The federal government provides grants-in-aid to states and local governments to provide a range of benefits and human services programs to disadvantaged families and persons. Most such human services are administered, and often designed, at the state and local level. States and localities also often contribute spending from their own funds for these programs. Some human services are provided by community or nonprofit organizations. The current recession is straining the budgets of state and local governments, putting pressure on many jurisdictions to cut spending or raise taxes. The recession also might increase the demand for services for programs designed to alleviate economic hardship. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5 , H.R. 1 ) includes provisions to temporarily increase funding for several human services programs. Some of the funding is directed to help finance increases in payments through the states to households and families. Some of the additional funds provided offer fiscal relief to the states for a portion of the costs of certain programs. Additional funding increases would go to localities, community organizations, and faith-based organizations that provide human services. This report discusses provisions of the ARRA for selected human services programs. The selected programs generally are those that provide benefits and services to families with children, though some programs (e.g., the Community Services Block Grant) provide services to other families as well. All of the programs discussed in this report are administered by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). This report does not address proposals related to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, the program formerly known as Food Stamps), nor does it discuss the Medicaid proposals in the bill. The ARRA changes spending for some mandatory programs (e.g. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the Title IV-E programs of the Social Security Act), as well as providing additional, supplemental appropriations for other programs. The term "additional funding" is used to denote appropriations above those in the regular appropriations for the program. At this point, FY2009 regular appropriations are contained in the FY2009 continuing resolution ( P.L. 110-329 ). The first part of the report provides a summary of each grant or program's purpose, current funding, and the proposed changes in the enacted version of the ARRA. It concludes with a table that provides a detailed comparison of current law, the House-passed version of the ARRA, the Senate-passed version of the ARRA, and the final, enacted version of the ARRA. Proposed funding increases for Low Income Home Energy Assistance ($1 billion in the House version of ARRA) and the Social Services Block Grant ($400 million in the Senate version of ARRA) were not a part of the final bill, but are shown in the table. The TANF block grant is best known as a funding source for cash welfare programs that provide assistance to needy families with children. However, TANF also funds a wide range of benefits and services for disadvantaged families with children, as well as activities to further the goals of reducing out-of-wedlock pregnancies and promoting the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. The bulk of TANF federal funding is in a basic block grant that totals $16.5 billion per year. Also part of the TANF financial system is state spending, statutorily set at a minimum of $10.4 billion per year. Both the basic block grant and the state spending requirement (known as the maintenance of effort, or MOE requirement) have been fixed since Fiscal Year (FY) 1997 without any adjustments. Most TANF grants are funded through FY2010 through amounts pre-appropriated in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 ( P.L. 109-173 ). In addition, TANF has a $319 million supplemental grant for 17 states based on historically low federal grants per poor person or high population growth. Under pre-ARRA law, supplemental grants would have expired at the end of FY2009. Finally, TANF has a contingency fund for states that meet criteria of economic need. The 1996 welfare law, which created TANF, appropriated $2 billion for the contingency fund. At the beginning of FY2009, about $1.3 billion remained in the contingency fund. Each state's annual contingency fund grants are capped at 20% of their basic state family assistance grant. The ARRA retains the current TANF contingency fund and adds a new, temporary "emergency contingency fund," that provides extra funding to states in FY2009 and FY2010. States receive extra federal grants to cover 80% of increased recession-related costs in those two years. Recession-related costs are defined as increased basic assistance (for states with increased basic assistance caseloads), non-recurrent short-term benefits, or subsidized employment expenditures. Each state's extra grants would be capped. A state's cumulative, combined funding from both the TANF contingency fund and the temporary emergency fund is limited to 50% of its annual basic TANF block grant for the two years. The ARRA provides an appropriation of $5 billion for the emergency fund. The ARRA extends the TANF $319 million supplemental grant through the end of FY2010. The ARRA temporarily modifies the caseload reduction credit toward the TANF work participation standards. The caseload reduction credit reduces TANF work participation for caseload reduction that has occurred since FY2005 to the previous fiscal year. If caseloads rise, the credit diminishes, raising the effective (after credit) work participation standard. The ARRA modifies the credit for the FY2009, FY2010, and FY2011 standards, allowing the credit to be based on caseload reduction through FY2007 or FY2008 for those years. Thus, caseload increases occurring in FY2008 through FY2010 will not reduce caseload reduction credits. Under pre-ARRA law, states could reserve unspent TANF grants without fiscal year limit for the purpose of providing cash welfare. The ARRA allows states to use unspent TANF grants for any TANF benefit and service. The Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) is the primary source of federal funding dedicated solely to child care subsidies for low-income working families (regardless of welfare status). Through the CCDBG, low-income parents receive vouchers or other reimbursement for child care costs to enable them to work or participate in education or training activities. Generally, families must provide a co-payment for child care, but co-pays may be waived under certain circumstances. Authorization for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) expired in FY2002. However, the discretionary program has continued to receive funding through annual appropriations bills, including $2.062 billion under the current FY2009 continuing resolution ( P.L. 110-329 ). A second child care funding stream, authorized by section 418 of the Social Security Act, includes $2.917 billion annually in pre-appropriated mandatory funds through FY2010. These two funding streams (discretionary and mandatory) are frequently referred to, in concert, as the "Child Care and Development Fund" (CCDF). CCDF and CCDBG are terms that are often used interchangeably. Discretionary CCDBG funds are allocated among states according to a formula that is based on each state's share of children under age five, the state's share of children receiving free or reduced-price lunches, and state per capita income. Half of 1% of appropriated funds is reserved for the territories, and between 1% and 2% is reserved for payments to Indian tribes and tribal organizations. There is no state match required in order to receive these discretionary funds. The ARRA appropriates an additional $2.0 billion in discretionary funds to the CCDBG. The ARRA specifies that these funds should be used to supplement, not supplant, state funding spent on child care assistance for low-income families. The ARRA also specifies that a sum of approximately $255 million be reserved, out of the total appropriated to CCDBG, for activities designed to: (1) provide comprehensive consumer education to parents and the public; (2) increase parental choice; and (3) improve quality and availability of child care (such as resource and referral services). This sum would augment the amount that states are already required to use for such activities (not less than 4% of the total amount received by each state, per section 658G of the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act). Of the $255 million, nearly $94 million is reserved for activities designed to improve the quality of infant and toddler care. The Child Support Enforcement (CSE) program was enacted in 1975 as a federal-state program (Title IV-D of the Social Security Act) to help strengthen families by securing financial support for children from their noncustodial parent on a consistent and continuing basis and by helping some families to remain self-sufficient and off public assistance by providing the requisite CSE services. The CSE program serves both welfare and non-welfare families. All 50 states and four jurisdictions (the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands) operate CSE programs. On average, child support constitutes about 17% of family income for households who receive it. Among poor households who receive it, child support constitutes about 30% of family income. In FY2007, the CSE program collected $24.9 billion in child support payments and served nearly 15.8 million child support cases. CSE is a matching grant program, with the federal government reimbursing states for a share of the CSE expenditures. In FY2007, CSE program expenditures amounted to nearly $5.6 billion. The federal government and the states share program costs at the rate of 66% and 34%, respectively. The federal government also pays states an incentive payment to encourage them to operate effective CSE programs.