Notice2023-26100
Request for Information: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Implementation of Sections 302 and 304 of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
November 27, 2023
Issuing agencies
Health and Human Services DepartmentChildren and Families Administration
Abstract
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), invites public comments on the possibilities for design and implementation of the new pilot program and work outcomes measures of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (FRA), in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. The FRA requires HHS to carry out a pilot program for up to five states to promote accountability by measuring employment and earnings outcomes as well as additional indicators of family stability and well-being for TANF recipients. In addition, it requires all states to report the information necessary to calculate certain statutory work outcomes measures. ACF seeks input from partners to help understand some of the options, opportunities, and potential challenges associated with the development and implementation of the pilot program and the reporting of new statutory work outcomes measures applicable to all states.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 226 (Monday, November 27, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82902-82905]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26100]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
Request for Information: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) Implementation of Sections 302 and 304 of the Fiscal
Responsibility Act of 2023
AGENCY: Office of Family Assistance, Administration for Children and
Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
ACTION: Request for information (RFI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), in the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), invites public
comments on the possibilities for design and implementation of the new
pilot program and work outcomes measures of the Fiscal Responsibility
Act of 2023 (FRA), in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) program. The FRA requires HHS to carry out a pilot program for
up to five states to promote accountability by measuring employment and
earnings outcomes as well as additional indicators of family stability
and well-being for TANF recipients. In addition, it requires all states
to report the information necessary to calculate certain statutory work
outcomes measures. ACF seeks input from partners to help understand
some of the options, opportunities, and potential challenges associated
with the development and implementation of the pilot program and the
reporting of new statutory work outcomes measures applicable to all
states.
DATES: Comments are due January 11, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit responses to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#83d7c2cdc5f2f6e6f0f7eaecedf0c3e2e0e5adebebf0ade4ecf5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7f2b3e31390e0a1a0c0b1610110c3f1e1c195117170c51181009">[email protected]</span></a>. Please
include ``TANF FRA'' in the subject line of the email.
Guidance for Submitting Comments
<bullet> To ensure that your comments are clearly understood and
properly contextualized, please identify the specific question or
section of this notice that your comments address, as well as your
experience or role that informs your response.
<bullet> You are encouraged to comment on any issues or concerns
you believe are relevant or appropriate for our consideration and to
submit written data, facts, and views addressing this subject,
including but not limited to the questions below.
<bullet> You do not need to answer all questions listed--only the
question(s) for which you have relevant information. The written RFI
response should address ONLY the topics for which the respondent has
knowledge or expertise.
<bullet> Wherever possible, please provide credible data and
specific examples to support your views. If you cite academic or other
studies, they should be publicly available to be considered.
<bullet> All submissions are public records and may be published on
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. Do NOT submit sensitive, confidential, or
personally identifiable information.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1.0 Background
1.1 Pilot Program
Section 302 of the FRA authorizes a pilot program under which HHS
may select up to five states to test alternative performance metrics in
the TANF program. Section 302 of the FRA provides that for the duration
of the pilot projects, the work participation requirements shall not
apply to the pilot states and instead, participating states will comply
with agreed upon performance measures and benchmarks. In lieu of the
work participation rate (WPR), state performance will be measured by
(A) the percentage of work-eligible individuals who are employed during
the 2nd quarter after exiting the TANF program; (B) the level of
earnings of those individuals in the 2nd and 4th quarters after exit;
and (C) other indicators of family stability and well-being as
established by HHS. States that fail to meet agreed upon performance
benchmarks for these measures will be required to enter into a plan
with HHS
[[Page 82903]]
to either achieve the level of performance or adjust the benchmarks. In
the event neither is accomplished, the state will no longer be
permitted to participate in the pilot. The pilots will be in effect for
six years, with the first year being used to establish baseline data.
Since TANF was enacted in 1996, the chief measure of program
performance has been the requirement that states meet WPR targets. The
WPR measure the extent to which states engage families receiving TANF
cash assistance in certain work activities for a specified number of
hours each week each month during a fiscal year. A state must meet an
overall (or ``all families'') and a two-parent work participation
requirement or face a potential financial penalty. The WPR targets are
50 percent for all families and 90 percent for two-parent families, but
a state's individual targets equal the statutory rates adjusted
downward by the number of percentage points by which the caseload has
fallen since a base year for reasons other than changes in eligibility
rules.
Over time, states, members of Congress, and others have advocated
for moving TANF beyond solely relying on the WPR as a means of defining
the success of states in supporting TANF recipients in entering
employment and gaining the skills they need for economic stability.
Many have also noted that the WPR is a process measure rather than an
outcome measure, as it measures only a state's ability to engage
individuals in specified countable activities that lack research to
support their connection to long term employment outcomes.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See <a href="https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/report/measuring-employment-outcomes-tanf">https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/report/measuring-employment-outcomes-tanf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While this performance standard structure has remained largely
unchanged since 1996, in recent years there has been an increasing
interest in alternative methods of measuring state performance in TANF
and other human services programs.\2\ The FRA authorized pilots to test
alternatives to the WPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See p.19 <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45966">https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45966</a>; <a href="https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/report/measuring-employment-outcomes-tanf">https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/report/measuring-employment-outcomes-tanf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an alternative to the WPR, states participating in the pilots
would be measured against negotiated benchmarks for work outcomes and
other indicators of family stability and well-being. The pilots will
provide an important opportunity for selected states to demonstrate
different approaches to measuring their performance in assisting
families with low incomes. We encourage states to think about
strategies for promoting and measuring economic success and family
stabilization. ACF is interested in learning more about the
opportunities that the pilot program presents for states. ACF is
committed to a successful pilot program, one that results in useful
information for policymakers and leads to a more effective TANF program
that further benefits American families.
1.2 Work Outcomes Measures
Section 304 of the FRA requires all states to collect and submit
``the information necessary'' to determine four indicators of
performance. These are:
<bullet> Employment in the Second Quarter after Exit: The
percentage of individuals who were work-eligible individuals as of the
time of exit from the program, who are in unsubsidized employment
during the second quarter after the exit;
<bullet> Employment Retention: The percentage of individuals who
were work-eligible individuals who were in unsubsidized employment in
the second quarter after the exit, who are also in unsubsidized
employment during the fourth quarter after the exit;
<bullet> Median Earnings: The median earnings of individuals who
were work-eligible individuals as of the time of exit from the program,
who are in unsubsidized employment during the second quarter after the
exit; and
<bullet> High School Attainment: The percentage of individuals who
have not attained 24 years of age, are attending high school or
enrolled in an equivalency program, and are work-eligible individuals
or were work-eligible individuals as of the time of exit from the
program, who obtain a high school degree or its recognized equivalent
while receiving assistance under the State program funded under this
part or within 1 year after the exit.
Section 304 specifies that to ensure nationwide comparability of
data, HHS shall issue regulations governing reporting of the
performance indicators after it consults with the Secretary of Labor
and with states. This RFI is one of the ways HHS is consulting with
states.
The above measures are similar to some of the performance
accountability measures required under the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act of 2014 (WIOA).\3\ The FRA does not specify which data
sources should be used for the above measures. For the first three
measures, ACF is considering requiring states to submit Social Security
Numbers (SSN) of all work-eligible individuals who left TANF in a given
quarter and ACF would then match those SSNs with quarterly wage records
in the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH).\4\ ACF would then use
the matched results to compute the first three work outcomes measures
on behalf of states. This approach would allow for standardized
measures and would not require states to initiate new data sharing
agreements at the state level. ACF is interested in learning about
alternative data sources, such as unemployment insurance quarterly wage
records contained in the State Wage Interchange System (SWIS),\5\ as
well as data sources that could be used to supplement standardized
measures. Under WIOA, states are allowed to submit ``other information
as is necessary to measure the progress of those participants through
methods other than quarterly wage record information'' if quarterly
wage records are not available for a participant.\6\ ACF has matched
individual TANF case records with NDNH wage records since FY 2002 for
the High Performance Bonus measures, and later for performance measures
that are reported as part of the Congressional Budget Justification,\7\
but ACF has not calculated a high school attainment measure and so is
looking for information about potential data sources and key
considerations. Other areas include how to operationally define TANF
exiters, which are defined in the statute as those who ``cease[ ] to
receive assistance under the program funded by this part.'' However,
many studies have defined an ``exit'' from TANF in different ways,
taking churn into account; TANF ``leavers'' studies from the early
2000s often defined a ``leaver'' as someone who has left cash
assistance for at least two months, while WIOA defines a ``common
exit'' as a participant not receiving Department of Labor-administered
services for at least 90 days.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/performance-indicators">https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/performance-indicators</a>.
\4\ See <a href="https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/training-technical-assistance/overview-national-directory-new-hires">https://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/training-technical-assistance/overview-national-directory-new-hires</a>.
\5\ See <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/swis">https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/swis</a>.
\6\ See <a href="https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEGL/2017/TEGL_26-16_Acc.pdf">https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/advisories/TEGL/2017/TEGL_26-16_Acc.pdf</a>.
\7\ See TANF-ACF-PI-2002-01 (FY 2002 TANF High Performance Bonus
(HPB): New Reporting Requirements) <a href="https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ofa/policy-guidance/tanf-acf-pi-2002-01-fy-2002-tanf-high-performance-bonus-hpb-new-reporting">https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ofa/policy-guidance/tanf-acf-pi-2002-01-fy-2002-tanf-high-performance-bonus-hpb-new-reporting</a>; FY 2024 Congressional Budget Justification,
p. 338 <a href="https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/olab/fy-2024-congressional-justification.pdf">https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/olab/fy-2024-congressional-justification.pdf</a>.
\8\ See <a href="https://aspe.hhs.gov/tanf-leavers-applicants-caseload-studies">https://aspe.hhs.gov/tanf-leavers-applicants-caseload-studies</a> and <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/definitions">https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/performance/definitions</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These work outcomes measures are intended to assist federal--and
state--policymakers in better understanding
[[Page 82904]]
the effectiveness of TANF programs in promoting successful employment
and credential attainment. As with the pilots, the work outcomes
measures may inform future improvements to the TANF program. ACF is
interested in hearing from states their thoughts on operationalizing
these new measures including the potential administrative cost and
burden involved.
2.0 Request for Information.
Through this RFI, ACF is soliciting input and information from a
broad array of stakeholders on how best to design and implement the FRA
pilot program and the new work outcomes measures.
This RFI is for information and planning purposes only and should
not be construed as a solicitation or as an obligation on the part of
ACF or HHS.
We ask respondents to address the following questions. You do not
need to address every question and should focus on those for which you
have relevant expertise or experience. In your response, please provide
a brief description of yourself or your organization.
3.0 Key Questions--Pilot Program
3.1 What are the most important criteria a state should meet for
selection into the pilot program, and why? Are there a minimum set of
requirements a state should meet to be eligible for a pilot? If so,
which ones? Are there aspects of state TANF programs that may increase
their likelihood of success as a pilot? Are there aspects of state TANF
programs that may impede their likelihood of success as a pilot? For
example, if the benefit amounts or caseloads are low, full family
sanction and family cap policies exist, etc. Is there particular past
experience or past performance achievement that might be predictive of
states' ability to successfully carry out a pilot?
3.2 What factors might influence a state's decision whether to
pursue participation in the pilot program?
3.3 What technical assistance or supports would be helpful for
states and service providers in designing and implementing pilots? What
obstacles do you foresee and how can ACF provide assistance to overcome
or manage them?
3.4 What indicators of family stability and well-being, including
alternative measures related to employment, for families participating
in TANF should we consider measuring as part of the pilot? For example,
should pilots include measures related to family poverty, interactions
with the child welfare system, or other indicators related to child
well-being? Please explain your reasoning. What data source(s) would be
of most utility in tracking your recommended indicators? For example,
if a state is interested in measuring job quality as an indicator of
family well-being, would a state be able to measure that by tracking
jobs with benefits such as a paid leave or employer contribution
retirement plans? Should family income be included as a measure of
family stability and well-being and, if so, what are the important
components, who should be included, and what would be the most reliable
and practical sources of data? Should any indicators be measured for
all low-income families, irrespective of TANF participation, to
evaluate whether a state's TANF program is successfully serving these
families (e.g., the share of families living in deep poverty, taking
into account all sources of income)?
3.5 What factors (e.g., demographic, economic, policy,
programmatic) should be considered when establishing performance
benchmarks? In your experience, what are the most important factors and
variables to take into consideration when developing statistical
adjustment models for performance benchmarks?
3.6 What information should be collected about the pilots to help
evaluate and explain their level of success? Is there information HHS
should collect to help determine how a successful pilot program may be
replicated in a different state? Should the pilot program undergo a
formal evaluation? If so, what form should it take? Please provide your
reasoning.
3.7 At what point(s) in the continuum of participation in a program
should work and family well-being indicators be measured (e.g., while a
family is still receiving assistance, upon exit, two quarters after
exit, a year after exit)?
3.8 What characteristics among pilot states (e.g., programmatic,
geographic, economic, demographic) would be most helpful in providing
useful and scalable results for TANF administrators and policymakers?
What level of diversity among pilot sites (e.g., geographic, size,
location) would be most helpful in providing relevant results across
states?
3.9 In what ways should equity be considered when implementing a
pilot? Are there tools or resources needed to promote equity in pilot
design, implementation, and evaluation? What factors or data points
would you consider important to ensuring equity (avoiding disparate
impacts) in the implementation of work and family well-being measures
as part of the pilot? How do we ensure that the individual experiences
of families that receive TANF cash assistance are considered in the
pilot design, implementation, and evaluation?
3.10 Are there similar past pilot efforts (federal, state, local)
from which HHS should draw lessons learned in setting up this pilot
project?
3.11 Are there any other questions or issues related to the pilots
for which you wish to provide comments?
4.0 Key Questions--Work Outcomes Measures
4.1 In your experience, what data sources on employment and
earnings are most accurate and practical for work outcomes measures
similar to those required by the FRA? What do you see as advantages and
limitations of matching with the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH)
at the federal level, as compared to the State Wage Interchange System
(SWIS) or other alternatives? We are particularly interested in
understanding the costs, timing, administrative burden, and reliability
of different data sources.
4.2 If given the opportunity, do you believe state agencies would
have the interest and capacity to voluntarily submit supplemental wage
information (similar to WIOA \9\) in addition to information needed for
a match with the NDNH? If so, would states be more likely to submit
supplemental individual-level data or aggregated outcomes measures
using an alternative data source? We are interested in the rationale
behind the preferred approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See <a href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/advisories/training-and-employment-guidance-letter-no-26-16">https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/advisories/training-and-employment-guidance-letter-no-26-16</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.3 In your experience, what data sources are most accurate and
practical for high school degree or secondary school diploma
equivalency attainment? Is it feasible to reliably determine high
school completion or secondary school diploma equivalency attainment
for current and former TANF recipients using survey data? Please share
the nature of your experience.
4.4 When thinking about exit from the TANF program, what are the
most important considerations? In what manner, if any, should the issue
of ``churn'' be addressed? (That is, those cases that cycle off for
short periods of time due to causes such as administrative errors,
delays in redetermination, or sanctions.)
4.5 We are interested in understanding the timelines involved in
reliably reporting and calculating outcome measures. What operational
issues affect the timing and availability of data for the work outcomes
measures, including TANF caseload, employment
[[Page 82905]]
and earnings, and education data? For example, what is the earliest
turnaround time for reliably reporting that a TANF case has closed?
What are the timelines involved in matching and working with employment
and earnings data and education data?
4.6 What factors (e.g., demographic, economic, policy,
programmatic) should be considered for presenting the work outcomes
measures in context? Are there variables such as state economic
conditions that may impact state outcomes and are outside a state TANF
program's control?
4.7 In what ways should equity be considered when implementing work
outcome measures? What are the advantages of and/or possible
difficulties associated with reporting data disaggregated by race,
ethnicity, gender, age, disability, other demographic characteristics,
or geography to enable equity analyses around work outcomes? \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/eo13985-vision-for-equitable-data.pdf">https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/eo13985-vision-for-equitable-data.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.8 What technical assistance or supports would be helpful for
collecting data for work outcomes? What obstacles do you foresee and
how can ACF and its partners provide assistance to overcome or manage
those barriers?
4.9 Please describe the characteristics of successful partnerships
between the public workforce system and the TANF system that support
the collection of data for the work outcomes measures required by the
FRA?
4.10 Please describe the specific steps for a state to begin
collecting and reporting data and their estimated duration. For
example, please estimate the timeframe for system changes to generate a
list of SSNs of work-eligible individuals who left TANF in a given
quarter.
4.11 Are there any other questions or issues related to the work
outcomes measures for which you wish to provide comments?
4.12 HHS has determined that tribes are NOT required to report work
outcomes measures as laid out in the Fiscal Responsibility Act.
However, OFA is committed to supporting Tribal TANF programs that wish
to voluntarily measure work outcomes for their caseloads. As we explore
this possibility, what factors do we need to better understand? What
training or technical assistance could support Tribal TANF programs
interested in measuring work outcomes?
Authority: Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023.
Ann Flagg,
Director, Office of Family Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2023-26100 Filed 11-22-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-36-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on November 27, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.