Severity, timing, and duration of welfare sanctions and the economic well-being of TANF families with children

Children and Youth Services Review

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 26-44

  Wu, Chi Fang ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Economic well being; Poverty; TANF families with children; Welfare reform; Welfare sanctions

Indexed keywords

EID: 37349097250     PISSN: 01907409     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.06.009     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Abramovitz M. Under attack, fighting back: Women and welfare in the United States. (2000), Monthly Review Press, New York
2. Bloom D., and Winstead D. Sanctions and welfare reform (Policy Brief No. 12). (2002), The Brookings Institute, Washington, DC
3. Cancian M., and Meyer D.R. Alternative measures of economic success among TANF participants: Avoiding poverty, hardship, and dependence on public assistance. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 23 3 (2004) 531-548
4. Cherlin A.J., Burton L., Francis J., Henrici J., Lein L., Quane J.M., et al. Sanctions and case closings for noncompliance: Who is affected and why (Third policy brief from Welfare, children, and families: A three-city study). (2001), Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
5. Cherlin A.J., Bogen K., Quane J.M., and Burton L. Operating within the rules: Welfare recipients' experiences with sanctions and case closings. Social Service Review 76 3 (2002) 387-405
6. Fein D.J., and Lee W.S. Carrying and using the stick: Financial sanctions in Delaware's A Better Chance Program. (1999), ABT Associates, Cambridge, MA
7. Fording R., Schram S.F., and Soss J. Devolution, discretion, and local variation in TANF sanctioning (Discussion Paper Series No. 2006-04). (2006), UK Center for Poverty Research, Lexington
8. Goldberg H., and Schott L. A compliance-oriented approach to sanctions in state and county TANF programs. (2000), Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Washington, DC
9. Gordon R. Cruel and usual: How welfare "reform" punishes poor people. (2001), Applied Research Center, Oakland, CA
10. Greenberg M., Strawn J., and Plimpton L. State opportunities to provide access to postsecondary education under TANF. (2000), Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Washington, DC
11. Grogger J., and Karoly L.A. Welfare reform: Effects of a decade of change. (2005), Harvard University Press, Cambridge
12. Hamilton G., and Scrivener S. Promoting participation: How to increase involvement in welfare-to-work activities. (1999), Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, New York
13. Hasenfeld Y., Ghose T., and Larson K. The logic of sanctioning welfare recipients: An empirical assessment. Social Service Review 78 2 (2004) 304-319
14. Hofferth S.L., Stanpope S., and Harris K.M. Exiting welfare in the 1990s: Did public policy influence recipients' behavior. Population Research and Policy Review 21 3 (2002) 433-472
15. Hofferth S.L., Stanhope S., and Harris K.M. Remaining off welfare in the 1990s: The influence of public policy and economic conditions. Social Science Research 34 2 (2005) 426-453
16. Holcomb P.A., Pavetti L., Ratcliffe C., and Riedinger S. Building an employment focused welfare system: Work first and other work-oriented strategies in five states. (1998), Urban Institute, Washington, DC
17. Institute for Wisconsin's Future. Sanctioned by design: W-2 punishment policies that hurt families and best practice models that would help. (2005), Author, Milwaukee, WI
18. Kalil A., Seefeldt K.S., and Wang H. Sanctions and material hardship under TANF. Social Service Review 76 4 (2002) 642-662
19. Kaplan J. The use of sanctions under TANF. Issue Notes Vol. 3(3) (1999), Welfare Information Network, Washington, DC
20. Kaplan T. Wisconsin's W-2 program: Welfare as we might come to know it?. In: Weissert C.S. (Ed). Learning from leaders: Welfare reform politics and policy in five midwestern states (2000), Rockefeller Institute Press, Albany, NY 77-118
21. Lee B.J., Slack K.S., and Lewis D.A. Are welfare sanctions working as intended? Welfare receipt, work activity, and material hardship among TANF-recipient families. Social Service Review 78 3 (2004) 370-403
22. Lindhorst T., Mancoske R.J., and Kemp A.A. Is welfare reform working? A study of the effects of sanctions on families receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare 27 4 (2000) 185-201
23. Mead L.M. The new paternalism: Supervisory approaches to poverty. (1997), Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
24. Mead L.M. Governmental quality and welfare reform (Discussion Paper No. 1230-01). (2001), Institution for Research on Poverty, Madison
25. Parrott S., Schott L., Sweeney E., Baider A., Ganzglass E., Greenberg M., et al. Implementing the TANF changes in the Deficit Reduction Act: "Win-win" solutions for families and states. (2006), Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and Center for Law and Social Policy, Washington, DC
26. Pavetti L., and Bloom D. State sanctions and time limits. In: Blank R., and Haskins R. (Eds). The new world of welfare (2001), The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC 245-269
27. Pavetti L., Derr M.K., and Hesketh H. Review of sanction policies and research studies: Final literature review. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003), Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC
28. Pavetti L., Derr M.K., Kirby G., Wood R.G., and Clark M.A. The use of TANF work-oriented sanctions in Illinois, New Jersey, and South Carolina. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2004), Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC
29. Piven F.F. Welfare and work. Social Justice 25 1 (1998) 67-83
30. Piven F.F., and Cloward R.A. Regulating the poor: The functions of public welfare. 2nd ed. (1993), Vintage Press, New York
31. Powers D.A., and Xie Y. Statistical methods for categorical data analysis. (1999), Academic Press, San Diego
32. Rector R.E., and Youssef S.E. The determinants of welfare caseload decline. (1999), Heritage Foundation, Washington, DC
33. Reichman N.E., Teitler J.O., and Curtis M.A. TANF sanctioning and hardship. Social Service Review 79 2 (2005) 215-236
34. Shook K. Does the loss of welfare income increase the risk of involvement with the child welfare system?. Children and Youth Services Review 21 9 (1999) 781-814
35. State Policy Documentation Project. Summary of state sanction policies. (2000). http://www.spdp.org Retrieved from Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Center on Law and Social Policy Web site: www.spdp.org
36. Westra K.L., and Routley J. Arizona cash assistance exit study. First quarter 1998 cohort: Final report (2000), Arizona Department of Economic Security Office of Evaluation, Phoenix, AZ
37. Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. Payment reductions. Wisconsin Works manual. (2003). http://www.dwd.state.wi.us/dws/manuals/w-2_manual/w-2_pdf/11REDUCT.pdf Retrieved from www.dwd.state.wi.us/dws/manuals/w-2_manual/w-2_pdf/11REDUCT.pdf
38. Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. Wisconsin work (W-2) sanction study. (2004), Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, Madison, WI
39. Wood R.G., and Wheeler J. An examination of the first ten years under TANF in three states: The experiences of New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. (2006), Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC
40. Wu C., Cancian M., Meyer D.R., and Wallace G.L. How do welfare sanctions work?. Social Work Research 30 1 (2006) 33-50