U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Helping You Make Informed Decisions

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Participation of Mothers 

in Government Assistance

Programs: 2001

Household Economic Studies

P70-102

Issued September 2005

Current

Population

Reports

By 

Terry A. Lugaila

INTRODUCTION The SIPP data represent program participation at one point in time. They do not This report focuses on the fertility and represent annual caseloads or the total socioeconomic characteristics of mothers number of people who may have partici- in 2001 related to participation in six pated in these programs at any time dur- public assistance programs: Temporary ing the year.3

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF);

food stamps; the Special Supplemental MOTHERS’ PARTICIPATION Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, IN PROGRAMS and Children (WIC); Medicaid; housing

assistance; and other programs, which In 2001, 9.7 million women 15 to 44

include general assistance and other years old, or 16 percent of all women of

types of welfare (see the Program childbearing age, were participants in or

Coverage description box on the follow- covered by at least 1 of the 6 public

ing page). It expands the scope of the assistance programs highlighted in this

previous report, based on 1996 data, by report (Table 1).4 Sixty-seven percent 

including information on mothers’ partic- (6.5 million) of the participants in these

ipation in housing and other assistance programs were mothers; 12 percent of

programs.1 The report also focuses more the participants (1.2 million mothers) had

closely on mothers aged 15 to 44 with a a birth in the last year. The program with

birth in the last year, as the needs of

mothers with infants may differ from 3 The data in this report were collected from June

those of mothers with older children. through September 2001 in the second wave (interview) of the 2001 Survey of Income and Program

Participation. The population represented (the popu- The data come from Wave 2 of the 2001 lation universe) is the civilian noninstitutionalized

Survey of Income and Program population living in the United States. Differences

may be noted between estimates of program partici- Participation (SIPP), which was conducted pation shown in this report and estimates presented

from June through September 2001. This in reports from agencies that administer these proreport provides the first look at the partic- grams. In addition to different universe definitions

(this analysis includes only mothers 15 to 44 years

ipation of mothers in these programs old), the SIPP data are based on participation at one

since the 1996 Personal Responsibility point in time rather than total participation in a calendar year. Administrative data may include people

and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act multiple times as they enroll, leave, and re-enroll in a

(PRWORA) was enacted. The PRWORA program over the course of a year. In addition to

these differences, reports of program participation gave states greater flexibility to formulate may be affected by different names of programs in

and implement initiatives to reduce wel- different states and by inaccuracies or omissions

made by the household respondent for other mem- fare dependency and encourage employ- bers of the household in the survey.

ment for members of low-income families 4 The estimates in this report (which may be

with children.2 shown in text, figures, and tables) are based on

responses from a sample of the population and may

differ from actual values because of sampling vari- 1 Jane L. Dye, Fertility and Program Participation ability or other factors. As a result, apparent differin the United States: 1996. Household Economic ences between the estimates for two or more groups

Studies, P70-82. U.S. Census Bureau: Washington, may not be statistically significant. All comparative

DC, 2002. statements have undergone statistical testing and 2 U.S. Congress, Public Law 104-193. H.R. 3734, are significant at the 90-percent confidence level

1996. unless otherwise noted.
2 U.S. Census Bureau

PROGRAM COVERAGE

The following descriptions explain 15 to 49 years aged, the disabled, the medically

federal and state programs as they <www.acf.hhs.gov/programs needy, and the poor. Unlike its predexisted at the time SIPP data were /ofa/tanfindex.htm>. ecessor program, Aid to Families

collected in 2001.a Participation in with Dependent Children (AFDC),

programs is defined to include Food Stamps TANF eligibility does not automaticalwomen who were enrolled or ly confer Medicaid eligibility on fami- The Food Stamp Program, adminis- covered in the programs and living lies. Medicaid covered pregnant tered by the U.S. Department of in households receiving housing women and children under age 6 Agriculture, provides low-income

assistance. with family incomes up to 133 per- households with access to a “nutricent of the poverty level ($19,458 tionally adequate low-cost diet.” The Temporary Assistance for for a family of three in 2001). States value of food stamps received by eli- Needy Families (TANF) had the option of covering pregnant gible households is based on the women and infants with family TANF benefits are tied to economic requirement that households con- incomes up to 185 percent of the requirements that most adult recipi- tribute about 30 percent of their poverty level. In fiscal year 2002, ents work as soon as “job ready” or income to the purchase of food. In 9.8 million adults were enrolled in no later than 2 years after assistance 2001, people who were eligible for

begins.b Medicaid TANF defines work as labor TANF were, in general, automatically <www.cms.hhs.gov/researchers force participation, such as looking eligible for food stamps, although /pubs/datacompendium/current>. for employment or being employed. not all TANF participants received

Work may also be defined as work- food stamps. In fiscal year 2002, Housing Assistance related activities, such as community 8.2 million households participated

service, schooling, vocational train- in the Food Stamp Program Housing assistance reduces housing

ing, general skill development, or <www.fns.usda.gov costs and improves housing quality

other types of training. Eligibility /pd/fsfyhh.htm>. for low-income households.

may vary by state, but generally eli- Participants may live in public housgibility for TANF depends upon Special Supplemental ing developments or receive subsiincome, assets, and the presence of Nutrition Program for dies for rent outside of public housa dependent child under age 18 (or Women, Infants, and ing. Eligibility is based on income Children (WIC) an older age if the child is enrolled limits developed by the U.S.

full-time in high school or an equiva- WIC provides nutritional assistance Department of Housing and Urban

lency program). The child must be to low-income pregnant and postpar- Development and varies from area

deprived of financial support or care tum women, their infants, and their to area. U.S. citizenship or eligible

because a parent died, left home, is other children under 5 years of age. immigration status is also required.

physically or mentally incapacitated, To be eligible, a recipient’s income

or is unemployed or underemployed. must fall at or below 185 percent of General Assistance or 

Applicants must be residents of the Other Welfare the U.S. Poverty Income Guidelines

state making the payments and a ($27,065 for a family of three in General assistance (or general relief) U.S. citizen or an eligible, qualified 2001) and the recipient must have usually covers those not covered by alien. In fiscal year 2002, 1.3 million been nutritionally at risk. Benefits TANF or Supplemental Security adults received TANF, of whom about include checks or vouchers to pur- Income (SSI). SSI usually assists the 85 percent (1.1 million) were women chase specific food items, nutrition elderly and severely disabled and is

education and counseling, and not covered in this report. Not all

a breastfeeding support. In fiscal year states offer general assistance. More detailed information on the eligibility requirements for these programs can 2002, 1.8 million women participat- Benefits to families with children or

be found in the U.S. House of ed in the WIC program to pregnant women in their first two Representatives’ 2000 Green Book: <www.fns.usda.gov/pd/WIC Background Material and Data on Programs trimesters may be administered

Within the Jurisdiction of the Committee on _Monthly.htm>. under general assistance or TANF. Ways and Means: WMCP 106-14, 2000. b Administration for Children and “Other welfare” in this report

Families, ACF News, Fact Sheets, Temporary Medicaid describes any type of state or county

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid provides access to health welfare programs not accounted for <www.acf.hhs.gov/news/facts/tanf.html>,

May 5, 2004. care for low-income families, the under TANF or general assistance. 
the highest participation rate

among women aged 15 to 44,

regardless of motherhood, was

Medicaid. Among the 51.6 million

nonparticipants (women who were

not participating in any program),

56 percent were mothers and 6 percent had a birth in the last year. 

For the 4.1 million mothers with a

birth in the last year, 29 percent were

program participants, compared with

17 percent of mothers who did not

have a birth in the last year and 

12 percent of childless women.5

Fourteen percent of mothers with

infants received food stamps, as did

9 percent of mothers without recent

births. Four percent of women aged

15 to 44 with no children ever born

received food stamps. 

Among all women 15 to 44 years

old who were program participants,

U.S. Census Bureau 3

5 Data from this survey show that 99 percent of all women with a birth in the last

year, both program participants and nonparticipants, had their child living with them. 

WIC recipients were most likely to

have had a child in the last year 

(40 percent). Program participants

who were least likely to have had a

child born in the last year were

those receiving housing assistance 

(8 percent).6

6 Childless pregnant women may also

receive WIC benefits. The SIPP does not collect

information on the pregnancy status of respondents; so WIC participants who are pregnant

but childless are excluded from this analysis

except as shown in Table 1. There may also

be other reasons why women without children

receive WIC benefits, such as having custody of

a child they did not give birth to.

Table 1.

Fertility and Program Participation Status for Women 15 to 44 Years: 2001

Program participation status

Total women Women with at least one child ever born

Women

with no

children

Number ever born

Margin of1 error Total

Mothers

who had a

child in the

last year

Mothers who

did not have

a child in the

last year

NUMBER (thousands)

Total2 ........................................ 61,315 577 35,240 4,066 31,174 26,075

Participants3 ...................................... 9,688 323 6,527 1,194 5,334 3,161

TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 960 106 748 171 577 213

Food stamps .................................... 4,458 225 3,501 559 2,941 957

WIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,134 115 898 449 449 235

Medicaid . ....................................... 6,669 272 4,252 767 3,484 2,418

Housing assistance .............................. 2,911 183 2,073 239 1,834 838

Other4 .......................................... 263 56 198 44 154 65

Nonparticipants5 ................................... 51,627 577 28,713 2,872 25,841 22,914

PERCENT BY PROGRAM PARTICIPATION STATUS

Total2 ........................................ 100.0 (X) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Participants3 ...................................... 15.8 0.5 18.5 29.4 17.1 12.1

TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6 0.2 2.1 4.2 1.9 0.8

Food stamps .................................... 7.3 0.4 9.9 13.8 9.4 3.7

WIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 0.2 2.5 11.0 1.4 0.9

Medicaid . ....................................... 10.9 0.4 12.1 18.9 11.2 9.3

Housing assistance .............................. 4.7 0.3 5.9 5.9 5.9 3.2

Other4 .......................................... 0.4 0.1 0.6 1.1 0.5 0.2

Nonparticipants5 ................................... 84.2 0.5 81.5 70.6 82.9 87.9

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY FERTILITY STATUS

Total2 ........................................ 100.0 (X) 57.5 6.6 50.8 42.5

Participants3 ...................................... 100.0 (X) 67.4 12.3 55.1 32.6

TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 (X) 77.9 17.8 60.1 22.1

Food stamps .................................... 100.0 (X) 78.5 12.6 66.0 21.5

WIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 (X) 79.2 39.6 39.6 20.8

Medicaid . ....................................... 100.0 (X) 63.7 11.5 52.2 36.3

Housing assistance .............................. 100.0 (X) 71.2 8.2 63.0 28.8

Other4 .......................................... 100.0 (X) 75.4 16.8 58.7 24.6

Nonparticipants5 ................................... 100.0 (X) 55.6 5.6 50.1 44.4

(X) Not applicable.

1 This figure added to or subtracted from the estimate provides the 90-percent confidence interval. 2 Sum of individual programs may exceed the total because of participation in more than one program. 3 Currently participating or covered by one or more programs. 4 Includes general assistance and other welfare. 5 Not currently participating in any program.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.
Participation in one program could

overlap with participation in other

programs. Figure 1 shows that, for

mothers with a birth in the last

year, 15 percent participated in one

public assistance program. The

proportion receiving assistance

from two programs was 7 percent,

and an additional 7 percent were

enrolled in three to five programs.7

Mothers without recent births had

lower participation rates: 9 percent

participated in one public assistance

program, 4 percent participated in

two programs, and 4 percent participated in three to five programs.

Seventy-two percent of all mothers

participating in two or more programs were receiving both food

stamps and Medicaid. 

MARITAL STATUS AND

PROGRAM PARTICIPATION

Historically, unmarried mothers

have been at a greater risk of living in poverty than married mothers.8 In addition to being unmarried and not having a spouse’s

income to include in their overall

family income, unmarried mothers

are typically younger and hence

may have less education and fewer

labor force skills. 

Figure 2 shows program participation rates by age for mothers with

and without a recent birth. For

both groups, steady declines in

program participation occurred

between ages 15 to 19 and 30 to

34.9 Figure 2 shows also that the

majority of participants with recent

births at younger ages were

unmarried. Beginning at age 25,

mothers with a birth in the last

year who were program participants were just as or slightly more

likely to be married than unmarried. Among mothers who did not

have recent births, and who may

have had their children some years

before and been subsequently

divorced, unmarried women

appeared to make up more than

half of all participants through

ages 40 to 44. 

Among mothers who had a birth in

the last year, Table 2 indicates that

unmarried mothers were about 3

times as likely to be program participants (57 percent) as married

mothers (18 percent). Among

mothers who did not have a birth

in the last year, the participation

rate was also higher for unmarried

(34 percent) than married (8 percent) mothers. 

The majority of program participants among women with a recent

4 U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 1.

Mothers by Participation in Public 

Assistance Programs: 2001

Note: The public assistance programs included are TANF, food stamps, WIC, Medicaid, 

housing assistance, and other (which includes general assistance and other welfare). 

No mothers participated in all six programs.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.

(Percent of mothers. Mothers are defined as women 15 to 44 who have 

had one or more births)

Mothers who did

not have a child in

the last year

Mothers who had

a child in

the last year

1 program

2 programs

3 programs

4 and 5 programs

17

1

3

4

9

15

7

4

3

29

7 The proportion receiving assistance from

two programs (7 percent) was not statistically

different from the proportion enrolled in three

to five programs (7 percent). 8 U.S. Census Bureau, “Historical Tables

(Table 4) Poverty Status of Families, by Type

of Family, Presence of Related Children, Race

and Hispanic Origin: 1959 to 2002,” updated October 6, 2003, <www.census.gov/hhes

/poverty/histpov/hstpov4.html>.

9 Program participation rates between

mothers with a birth in the last year and

mothers without a birth in the last year were

not statistically different for the following age

groups: 15 to 19, 25 to 29, 30 to 34, and 40

to 44. For both married and unmarried mothers, there were no statistical differences

between mothers with a birth in the last year

and mothers without a birth in the last year

for the age groups 15 to 19 and 40 to 44. 
birth were unmarried with the

exception of women enrolled in

WIC or receiving other forms of

general welfare assistance. Among

mothers without a recent birth,

unmarried participants outnumbered married program participants for all of the programs

shown in Table 2 except for WIC,

even though overall there were

twice as many married as unmarried mothers (20.7 million and

10.5 million, respectively).10

The 2001 SIPP data on program

participation and fertility are the

first to become available since the

passage of the 1996 PRWORA.

Program participation rates since

1996 fell from 42 percent to 

29 percent for mothers with a

recent birth and from 22 percent

to 17 percent for mothers without

a recent birth. For both groups of

mothers, participation rates fell for

both married and unmarried mothers and for mothers 15 to 24 years

old and 25 to 34 years old.11

MARITAL STATUS AND

LIVING ARRANGEMENTS

Regardless of whether a mother had

a birth in the last year, mothers participating in programs were less

U.S. Census Bureau 5

10 Comparisons between women with

recent births and women without recent

births were not statistically significant for

any program regardless of marital status,

except between unmarried mothers (with

and without recent births) receiving housing

assistance.

11 In 2001, the participation rates for

arried women with children born in the

ast year were not significantly different

etween women 25 to 34 years and 35 to

4 years. The participation rates for married

omen 25 to 34 years were not significantly

ifferent for those with recent births versus

hose without a birth in the last year. The

articipation rate for married women 35 to

4 years was not significantly different

etween 1996 and 200l. The participation

ate for unmarried women with a birth in the

ast year was not significantly different for

hose 15 to 24 years versus 25 to 34 years.

m

l

b

4

w

d

t

p

4

b

r

l

t

likely than nonparticipating mothers

to be living with their spouse 

(Table 3 and Figure 3). Among

mothers with a recent birth, 40 percent of program participants were

living with their spouse, compared

with 82 percent of nonprogram participants. For mothers without a

recent birth, the percentage living

with their spouse was lower for

both groups: 30 percent and 

72 percent, respectively. Higher

proportions of program participants

had never been married; about 4

out of 10 program participants,

regardless of how recently they had

had a birth, had never been married, compared with 1 out of 10

nonprogram participants.

Among women with a recent birth

who were program participants, 

80 percent lived with another adult

in the household, compared with

62 percent of mothers without a

recent birth. The presence of adult

Figure 2.

Program Participation Rates by Age: 2001

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.

(Percent participating in programs)

13

13

19

13

9

12

11

6

8

9

8

6

5

16 4

50

30

12

7 10 6

11

43

29

16 12 8 6

Total 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 Total 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44

Age group

Mothers who had a child in the last year

Age group

Mothers who did not have a child in the last year 

Now married

Unmarried

29

63

49

25

16

22

17 17

51

38

24

18

13

10
relatives may indicate additional

support for, or strain on, family

resources. For example, some

households may include a grandparent who helps the parent by

providing financial or in-kind support, such as child care, while in

other households, the grandparent

may require additional resources

and care because of old age or

disability.12 Nearly one-quarter 

(23 percent) of recent mothers

receiving benefits and 21 percent

6 U.S. Census Bureau

12 Ken Bryson and Lynne M. Casper,

Coresident Grandparents and Grandchildren,

Current Population Reports, P23-198,

<www.census.gov.prod/99pubs/p23-198.pdf>

(U.S. Census Bureau: Washington, DC, 1999;

Table 1. Characteristics of Grandparents Who

Are Coresident With Grandchildren: 1997; and

related text).

of participant mothers without a

birth in the last year were living

with adult relatives other than their

spouse.13 About 9 percent of nonparticipant mothers either with or

13 The difference between 23 percent of

recent mothers receiving benefits and 21 percent of mothers without a birth in the last

year living with adult relatives other than

their spouse was not statistically significant.

Table 2.

Program Participation Status of Mothers 15 to 44 Years With a Birth in the Last Year by

Marital Status and Age: 1996 and 2001

(Numbers in thousands)

Marital status and

age of mother

Total Participants2 Nonparticipants4 19965

Number

Participation

rate1

Total

TANF

Food

stamps WIC

Medicaid

Housing

assistance Other3 Number

PercentNumber

Participation

rate1 Number

Percent

Mothers who had a

child in the last

year .............

NOW MARRIED6

4,066 29.4 1,194 100.0 171 559 449 767 239 44 2,872 100.0 3,859 41.5

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,899 18.2 526 44.1 50 166 248 251 80 21 2,373 82.6 2,730 27.7

15 to 24 years .......... 493 41.7 206 17.2 24 56 100 110 19 12 287 10.0 586 55.4

25 to 34 years .......... 1,840 12.9 237 19.9 21 83 111 102 52 3 1,603 55.8 1,634 21.7

35 to 44 years ..........

UNMARRIED7

567 14.8 84 7.0 5 27 37 39 9 6 483 16.8 510 15.2

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,167 57.2 667 55.9 121 394 201 516 159 23 499 17.4 1,129 74.7

15 to 24 years .......... 670 59.8 400 33.5 68 225 112 310 103 13 269 9.4 672 80.9

25 to 34 years .......... 365 56.0 205 17.1 54 134 73 165 42 5 161 5.6 356 68.0

35 to 44 years ..........

Mothers who did not

have a child in the

132 (B) 62 5.2 - 35 17 41 14 5 69 2.4 101 (B)

last year .........

NOW MARRIED6

31,174 17.1 5,334 100.0 577 2,941 449 3,484 1,834 154 25,841 100.0 31,633 21.7

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,675 8.4 1,747 32.8 110 808 201 1,011 414 42 18,929 73.3 21,760 11.5

15 to 24 years .......... 1,049 24.3 255 4.8 14 119 46 144 61 3 794 3.1 1,119 34.4

25 to 34 years .......... 6,833 10.7 729 13.7 42 332 101 416 191 7 6,105 23.6 8,061 14.7

35 to 44 years ..........

UNMARRIED7

12,793 6.0 763 14.3 54 357 54 451 162 32 12,030 46.6 12,581 7.5

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,499 34.2 3,587 67.2 467 2,133 248 2,473 1,421 112 6,912 26.7 9,873 44.2

15 to 24 years .......... 1,758 48.6 854 16.0 134 422 131 626 324 25 904 3.5 1,592 63.5

25 to 34 years .......... 3,724 37.9 1,411 26.4 212 919 92 982 551 33 2,314 9.0 3,609 50.1

35 to 44 years .......... 5,017 26.4 1,322 24.8 121 792 25 865 546 55 3,695 14.3 4,672 33.1

- Represents or rounds to zero. (B) Derived measure not shown when base is less than 200,000.

1 Percent of mothers currently participating or covered by one or more programs. 2 Currently participating in or covered by one or more programs. 3 Includes general assistance and other welfare. 4 Not currently participating in any program. 5 Data for 1996 may vary from P70-82, Fertility and Program Participation in the United States: 1996 due to analysis of additional assistance programs. 6 Includes married spouse present, married spouse absent (excluding separated). 7 Includes separated, divorced, widowed, and never married.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.
U.S. Census Bureau 7

Table 3.

Mothers 15 to 44 Years by Program Participation Status, Age, and Family

Characteristics: 2001

(Numbers in thousands)

Characteristic

Mothers who had a child in the last year Mothers who did not have a child in the last year

Total Participants2 Nonparticipants3 Total Participants2 Nonparticipants 3

Number

Participation

rate1

NumberPercentNumberPercentNumber

Participation

rate1

NumberPercentNumberPercent

Total.....................

Age

4,066 29.4 1,194 100.0 2,872 100.0 31,174 17.1 5,334 100.0 25,841 100.0

15 to 19 years ................ 276 62.9 174 14.6 102 3.6 345 51.4 177 3.3 168 0.6

20 to 24 years ................ 886 48.8 432 36.2 454 15.8 2,462 37.9 932 17.5 1,530 5.9

25 to 29 years ................ 1,014 24.8 251 21.1 763 26.6 4,250 23.8 1,011 18.9 3,239 12.5

30 to 34 years ................ 1,191 16.0 190 15.9 1,001 34.8 6,308 17.9 1,129 21.2 5,179 20.0

35 to 39 years ................ 515 22.3 115 9.6 400 13.9 8,468 13.1 1,109 20.8 7,359 28.5

40 to 44 years ................

Marital Status

183 (B) 31 2.6 152 5.3 9,342 10.4 976 18.3 8,366 32.4

Now married.................. 2,899 18.2 526 44.1 2,373 82.6 20,675 8.4 1,747 32.8 18,929 73.3

Married, husband present .... 2,833 16.8 476 39.9 2,357 82.1 20,288 8.0 1,614 30.3 18,675 72.3

Married, husband absent4 . . . . 66 (B) 51 4.2 16 0.5 387 34.4 133 2.5 254 1.0

Separated .................... 120 (B) 72 6.0 48 1.7 1,486 34.4 511 9.6 975 3.8

Divorced . . ................... 168 (B) 77 6.5 91 3.2 3,914 22.9 898 16.8 3,016 11.7

Widowed ..................... 13 (B) 3 0.2 11 0.4 310 25.4 79 1.5 231 0.9

Never married ................

Living Arrangements

No other person 18 years and

865 59.6 516 43.2 349 12.2 4,789 43.8 2,099 39.4 2,689 10.4

over present ................. 332 72.1 240 20.1 93 3.2 5,055 40.3 2,036 38.2 3,019 11.7

Other adult present5 ........... 3,733 25.6 954 79.9 2,779 96.8 26,119 12.6 3,298 61.8 22,821 88.3

Living with spouse...........

Living with other adult

2,833 16.8 476 39.9 2,357 82.1 20,288 8.0 1,614 30.3 18,675 72.3

relative(s)6 ................

Living with an unmarried

505 55.4 280 23.4 225 7.8 3,421 32.0 1,093 20.5 2,327 9.0

partner....................

Living with other adult

336 55.5 186 15.6 150 5.2 2,062 25.6 527 9.9 1,534 5.9

nonrelative(s)7 ............. 139 (B) 54 4.5 85 3.0 805 24.1 194 3.6 611 2.4

(B) Derived measure not shown when base is less than 200,000.

1 Percent of mothers currently participating in or covered by one or more programs. 2 Currently participating in or covered by one or more programs. 3 Not currently participating in any program. 4 Includes women whose spouse is absent other than due to marital separation. 5 Categories under ‘‘Other adult present’’ are not mutually exclusive. 6 Excludes spouse. 7 Excludes unmarried partner.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.
without a birth in the last year

lived with other adult relatives.

In 2001, a total of 2.4 million

mothers lived with an unmarried

partner: 336,000 mothers with a

recent birth and 2.1 million mothers without a recent birth (Table 3).

Sixteen percent of participant

mothers with recent births were

cohabiting, compared with 10 percent of participant mothers without a birth in the last year. The

least common living arrangement

for mothers who were program

participants was living with an

adult nonrelative who was not a

cohabiting partner.

TEENAGERS AND PROGRAM

PARTICIPATION

Congress identified teenage childbearing as both a considerable

social issue and a factor associated

with long-term receipt of public

assistance.14 Having a child as a

teenager may interrupt a young

woman’s education and put her at

risk of economic hardship. In

addition, early childbearing can

lead to higher levels of lifetime fertility, and larger families may have

increased financial burdens and

increased likelihood of receiving

public assistance. Of the estimated 621,000 teenage mothers in

2001, 351,000 (57 percent) were

enrolled in one or more of the public assistance programs examined

in this report (Table 3). For teen

mothers with a birth in the last

year, 63 percent were receiving

benefits, as were one-half (51 percent) of teen mothers without a

recent birth (a difference that is

not statistically significant). Teen

mothers made up 15 percent of

8 U.S. Census Bureau

14 U.S. Congress, Public Law 104-193,

H.R. 3734, 1996. Title 1—“Block Grants for

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.”

Section 101, Findings. 

participants with a birth in the last

year, compared with 3 percent of

participants without a recent birth.

Mothers with recent births are generally younger; 29 percent of the

4.1 million mothers with a birth in

the last year were 15 to 24 years

old, compared with 9 percent of

the 31.2 million mothers without a

recent birth.15

RACE, HISPANIC ORIGIN,

AND NATIVITY

Race and Hispanic origin

Program participation rates among

mothers in 2001 differed by race

15 The percentage of mothers 15 to 19

years without a birth in the last year who participated was not statistically different from

the percentage of mothers 15 to 19 years

without a recent birth who did not participate.

and Hispanic origin (Table 4).16

Among Black mothers with infants,

56 percent were program participants. Among non-Hispanic White

mothers with infants and their

Asian and Pacific Islander counterparts, the rate was 21 percent

each. Hispanic mothers with

infants recorded an intermediate

participation rate (43 percent).

Participation rates were lower for

16 Hispanics may be any race. Based on

the population of mothers aged 15 to 44 in

Wave 2 of the 2001 SIPP Panel, 14.9 percent

of the White population and 4.5 percent of

the Black population were also Hispanic.

Data for the American Indian and Alaska

Native population are not shown in this

report because of the small sample size in

the SIPP. In 2001, Asian and Pacific Islanders

were counted as one racial category.

Beginning in 2004, the SIPP has the same

racial categories as used in the Current

Population Survey, the American Community

Survey, and Census 2000.

Figure 3.

Living Arrangements of Mothers Who Had a Child 

in the Last Year by Program Participation: 2001

*Excluding spouses.

**Excluding cohabiting partners.

Note: Percentages may sum to more than 100 percent because more than one type of 

adult may live in a household.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.

(Percent in living arrangement)

3

82

8

5 3

20

40

23

16

5

With other

adult

nonrelatives**

With unmarried

partner

With other

adult

relatives*

With no With spouse

other adult

Program participants Nonparticipants
U.S. Census Bureau 9

Table 4.

Mothers 15 to 44 Years by Program Participation Status and Selected Characteristics:

2001

(Numbers in thousands)

Mothers who had a child in the last year Mothers who did not have a child in the last year

Total Participants2 Nonparticipants3 Total Participants2 Nonparticipants3

Characteristic

Partici- Participation Per- Per- pation Per- PerNumber rate1 Number cent Number cent Number rate1 Number cent Number cent

Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,066 29.4 1,194 100.0 2,872 100.0 31,174 17.1 5,334 100.0 25,841 100.0

Race and Hispanic Origin

White .................... 3,274 25.1 823 68.9 2,451 85.3 24,318 13.6 3,307 62.0 21,011 81.3

Non-Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,617 21.1 551 46.2 2,065 71.9 20,870 11.6 2,423 45.4 18,447 71.4

Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511 55.7 285 23.9 227 7.9 5,100 33.9 1,730 32.4 3,371 13.0

Asian and Pacific Islander . . . . 226 21.4 48 4.1 178 6.2 1,350 10.0 136 2.5 1,215 4.7

Hispanic (any race) . . . . . . . . . 704 43.0 303 25.3 401 14.0 3,762 26.2 986 18.5 2,776 10.7

Nativity Status

Native4 ................... 3,280 29.5 969 81.2 2,311 80.5 26,379 17.1 4,503 84.4 21,876 84.7

Foreign born . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 786 28.6 225 18.8 561 19.5 4,795 17.3 831 15.6 3,964 15.3

Naturalized citizen . . . . . . . . 205 16.1 33 2.8 172 6.0 1,558 11.6 180 3.4 1,377 5.3

Not a citizen . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581 33.0 192 16.1 389 13.5 3,237 20.1 650 12.2 2,587 10.0

Labor Force Status

Had a job during last

4 months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,282 20.3 464 38.8 1,818 63.3 23,474 13.1 3,069 57.5 20,405 79.0

No job last 4 months5 . . . . . . . 1,784 40.9 730 61.2 1,054 36.7 7,701 29.4 2,265 42.5 5,436 21.0

Unable to find work . . . . . . . 28 (B) 21 1.8 7 0.3 261 58.9 154 2.9 107 0.4

Not able to work due to

disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 (B) 29 2.4 4 0.1 754 70.6 532 10.0 222 0.9

Educational Attainment

Not a high school graduate . . . 749 60.0 449 37.6 300 10.4 4,684 38.9 1,823 34.2 2,860 11.1

High school graduate . . . . . . . . 1,080 39.8 430 36.0 650 22.6 10,089 19.2 1,940 36.4 8,149 31.5

College, 1 or more years ..... 2,237 14.1 315 26.4 1,923 66.9 16,402 9.6 1,570 29.4 14,832 57.4

Job Training

Received job training in past

12 months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 (B) 81 6.8 86 3.0 1,420 28.8 409 7.7 1,010 3.9

Sponsored by the government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 (B) 47 4.0 8 0.3 407 65.4 266 5.0 141 0.5

Monthly Family Income6

Less than $500 . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 73.1 147 13.6 54 1.9 1,013 57.5 582 11.5 431 1.7

$500 to $1,499. . . . . . . . . . . . . 595 57.3 341 31.7 254 9.0 4,246 50.9 2,160 42.6 2,085 8.2

$1,500 and over. . . . . . . . . . . . 3,094 19.1 590 54.7 2,504 89.1 25,303 9.2 2,328 45.9 22,975 90.1

$1,500 to $2,499 . . . . . . . . . 617 42.2 261 24.2 356 12.7 4,759 21.8 1,039 20.5 3,720 14.6

$2,500 to $3,999 . . . . . . . . . 746 23.2 173 16.1 573 20.4 6,561 11.0 721 14.2 5,840 22.9

$4,000 and over . . . . . . . . . . 1,730 9.0 156 14.4 1,575 56.0 13,983 4.1 567 11.2 13,416 52.6

Child Support7

Received payments . . . . . . . . . 196 53.9 106 15.5 90 22.8 3,888 24.3 945 32.9 2,943 46.6

Did not receive payments . . . . 881 65.3 575 84.5 305 77.2 5,304 36.3 1,926 67.1 3,378 53.4

Poverty Level6

Below poverty level . . . . . . . . . 760 66.6 506 46.9 254 9.0 4,534 55.8 2,529 49.9 2,005 7.9

100 to 199 percent of

poverty level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 892 40.3 359 33.3 533 18.9 6,763 24.1 1,628 32.1 5,135 20.1

200 percent of poverty level or

higher. . . . . . ............. 2,238 9.5 213 19.8 2,025 72.0 19,265 4.7 914 18.0 18,351 72.0

Type of Residence

Metropolitan .............. 3,302 25.7 850 71.2 2,452 85.4 24,776 16.0 3,957 74.2 20,819 80.6

In central city . . . . . . ...... 1,132 37.3 423 35.4 709 24.7 8,507 25.6 2,180 40.9 6,328 24.5

Not in central city . ........ 2,170 19.7 427 35.8 1,743 60.7 16,269 10.9 1,778 33.3 14,491 56.1

Nonmetropolitan. . . . . . . . . . . . 763 45.1 344 28.8 419 14.6 6,399 21.5 1,376 25.8 5,023 19.4

(B) Derived measure not shown when base is less than 200,000.

1 Percent of mothers participating in or covered by one or more programs. 2 Currently participating in or covered by one or more programs. 3 Not currently participating in any program. 4 Includes people born in U.S. outlying areas and abroad to parents who are U.S. citizens. 5 Includes people not in the labor force. 6 Percent distribution based only on families reporting income in the past 4 months. Average income for 4 months prior to the interview date. 7 Data shown only for mothers whose children are under 21 years and whose marital status is other than married spouse present, unless the spouse is a

stepparent. Percent distribution based on this specified universe of mothers.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.
mothers without a birth in the last

year for each of these population

groups, with non-Hispanic White

and Asian and Pacific Islander

mothers recording lower participation rates than Black or Hispanic

mothers.17

Nativity

Sixteen percent (1.1 million) of

mothers receiving assistance were

foreign born. For mothers with a

birth in the last year, the participation rates were not statistically different for foreign-born and native

mothers—29 percent and 30 percent, respectively. Among the foreign-born population, naturalized

mothers with a birth in the last

year had a lower participation rate

(16 percent) than mothers who

10 U.S. Census Bureau

17 Participation rates for non-Hispanic

White mothers and Asian and Pacific Islander

mothers either with a child in the last year

or without a child in the last year were not

statistically different.

were not citizens (33 percent).

Mothers who were naturalized citizens were older than foreign-born

mothers who were not citizens,

and thus may have more economic

resources that affect their program

participation levels.18

For mothers without a recent birth,

a similar pattern exists; there was

no statistical difference in participation rates between native and foreign-born mothers, while participation rates were almost twice as high

for noncitizens (20 percent) as naturalized citizens (12 percent). 

18 In 2001, 56 percent of naturalized participant mothers were aged 35 to 44, compared with 36 percent of noncitizen participant mothers. For nonparticipants, 

67 percent of naturalized mothers were aged

35 to 44, compared with 42 percent of

noncitizen mothers. Also, participation rates

of mothers who were naturalized citizens

with a child born in the last year were not

statistically different from those of mothers

without recent births. 

LABOR FORCE

PARTICIPATION,

EDUCATION, AND

ECONOMIC STATUS

Families usually obtain their economic support from various

sources. These sources can

include earnings of family members, child support, public assistance, and other sources such as

help from relatives and friends. In

general, mothers receiving program assistance had lower family

incomes, lower levels of labor

force participation, and less education than nonparticipant mothers.

The younger age of the program

participants may account for some

of the socioeconomic differences

by program status.

Labor force 

In 2001, the majority of mothers

had a job in the last 4 months. The

proportion was 56 percent for

Figure 4.

Selected Employment, Educational, and Economic Characteristics of Mothers

Who Had a Child in the Last Year by Program Participation: 2001

*Based only on families reporting income in the past 4 months. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation, Wave 2, 2001.

(Percent with selected characteristics)

63

10

23

67

3

9

39 38 36

26

7

47

Below

poverty level*

Received job training

in past year

College,

1 or more

years

High

school,

4 years

Not high

school

graduate

Employed during

past 4 months

Program participants Nonparticipants
mothers with a birth in the last year

and 75 percent for other mothers.

Mothers who had not worked in

the last 4 months were about twice

as likely as mothers who had

worked in the last 4 months to be

receiving some form of assistance:

41 percent compared with 21 percent for mothers with a recent

birth, and 29 percent compared

with 13 percent for mothers without a recent birth. 

For participant mothers with a

birth in the last year, 39 percent

were working compared with 

63 percent of their nonparticipant

counterparts (Figure 4). The proportions working were higher for

mothers without recent births 

(58 percent for participants and 

79 percent for nonparticipants).

Education and job training

Figure 4 shows that in 2001, 

38 percent of participant mothers

with a birth in the last year had not

completed high school, compared

with 10 percent of nonparticipant

mothers. In contrast, 26 percent of

mothers with a birth in the last year

who were program participants had

completed 1 or more years of college, compared with 67 percent for

nonparticipants. 

Among recent mothers, 7 percent

of participant mothers and 3 percent of nonparticipants had

received job training in the 12

months preceding their interview

in 2001. Among mothers who had

not given birth in the last year, 

8 percent of participants and 4

percent of nonparticipants received

job training.19

U.S. Census Bureau 11

19 When looking at mothers receiving job

training, the difference between participant

mothers with a recent birth and those without a recent birth was not statistically significant. The same was true for nonparticipant

mothers.

Income, poverty, and 

child support

Since qualifying for assistance is

income-based, the participation

rates were higher for the lowest

income levels regardless of

whether the mother had a child in

the last year.20 Among program

participants who were recent

mothers in families with reports of

income in the 4-month period prior

to the survey, 55 percent had average monthly incomes of $1,500 or

more. The corresponding percentage for participant mothers without a recent birth was 46 percent.

Among mothers not participating

in any program, 9 out of 10 mothers were living in families whose

monthly income was $1,500 or

more, regardless of when they had

their last birth.

While about one-half of mothers

who participated in assistance programs were living in poverty,

regardless of when they had their

last birth, program assistance was

not limited to families in poverty.

About 1 in 6 participating mothers

lived in a family whose income

was 200 percent of the poverty

level or higher (Table 4).

Economic support from fathers is

another potential source of income

that the SIPP asks about for mothers who were not married or living

with a spouse and for currently

married women receiving child

support from their ex-husband or

the child’s biological father. For

participant mothers with a birth in

the last year, 85 percent did not

receive any payments, compared

with 67 percent of participant

mothers who did not have a child

in the last year (Table 4). Among

nonparticipants, 77 percent of

20 For mothers with monthly family

income of $500 to $1,499, there was no statistical difference in the participation rates of

mothers with recent births and mothers

without births in the last year.

recent mothers and 53 percent of

mothers without a recent birth did

not receive child support payments. For mothers with a birth in

the last year who did not receive

child support payments, the difference between participants and

nonparticipants was not statistically significant. 

SUMMARY

This report examined participation

in selected public assistance programs for mothers with and without a birth in the last year. It also

looked at differences between participants and nonparticipants. Of

the 35.2 million mothers 15 to 44

years old in 2001, 6.5 million 

(19 percent) were participants in

either TANF, food stamps, WIC,

Medicaid, housing assistance, or

other assistance. Half of mothers

(regardless of whether they had a

birth in the last year) participating

in any of these assistance programs were enrolled in two or

more programs. Twenty-nine percent of the 4 million mothers with

a birth in the last year were participants. Over half (56 percent) of

participant mothers with a child in

the last year were unmarried. 

Overall program participation fell

between 1996 and 2001 from 

42 percent to 29 percent for mothers with a recent birth and from 

22 percent to 17 percent for all

other mothers. Participation rates

also declined for both married and

unmarried mothers, regardless of

when they had their last birth.

Among participant mothers with a

recent birth, 40 percent lived with

their spouse. Two in 10 participant mothers with a recent birth

lived without another adult present

in the household. For teen mothers with a birth in the last year, 

63 percent received benefits, as

did one-half (51 percent) of teen

mothers without a recent birth.
Program participants in 2001 were In Wave 2, about 28,100 interviews people who are missed by the surracially and ethnically diverse. were obtained from the 30,500 eli- vey differ from those interviewed

Among Black mothers, 36 percent gible units. The institutionalized in ways other than age, race, sex,

were program participants. Among population, which is excluded from and Hispanic origin. How this

Hispanic mothers, the rate was the population universe, is com- weighting procedure affects other

29 percent, and among non- posed primarily of the population in variables in the survey is not preHispanic White mothers, it was correctional institutions and nursing cisely known. All of these consider13 percent. Overall, 16 percent of homes (91 percent of the 4.1 mil- ations affect comparisons across

mothers receiving assistance were lion institutionalized people in different surveys or data sources. 

foreign born. Census 2000). For further information on statistiParticipant mothers with a birth in cal standards and the computation ACCURACY OF THE

the last year were more likely not and use of standard errors, go to ESTIMATES

to have completed high school, to <www.sipp.census.gov/sipp

Statistics from surveys are subject be living below the poverty level, /sourceac/S&A2_SIPP2001_w1tow9

to sampling and nonsampling error. and to have received job training _20050214.pdf> or contact David

All comparisons presented in this than were their nonparticipant Hall of the Census Bureau’s

report have taken sampling error counterparts. Participant mothers Demographic Statistical Methods

into account and are significant at with infants were also less likely to Division at

the 90-percent confidence level have been employed in the last <david.warren.hall@census.gov>.

unless otherwise noted. This 4 months. 

means the 90-percent confidence Additional information on the SIPP

interval for the difference between can be found at the following Web SOURCE OF DATA

the estimates being compared does sites: 

The population represented (the not include zero. Nonsampling <www.sipp.census.gov/sipp/> population universe) in the 2001 errors in surveys may be attributed (main SIPP Web site), Survey of Income and Program to a variety of sources, such as how <www.sipp.census.gov/sipp Participation (SIPP) is the civilian the survey is designed, how respon- /workpapr/wp230.pdf> noninstitutionalized population liv- dents interpret questions, how able (SIPP Quality Profile), and ing in the United States. The SIPP is and willing respondents are to proa longitudinal survey conducted at <www.sipp.census.gov/sipp vide correct answers, and how

4-month intervals. The data in this /usrguide/sipp2001.pdf> accurately the answers are coded

report were collected from June (SIPP Users’ Guide). and classified. The U.S. Census

through September 2001 in the sec- Bureau employs quality control proond wave (interview) of the 2001 cedures throughout the production MORE INFORMATION

SIPP. The data highlighted in this process, including the overall The report as well as five additionreport come primarily from the core design of surveys, the wording of al detailed tables are available on

and the fertility history topical mod- questions, review of the work of the Internet <www.census.gov>;

ules. Although the main focus of interviewers and coders, and the search for this report by clicking

the SIPP is information on labor statistical review of reports, to mini- on the word “People” on the Web

force participation, jobs, income, mize these errors. page and selecting “Fertility.” and participation in federal assis- The Survey of Income and Program tance programs, information on CONTACTS Participation weighting procedure other topics is also collected in topi- uses ratio estimation, whereby For additional information on cal modules on a rotating basis. sample estimates are adjusted to fertility and program participation, For the 2001 SIPP panel, approxi- independent estimates of the contact the author of this report in mately 50,500 housing units were national population by age, race, the Fertility and Family Statistics in sample for Wave 1. Of the sex, and Hispanic origin. This Branch at 301-763-2416, or by 40,500 eligible units, 35,100 were weighting partially corrects for e-mail at interviewed. In Wave 2, a 13-per- bias due to undercoverage, but <Terry.A.Lugaila@census.gov>. cent sample cut was implemented. biases may still be present when

12 U.S. Census Bureau
USER COMMENTS SUGGESTED CITATION

The Census Bureau welcomes the Lugaila, Terry A., 2005.

comments and advice of data and Participation of Mothers in

report users. If you have any sug- Government Assistance Programs:

gestions or comments, please 2001. Current Population Reports,

write to: P70-102. U.S. Census Bureau,

Washington, DC. Chief, Population Division

U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, DC 20233 or send

e-mail to: <pop@census.gov>

U.S. Census Bureau 13
U.S. Department of Commerce

FIRST-CLASS MAIL Economics and Statistics Administration POSTAGE & FEES PAID

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, DC 20233 Permit No. G-58

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use $300