those with fewer barriers, but they are 

more likely to work now than prior to welfare reform.7 More specifically, one study by the 

Urban Institute found a much higher incidence of multiple 

1

 Olson, Krista and Pavetti, LaDonna. Personal and Family Challenges to the Successful Transition from 

Welfare to Work. Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1996. 

2

Loprest, Pamela and Zedlewski, Sheila. Current and Former Welfare Recipients: How Do They Differ? 

Washington D.C. Urban Institute, Discussion Paper 99-17, November 1999. 

3

Sweeney, Eileen P. Recent Studies Indicate that Many Parents Who are Current or Former Welfare 

Recipients have Disabilities or Other Medical Condition. Washington D.C. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 

February 29, 2000.

4

Ibid. 

5

Loprest, Pamela and Zedlewski, Sheila. Current and Former Welfare Recipients: How Do They Differ? 

Washington D.C. Urban Institute, Discussion Paper 99-17, November 1999.

6

Zedlewski, Sheila and Alderson, Donald. Before and After Reform: How have Families on Welfare 

Changed? The Urban Institute, April 2001. 

7 Smith, Shannon. Background on the Composition of the TANF Caseload Since Welfare Reform, 

Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., Discussion Paper, June 2001. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 4 OEI-02-00-00630 
obstacles among families remaining on TANF than among families who had left the rolls.8 

Another study based on a sample of single women in urban Michigan found that the probability 

of a woman working at least 20 hours decreased as the number of barriers to work increased.9 

Identifying Potential Barriers to Employment 

The PRWORA requires all States to make an initial assessment of skills, prior work 

experience, and employability of each recipient who is at least 18 years of age or has not 

completed high school or high school equivalency. A report by the American Public Human 

Services Association (APHSA) found that all States conduct some form of assessment of 

TANF eligibility, employment history, vocational skills, literacy, family strengths and supports, 

family needs and problems, child-care needs, transportation needs, substance abuse status, 

physical health and disabilities, and domestic violence.10 

METHODOLOGY 

This inspection is based on a review of State documents and information gathered from all 50 

States and the District of Columbia. 

For the purposes of this report, we define hard-to-employ as those currently on welfare who 

have had difficulty obtaining and sustaining employment and have at least one barrier to 

employment. Since it was not possible to address all barriers, we considered eight issues that 

have been identified by researchers and practitioners as significant barriers to employment. 

These include: substance abuse, domestic violence, mental health issues, chronic health 

problems, physical disabilities, learning disabilities, language barriers, and multiple barriers. 

Document Review. We requested and received each State’s most recent TANF plan. We 

reviewed each plan for activities and policies that address recipients with each of the eight 

barriers we addressed. We also reviewed ACF’s Third Annual Report to Congress for data 

on each State’s TANF program. Finally, we reviewed reports and key websites 

8

 Loprest, Pamela and Zedlewski, Sheila. Current and Former Welfare Recipients: How Do They Differ? 

Washington D.C. Urban Institute, Discussion Paper 99-17, November 1999. 

9 Danziger, Sandra, et al. Barriers to the Employment of Welfare Recipients. University of Michigan 

Poverty Research and Training Center. February, 2000.

10Survey of State TANF Client Assessment Policies and Practices, Executive Summary for the August 2000 

Satellite Videoconference. Washington D.C. American Public Human Services Association. 2000. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 5 OEI-02-00-00630 
of organizations and research institutions to learn about the issues related to each of the barriers 

that we addressed. 

State TANF Official Data. We gathered information about each State’s programs, services, 

and policies that address recipients with these eight barriers. To gather this information, we 

conducted in-depth telephone interviews with officials from each of the 50 States and the 

District of Columbia. We used a standardized interview protocol to obtain information about 

various methods of identifying and assessing recipients with these barriers, use of non-TANF 

agencies and organizations, and challenges faced in serving recipients with these barriers. We 

obtained responses from all 50 States and the District of Columbia. 

Analysis 

The information gathered from our review of State documents and from State officials provides 

a national picture of what States are doing to address these populations. We gathered the same 

information about each of the barriers so that we could identify commonalities and differences in 

States’ strategies to work with these different populations. 

Limitations 

This inspection is not an exhaustive review of all efforts underway to address these populations. 

It recognizes that given the flexibility under PRWORA wide variations may exist at the local 

level within each State. This inspection is based on self-reported data from TANF officials. It 

aims to provide ACF and Congress with valuable information for the re-authorization process. 

It is also intended to provide States and localities with information they can use to build on their 

current strategies. It does not make any conclusions about the effectiveness or limitations of the 

different approaches taken by States. 

This inspection was conducted in accordance with the Quality Standards for 

Inspections issued by the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 6 OEI-02-00-00630 
FINDINGS 

Our document review and survey of officials in each of the 50 States and the District of 

Columbia show that States have developed strategies for working with hard-to-employ 

populations. The most common strategies are to use standardized tools to identify recipients 

with barriers, to develop partnerships with other agencies and organizations, and to refer these 

recipients to appropriate services. States have also structured their TANF policies to provide 

additional flexibility for recipients with barriers. Challenges remain, however, particularly in 

addressing recipients who face multiple barriers and in effectively tracking and evaluating how 

well these populations are being served. 

States rely on a number of strategies to identify barriers to 

employment 

At least 17 States screen all recipients 

for each of these barriers 

States commonly screen all recipients for 

domestic violence issues, substance abuse, 

physical disabilities, and chronic health 

problems. (See Table 1.) Fewer screen all 

recipients for mental health issues or learning 

disabilities. Only 13 States report screening all 

TANF recipients for all of the barriers we 

addressed, with the exception of language 

barriers. Seven States mention that they only 

screen recipients with any of these barriers who 

they suspect have a barrier or who have not 

been able to succeed in the labor market. 

At least 26 States use formal tools to 

identify each of the barriers to 

employment 

Table 1

State Screening Practices 

N=51

Barrier Number of 

States that 

Screen All 

Recipients 

Domestic Violence 37 

Substance Abuse 33 

Physical Disabilities 33 

Chronic Health 30 

Problems 

Mental Health Issues 24 

Learning Disabilities 17 

Source: OEI Survey of TANF Officials, 2001 

Over half of States use some type of formal tool or instrument to identify each of the barriers 

we addressed, with the exception of language barriers. (See Table 2.) These tools range from 

a brief screening instrument to a comprehensive needs assessment and can be administered 

either face-to-face or as written questionnaires. Some are specific to 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 7 OEI-02-00-00630 
a particular barrier whereas others include indicators for a range of barriers. States use these 

tools to screen recipients at different points in time. They may screen recipients when they 

apply to the program or when a caseworker is developing a recipient’s employability plan. 

Others screen recipients after they have experienced difficulty finding or retaining employment. 

Some States use tools that are more widely 

established to target specific barriers. 

Fourteen States utilize Substance Abuse 

Subtle Screening Inventory (SASSI) or the 

CAGE questionnaire to identify recipients 

with substance abuse problems. Nine States 

implement the Tests of Adult Basic Education 

(TABE) or a tool developed by the State of 

Washington to screen individuals for potential 

learning disabilities. 

States also report using tools they developed 

in collaboration with other agencies or 

organizations. These types of tools are 

typically used to identify domestic violence 

issues. Seven States have also developed 

comprehensive assessments that screen 

recipients for a number of the barriers we 

Table 2 

State Use of Formal Tools 

N=51 

Barrier Number of 

States that Use a 

Formal Tool 

Substance Abuse 37 

Domestic Violence 33 

Physical Disabilities 28 

Learning Disabilities 28 

Chronic Health Issues 27 

Mental Health Issues 26 

Source: OEI Survey of TANF Officials, 2001 

addressed. These types of tools often gather information about physical disabilities or chronic 

health problems and are used to help determine whether recipients may be eligible for 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI). 

Other methods are also used to identify barriers 

In addition to relying on formal tools, States use a number of other approaches to identify 

potential barriers to employment. States rely on recipients to disclose information about 

barriers they face. They may also train staff to observe behaviors or other clues that may 

indicate a recipient has a particular obstacle to employment. These methods are most 

commonly used to identify recipients with language barriers. 

Twelve States mention that they use the labor market to screen recipients as to whether or not 

they are ready for work for any of the barriers we addressed. Difficulty finding work or 

repeated patterns of job loss may indicate that a recipient has a barrier that may not be readily 

apparent. Employers or other organizations may also alert TANF agencies that a 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 8 OEI-02-00-00630 
recipient has a specific barrier. For example, refugee organizations commonly refer recipients 

who have language barriers to TANF agencies. 

At least 20 States note that they have difficulty identifying recipients who have each of the 

following barriers: substance abuse, mental health issues, learning disabilities, and domestic 

violence. They commonly explain that recipients are reluctant to disclose this information, 

particularly in the case of domestic violence when they may fear for their safety. Other 

recipients may fail to recognize that they have a problem or that a particular issue is limiting their 

success in the labor market. 

At least 37 States provide in-depth assessments for recipients with most of 

these barriers 

Once a recipient has been identified as having a potential barrier, almost all States provide indepth assessments to further understand the nature and extent of the barrier and how it may 

affect the recipient’s ability to work. Specifically, 42 States conduct in-depth assessments for 

recipients with substance abuse issues and at least 37 States do such assessments for those with 

mental health issues, learning disabilities, physical disabilities, and chronic health problems. 

States may refer recipients with potential barriers to other agencies or organizations that 

specialize in these particular issues. Professionals at these organizations then conduct in-depth 

assessments and provide feedback to the TANF agency. 

Partnerships are key to helping States serve recipients with 

barriers to employment 

All States form partnerships with other agencies and organizations to help recipients with 

barriers to work. Specifically, States use partnerships to develop screening and assessment 

tools, to provide services to address specific barriers, and to train TANF staff, among other 

things. 

States partner with a variety of agencies and organizations. They frequently work with State or 

local departments of labor, vocational rehabilitation, health, mental health, substance abuse, and 

education. Community-based organizations that provide drug, alcohol, and mental health 

services, as well as vocational training, English as a Second Language (ESL) classes, basic 

education, and literacy services are also partners. In addition, States may collaborate with 

advocacy groups such as domestic violence coalitions that have networks of providers 

throughout the State. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 9 OEI-02-00-00630 
Thirty-three States mention that building and sustaining partnerships is one of the main 

challenges they face for any of the barriers we addressed. They experience difficulty getting 

partners to understand the need to provide services in a time-limited environment. Others say 

they have problems finding partners to provide additional services for TANF recipients. 

Establishing effective communication among partners, which is particularly important in 

monitoring recipients, is also difficult. 

Thirty-seven States rely on non-TANF agencies and organizations 

to provide services to recipients with each of these barriers 

States commonly refer to or have some arrangement with non-TANF agencies or organizations 

to provide services to recipients with barriers to employment. In some cases, States have 

contracts with organizations to provide specific services. Services may include drug treatment, 

mental health treatment, shelters for domestic violence victims, ESL classes, or vocational 

rehabilitation. (See Appendix A.) States may also refer certain recipients to the Social Security 

Administration to determine whether they are eligible for SSI. In addition, 13 States mention 

using performance-based contracts in which organizations or companies are responsible for 

achieving specific work placement goals for certain recipients or for specific services. 

The services that TANF recipients are 

referred to are generally not specific to 

TANF recipients and are available to others 

in the community. (See Table 3.) Only ten 

States say they provide any services that 

address these barriers that are solely for 

TANF recipients. Moreover, most States 

report that programs and services for TANF 

recipients with these barriers do not differ in 

any way from those provided to others in the 

community. The States that note differences 

commonly explain that TANF recipients have 

separate protocols or goals than others in the 

program. Two States comment that 

programs or services are more intensive for 

TANF recipients to help transition them to 

work before they reach the time limit. 

Table 3 

States With Services that 

Do Not Differ from Those Provided to 

Others in the Community 

N=51 

Barrier Number of 

States with 

Services that 

Do Not Differ 

Domestic Violence 44 

Physical Disabilities 41 

Mental Health Issues 39 

Chronic Health Problems 38 

Language Barriers 36 

Substance Abuse 36 

Learning Disabilities 35 

Source: OEI Survey of TANF Officials, 2001 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 10 OEI-02-00-00630 
At least 36 States report that they strive to maintain a focus on employment for 

recipients with each of these barriers 

Even though States refer recipients with barriers to other organizations and agencies for 

services, States aim to keep a focus on employment. At least 36 States express that 

employment is the ultimate goal for hard-to-employ recipients with each of the barriers we 

addressed as it is for all TANF recipients. 

States incorporate employment for these recipients in a number of ways. States may require 

some hard-to-employ recipients to work in addition to receiving services that address their 

specific barrier. For example, a recipient who is receiving drug treatment may also be required 

to participate in a work-related activity such as job search. In other situations, States may 

require recipients to work after they have completed a program or have made sufficient 

progress in addressing their barrier. This progression is typical of how States address domestic 

violence issues in that they first secure the recipient’s safety and only then initiate work-related 

activities. 

As many as 28 States further integrate employment objectives into services for each of the 

barriers we addressed. To do this, they may refer recipients to programs that place a particular 

emphasis on work. For example, Oregon refers recipients to ESL classes that use workrelated materials, such as job applications and resumes to prepare non-English speakers for the 

job market. States also often refer recipients to vocational rehabilitation programs that are 

specifically geared toward developing or improving job skills. 

Thirty-one States have expanded their case management services 

to better meet the needs of recipients with barriers 

States commonly report that they provide more intensive case management or use 

interdisciplinary teams or multiple agencies to help coordinate and broker services for these 

recipients. Others may assign hard-to-employ recipients to caseworkers who have smaller 

caseloads or who specialize in a particular barrier. As a result, recipients receive more 

individualized attention and additional assistance with finding and coordinating services. More 

emphasis may also be placed on getting recipients to go to treatment and on monitoring 

recipients’ progress. 

More than half of the States also report that caseworkers receive at least some training about 

each of the barriers we addressed in order to better serve these recipients. States most 

commonly report that caseworkers receive training on domestic violence issues and 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 11 OEI-02-00-00630 
substance abuse. Thirty-six States report that 

caseworkers receive training on learning 

disabilities and mental health issues. (See 

Table 4.) 

States take different approaches to training. 

Some provide information to caseworkers 

about these barriers during orientation 

whereas others conduct special sessions about 

a particular barrier. Several States mention 

that staff are trained on how to use screening 

and/or assessment tools for each of the 

barriers we addressed as well as how to look 

for signs that may indicate a recipient has a 

particular barrier. Training may also include 

information about what resources are available 

and how to make referrals for further 

assessments or services. Training is not 

always extensive and may not include all 

Table 4

State Training Practices 

N=51

Barrier Number of 

States that Train 

Caseworkers 

Domestic Violence 47 

Substance Abuse 46 

Mental Health Issues 36 

Learning Disabilities 36 

Physical Disabilities 29 

Language Barriers 29 

Chronic Health 27 

Problems 

Source: OEI Survey of TANF Officials, 2001 

caseworkers. As many as six States plan to provide additional training for caseworkers about 

each of the barriers we addressed in the near future. 

As many as 16 States employ specialized staff to provide targeted assistance to recipients with 

each of the barriers we addressed. These specialists can be co-located with TANF staff or be 

off-site. They may screen recipients for potential barriers or conduct more in-depth 

assessments. Specialists may also offer treatment or assist in referring recipients to other 

services. States most commonly use specialists to help recipients who have substance abuse 

and domestic violence issues. Four States use specialists to assist recipients who may be 

eligible for SSI with the application process. 

States have structured their TANF policies to provide additional 

flexibility for recipients with barriers 

Forty-one States report they give or plan to give extensions to recipients 

with at least some of these barriers when they reach the time limit 

The PRWORA gives States some flexibility in meeting the time limits in that it allows States to 

provide extensions for up to 20 percent of the State’s caseload. In addition, States that adopt 

the Family Violence Option can also extend benefits beyond the 20 percent cap for victims of 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 12 OEI-02-00-00630 
domestic violence. The length of the extension policies varies by State and is not limited by 

PRWORA. 

Forty-one States report that they give or plan to give extensions to at least some hard-toemploy recipients with employment barriers when they reach the State or Federal time limit. 

Eight States are still in the process of deciding who will be covered by the 20 percent rule. 

Three States say they will consider cutting off recipients from assistance who have reached the 

time limit. 

Eleven States have also developed alternative programs for recipients with employment barriers 

who have reached the State or Federal time limit. For example, in New York, some recipients 

who reach the Federal time limit may be eligible for the State-funded Safety Net Assistance 

program that provides similar assistance as the TANF program but does not have time limits. 

In addition, most States report that they do not have problems complying with the extension 

limit or meeting work participation requirements. Specifically, 37 States say they do not 

anticipate exceeding the 20 percent extension limit in the near future. Forty-six States report 

that they will not have difficulty meeting the 50 percent 2002 work participation requirement for 

one-parent families, often because of the caseload reduction credit.11 Fourteen States, 

however, report that they have or will have problems in the near future meeting the current 90 

percent work participation requirement for two-parent families. 

Thirty-eight States have expanded the definition of allowable activities to 

provide increased flexibility to recipients with barriers 

Under PRWORA, a certain percentage of the annual caseload in each State must participate in 

defined work-related activities. These activities include subsidized and unsubsidized 

employment, work experience, on-the-job training, job search, and some education and 

training activities. States, however, have the flexibility to expand the definition of allowable 

activities, although these activities may not count toward their Federal work participation rate 

requirement. 

Specifically, 38 States report that they have expanded the definition of allowable activities in 

order to better serve recipients with barriers to work. States include such activities as 

substance abuse and mental health treatment, domestic violence counseling, physical 

11The caseload reduction credit reduces the minimum participation rate a State must meet by the reduction 

in the State’s TANF caseload in the prior year compared to its AFDC caseload in FY 1995. It excludes reductions 

due to Federal law or to changes in eligibility criteria. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 13 OEI-02-00-00630 
rehabilitation, or enrollment in educational activities beyond 12 months. Seven States note that 

they allow any activity that will help remove a barrier to employment and move the recipient 

toward self-sufficiency. Sixteen States that have waivers report that they broadly define their 

allowable activities to include such activities that can count toward their Federal work 

participation requirement. 

At least 22 States exempt recipients with most of these barriers 

At least 22 States report that they exempt recipients from work participation requirements or 

State time limits for each of the following barriers: physical disabilities, domestic violence 

issues, chronic health problems, and mental health issues. States are less likely to grant 

exemptions to recipients with substance abuse issues, language barriers, or learning disabilities. 

Only two States use exemptions as their only strategy for working with recipients with barriers 

to employment. At least 14 States mention that they exempt individuals on a case-by-case 

basis by taking into account the severity of a recipient’s barrier or their compliance with the 

program. For example, a few exempt recipients with physical disabilities or chronic health 

problems if they have written documentation to support their incapacity, if they are ill for more 

than 30 days, or if they are in the process of applying for SSI. 

Several challenges exist for States in helping recipients with 

barriers 

At least 13 States report that they do not have the capacity to serve all 

recipients with certain barriers 

At least 13 States report that they do not have the capacity to serve all recipients who need 

them for each of the following barriers: physical disabilities, learning disabilities, and mental 

health issues. Some States comment that there are often delays or waiting lists to get treatment 

or services, particularly for mental health and substance abuse issues. 

As many as 11 States note that services for each of the barriers we addressed are not available 

Statewide. They note that such services are not available in every county or that they are 

limited particularly in rural areas. TANF recipients may also have to travel to neighboring 

counties for these services because there is not enough demand in some areas to support a 

separate program. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 14 OEI-02-00-00630 
Forty-one States do not report any specific strategy to address recipients 

with multiple barriers 

Most States do not report any specific strategies to help recipients who face multiple barriers to 

employment. Several note that their approach to dealing with these recipients is no different 

from their strategy for dealing with recipients with a single barrier. Only six States provide any 

formal guidance on how to work with recipients with multiple barriers. No States mention 

providing guidance about the relationship among barriers or about referring recipients to 

services that are geared toward addressing more than one barrier. As one State comments 

“we are in the understanding stage” in terms of knowing how to prioritize barriers and address 

recipients who face more than one issue. 

States generally report that helping recipients who face multiple barriers requires an 

individualized approach that takes into account each recipient’s unique situation. Some further 

explain that TANF staff triage barriers and work on the one that is most severe or most strongly 

impedes employment. As one State comments it is like “peeling an onion” in that a caseworker 

identifies barriers as they surface and then develops a plan to work on them simultaneously or 

sequentially. 

Only nine States report using pilot programs as part of their strategy to help 

recipients with barriers 

Most States do not mention using pilot programs to implement new approaches for recipients 

with any of the barriers we addressed. Only a few report that they have plans to expand pilot 

programs that target these recipients in the near future. States that have pilot programs have 

increased services or built partnerships with other agencies or community-based organizations 

to better serve recipients with certain barriers. Other States use pilot programs to introduce 

new assessment tools. For example, New Hampshire operates two pilot programs that are 

testing improved screening and referral procedures for recipients who have substance abuse 

issues. 

Only eight States report that they have information about the barriers faced 

by individuals who have been sanctioned 

Research has shown that sanctions may have a large impact on recipients with barriers to 

employment.12 At the same time, the majority of States do not have information about the 

12 Pavetti, LaDonna and Bloom, Dan. State Sanctions and Time Limits. The Brookings Institution, 

Washington, D.C., February, 2001. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 15 OEI-02-00-00630 
barriers faced by individuals who have been sanctioned. As a result, States are unsure how 

their sanction policies impact recipients who have barriers. Several report, however, that their 

TANF program tries to resolve these barriers to prevent these recipients from being sanctioned 

or that their State law does not allow the program to sanction recipients with barriers. 

Little is known about the effectiveness of strategies for helping recipients 

with barriers 

Few States have strong evidence about the effectiveness of their strategies to help recipients 

with any of the barriers that we addressed. Only ten States mention that they have conducted 

evaluations about how these populations are faring. Most of these States describe their 

evaluation efforts as monitoring or tracking recipients after they finish a specific program or 

service. Only a few States have contracted with outside organizations to formally evaluate how 

their programs are serving recipients with these barriers.13 In addition, six States have 

performance-based contracts in which providers must show that recipients with any of these 

barriers are finding and retaining jobs. 

At the same time, over half of States believe that their strategy for serving recipients with 

substance abuse, chronic health problems, physical disabilities, language barriers and domestic 

violence is effective. States have less confidence in their strategy to address mental health 

issues, learning disabilities, and multiple barriers. Others say that they simply do not know as of 

yet. Some States cite anecdotal evidence or that their strong overall program measures indicate 

that their strategy to deal with each of these barriers is effective. No States report having data 

to determine whether one approach is more effective than another in helping recipients with any 

of these barriers transition to work. 

13It should be noted that there is a long history of evaluation about programs that address specific barriers 

such as substance abuse and mental health issues. These studies generally do not address issues specific to TANF 

recipients nor focus on how these programs affect work and economic self-sufficiency. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 16 OEI-02-00-00630 
NEXT STEPS 

This inspection suggests several opportunities to improve the TANF program to better serve 

hard-to-employ recipients. They are for Congress to consider when re-authorizing TANF, the 

Administration for Children and Families (ACF) to address when focusing its technical 

assistance efforts, States to examine when developing their strategies for this population, and 

researchers to review in planning their work. These opportunities include: 

C Encouraging States to create and expand innovative programs to better serve recipients 

with barriers, particularly those facing multiple barriers; and 

C Expanding States’ capacity to track recipients who have barriers to employment in 

order to increase capacity to evaluate States’ initiatives that address these populations 

and the effects of States’ sanction policies. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 17 OEI-02-00-00630 
AGENCY COMMENTS 

We received comments from the Administration for Children and Families (ACF). The ACF 

is in general agreement with the background, findings, and next steps of the inspection. We 

concur with ACF that the Administration’s proposed re-authorization legislation is consistent 

with our findings and next steps. We further recognize that ACF’s past and on-going technical 

assistance efforts continue to assist States in implementing initiatives to better serve hard-toemploy populations. However, we urge ACF to consider more targeted efforts regarding the 

next steps that we outlined. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 18 OEI-02-00-00630 
APPENDIX A 

Profile of Programs and Services Available to Recipients 

Barrier TANF caseworkers often refer recipients to: 

Substance Abuse Substance abuse treatment programs operated by State agencies 

or local providers. 

as outpatient drug and alcohol treatment programs. 

Mental Health Mental health treatment programs operated by State agencies or 

community mental health centers. 

inpatient and outpatient programs, as well as other treatment. 

Domestic Violence Domestic violence coalitions that offer shelter/housing, 

counseling, legal aid, as well as assistance with developing safety 

plans. 

These programs may include inpatient as well 

These programs may include 

Physical Disabilities and 

Chronic Health 

Problems 

Various services include adult basic education, vocational 

rehabilitation, or organizations that conduct further assessments. 

Assessments may also identify specific accommodations that can 

be made to the workplace to help individuals transition to work. 

Learning Disabilities Various services including remedial education, vocational 

rehabilitation, or organizations that conduct further assessments 

that help identify the nature of the problem and determine the 

most appropriate workplace settings for these individuals. 

Language Barriers ESL classes operated by local community colleges and 

community-based organizations. TANF agencies may also have 

translators, bilingual staff, and translated brochures, notices, and 

application forms to assist these individuals. 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 19 OEI-02-00-00630 
APPENDIX B 

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 20 OEI-02-00-00630 
State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 21 OEI-02-00-00630 
State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 22 OEI-02-00-00630 
State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 23 OEI-02-00-00630 
State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 24 OEI-02-00-00630 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

This report was prepared under the direction of John I. Molnar, Regional Inspector General for 

Evaluation and Inspections in New York and Renee C. Dunn, Deputy Regional Inspector General. 

Other principal Office of Evaluation and Inspections staff who contributed include: 

Jodi Nudelman, Project Leader Linda Hall, Program Specialist

Danielle Fletcher, Program Analyst

Nicole Gillette, Program Analyst

State Strategies for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients 25 OEI-02-00-00630