Acting Commissioner of Department of Labor
African-American Affairs Commission
Bristol One-Stop
Care4Kids United Way
Coalition for a Working Connecticut (Meeting)
Commissioner of Department of Social Services
Connecticut Association of Human Services
Connecticut Employment and Training (Commission Meeting)
Connecticut Voices for Children
Connecticut Women's Education and Legal Fund
DOL Jobs First Employment Services, Welfare to Work Program, DOL Director of Research,
WIA Program
DSS Division of Assistance Programs Central Office Director, Research Analyst, MIS staff,
DSS Manchester Office
DSS New Haven Office
Greater Hartford Legal Aid
Greater Hartford Literacy Council (Quarterly Meeting)
Hartford WIB (North Central WIB)
Latino & Puerto Rican Affairs Commission
Legal Assistance Resource Center
Legislative Office of Legislative Research
Middletown One-Stop
New Haven WIB (South Central WIB)
Office for Workforce Competitiveness
Permanent Commission on the Status of Women
TANF Council
Trends in Interviews
Program review staff spoke with over 20 organizations and other interested parties (see Appendix G for a complete list). Based on these interviews, several themes emerged which are now presented.
The Clients
• The majority of JFES clients are people who want to succeed, but their barriers to employment, the system, and other issues get in their way and they drop off. The majority of customers really want to benefit from JFES. They just need the guidance and support to do it.
• A sizeable number of clients (estimated at 40 percent) do not show up for their exit interviews. Had they attended the interview, they may have received extensions, food stamps, and/or other services.
The Economy
• Greater numbers of the earlier welfare leavers found jobs: this may be due to the economy and employers willing to take inexperienced employees (now the market is tighter). The current caseload is harder to serve and slower to find jobs.
• The first four years of TANF—pre-9/11—were good years for the economy and this contributed to the sharp decline in the number of TFA cases. The economy is a big factor in TFA recipients finding employment.
• Unconfirmed suspicion that there are many people living in deep poverty.
The TFA Program
• There are regional differences across the WIBs with different operational systems and processes.
• TANF block grant money originally used and intended to directly provide cash assistance and employment services is now being used for other, indirectly related programs, short-changing the employment services, child care and sufficient number of DSS and DOL agency staff
• Cash assistance amounts have remained unchanged for many years.
• Not enough is done to prepare temporarily exempt clients for possible future work. For example, someone who is exempt because they have a child under 1 year old, can still be preparing for their future entrance into the workforce (e.g., GED, other preparations); someone caring for an elderly/disabled parent will someday need to enter the workforce after the parent dies or goes into a nursing home; and someone caring for a disabled child will eventually have that child in school and the parent will be freed up to work.
• The sanctioning rate is not very high in Connecticut (ranges from 1-2 percent), and there are concerns about the length of time taken to process sanctioning referrals.
Related Programs
• The Diversion program is not used very often. It compares unfavorably to the TFA cash assistance. Ways to make the Diversion program more attractive would encourage greater usage.
• The Safety Net program rewards sanctioned, uncooperative participants while not serving participants who have made a good faith effort to find employment and have been timed off the system. A safety net does not exist for cooperative people who have timed out of the system.
• There are issues with the Care 4 Kids program including: difficulty processing the lengthy applications in a timely fashion; providers caring for children without reimbursement for rejected applications; and communication between JFES case managers and Care 4 Kids staff. The recent transfer of the administration of the program to the United Way, however, has resulted in an improvement to the system.
The Barriers
• The Service Needs Assessment under-reports barriers to employment. This may occur because: there is not enough time to do a more thorough assessment; the client is unwilling to disclose barriers; or the client does not recognize the issue as a barrier to employment. DSS officials are hoping to have a more extensive mental health screen, particularly if a client is being sanctioned.
• More education and vocational training is needed to assist clients in getting good paying jobs. To really help these clients, deeper issues need to be addressed instead of focusing on trying to get them into any job as soon as possible.
The Outcomes
• Measuring program outcomes is very difficult -- not only because of the limitation of the automated systems—but because of the staff reductions -- particularly in research functions -- and difficulties maintaining contact with recipients once they have left cash assistance.
• The automated systems used by the Department of Social Services and the Department of Labor were not intended for use to conduct research such as the measuring of outcomes, summarizing information about caseloads, and tracking what happens to welfare recipients. Wage data is also very challenging to obtain due to confidentiality issues, six-month lags in availability of information, and exclusion of wages earned in self-employment, at companies headquartered outside of Connecticut, or earned in another state.
• Many would like to know whether recipients have benefited at the end of the 21 months -- are they any better off? It is hard to get a handle on what has happened to leavers. Are some programs or activities more effective than others? What would be most useful?
Appendix B
Selected Other States' Programs
This appendix contains some comparative information on selected other states and some of the key provisions of their welfare programs. Table B-1 provides a summary of the narrative.
Time Limits
Welfare time limits apply to non-exempt TANF recipients in Connecticut and are among the shortest in the nation. The lifetime limit of 21 months is the lowest lifetime limit; however, most clients that apply can receive at least two 6-month extensions, extending the limit to 33 months for time-limited clients which would surpass three other states. No other New England state has a lifetime limit under the federal limit of 60 months. Massachusetts does limit its nonexempt recipients to 24 months out of a 60 month period, and 11 other states have similar policies that allow for the full 60 months of lifetime eligibility while allowing for shorter periods within a specific time frame.
Diversion Payments
Since 1999 Connecticut has provided potential TFA recipients who are facing a short term set back with the option of taking a lump sum diversion payment instead of beginning long-term monthly assistance. While Maine is the only other New England state to offer this option, a majority of other states outside of New England offer similar programs.
Initial Eligibility (family of three)
Nationwide, Connecticut ranks 5th in cost of living, and 2nd (only behind D.C.) in per capita income, it ranks first in both categories in New England. The maximum income for initial TANF eligibility has remained at $835 for a family of three since the beginning of the Jobs First program in 1996, falling from the 11th highest limit to 18th. Only Massachusetts and New Hampshire have lower income eligibility limits in New England. Connecticut's asset limit of $3000 is the highest in New England and 11th in the nation. Connecticut allows a vehicle exemption of up to $9500. New Hampshire and Vermont allow one vehicle per licensed driver, and Maine allows one vehicle per household, regardless of value. Eleven states exempt all vehicles owned by a household.
Earned Income Disregard
Connecticut's earned income disregard, the amount that a family can earn and still remain eligible for TFA, is 100% of the federal poverty level which is the highest in New England and among the highest in the nation.
Maximum Monthly Benefit (family of three)
While Connecticut's maximum monthly benefit for a family of three is the 11th highest in the nation, it has remained unchanged since 1995 and only Maine has a lower benefit level in New England. Vermont offers the highest monthly benefits in New England.
Family Cap
Along with 21 other states, Connecticut has a family cap policy that reduces benefit amounts for children who are conceived while on assistance. Massachusetts, however, is the only other New England state with a similar policy.
Work-Related Activity Requirements
Connecticut is among the majority of states that require work-related activities to begin immediately in order to receive benefits; Massachusetts is the only New England state that does not, requiring them to begin within 60 days. Connecticut is the only state in New England, and one of only five in the nation that does not include postsecondary education as an allowable activity. The other four states are California, Hawaii, Idaho and Indiana.
Table B-1. Comparison of Key Provisions – Selected Other States. | ||||||||
|
States |
Time Limits |
Maximum Income for Initial Eligibility (family of three) |
Asset Limit |
Vehicle Exemption |
Earned Income Disregard |
Monthly Benefit (family of three) |
Family Cap |
Diversion Payments |
CT |
21 months 1 |
$835 |
$3000 |
$9500 equity |
100% of FPL |
$543 |
Yes |
Yes |
MA |
24 of 60 months for nonexempt, no time limit otherwise |
$723 |
$2500 |
$5000 equity / $10000 fair market value |
$120 and 33.3% of remainder (exempt) $120 and 50% of remainder (nonexempt) |
$633 |
Yes |
No |
ME |
None 2 |
$1023 |
$2000 |
One vehicle per household |
$108 and 50% of remainder |
$485 |
No |
Yes |
NH |
60 months |
$781 |
$2000 7 |
One vehicle per licensed driver |
50% |
$625 |
No |
No |
RI |
60 months 3 |
$1278 |
$1000 |
$1500 equity / $4650 fair market value |
$170 and 50% of remainder |
$554 |
No |
No |
VT |
None |
$1001 |
$1000 8 |
One vehicle per adult |
$150 and 25% of remainder |
$639 |
No |
No |
NJ |
60 months |
$636 |
$2000 |
$9500 fair market value |
100% first month, 50% thereafter |
$424 |
Yes |
Yes |
NY |
60 months 4 |
$667 |
$2000/$3000 9 |
$4650 fair market value |
$90 and 51% of remainder |
$577 |
No |
Yes |
VA |
24 months, followed by 24 months of ineligibility 5 |
$1272 |
$1000 |
One vehicle per household |
$120 and 33.3% of remainder first 4 months, $120 next 8 months, $90 thereafter |
$320 |
Yes |
Yes |
WI |
60 months |
__6 |
$2500 |
$10000 equity |
No disregards – flat grant amount |
$673 |
No |
Yes |
1 Recipients may apply for an extension to the time limit once their 21 months of assistance have expired. Recipients must reapply for extensions every six months. Recipients may only receive two extensions unless they meet specific criteria. If recipients are sanctioned during the extension period, they are ineligible to receive benefits again. Units may only receive a total of 60 months, including extensions. 2 Units in compliance with TANF program rules may continue to receive benefits beyond 60 months. If members of the nit have been sanctioned three or more times during their 60 months of assistance, the adult's needs are not considered for benefit computation for an amount of time equal to the length of the adult's last sanction period. 3 Only the adult portion of the benefit is terminated at 60 months. 4 After 60 months, the unit is still eligible to receive non-cash assistance through the state's Safety Net Assistance program 5 After receiving 24 months of assistance, the unit may receive up to 12 months of transitional benefits. The 24 months of ineligibility begins with the month in which the case was closed or the month in which transitional benefits were terminated, whichever is later. There is a 60 month lifetime limit. 6 Units with full-time employment (generally greater than 30 hours a week) will not receive a cash benefit in the state. There are provisions to provide prorated benefits to Community Service Jobs participants who are also employed part-time at an unsubsidized job. These eligibility determinations are made on a case-by-case basis. Recipients may earn up to $1462 and still be eligible for non-financial assistance. 7 The asset limit for applicants is $1000 8 In addition to the $1000 asset limit, up to 100% of the unit's total gross earnings from the previous month, if placed in a savings account, will not count toward its asset limit. 9 Units including a member age 60 years and over may exempt $3000, all other units exempt $2000. Sources: Rowe, Gretchen and Versteeg, Jeffrey. (2005). Welfare Rules Databook: State TANF Policies as of July 2003. The Urban Institute. | ||||||||
APPENDIX C: TFA Payment Regions by Town
Region |
Towns and Cities in the Region | |||||
A |
Bethel |
Darien |
New Milford |
Ridgefield |
Washington |
|
Bridgewater |
Greenwich |
Newtown |
Roxbury |
Weston |
||
Brookfield |
New Canaan |
Norwalk |
Sherman |
Westport |
||
Danbury |
New Fairfield |
Redding |
Stamford |
Wilton |
||
B |
Andover |
Columbia |
Franklyn |
Mansfield |
Plainfield |
Stratford |
Ashford |
Coventry |
Glastonbury |
Marlborough |
Plainville |
Suffield | |
Avon |
Cromwell |
Granby |
Meriden |
Plymouth |
Thompson | |
Berlin |
Deep River |
Griswold |
Middlefield |
Pomfret |
Tolland | |
Bethany |
Durham |
Groton |
Middletown |
Portland |
Trumbull | |
Bloomfield |
Eastford |
Guilford |
Milford |
Preston |
Union | |
Bolton |
East Granby |
Haddam |
Monroe |
Putnam |
Vernon | |
Bozrah |
East Haddam |
Hamden |
Montville |
Rocky Hill |
Voluntown | |
Branford |
East Hampton |
Hampton |
New Britain |
Salem |
Wallingford | |
Bridgeport |
East Hartford |
Hartford |
New Haven |
Scotland |
Waterford | |
Bristol |
East Haven |
Hebron |
Newington |
Shelton |
Westbrook | |
Brooklyn |
East Lyme |
Killingly |
New London |
Simsbury |
West Hartford | |
Burlington |
Easton |
Killingworth |
No. Branford |
Somers |
West Haven | |
Canterbury |
East Windsor |
Lebanon |
North Haven |
Southington |
Wethersfield | |
Canton |
Ellington |
Ledyard |
N. Stonington |
S. Windsor |
Willington | |
Chaplin |
Enfield |
Lisbon |
Norwich |
Sprague |
Windham | |
Chester |
Essex |
Lyme |
Old Lyme |
Stafford |
Windsor | |
Clinton |
Fairfield |
Madison |
Old Saybrook |
Sterling |
Windsor Locks | |
Colchester |
Farmington |
Manchester |
Orange |
Stonington |
Woodbridge Woodstock | |
Region |
Towns and Cities in the Region | |||||
C |
Ansonia |
Colebrook |
Kent |
Norfolk |
Sharon |
Watertown |
Barkhamsted |
Cornwall |
Litchfield |
North Canaan |
Southbury |
Winchester | |
Beacon Falls |
Derby |
Middlebury |
Oxford |
Thomaston |
Wolcott | |
Bethlehem |
Goshen |
Morris |
Prospect |
Torrington |
Woodbury | |
Canaan |
Hartland |
Naugatuck |
Salisbury |
Warren |
||
Cheshire |
Harwinton |
New Hartford |
Seymour |
Waterbury |
||
Source: Connecticut Department of Social Services Uniform Policy Manual | ||||||
Appendix D. Definitions of Allowable Work Activities to Count Toward WPR in October 2003 | |
Core Work Activity |
Definition |
Unsubsidized Employment |
Any work in which the wages are paid solely by the employer without any public sector subsidy. Unsubsidized employment also includes self-employment. |
Subsidized Private Sector Employment |
Work in which wages are paid for in part by the employer and in part with public funds. Employers may have jobs in the for-profit or not-for-profit sector. The subsidy is given for a limited period of time. |
Subsidized Public Sector Employment |
Work in which wages are paid for in part by the employer and in part with public funds. Employers may have jobs in a federal, state or local government organization. The subsidy is given for a limited period of time. |
1Work Experience |
Time-limited, paid, supervised work that is intended to improve the employability level of clients who have not otherwise been able to secure a job. The supervised work can occur in either the public or private sector. The work experience must follow Connecticut wage and hour laws as well as adhere to the Fair Labor Standards Act requirements. |
On-The-Job Training (OJT) |
Paid and supervised work activities that may take place in either the public or private sector. In these situations, the client is given training in the skills and knowledge needed to do a specific job. The public or private sector employer is reimbursed at least in part to cover the training and supervision given to the client. |
Job Search and Job Readiness Training |
Encompasses a variety of structured activities that last for a period of four to six weeks. The activities that may occur either in a supervised group or one-on-one with the client and include: • Job search techniques, completing job applications, interviewing, resumes; • Life skills training; • Orientation to the world of work, motivational exercises, family budgeting; • Job placements and job development; and • Supervised support groups. |
Vocational Education Training |
Training that is expected to result in the client gaining a particular skill or knowledge. This formal training can occur in a classroom and/or workplace setting and includes: occupational skills training; ESL, GED and ABE when the education is delivered as part of a vocationally focused curriculum; and entrepreneurial training as appropriate. |
Community Service |
A client volunteers to work at a public or non-profit organization. The advantage to the client is development of appropriate work skills and a work history that can be used when applying for future employment. Community service may also include volunteering in community-based programs, where the goal is community enhancement rather than improving the employability of the client. |
Child Care for Others Doing Community Service |
Counted toward time spent in a core activity when the child care is for a client in community service. Two-parent households can not count care for their own child as an activity while the other parent is participating in community service. |
Non-Core Work Activity |
Definition |
Job Skills Training Directly Related to Employment |
Any suitable occupational or vocational training given to a client that will result in a job. |
Education Directly Related to Employment |
For clients who do not have a high school diploma or GED, and includes Adult Basic Education (ABE), GED, and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs that are not a piece of a vocational educational program. |
High School Completion/GED |
An option for clients who did not complete high school earlier. With instruction delivered in adult education or other settings, clients work toward attaining the academic skills and concepts needed to pass a multi-part written exam, resulting in the equivalency of a high school diploma. |
1 Consistent with the Deficit Reduction Act definition, beginning July 1, 2006, the activity previously defined as “work experience” will now be included under “subsidized employment.” | |
Source: Department of Labor | |
Appendix E. Counters For Time-Limited TFA Cases
Counter |
When Counter Began |
Maximum months on Counter |
Count partial months? |
Funding Source for Program |
Counts 2-P families? |
Comments |
Federal Non-CT TANF Counter |
October 1996 or when a particular state implemented TANF |
60 |
Yes |
Any Federal Dollars Used All states combined |
No |
Counts number of months of TANF assistance received in other states. |
Federal CT TANF Counter |
October 1996 |
60; Counts assistance from CT; Counts months paid for with at least $1 of Federal money during time-limited status |
Yes |
Any Federal Dollars Used |
No |
Counts months client received TANF assistance in CT; Important for Federal reporting purposes. Excludes time in programs funded by MOE (2-P). Counts some exempt months as of 10/2001 due to the expiration of the AFDC waiver. Until the waiver expired, the federal government allowed clients exempt under CT rules to also be exempt from Federal participation requirements. |
Federal Total TANF Counter |
October 1996 |
60; Counts the total number of months a client received TANF assistance in any state |
Yes |
Any Federal Dollars Used |
No |
Sum of Federal Non-CT TANF Counter + Federal CT TANF Counter |
State TFA Counter |
October 1996 |
60; includes any month they got TFA, no matter how they funded it |
Yes |
Federal or State Dollars used |
Yes |
Counts time-limited months on TFA program, including partial months |
Jobs First/AU Counter |
February 1996 |
21; plus extensions; requirements more restrictive after first 2 extensions |
No |
Federal or State Dollars used |
Yes |
Counts time-limited months in program, beginning with the first full month. Used to determine eligibility for time-limited Jobs First benefits. |
APPENDIX F: JFES Program Operating Principles
1. The primary focus of the JFES program is to assist participants to become independent of assistance through employment
2. Every participant shall be assigned to activities that will enable him/her to become and remain independent of TFA. Whenever possible, activities shall be combined in a way which will meet the federally established participation rates
3. Each service delivery area shall manage their caseload in such a way as to meet the state target levels for the participation rates. If the caseload is managed by smaller “units” of case managers, each case management unit supervisor is to ensure that their unit's caseload is meeting the participation rate
4. An individualized employment plan based on assessment of skills, abilities, work experience, education level, aptitudes, interests and program goals is developed for every participant. The individual employment plans for parents in a two-parent family are coordinated with each other in order to meet program goals. The combination of both parents' plans constitutes a plan for the family.
5. If, based on the assessment, it is determined that the family is capable within the first 21 months or anytime during an extension period of obtaining employment at earnings equal to the Federal Poverty Level for their family size, the participant(s) are required to find and/or maintain employment at the Federal Poverty Level as soon as possible
6. If it is determined that the family cannot obtain earnings at the Federal Poverty Level (In the case of a two-parent family, both parents wages or potential wages are combined) without further training and/or education, the participant(s) are assigned work, education and/or training activities that will maximize the families income level within the first 21 months of assistance. For participants in extensions, work, education and/or training activities that will maximize the family income level as soon as possible are assigned. Whenever possible, employment shall be combined with education and training in such a way that the combination is countable toward the federally established participation rate.
7. As long as consistent with the program goals, employment plan activities are based on the participant's interests, ability, availability of resources and labor market demands. Motivation is key to success.
8. If it is evident that the family will not be able to become or remain independent of TFA through current employment or future employment that is secured (such as seasonal employment) without additional education and/or training, new or additional activities designed to increase the family income may be assigned, which may preclude continuation of existing employment or self-employment
9. The operating principles listed above apply to all participants according to their needs, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, disability or sexual orientation
Appendix G
Study Sample Compared with Connecticut TFA Population
The Study Sample Is Representative of the Connecticut TFA Population | ||
Characteristic |
Study Sample |
Connecticut TFA Population |
DSS Region1 |
||
Northern |
42% |
39% |
Southern |
29% |
32% |
Western |
29% |
29% |
WIB Region2 |
||
Eastern |
13% |
9% |
North Central |
37% |
38% |
Northwest |
16% |
15% |
South Central |
18% |
22% |
Southwest |
16% |
16% |
Gender2 |
||
Female |
88% |
88% |
Male |
12% |
12% |
Race/Ethnicity2 |
||
Hispanic |
40% |
39% |
Caucasian |
32% |
29% |
African-American |
27% |
31% |
Asian |
1% |
1% |
Native American |
<1% |
0% |
Age2 |
||
16-18 |
6% |
1% |
19-21 |
15% |
17% |
22-29 |
38% |
43% |
30-39 |
27% |
25% |
40-49 |
12% |
12% |
50-59 |
1% |
2% |
60+ |
<1% |
<1% |
Source: 1DSS report: TFA Caseload Profile by Office, by Month, for SFY 2004 2CTDOL report: At-A-Squint June 2004 | ||
Appendix H
Comparison of Families in Urban, Suburban and Rural Areas
Demographic Differences Across the Urban, Suburban and Rural Areas | |||
Characteristic |
Area | ||
Urban (n=805) |
Suburban (n=402) |
Rural (n=68) | |
Average Age |
28 years old |
29 years old |
31 years old |
High School Diploma |
54% |
61% |
75% |
Head of Household Ever Married |
25% |
31% |
46% |
Race/Ethnicity |
|||
Latino |
48% |
30% |
9% |
African American |
34% |
17% |
1% |
Caucasian |
17% |
51% |
90% |
Other |
1% |
2% |
0% |
Total |
100% |
100% |
100% |
Percents may not total to 100 percent due to rounding. Source: DSS | |||
Appendix I
Connecticut TFA Recipients that Received TANF in Another State
CT Recipients and TANF Received in Other States | |
State |
Number of CT TFA Recipients1 |
New York |
15 |
North Carolina |
7 |
Florida |
6 |
Puerto Rico |
6 |
Massachusetts |
5 |
Pennsylvania |
5 |
Rhode Island |
5 |
Virginia |
4 |
Georgia |
3 |
One each from Colorado, Maine, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, Washington |
6 |
1Two clients had received TANF in two other states. Source: Department of Social Services | |
Appendix J
Time When Sample Clients First Began Receiving Time-Limited Cash Assistance
Year When 748 Clients First Began Receiving Cash Assistance as a Time-Limited Recipient | ||
Year |
Number |
Percent of 748 |
1996 |
169 |
23% |
1997 |
106 |
14% |
1998 |
72 |
10% |
1999 |
68 |
9% |
2000 |
85 |
11% |
2001 |
106 |
14% |
2002 |
93 |
12% |
Jan-Jun 2003 |
49 |
7% |
Total |
748 |
100% |
Source: Department of Social Services | ||
Time on TFA Prior to October 2003 Opening and by August 20061 | ||
Household Status |
Prior to Oct 03 opening |
August 20062 |
Total |
||
No time |
23% |
4% |
1-21 months |
54% |
43% |
22-27 months |
11% |
20% |
28-33 months |
5% |
15% |
Over 33 months |
7% |
19% |
Time-Limited in October 2003 (n=837) |
||
No time |
17% |
0% |
1-21 months |
63% |
44% |
22-27 months |
13% |
21% |
28-33 months |
4% |
16% |
Over 33 months |
3% |
18% |
Exempt on October 2003 (n=334) |
||
No time |
37% |
12% |
1-21 months |
33% |
41% |
22-27 months |
7% |
16% |
28-33 months |
7% |
12% |
Over 33 months |
16% |
20% |
1Although TFA eligibility was determined in October 2003, the state TFA counter could have been changed retroactive to the application month. 2New and returning TFA families, regardless of whether they closed by August 2006. Source: DSS | ||
Appendix K
Number of Extensions for Time-Limited and Exempt Families
Number of Extensions for Time-Limited and Exempt Families With that Status on October 2003 | |||
No. of Extensions |
Time-Limited (n=837) |
Exempt (n=334) |
Total (n=1,171) |
No extensions |
410 (49%) |
216 (65%) |
626 (54%) |
1 extension |
135 (16%) |
48 (14%) |
183 (16%) |