Welfare study: Mixed marks for MT

A state-by-state analysis of welfare reform after 10 years gave Montana D- for welfare-reform policies, but ranked the state in the middle of the pack overall.

The state earned higher marks for anti-poverty success, however, acing the work participation rate and placing fourth nationwide for having low unemployment rates. Overall, Montana was ranked 10th for its anti-poverty efforts.

The nonprofit, nonpartisan Heartland Institute last week released the report, ranking the 50 states and District of Columbia, grading them by the success of their anti-poverty efforts and reform policies they adopted.

When President Bill Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, he gave the states unprecedented flexibility in implementing welfare reform, the institute said.

"This report card provides policy-makers with a roadmap to successful anti-poverty efforts," said Gary MacDougal, director of the research project.

The states' overall ranking is an average of two separate analyses. The first measured five variables that reflect success in fighting poverty: percentage decline in the number of Temporary Aid to Needy Families recipients, change in poverty rate, temporary-aid work participation rate, change in unemployment rate and change in teenage birth rate.

The second study reviewed seven welfare reform policies states can adopt: service integration, increased utilization of the federal Earned Income Tax Credit, work requirements, cash diversion programs, family cap provisions, lifetime limits on aid, and sanctions.

Montana ranked 10th in anti-poverty success and 39th for welfare reform policies.

MONTANA'S brightest spot was in the work-requirements category, where the state got an A and placed first in the nation. The welfare-reform law requires most recipients of temporary cash assistance to work. Fostering self-sufficiency through work was the major goal of the 1996 reform.

"Montana has always been good in work requirements," said John Gardner, director of the Flathead County Office of Public Assistance.

During the first decade of welfare reform, Montana's caseload for the Temporary Aid for Needy Families program dropped from about 31,000 recipients in 1996 to about 9,000 in 2006, a 71.2 percent reduction.

Flathead County's caseload reduction has paralleled the state decline, from 750 families in the early 1990s to about 200 families this year.

Montana got failing grades in cash diversion, family-cap provisions and sanctions.

Cash diversion is a welfare-reform policy whereby the state provides applicants with a lump-sum cash payment to meet a short-term need, worth up to a few months of benefits if they agree not to participate in the temporary-aid program for some period of time.

Often called "front-door money," cash diversion empowers caseworkers to fix problems without adding people to welfare rolls, the study said.

"It's a means of diverting people from cash by offering employment and other incentives," Gardner explained. "It's never taken off in Montana."

Montana welfare officials have discussed setting a family cap, but never did it, Gardner said, explaining the "F" grade in that category. One of the driving forces for welfare reform was the belief, supported by social science research, that conventional welfare programs encouraged having more children by increasing benefits as the size of a family increased.

States that scored perfect marks in family-cap provisions do not provide additional cash benefits for the birth of an additional child. Montana was one of 27 states that failed for having no family cap.

Montana also failed for having adequate sanctions, or enforcement tools to get compliance of welfare recipients with work and other requirements for eligibility. The state's poor marks may be due to the high percentage of tribal members who receive welfare assistance, Gardner said.

"The tribes are not subject to [welfare reform] time limits," he said. "Some tribes, like Salish-Kootenai, do a good job of sanctioning. But if you're in Browning, where unemployment might be 43 percent, what good does sanctioning do" if jobs are scarce?

Flathead County, where jobs have been plentiful in recent years, has toed the mark in sanctioning, Gardner said.

Montana earned a "D" in lifetime eligibility limits. Welfare reform strongly encouraged states to limit the lifetime eligibility for cash assistance to 60 months, but the study noted that the policy has loopholes and has been followed loosely.

The study showed that Maryland, Idaho, Illinois, Florida, Virginia and California most successfully seized the opportunities provided by welfare reform, "developing thoughtful policies and integrating services needed to help recipients move into the workplace."

Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Kansas, Vermont and Missouri got the lowest marks. Montana ranked 25th of the 50 states and District of Columbia.

"While the federal government gave great flexibility to the states, it is up to state officials to take advantage of that," MacDougal said in a prepared statement. "There is no good reason why states performing poorly can't learn from the policies and practices of more successful states to help people move from dependence to self-sufficiency.

Features editor Lynnette Hintze may be reached at 758-4421 or by e-mail at lhintze@dailyinterlake.com