TANF Evaluation Proposal: Action Research and Cost-Benefit Analysis

The Role of Evaluation in Public Administration

Within the private sector, evaluation has long been deemed a critical component of determining that resources are being used efficiently. Data such as customer buying patterns, quality of manufacturing, rates of errors, and feedback about customer satisfaction can all be used to determine whether an organization is operating effectively and can improve its services. The same is true of public administration. Resources are also limited in the public sphere, and the public has a right to be assured that its tax dollars are being spent effectively. Beneficiaries of social welfare programs also have a right to participate in programs that genuinely address their needs.

This is particularly true of programs such as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), also known as Work First Family Assistance (WFFA). TANF provides assistance to needy families — usually single mothers with children — with the aim of transitioning participants off public assistance and into meaningful work. It was controversial when first implemented, given that it limits the duration of benefits and links the continuance of such benefits to participants pursuing work outside the home. Welfare is often viewed through a moral or punitive lens within the United States, and using statistical data to determine whether a program is effective is essential, rather than assuming that participants require moral correction and structuring a program solely through an ideological lens.

Evaluation can also help guide public policy by highlighting what is not working versus what is. Simply assuming that working is better than not working is not necessarily valid if women are struggling to find adequate childcare and spending most of their salary and energy on transportation to reach low-paying, low-skilled jobs with few benefits. In fact, among TANF graduates, only 40% held jobs that paid at least $7.50 per hour with employer-provided health insurance, and 40% had only part-time employment — findings that highlight clear problems with the program's structure and its ability to serve participant needs (Hildebrandt & Stevens, 2009). If the stated goal is economic self-sufficiency, this is clearly not being achieved under the current structure, since the work into which women are being transitioned does not pay a living wage or enable them to be self-supporting.

TANF Program Overview and Performance Gaps

From a theoretical perspective, quantitative analysis can be used to determine whether a program's goals are being met. Qualitative, phenomenological data — such as women's accounts of their lived experiences — can further contextualize those findings. Qualitative research focuses on a small population group, while quantitative research can encompass larger numbers of participants but is limited to questions that can be analyzed statistically. Quite often, particularly in the case of programs such as TANF, which have significant psychological and social dimensions, a mixed methods approach is most useful. Anecdotal evidence can be used to inform and enrich statistical data.

TANF was designed to move low-income families — predominantly single mothers — toward economic independence through rapid attachment to the labor market. However, evidence suggests the program falls short of this goal for a substantial portion of participants. Research indicates that many women exit TANF into jobs that do not provide sufficient wages, benefits, or hours to sustain their families. This disconnect between program design and participant outcomes underscores the need for rigorous, ongoing program evaluation.

Cost-Benefit Analysis Framework

The costs of programs such as TANF must be evaluated not in isolation but in relation to other forms of assistance that could potentially be offered to participants. For example, programs that focus more on job training in highly skilled occupations might represent a better use of state and federal funds. Comparing the current structure of TANF to other work-to-welfare programs — in terms of graduates' salaries on a long-term basis — would be particularly informative. Comparing and contrasting the characteristics of TANF participants with those of other aid recipients is also necessary to determine what issues may impede their ability to fully benefit from available resources. The data indicate that among TANF recipients who remained on assistance, "44% had not completed high school, 62% reported functional disability, and 22% reported clinical depression" (Hildebrandt & Stevens, 2009). Focusing on educating participants and providing counseling and mental health treatment may be a better use of resources than maintaining a program structure that focuses solely on a swift transition into work. TANF participants who cycle on and off assistance are also more likely to exhibit "low cognitive functioning, limited education and language skills, and physical health problems" than individuals who successfully complete the program (Hildebrandt & Stevens, 2009).

A cost-benefit analysis plan would therefore, first, determine the costs of the program in dollar terms (i.e., its implementation costs); second, measure the benefits to participants in terms of income gains; and third, assess the gains to the state from having participants become wage earners. These figures would then be compared with the costs and income gains associated with work-to-welfare programs that emphasize education and support for women rather than rapid transition to work, and that do not impose aggressive benefit cutoff points.

Conclusion