Welfare to Recovery Pwora vs.

¶ … Welfare to Recovery

PWORA vs. Key Concepts from A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving

Annotated Bibliography

Over the last several years, the total number of people who are receiving welfare assistance has been increasingly brought to the forefront. This is because of shifts in the way these programs are run with increased accountability and transparency. In the state of Illinois, these transformations are more pronounced with the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). ("Public Law 104 -- 193," 1996) (Grogger, 2009)

This is a federal law that shifted the way welfare assistance is provided to the poor. These changes are occurring in several different areas including: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills training program (JOBS). TANF is a provision that provides cash assistance to needy families for a total of 60 months (over a person's lifetime). ("Public Law 104 -- 193," 1996) (Grogger, 2009)

In some cases, the states can make adjustments to these guidelines (with the implementation of their own welfare protocols). Once someone reaches this level, is the point when aid will be completely eliminated or reduced for adults. The basic idea is to place restrictions on the kinds of assistance someone can receive and the amount of time they can remain in the program. ("Public Law 104 -- 193," 1996) (Grogger, 2009)

The JOBS program is helping recipients to learn some kind of meaningful skill they can use. At the same time, they will work with the state unemployment agency to place recipients in different careers. The strategy is designed to increase accountability by having the person actively seeking out meaningful employment. Then, once they obtain the job, these people have the skills and training necessary to keep it. The combination of these factors is supposed to create a program that is responsive to recipients (versus becoming an entitlement for low income individuals and families). ("Public Law 104 -- 193," 1996) (Grogger, 2009)

To determine the effectiveness of this program in the state of Illinois requires comparing these provisions with Eugene Bardach's A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving. This will be accomplished by studying various aspects of the law in contrast with key ideas and conducting an annotated bibliography. Together, these elements will offer specific insights about how public policy decisions are implemented.

PWORA vs. Key Concepts from A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving

In A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving; Bardach (2000) thinks that communication is an essential part of the process. This is because the relationship between officials, recipients and other stakeholders will have an effect on how successful the program will be over the long-term. To determine if the different sides are communicating effectively, Bardach recommends using the New York Taxi Driver Test. This is when communication must be simple enough for these individuals to comprehend critical ideas and realize their lasting impact. (Bardach, 2000)

At the same time, these people are known for having a certain amount of skepticism. Anyone who can convince a person of this mindset, to follow their ideas, is effectively communicating with different stakeholders. This is the point that the policy can take into the account those issues and challenges that are most important to select segments. (Bardach, 2000)

Moreover, there is an eight step approach that officials must follow in order to consider different perspectives when implementing any kind of policy changes. This includes: defining the problem, assembling evidence, constructing alternatives, selecting the criteria, projecting the outcomes, confronting the tradeoffs, deciding and telling the story to everyone. The combination of these factors will help to create policy decisions that are taking into account the needs of stakeholders in the process. (Bardach, 2000)

Defining the Problem

Defining the problem is when everyone is looking at the issues and challenges impacting the public. This process involves examining a number of solutions and debating the lasting effects on society. In the case of the PRWORA, the problem is defined with many individuals unable to find long-term skills or employment. This is because they will have to spend considerable amounts of time in school receiving the assistance they need. (Bardach, 2000)

To make matters worse this segment of the population, is more likely to be underemployed. This is from them not having the experience or education to work in the higher paying jobs. For most employers, these kinds of individuals are easy to locate in the current economic environment. These factors are illustrating how the PRWORA is creating problems for the most vulnerable in society. This occurring with the limited amounts of time someone is allowed to remain in the program. The sudden decreases in benefits, hurts their standard of living and ability to provide for their families. (Bardach, 2000)

Recently, the Department of Health and Human Services has offered waivers to the states from TANF provisions. This is provided that they can show credible approaches through reducing unemployment by 20%. These changes are illustrating how the problem is negatively impacting a variety of stakeholders. What is making it worse, are these provisions requires someone to leave welfare (even though the economy could be in a severe recession). This is illustrating how the PRWORA is creating new challenges by cutting off recipients when they are most vulnerable. It is at this point when many low income families will realize a severe decline in their standard of living. (Hymowitz, 2012)

Assembling Evidence

Assembling the evidence is when different sources of information are collected to highlight the problem and potential solutions. This means looking at various data and comparing key findings with one another to understand the overall trends. This will offer a basic background of key ideas and areas of weakness associated with current strategies. (Bardach, 2000)

When this is applied to the PRWORA in Illinois, there are conflicting pieces of information which are illustrating how the law has added certain amounts of personal responsibility to public welfare programs. For example, according to Bauer (2010) these reforms have been a tremendous success. This is because there was a focus on removing these individual from government programs and having greater amounts of accountability. (Bauer, 2010)

Evidence of this can be seen with Bauer saying, "Welfare reform has been an overwhelming success. Since 1996, welfare caseloads have decreased 70%, which translates into 8.8 million fewer people dependent on government. Child-poverty rates dropped, particularly among blacks and Hispanics. Teen pregnancies have (until recently) decreased, and child-support collections have increased." This is showing how the PRWORA has forced the parents to assume greater responsibility for themselves and their families. The results are reduced case loads from people who are dependent upon these programs. (Bauer, 2010)

However, the tighter controls means, that there are greater amounts of confusion among select segments of the population (such as: foreign born immigrants). In these situations, many people feel that if they try to understand or seek out assistance. It will result in them losing their benefits. Moreover, they are fearful if they do speak out. There is a possibility of additional scrutiny from immigration officials. This is problematic, as this segment of society is the most vulnerable from their inability to locate the assistance they need. (Paral, 2011)

According to Paral (2011), these challenges are directly associated with changes in welfare reform laws. In study that he conducted of the Illinois immigrant population; he determined that they were the most adversely affected by these provisions. Evidence of this can be seen with him saying, "The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), passed in August 1996 and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA, passed in September 1996), have substantially restructured immigrants' eligibility for public benefits programs. The result of the legislative overhaul has been widespread confusion among immigrants about their eligibility for benefits programs and fear that they may be determined to be a public charge if they utilize benefits programs." (Paral, 2011)

This is showing how these concerns are resulting in fewer immigrants using public assistance programs. In many cases, this has led to severe declines in their standard of living and quality of life. This increases; the chances that this demographic will suffer from greater amounts of pressure by not having access to additional support. (Paral, 2011)

As a result, all evidence is showing how there are benefits and drawbacks from the implementation of the PRWORA. This is offering the different sides with facts they need to enhance their viewpoints. When in reality, these changes are providing mixed results that are addressing select aspects of the problem. However, like any kind of reforms there will be certain segments that will be adversely affected by any transformations. (Paral, 2011)

Constructing Alternatives

Constructing alternatives is when there is a concentration on different solutions for addressing the problem. The primary objectives are to understand other avenues and the lasting impact of specific actions on stakeholders. It is at this point when new ideas will be studied and analyzed as part of the process. This will ensure that a variety of perspectives are taken into account by government officials. (Bardach, 2000)

In the case of the PRWORA, this process means looking at the impact of these changes on recipients. Over the last several years, many officials are realizing that more people need the help of these programs to deal with the lingering challenges from the stagnant recovery. This has resulted in some of the provisions receiving greater amounts of scrutiny (i.e. The TANF). (Lichter, 2002)

As a result, actuaries are examining the lasting impact of these changes by reducing the number of people who are a part of the programs. While at the same time, it is concentrating on how these shifts are hurting those that are most vulnerable in society. Evidence of this can be seen with observations from Lichter (2002). He found that some kind of balance and flexibility must be taken when looking at alternatives with him saying, "Our study reveals many positive changes including: reduced poverty rates, lower out of-wedlock childbearing, greater family stability and little indication of more spouse abuse or child neglect. But it is too early to claim success and many questions remain unanswered. Poverty remains high among single mothers and their children, welfare recipients experience serious barriers to stable employment, and poor women and children face an uncertain economic and social future as welfare eligibility is exhausted and the economy wanes. With the welfare debate shifting to family and child well-being, sociology has an important policy role to play." (Lichter, 2002)

This showing how there are contrasting impacts of potential solutions on different stakeholders. The key for public officials is to reduce the negative effects that certain changes will have on various segments of the population. The different provisions of the PRWORA are demonstrating how it is having positive and adverse consequences on recipients. (Lichter, 2002)

In most situations, this is leading to changes in attitudes about personal responsibility. However, these shifts have not reduced the poverty rates. Instead, these numbers have been increasing since the law was first enacted. As a result, one could argue that these transformations are having positive and negatives effects on recipients. (Lichter, 2002)

Selecting Criteria

Selecting the criteria is when officials will determine what standards must be applied to any kind of regulations. As far as the PRWORA is concerned, these challenges resulted in the federal government and the states imposing the TANF and JOBS provisions. This is designed to increase accountability and ensure that there are greater amounts of transparency. (Bardach, 2000) (Lichter, 2002)

Moreover, officials were concentrating on reducing the total number of people who are on state welfare caseloads. This helps to show that the government is reforming a program which was known for waste and inefficiency. Yet, over the course of time, the criterion is continually evolving. This is because officials realize that states need greater amounts of flexibility in adjusting these programs to economic conditions. In 2010, there were waivers provided to in order to give them more control over the process. These elements are illustrating how officials will determine eligibility based upon their current needs. In the future, this can change resulting in new policies to improve flexibility. (Bauer, 2010)

Projecting the Outcome

Projecting the outcome is when different government officials and stakeholders will evaluate the long-term impact of new proposals on everyone. During this process, there are intense discussions and predications about potential effects. This is designed to improve everybody's understanding of the issue and see how it will impact them over the long-term. (Bardach, 2000)

In the case of the PRWORA, the law was first enacted in response to the total number of recipients who were taking advantage of the system. The new reforms were a part of the campaign promises made by President Bill Clinton and the Republicans to transform it. This led to shifts in who was eligible for assistance and how long they could receive benefits. (Zubri, 2006)

As a result, many proponents feel that these shifts are improving accountability by ensuring that everyone is responsible for their own well-being. However, opponents argue that these changes are hurting working families, the poor, the disabled and immigrants. This is because these guidelines are applying general restrictions as to when assistance will no longer be provided. For many people, this is challenging as these shifts are coming at a time when they are dealing with fiscal problems from the stagnant economy. This is hurting their standard of living and quality of life for the middle class segments of society downward. (Zubri, 2006)

These contrasting views are showing the lasting and potential changes in the PRWORA. In either case, the different sides will use this as a way to demonstrate how these changes will harm stakeholders at some point in the future. While others will claim, that these adjustments are necessary in order to deal with new challenges that are emerging. (Zubri, 2006)

Confront the Trade Offs

Any kind of changes will involve tradeoffs. This means that certain stakeholders will benefit from them. Whereas others, will lose some kind of advantage or benefit they are receiving. The key with confronting these kinds of tradeoffs is to show how a particular policy is hurting society and the economy. This will create the need for reforms to occur in order to address these issues. (Bardach, 2000)

For public officials, they must confront the different sides and show them how the trade off will benefit everyone in the future. This means that certain parties will realize short-term challenges in order to enjoy these long-term benefits. Once this occurs, is the point when policy decisions can be enacted that will prevent non-compliance and help to improve support for them. (Bardach, 2000)

In the case of the PRWORA, this occurred when the law was first implemented. As various recipients and opponents felt that the TANF provisions would harm the most vulnerable in society. To account for these issues, officials claimed that it and the job training program increased accountability and transparency. This is when everyone will take greater amounts of personal responsibility by understanding that this is a second chance (not an entitlement). (Zubri, 2006)

However, the stagnant economy and higher number of unemployed means that more people need the assistance of these programs. This has led to a confrontation between the different sides about leaving the TANF in place (versus offering select waivers). These contrasting views are demonstrating the various ideas about how the different provisions should be implemented. (Zubri, 2006)

Deciding

Deciding is when public officials will make choices about how, when and where to implement the changes in the policy. This requires them setting a date as to when they will occur and the practices that must be utilized by stakeholders. Once this happens, is the point that they have examined the different viewpoints, outcomes and the potential impact. (Bardach, 2000)

In the case of the PRWORA, there were changes that occurred in 2010. This is when waivers were given to the states from the TANF provisions (provided they meet predetermined conditions). In this aspect, these adjustments were taking place by offering greater amounts of flexibility. These transformations were considered in response to the challenges many working families were facing from the one size fits all approach (under the old guidelines). (Zubri, 2006) (Bauer, 2010)

As a result, this policy decision was reached by determining the effects of economic issues on stakeholders. Then, officials are making slight adjustment to these regulations. This is leading to a program that is more responsive and has high levels of transparency. In the state of Illinois, these provisions are providing officials with more flexibility in addressing critical issues with the state's welfare program. (Zubri, 2006) (Bauer, 2010)

Tell Your Story

Telling the story is when officials will visit with stakeholders about how these transformations are helping to address critical challenges. This adds to the support of various provisions by demonstrating that they are effective. It is at this point when any kind of adjustments contrary to them will result in fierce amounts of anger and animosity. (Bardach, 2000)

As far as the PRWORA is concerned, this is taking place through different studies that are conducted (which are analyzing the long-term impact of the law). For example, Lichter (2002) found that there are contrasting aspects of a story. In a research study, he determined the effectiveness of the law. As he found that there were positive and negative effects with him saying, "Rural poverty among female-headed families with children has declined since 1996 welfare reforms. Moreover, the income of female-headed families has increased, while income from earnings has more than offset declines in public assistance income. Rural single mothers nevertheless continue to experience higher poverty rates than their urban counterparts, and a higher percentage are working but still poor." (Lichter, 2002)

This is showing how the PRWORA is helping to increase personal responsibility and the income of single parents. Moreover, those women who are from lower income demographics and single parents are experiencing greater self-reliance and independence. This is from these provisions teaching them the skills to support themselves. (Lichter, 2002)

Yet, at the same time, there are other demographics of women (in the same segment) who are experiencing greater amounts of poverty and financials challenges. This is because they are having challenges adjusting with these changes. Furthermore, they have no skills or the ambition to support themselves. These different elements are showing how the various stories are highlighting contrasting results. Depending upon individual beliefs, these findings are used to support or refute the effectiveness of the PRWORA. (Lichter, 2002)

In Illinois these issues have become even more challenging. This is from the state encompassing a wide variety of contrasting neighborhoods, income levels and demographics. The results are that the economy can experience tremendous increases in growth. However, it will be in pockets with other regions often overlooked by private firms, nonprofits and government officials. When this happens, the state's welfare recipients will have severe challenges despite the fact that the economy is growing. (Theodore, 2001)

Evidence of this can be seen with observations from Theodore (2001) who said, "In Illinois, a state enjoying robust job growth, 16% of recipients were initially exempted from work requirements. However, state officials believed that additional recipients should be covered by waivers because the geography of unemployment is such that residents of some urban areas search for jobs in local labor markets with insufficient employment opportunities despite these labor markets being embedded in fast-growing counties. A case in point is Chicago, with above average unemployment levels and concentrated poverty, located within Cook County with its rapid and decentralizing job growth in exurban locations. State officials used data from the Midwest Job Gap Project to justify the inclusion of Chicago in a larger statewide waiver request citing findings of significant job shortfalls for entry-level workers in various areas of Illinois. This request was approved, and more than 70% of the ABAWD population receiving food stamps in Illinois was waived from work requirements. Nationwide, the proportion of this population covered by waivers grew to exceed 40%. Given both the large number of waivers approved and the extent of their coverage, it is surprising that the CBO and policymakers so badly misjudged the state of local labor markets and the conditions under which food stamp recipients search for jobs. The Economic Policy Institute as well as other researchers has warned of crowding in low-wage labor markets, falling real wages for the working poor, and the instability associated with low-paid, contingent work. . The welfare reform debate has been driven by anecdotal evidence that supports the view that most recipients of income support possess a deficient work ethic. When more rigorous analysis has been conducted, it has been aspatial analysis that misses variations that may be decisive in determining the success of social policies. In the process, demand deficiencies, spatial mismatches, employment discrimination, and job instability have been overlooked as possible causal explanations of unemployment and welfare use." (Theodore, 2001)

This is showing how the different provisions from the PRWORA are making the situation worse in Illinois. The way that this is occurring is from officials taking a one size fits all approach when enacting different guidelines. This is leading to other challenges that individuals will face from a number of areas including: where the live, demand deficiencies, spatial mismatches, employment discrimination and job instability. (Theodore, 2001)

Moreover, many of these individuals are receiving waivers. As the state has nearly double the number of cases, in contrast with the rest of the nation. This is effectively going around the different provisions of the TANF. As a result, many opponents will argue that these misconceptions are not doing anything to reduce the overall rates of poverty. Instead, they are transferring them out of the program under the waiver system. Yet, the majority of people continue to receive assistance (despite TANF provisions). Therefore, opponents believe that more flexibility should be provided to the states. This will allow them to create a welfare program that is more responsive to their current and future problems. If this were to occur, the PWRORA will be more focused and effective in addressing the root causes of poverty. (Theodore, 2001)

Annotated Bibliography

Schmidt, S. (2000). Welfare Reform. NBER. Retrieved from: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c10850.pdf

Schmidt (2000) is examining the impact of welfare reform on different stakeholders. The findings are that it is resulting in positive transformations with her saying, "The major results of these transformations include: (1) a work-first approach to cash assistance, (2) large increases in federal funding for child care, (3) increasing diversity in state and local cash assistance and child- care programs, (4) the beginning stages of the integration of diverse child-care programs, and (5) the severing of the link between child-care assistance and cash assistance in some states. Changes for families include (1) increases in financial incentives to work; (2) mandatory work-related activity requirements, sanctions if requirements are not met, and time limits on cash-assistance receipt; (3) increased availability of child-care subsidies; and (4) a different environment and culture at welfare offices stressing work and personal responsibility. The clearest impact is the marked decline in the number of individuals receiving cash assistance and the equally marked increase in the number of children being cared for in non-familial settings. A markedly increased proportion of cash-assistance recipients are working or in other approved activities. Increased child-care subsidies appear to have increased the earnings of both current and former welfare recipients and other low-income families. Preliminary results suggest that work requirements and time limits have succeeded in moving low-income women with children into jobs, but have decreased the wages they are able to obtain compared to women who are not subject to time limits." (Schmidt, 2000)

This is demonstrating how the PWRORA is having a positive impact in helping recipients to support themselves. The way that this is occurring is through changing the program with stipulations tied to work vs. receiving cash. The results are that more people are self-reliant. However, the support that is provided is limited with these programs covering areas such as child care assistance. This has led to a shift in how the individual is looking at the funds they are receiving. The information from this source is highlighting potential avenues and approaches for effectively implementing these policies. (Schmidt, 2000)

Kirby, G. (2004). The Use of TANF. MPR. Retrieved from: http://www.mathematica-mpr.org/publications/PDFs/tanf3state.pdf

Kirby (2004) determined that the PWRORA is not helping those individuals who have mental health problems, criminal records, self identified child care issues or physical ailments. In these situations, the recipient is unable to adjust with these challenges. This is because many of them are so severe that the individual does not receive the assistance or support they need.

Evidence of this can be seen with Kirby saying, "In Illinois, recipients with no high school diploma, with limited work experience, with a physical or mental health problem, with two or more arrests or with a self-identified child care problem are much more likely to be sanctioned (either partially or fully) than recipients who do not face these personal liabilities. The likelihood of being sanctioned if only one of these liabilities is present and a recipient has 'average' characteristics is between 18 and 21%, compared to a 12% likelihood if no liabilities are present." (Kirby, 2004)

These ideas are showing how those who have other personal challenges will have a greater chance of being subject the TANF provisions. This is because there are external or internal issues which make it difficult for them to live independent lives and support themselves. In this aspect, the PWRORA is taking a limited focus by ignoring these most vulnerable in society under these provisions. This is what has been happening with Illinois welfare cases, as higher numbers of recipients are receiving waivers because of these issues. The information from this source is illustrating how the policy has been implemented and its long-term effects on stakeholders. (Kirby, 2004)

Broughton, C. (2010). Bringing the Organization Back. Journal of Social Welfare, 37, 155 -- 163.

In this article, Broughton argues that the reduction in the total number of Illinois welfare roles were from the PRWORA. However, these transformations were because of changes in bureaucratic procedures. This has made it more difficult for someone to qualify for direct cash assistance. When they do, there are stipulations on what can be purchased and the time frame that support is provided. (Broughton, 2010)

Moreover, officials were increasing accountability and monitoring for potential fraud. While this did help to identify, those who were taking advantage of the system. It also harmed the most vulnerable. This resulted in many trying to receive waivers and assistance from nonprofit organizations and charities. The impact is that these changes only shifted the way bureaucratic procedures were applied vs. addressing the root causes of the problem. The information from this source is useful in corroborating some of the other findings. Most notably: those who are primarily affected by these changes and how individuals are responding. (Broughton, 2010)

Monte, L. (2012). Desperate and Deviant? Public & Policy, 3 (3), 1 -- 23.

In many cases, recipients do not have anywhere to turn once they receive reduced levels of support. To make matters worse, the stagnant economy and inability to provide for their families is forcing select amounts to become involved in criminal activities. According to Monte (2012), they used the Illinois Family Study to determine these effects on stakeholders. This examined those individuals who were receiving direct cash assistance in 1998. Then, as different parts of the PWRORA went into force, is when they monitored the underlying trends. (Monte, 2012)

The results were that financial hardship and unemployment lead to a 23% increase in the number of current or former recipients involved in illegal activities. This is because these individuals have no skills they could use to support themselves. At the same time, the elimination of cash benefits means that they will have challenges in making ends meet. After wrestling with these issues (for a certain amount of time), is the point when someone will turn to crime out of desperation. This is problematic, as these kinds of challenges will negatively impact communities by failing to address the root causes of the problems. The information from this source is useful, in demonstrating the adverse effects of implementing these provisions on everyone. (Monte, 2012)

Garfinkel, I. (2010). Child Support Enforcement. Social Service Review, 84 (3), 341 -- 380.

In this article, Garfinkel (2010) is studying the effects of the PWRORA on child support enforcement orders and collection. The findings show that as time goes by most fathers will reduce the support they are providing to their children. To address these challenges, mothers have traditionally turned to social service programs. (Garfinkel, 2012)

However, the increased focus on personal responsibility means that officials will determine if one of the parents owes back child support. They will then refer this to law enforcement, who will collect the money from them. The net effect is that this provision has forced parents to take greater responsibility for themselves and their children. This means that they are more careful about the decisions they make and the lasting impact it will have on them. (Garfinkel, 2012)

Evidence of this can be seen with Garfinkel saying, "Findings suggest that total cash support received drops precipitously over the first 15 months of living apart (as informal support drops off) and then increases slightly after 45 months (as the increase in formal support overtakes the decrease in informal support). While the study finds no effect of enforcement on total support received in the first 5 years after a non-marital birth, the substantial differences in total cash support received by the length of time that parents have not been cohabiting suggest that strong enforcement may be efficacious over time." (Garfinkel, 2012)

This is showing how the concepts from the PWRORA are leading to greater amounts of personal responsibility. The reason why is because bureaucrats will no longer see what kind of cash assistance is available from government programs. Instead, they will concentrate on how other forms of help such as how child support could address critical challenges. (Garfinkel, 2012)