Policy and Practice | December 2022

The Roots of TANF To understand TANF, we have to go back to the program’s inception. TANF became law in 1997, replacing the 1935 grant program Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). TANF provided block grants that gave individual states more leeway to spend dollars, so long as one of the four purposes of the program was met: 1. Assist needy families so that children can be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives. 2. End the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage. 3. Prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies. 4. Encourage the formation and main tenance of two-parent families. The intent of TANF was to create a program that led families to stable work and off of government assistance. Welfare caseloads dropped across the country almost immediately after enact ment and continued to steadily fall. However, poverty rates remained steady. The concept behind TANF is simple: families in crisis need help to bridge a gap until adults get back to work and the family can get back on its feet. But in practice, this is insufficient to support reentry into the workforce. It also does not recognize the changing structure of families in America, including grandparents who take care of their grandchildren and parents who are unable to work. Due to a variety of factors, such as the changing landscape of families and stringent state and federal regulations, many states find themselves in the same position as Tennessee—they face a large surplus of federal dollars. There is no doubt that these dollars should be spent for the benefit of families in need. Doing so requires a certain amount of strategy, innovation, and understanding of local needs, all while balancing the require ments of federal and state law. Innovating Our Approach toTANF Assess the current state To truly modernize the TANF program, it is critical that we begin

help agencies strategically identify and focus on new areas to invest in without overburdening the staff. The aligned partnerships will also bring an opportunity to collectively adjust the program portfolio to meet even greater and deeper needs. It’s time to stop offering programs that have little value and invest in new programs that are directly unique in providing services to families. Having this defined vision not only allows innova tive services to bloom but it keeps the agency focused on its North Star and forges partnerships at the federal and state levels to meet compliance. Implement and track outcomes Finally, and perhaps most critically, we need to begin tracking outcomes for families, not transactional activi ties. We know how many people are on TANF and how many dollars are spent on TANF participants. But do we know if people are better served because we’ve provided them with funds intended to help them? We need to apply robust data analytics to see which approaches have had the greatest success and build from those actions. We must expect the same from the community partners. Then we can begin to coalesce around the combi nation of data from multiple sources. That leads to better understanding the needs of the families and even tually using that data to inform our decisions, develop the right programs to achieve success, and work toward actual prevention of crisis, as opposed to reaction to it. Together, re-examining our TANF program in this way can help families go from surviving to thriving. In a time where so much has changed, we owe it to our families to rethink our role and make change for good where we can. The views reflected in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Ernst & Young LLP or other members of the global EY organization.

with a current state assessment. The approach is two-fold. First, garner an understanding of the journey and experience of the TANF participant. Take the time to assess what is going well and what is not going well from the perspective of those with lived experience. Discover the barriers to participation and unveil any unmet needs. Addressing needed policy and process changes for the recipients first is vital to a strategic redress of future success of the program. This may require changes to how services are delivered—meeting customers where they are. The world has changed, and the time is ripe to rethink how people need to be served. This is also a good time to review and reconsider state policy to make sure our programs reach families who need them and are not unduly burdensome. During my tenure, we traveled the state and often spoke directly with our customers. However, talking with them was not enough. We missed the opportunity to take a purposeful approach to systematically evaluate their experience and make changes to improve that experience and impact. Second, garner an understanding of current and prospective partners. There are undoubtedly many programs outside of enrollment in TANF that states are utilizing to bolster communities holistically. Many agencies have come to understand the necessity of com munity partnerships and rely on those programs to be “boots on the ground.” They are neighbors and community allies with our TANF families. Understanding the full array of programs and services that are available to engage and support families beyond a small cash grant, and coordinating those services and partnerships, is essential to a family’s ability to thrive. Future state vision By considering feedback from those who have lived experience with TANF—and input from other key stakeholders, the community, and employees—we can create a desired future state of TANF. Having this consensus and alignment will

Danielle Barnes is EY Americas Government and Public Sector Leader.

Reference Note 1. Graphical Overview of State TANF Policies as of July 2019 (www.hhs.gov)

7

December 2022 Policy&Practice