Welfare reform devolved authority to states in designing and implementing Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and child care subsidy programs, thereby creating substantial variation in both programs across states. TANF and child care subsidy programs are, in theory, designed to work together to support employment among low-income families, yet we have little information on how these two programs collectively impact work and family life among the target population. This study examines the intensity of TANF work requirements and generosity of child care subsidy provisions across states and the interaction of the two programs. Overall, we find that states with stringent work requirements do not typically provide generous child care subsidies. This article discusses the implications for families, policy, and social work practice in light of our findings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsG., HolcombP., SnyderK., KoralekR., & CapizzanoJ. (2006). Child care subsidies for TANF families: The nexus of systems and policies.Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
AdamsG., & SnyderK (2003). Child care subsidy policies and practices: Implications for child care providers. New Federalism: Issues and Options for States, No. A-57.Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
4.
BlauD. (2003). Child care subsidy programs. In MoffittR. (Ed.), Means-tested transfer programs in the United States (pp. 443–516). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5.
CancianM. (2001). Rhetoric and reality of work-based welfare reform. Social Work, 46(4), 309–314.
6.
DanzigerS. K., AnanatE. O., & BrowningK. G. (2004). Childcare subsidies and the transition from welfare to work. Family Relations, 53(2), 219–228.
7.
De JongG., RoempkeD. G., IrvingS. K., & St. PierreT. (2006). Measuring state TANF policy variations and change after reform. Social Science Quarterly, 87(4), 755–781.
8.
FenderL., McKernanS. M., & BernsteinJ. (2002). Linking state TANF and related policies to outcomes: Final report.Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
9.
ForryN. D., & HofferthS. L. (2011). Maintaining work: The influence of child care subsidies on child care-related work disruptions. Journal of Family Issues, 32(3), 346–368.
10.
GennetianL. A., CrosbyD. A., HustonA. C., & LoweE. D. (2004). Can child care assistance in welfare and employment programs support the employment of low-income families?Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(4), 723–743.
11.
GreenbergM., & ParrottS (2006). Summary of TANF work participation provisions in the Budget Reconciliation Bill.Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy.
12.
GrobeD., WeberR. B., & DavisE. E. (2008). Why do they leave? Child care subsidy use in Oregon. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 29(1), 110–127.
13.
HaY. (2009). Stability of child-care subsidy use and earnings of lowincome families. Social Service Review, 83(4), 495–523.
14.
HaY., & MeyerD. R. (2010). Child care subsidy patterns: Are exits related to economic setbacks or economic successes?Children and Youth Services Review, 32(3), 346–355.
15.
HanW.-J. (2004). Nonstandard work schedules and child care decisions: Evidence from the NICHD study of early child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 231–256.
16.
LaughlinL. (2010). Who's Minding the Kids? Child Care Arrangements: Spring 2005/Summer 2006. Current Population Reports.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
17.
LayzerJ. I., & CollinsA. (2000). National study of child care for lowincome families: State and community substudy: Interim report.Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.
18.
LeeB., GoergeR., ReidyM., KreaderJ. L., GeorgesA., WagmillerR.L., & WittA. (2004). Child care subsidy use and employment outcomes of TANF mothers during the early years of welfare reform: A three-state study.Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
19.
LoweE. D., & WeisnerT. S. (2004). “You have to push it—Who's gonna raise your kids?” Situating child care and child care subsidy use in the daily routines. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 143–171.
20.
LoweE. D., WeisnerT. S., & GeisS. (2003). Instability in child care: Ethnographic evidence from working poor families in the New Hope intervention (The Next Generation, Working Paper Series, No. 15). New York, NY: MDR C.
21.
McKernanS.-M., BernsteinJ., & FenderL. (2005). Taming the beast: Categorizing state welfare policies: A typology of welfare policies affecting recipient job entry. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(2), 443–460.
22.
MeyersM. K., GornickJ. C., & PeckL. R. (2000). Packaging support for low-income families: Policy variation across the United States. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(3), 457–483.
23.
MeyersM. K., & JordanL. P. (2006). Choice and accommodation in parental child care decisions. Community Development, 37(2), 53–70.
24.
MeyersM. K., PeckL. R., DavisE. E., CollinsA., KreaderJ., GeorgesA., & OlsonJ. A. (2002). The dynamics of child care subsidy use.New York, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty.
25.
National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies. (2011). Parents and the high cost of child care.Arlington, VA: Author.
26.
PittardM., ZaslowM., LavelleB., & PorterT. (2006). Investing in quality: A survey of state child care and development fund initiatives.Washington, DC: Child Trends.
27.
PressJ. E., FaganJ., & LaughlinL. (2006). Taking pressure off families: Child-care subsidies lessen mothers’ work-hour problems. Journal of Marriage and Family, 68(1), 155–171.
28.
RigbyE., RyanR. M., & Brooks-GunnJ. (2007). Child care quality in different state policy contexts. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(4), 887–907.
29.
RoweG., MurphyM., & MonE. Y. (2010). Welfare rules databook: State TANF policies as of July 2009.Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
30.
RyanR. M., JohnsonA., RigbyE., & Brooks-GunnJ. (2011). The impact of child care subsidy use on child care quality. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(3), 320–331.
31.
SchulmanK., & BlankH (2009). State child care assistance policies 2009: Most states hold the line, but some lose ground in hard times.Washington, DC: National Women's Law Center.
32.
SchulmanK., & BlankH (2011). State child care assistance policies 2011.Washington, DC: National Women's Law Center.
33.
SchumacherR., GreenbergM., & DuffyJ. (2001). The impact of TANF funding on state child care subsidy programs.Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy.
34.
ShlayA. B. (2010). African American, White and Hispanic child care preferences: A factorial survey analysis of welfare leavers by race and ethnicity. Social Science Research, 39, 125–141.
35.
ShlayA. B., WeinraubM., HarmonM., & TranH. (2004). Barriers to subsidies: Why low-income families do not use child care subsidies. Social Science Research, 33(1), 134–157.
36.
SossJ., SchramS. F., VartanianT. P., & O'BrienE. (2001). Setting the terms of relief: Explaining state policy choices in the devolution revolution. American Journal of Political Science, 45(2), 378–395.
37.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (2002). Child care: States exercise flexibility in setting reimbursement rates and providing access for low-income children (GAO-02-894). Washington, DC: Author.
38.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2010). Multiple factors could have contributed to the recent decline in the number of children whose families receive subsidies (GAO-10-344). Washington, DC: Author.
39.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children & Families, Office of Child Care. (n.d.). Program data and statistics. Retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ccb/data/index.htm.
40.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children & Families, Office of Child Care. (2011). Child care and development fund: Report of state and territory plans, FY 2010-2011.Washington, DC: Author.
41.
VeselyC. K., & AndersonE. A. (2009). Child care and development fund: A policy analysis. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 36(1), 39–59.
