Author(s): L. Jerome Gallagher, Cori E. Uccello, Alicia B. Pierce, Erin B. Reidy

Other Availability: PDF | Printer-Friendly Page

Posted to Web: June 01, 1999

Permanent Link: http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=409066

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors, and should not be attributed to The Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Copyright © April 1999. The Urban Institute. All rights reserved. Except for short quotes, no part of this book may be reproduced in any form or utilized in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from The Urban Institute.

Note: This document is also available in the PDF format, which many find convenient when printing.

---

Assessing the New Federalism

Assessing the New Federalism is a multi-year Urban Institute project designed to analyze the devolution of responsibility for social programs from the federal government to the states, focusing primarily on health care, income security, employment and training programs, and social services. Researchers monitor program changes and fiscal developments. In collaboration with Child Trends, Inc., the project studies changes in family well-being. The project aims to provide timely, nonpartisan information to inform public debate and to help state and local decisionmakers carry out their new responsibilities more effectively.

Key components of the project include a household survey, studies of policies in 13 states, and a database with information on all states and the District of Columbia, available at the Urban Institute's Web site. This paper is one in a series of occasional papers analyzing information from these and other sources.

This report is part of the Urban Institute's Assessing the New Federalism project, a multi-year effort to monitor and assess the devolution of social programs from the federal to the state and local levels. Alan Weil is the project director. The project analyzes changes in income support, social services, and health programs and their effects. In collaboration with Child Trends, the project studies child and family well-being.

The project has received funding from The Annie E. Casey Foundation, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, The Ford Foundation, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, The Commonwealth Fund, the Stuart Foundation, the Weingart Foundation, The McKnight Foundation, The Fund for New Jersey, and The Rockefeller Foundation. Additional funding is provided by the Joyce Foundation and The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation through a subcontract with the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

The authors would like to thank the many state and local officials who participated in the interviews that provided the content for this report. We also thank Pamela Holcomb, Karen Tumlin, Alan Weil, Michael Wiseman, Sheila Zedlewski, and Wendy Zimmerman for their valuable contributions and comments on earlier drafts.

---

Contents

---

Executive Summary

General Assistance (GA) programs are cash and in-kind assistance programs financed and administered entirely by the state, county, or locality in which they operate. They are designed to meet the short-term or ongoing needs of low-income persons ineligible for (or awaiting approval for) federally funded cash assistance such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) or Supplemental Security Income (SSI).

This report, based on a survey of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, provides an overview of states' GA programs as of the summer of 1998. Tables throughout the report describe policy choices made by states and counties in providing assistance for those ineligible for federal assistance. In addition, this report provides caseload and expenditure data where available and addresses major changes in GA programs since the last survey of GA programs, which coincided with the passage of federal welfare reform in the summer of 1996. Major dimensions of the program are summarized by state in Table 1. Key findings are as follows.

Thirty-five states, including the District of Columbia, have state General Assistance programs.¹

Thirty-five states, including the District of Columbia, have state GA programs; that is, they have GA programs in which the state government has at least some involvement. Twenty-four of the 35 states with GA programs have statewide General Assistance programs with uniform eligibility rules. In most of these states, the benefit schedule is also uniform, although some states adjust their benefit schedules to reflect the cost of living in various regions of the state. Nine of the 35 states with GA programs do not have uniform state GA programs, but require all counties to provide General Assistance. As a result, eligibility rules and benefit schedules may vary substantially from county to county in these states. The two remaining states (Wisconsin and Virginia) with GA programs do not provide statewide assistance, but do provide supervision and funding for counties that choose to have a program.

States without state government involvement in the provision of General Assistance are unlikely to have counties with General Assistance programs.

Of the 16 states without state General Assistance programs, only 6 have at least one county that has chosen to provide General Assistance without state involvement.² These county programs provide lower average benefits than state GA programs and are more likely than state programs to limit the duration of assistance and to provide in-kind assistance rather than cash. In addition, county GA programs are less likely than state programs to provide medical benefits to GA recipients. In the remaining 10 states, we were unable to identify either a state GA program or a local GA program.³ These states are almost all southern states, with most located in the Southeast.

Able-bodied adults without children (the population most often associated with General Assistance) are, in fact, the least likely to be eligible for such assistance.

Although the two most populous states, California and New York, provide General Assistance to able-bodied adults without children, few others do the same. Only 13 states provide GA to this population, down from 15 states in 1996. In addition, many states that provide assistance to able-bodied adults without children limit the duration of assistance to this group and/or provide in-kind assistance rather than cash.

General Assistance programs are more likely to serve disabled, elderly, and otherwise unemployable individuals, and children or families with children.

Thirty-four states provide General Assistance to disabled, elderly, or otherwise unemployable individuals not eligible for (or awaiting approval for) SSI. Twenty-four states provide assistance to children or families with children not eligible for TANF, such as children living with an unrelated adult.

Most states limit eligibility for General Assistance to the severely poor.

Although income eligibility limits vary considerably across states, a majority of state GA programs limit assistance to only the "severely poor," that is, those with income less than one-half the poverty level ($335 per month for an individual, $569 for a family of three). Among the 35 state GA programs, income eligibility limits range from $0 per month in New Hampshire to $1,674 per month for a couple in Hawaii, although most states set income eligibility limits between $100 and $400 per month for an individual and between $300 and $600 for a family of three. Most states set resource limits between $1,000 and $2,000, regardless of family size. However, states generally disregard some earned income and certain resources, such as a home and a car, in determining eligibility.

Nearly all states that provide assistance to able-bodied adults require recipients to work in order to maintain benefits.

Eighteen states extend GA eligibility to able-bodied adults without children or able-bodied adults with children. Fifteen require participation in work or training programs. Although 10 of these states provide some opportunities for job training, counseling, or education, the emphasis in most states is on finding private sector employment or "working off" the benefit amount through public sector employment. Recipients who fail to comply with the work requirements are sanctioned in most states, usually losing their entire benefit for a specific period of time ranging from seven days in one state to one year in another state.

General Assistance benefits are low and falling.

The maximum monthly benefits available to General Assistance recipients are generally set far below the federal poverty level. Among the 27 state GA programs that provide cash benefits to individuals (8 states provide in-kind assistance or a combination of cash and in-kind assistance), the average monthly benefit maximum for an individual is only 37 percent of the federal poverty level ($249). GA benefits are also lower than benefits in comparable federal assistance programs. On average, GA monthly cash benefit maximums for disabled individuals are less than 50 percent of state SSI monthly cash benefit maximums, and GA monthly cash benefit maximums for families are less than 90 percent of state TANF monthly cash benefit maximums. Moreover, few states have adjusted their benefit maximums since 1996, with the result that benefits in most states have decreased in real terms over the past two years. Only 7 states increased benefit maximums, and 2 states reduced benefit maximums.

Most states that provide General Assistance also provide medical assistance for GA recipients, although medical benefits are usually less extensive than Medicaid.

In 5 of the 35 state GA programs, all GA recipients are eligible for medical assistance under that state's Medicaid program or Medicaid waiver program. Of the remaining 30 state programs, 26 provide medical assistance to some or all GA recipients, either through a formal state or county GA medical program, or by providing benefits to cover certain medical expenses. The medical benefits of such programs vary widely in the types of services covered, but most provide more limited benefits than Medicaid.

General Assistance caseloads are small compared with the caseloads of the major federal assistance programs.

Most of the states with General Assistance programs provide GA benefits to less than 15 percent of the number of persons served by TANF assistance in their state. In New York, which has the most extensive GA program, about 8 percent of those living in poverty receive General Assistance--approximately 232,000 recipients per month. This is less than one-quarter of the number of TANF recipients in New York and about one-third of the number of SSI recipients in New York.

Many states made changes to their GA programs within the past two years, many of which continued the trend of tightening nonfinancial eligibility requirements.

Connecticut eliminated eligibility for a category of employable persons without children, although it did create an additional category for persons with an impairment that interrupts employment. The District of Columbia eliminated its General Public Assistance program for persons awaiting SSI. Two states, Hawaii and Connecticut, lengthened the time a person must be disabled in order to qualify for General Assistance as temporarily disabled. Four of the 35 state GA programs established or increased time limits, raising the total number of states with time limits to 10, and 3 states increased or established durational residency requirements, raising the total number of states with durational residency requirements to 7. Two states (Hawaii and Michigan), however, removed time limits for persons with a disability.

Changes to immigrant eligibility for federal assistance programs as a result of PRWORA have had a significant impact on General Assistance policies.

Following the federal lead, 19 of the 35 state GA programs tightened restrictions on assistance to immigrants. However, some states, such as New York and Washington, have explicitly enabled immigrants no longer eligible for federal benefits as a result of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) to qualify for GA.

Changes to family assistance as a result of PRWORA enabled states to shift some of the burden of providing assistance to the federal government.

Nine states transferred the responsibility for providing assistance to pregnant women in their first two trimesters and/or two-parent families with little or no work history from their GA program to their TANF program since the enactment of PRWORA. Both of these groups were ineligible for federal assistance under the prior law.

Administrative structures of General Assistance programs remained stable between 1996 and 1998.

Despite speculation since the passage of PRWORA that states would engage in "second-order devolution," that is, devolution of administrative and policy control of safety net programs from states to counties, we found no evidence that states are devolving more authority to their counties in the area of General Assistance. One state, in fact, made changes in the opposite direction. Connecticut, the only state to make a major change in the administration of its GA program, is now moving from a county-administered system to a state-administered system.

---

Introduction

Ever since the inception of the federal safety net for low-income individuals and families, some populations have remained outside the scope of the major federal cash assistance programs. Currently, the two major federal cash assistance programs are Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF--formerly the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program), which serves needy children and their families, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), which serves the low-income elderly and the severely disabled. State programs that provide benefits to populations not covered by TANF or SSI, such as able-bodied individuals without children, are collectively known as General Assistance (GA) programs.

Despite the importance of General Assistance as the only source of cash assistance for some low-income populations, GA often fails to receive the attention received by the larger assistance programs. However, the rise in state variation in the provision of cash assistance as a result of recent changes to the federal safety net has increasingly focused attention on safety net programs at the state level. As researchers assess the generosity and effectiveness of new and more complex state safety nets, state level information on General Assistance policies will be a vital component in understanding the overall welfare systems in the various states.

This report provides an overview of states' General Assistance programs as of the summer of 1998. Tables throughout the report describe the availability of GA, eligibility rules, and benefit amounts in order to document the policy choices made by states and counties in providing assistance for those ineligible for federal assistance. This information reveals the considerable variety of state programs and policies and provides a basis for comparing the relative generosity of states in providing benefits to populations not covered by SSI and TANF, especially able-bodied adults without children and individuals awaiting SSI determination.⁴ In addition, this report provides caseload and expenditure data to gauge the extent of support these assistance programs provide.

Finally, this report addresses major changes in General Assistance programs since the last survey of GA programs, which coincided with passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in the summer of 1996 (Uccello, McCallum, and Gallagher 1996). Although PRWORA did not address GA, eligibility changes to federal safety net programs as a result of PRWORA necessarily affect GA programs, because GA eligibility is often conditioned upon not being eligible for federal cash assistance. Where evident, this report notes the relationship between provisions of PRWORA and the recent changes in GA programs.

There is no uniform definition of General Assistance, a rubric that covers a wide range of state programs. In this paper, a General Assistance program is defined as a cash or in-kind assistance program that is financed and administered entirely by the state, county, or locality in which it operates and is designed to meet the short-term or ongoing needs of low-income persons ineligible for (or awaiting approval for) federally funded cash assistance. The population eligible for general assistance varies considerably by state, but usually consists of those individuals ineligible or not yet qualified for SSI (e.g., an able-bodied individual or an individual with a disability not severe enough to qualify for SSI) and/or families and children categorically ineligible for TANF (e.g., a child living with an unrelated caretaker). A few states, however, provide General Assistance to all persons categorically ineligible for SSI or TANF.

To distinguish General Assistance programs from emergency assistance programs, only those programs that allow assistance to be provided for at least two consecutive months are included in this definition. Our definition of General Assistance programs also includes "interim assistance," that is, financial assistance for persons waiting to become eligible for SSI or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). While interim assistance is sometimes administered separately from other forms of General Assistance, most states provide assistance to persons awaiting SSI or SSDI determination as a part of a larger General Assistance program.

Our definition of General Assistance programs does not include state programs generally referred to as state-segregated or state-separate TANF programs (i.e., state programs that expend funds that count toward TANF state Maintenance of Effort [MOE] requirements), despite the fact that such programs are entirely state funded. While some states provide General Assistance benefits that count toward the TANF MOE requirements, programs in which 100 percent of funds count toward the MOE are not included in this report. In addition, optional SSI state supplement programs and state food stamp replacement programs--both state-funded programs--are generally not considered General Assistance programs and are not included in this report.

The information for this report was obtained through a variety of sources, including state websites, state regulations, and caseworker manuals. However, the primary source was a telephone survey conducted during the months of June, July, and August 1998. State and county officials from all 50 states and the District of Columbia were interviewed to verify existing information, fill in missing information, and provide information on recent changes to their General Assistance programs. To ensure the accuracy of the information, survey results were sent to states and counties for verification.

For those states with state General Assistance programs that vary by county and those states with only county General Assistance programs, we obtained information from state officials about rules that did not vary and then collected information on rules in the region or county with the largest population, either from the state or county office. If the largest county did not have a General Assistance program, but a smaller county did have a program, then the program information from the smaller county was included in the report. These counties served as the focal counties and are noted as such throughout the tables. While rules from one county are often used to represent the state for throughout the report, readers should be cautioned when generalizing information from the focal county to the entire state. In many of the states in which a focal county is used, the degree to which programs vary across the state is unknown.

The last comprehensive survey of General Assistance programs was conducted in the summer of 1996 by the Urban Institute.⁵ This report follows the same methodology, although the format is slightly different. Most important, the tables in this report separate information obtained on state GA programs from information obtained on county GA programs. In addition, counts of state GA program features that appear in the text, such as the number of states with work requirements, are tallied separately for states with state GA programs and county programs. This differs from the 1996 survey, which included information on county GA programs along with state GA program information in the tables and the counts in that appear in the text.

Information on General Assistance programs by state, not separated into cross-state tables as in this report, is available in the Supplement to State General Assistance Programs, 1998: State Summaries on the web at: http://www.urban.org/.

---

General Assistance Program Availability, Requirements, Administration, and Funding Sources

No national law requires state governments to provide General Assistance or to establish uniform rules across the state if GA is provided. Consequently, the provision of General Assistance varies considerably across the states and often within states. This chapter provides an overview of the availability of General Assistance and the extent to which General Assistance rules vary within each state. Also discussed is the involvement of the state and local governments in creating, regulating, administering, and funding these programs. Table 2 provides detailed cross-state comparisons of this information.

States with State GA Programs

As illustrated in figure 1, 35 states (including the District of Columbia) have state GA programs. This includes states in which the state government has at least some involvement in General Assistance, through either the creation of a uniform statewide General Assistance program, requiring lower governmental units to provide General Assistance, or the supervision and funding of optional county GA programs.

Twenty-four of the 35 states with state GA programs have statewide General Assistance programs with uniform eligibility rules. In most of these states, the benefit schedule is also uniform, although some have benefit schedules that vary by the cost of living in different areas of the state. These 24 states are more likely than states without uniform eligibility rules to have a GA program that is administered in local field offices by the state government and are also more likely to fund their programs with state dollars. In 18 of these states, the GA program is administered by the state, while in the remaining 6 states, the GA program is administered by counties or localities. In 20 of the states, the GA program is funded with state dollars; in the remaining 4 states, the state shares funding with a lower level of government.

Nine of the 35 states with state GA programs require all counties or municipalities to provide General Assistance to low-income residents, but do not have uniform state GA programs.⁶ In these states, eligibility rules, benefit schedules, administration, and funding are left mainly to the counties or municipalities required to provide the assistance. However, the requirements placed on these county or local programs vary by state, and state governments have considerable involvement in some states. While the GA programs in all nine of these states are administered by the counties or municipalities, the programs in two states (Illinois and Maine) receive some state funding. In addition, some of these states, such as California and New Hampshire, require the counties or municipalities to follow broad state guidelines or meet basic requirements in designing their General Assistance programs.

The 2 remaining states of the 35 with state GA programs do not provide assistance statewide, but do provide supervision and funding for counties that choose to have a program. Wisconsin provides block grant funding for counties to provide cash and medical General Assistance programs. Virginia also provides funding to localities that choose to offer a General Assistance program, but the localities must operate the program within state guidelines. In both states, the counties and localities that offer General Assistance also administer the program and provide funding in addition to the state funding. In Wisconsin, almost half of all counties offer cash General Assistance; in Virginia, over three-fourths of all localities offer General Assistance.

States without State GA Programs

In 16 states, there are neither state GA programs nor requirements on counties to provide General Assistance. In 6 of these states and 1 of the states with a state General Assistance program, we identified at least one county or municipality that provides some form of county-based General Assistance.⁷ GA programs in these seven counties are solely county funded and are generally not subject to state constraints. In the remaining 10 states, we did not identify General Assistance programs in any of the states' counties.⁸ As indicated in figure 1, most of these states are located in the South.

General Assistance Eligibility Criteria and Program Requirements

States and counties set General Assistance eligibility criteria to target the specific populations considered most in need or deserving of assistance. Generally, these populations are low-income persons or families who are categorically ineligible for or are awaiting determination for federally funded cash assistance. Program requirements are created for other purposes, such as transitioning recipients to work through work requirements and reducing fraud through fingerprinting requirements. Although some GA programs have flexible eligibility and program requirements, most programs have a fixed set of rules. This section summarizes the various eligibility criteria and program requirements and describes how they vary across state GA programs and county programs. In states where program rules vary by county or locality, information was obtained from a focal county as described in the introduction.

Eligibility and program requirements are classified here into six categories: (1) categorical eligibility requirements, which limit benefits to certain types of persons or families; (2) financial eligibility requirements, which define financial need; (3) residency requirements; (4) citizenship requirements; (5) drug screening and treatment requirements; and (6) work requirements. In addition, many states have various other requirements such as requiring recipients to have a social security number, to be fingerprinted, or to apply for all federally funded assistance for which they are eligible.

Categorical Eligibility Requirements

Categorical eligibility requirements restrict eligibility to specific categories of individuals or families. While some programs provide assistance to all persons and families who do not meet the categorical eligibility requirements for federal cash assistance or who are awaiting eligibility for a federal assistance program, such as SSI, most states are more restrictive in the populations they serve. Of the 35 state General Assistance programs, 25 have categorical eligibility requirements. The remaining 10 states provide assistance to all categories of financially needy persons who do not qualify for, or are not receiving, federally funded cash assistance programs.⁹ Of the seven county programs, six have categorical eligibility requirements and one county provides assistance to all financially needy persons and families.

Categorical eligibility requirements are generally based on the family status and/or employability of the recipient. Table 3 provides detailed state-by-state descriptions of categorical eligibility requirements divided into three broad categories of eligibility: (1) disabled, elderly, and other unemployable adults; (2) children and families with children; and (3) employable adults without children. General descriptions of the various categories are presented below.

Disabled, Elderly, and Other Unemployable Persons

Persons with disabilities, elderly persons, and other unemployable persons are the most likely to be eligible for General Assistance. Thirty-four of the 35 state GA programs provide assistance to at least a portion of the disabled, elderly, or otherwise unemployable population ineligible for federal assistance, including 24 states with categorical eligibility requirements and the 10 states without categorical eligibility requirements. Additionally, each of the seven county GA programs provides assistance to at least a portion of this population. However, most states and counties differ with respect to the specific categories of disabled, elderly, and other unemployable persons served. For example, Massachusetts provides assistance to persons who are disabled at least 60 days, while Ohio provides assistance to persons who are disabled at least nine months. In addition, states may have contrasting definitions of "unemployable" persons. For instance, although both Connecticut and Vermont provide assistance to persons over age 55, Connecticut considers all such persons elderly and unemployable while Vermont considers some of them employable and subjects them to work requirements. Specific categories of disabled, elderly, and other unemployable persons generally include:

• Persons with a permanent disability. This category includes persons who meet the Social Security Administration's definition of disabled (i.e., persons with a medically verified disability--physical or mental--that is expected to last for at least 12 months or to result in death and that is severe enough to prevent the individual from engaging in "substantial gainful activity"). It includes persons who may be eligible for SSI and are awaiting SSI eligibility determination.¹⁰ Because it sometimes takes 12 or more months to determine eligibility, states provide GA to SSI applicants during the interim and typically refer to this assistance as "interim assistance." Once these persons are accepted for SSI, they receive a lump-sum payment retroactive to the application date. States may require that this payment be used to repay the state for any interim assistance received. Some states end assistance once all SSI appeals have been exhausted. In addition to persons awaiting SSI determination, states provide assistance to those who have a permanent disability as defined by the state but who do not qualify for SSI. For instance, Oregon provides assistance to persons with a permanent disability who are ineligible for SSI because of their immigrant status.¹¹
• Persons with a temporary disability. This category includes persons who have a disability but are unable to collect SSI benefits because the disability is temporary (i.e., expected to last less than 12 months). States vary, however, as to the minimum expected duration of the disability required to be eligible for benefits. Requirements range from 30 days to 9 months.
• Elderly persons. SSI also awards benefits to persons age 65 or older who meet the income eligibility criteria. A number of states, however, provide GA to elderly persons who, for whatever reason, do not meet the SSI criteria or are awaiting SSI determination. Some of these states have a less restrictive definition of "elderly" and award benefits to persons over 55 or 60 until they become eligible for SSI at age 65. In some other states, persons 55 to 65 may still be eligible, but are classified as "employable" persons and are subject to work requirements. As a result, they would be included in the employable adult category in table 3.
• Caretakers of an incapacitated spouse or child. This category includes persons who are unable to engage in work activity because of the time commitments of caring for an incapacitated spouse or child.
• Persons in a drug or alcohol abuse treatment program. A few states provide GA to persons considered "unemployable" because they are currently enrolled in a drug or alcohol abuse treatment program, usually a state-approved or -licensed facility. Rigid time limits and additional requirements are often imposed on persons in this category.

Children and Families with Children

Twenty-four of the 35 state GA programs provide assistance to low-income children or families with children, including 14 states with categorical eligibility requirements and 10 states without categorical eligibility requirements. Only two of the seven county programs provide assistance to low-income families with children, including one county with categorical eligibility requirements and one county without categorical eligibility requirements. Specific categories of eligible children and families with children include:

• Families with children. Under the former Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program, two-parent families who were recently unemployed or had limited work histories were ineligible for assistance. Some states, therefore, chose to cover these families through their General Assistance programs. Although states may now choose to assist all two-parent families under TANF, some states continue to assist these families through their GA program. Other categories of families that may also be ineligible for TANF assistance include families with a child who is not related to the principal caretaker; immigrant families who arrived after August 22, 1996, or who arrived earlier but are considered unqualified; and families who reached the 60-month federal TANF time limit.¹²
• Pregnant women in their first two trimesters. Under the former AFDC program, states had the option of defining AFDC eligibility to include women pregnant with their first child, but only after the pregnancy had reached the final trimester. Some states, therefore, chose to provide GA during the first two trimesters until they were eligible for AFDC. Although states may now choose to provide assistance to pregnant women in the first two trimesters under TANF, some states continue to provide assistance to these persons through their GA program.
• Unattached children. This category includes children, sometimes referred to as unrelated children, who are ineligible for TANF because they live with an adult caretaker who is not a parent or relative. Some states provide assistance only to the child, while other states provide assistance to the caretaker in addition to the unrelated child, as noted above in the families with children category.
• Emancipated minors. This category includes minors, generally between the ages of 16 and 18, who no longer live with a caretaker and thus are not eligible for TANF.

While the above list covers most of the categories of assistance that include families with children, it is necessary to advise caution when attempting to compare states on the generosity of their programs with respect to providing assistance to children or families with children. Some of the categories of families with children listed above are technically eligible to receive federal TANF assistance, including all two-parent families and all pregnant women.

Some states, therefore, no longer provide assistance to these populations through their GA program. Instead, these states have moved these families to their state TANF programs, which generally provide higher benefits. Other states have continued to exclude these families from their TANF programs and either provide no assistance for these families or provide these families with assistance through their GA program. In addition, other categories of families with children, including families that reach the 60-month federal time limit and immigrant families, are eligible for assistance that counts toward the state TANF Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirement. While some states provide assistance to these families through their GA program and count GA funding to these families toward the TANF MOE requirement, other states either have created separate programs for these families that are not included in this report or have integrated these families into their TANF program. As a result, only a comprehensive survey of state TANF programs, TANF MOE programs, and GA programs would allow accurate comparisons of eligibility for these families across states.

Employable Adults without Children

Employable adults without children are the least likely population to be eligible for GA. Only 13 of the 35 state GA programs provide assistance to employable adults without children, including 3 states with categorical eligibility requirements and 10 states without categorical eligibility requirements. Additionally, only one of the seven county programs--the only county program without categorical eligibility requirements--provides assistance to employable adults without children. Specific categories of able-bodied adults without children include:

• All employable adults without children. This category generally includes able-bodied adults between 18 and 65 who are deemed able to find employment. Many of these recipients are subject to work requirements.
• Able-bodied adults with some barriers to employment. This category consists of able-bodied persons who have some barriers to employment, such as lack of education or inability to speak English. Recipients in this category are also often required to participate in work or training programs.

Financial Eligibility Requirements

All states and counties consider the financial situation of GA applicants when determining eligibility for benefits. Most set specific income and resource eligibility limits along with exemptions from these limits, while a few determine income or resource limits on a case-by-case basis. Table 4 provides a detailed state-by-state listing of these financial eligibility requirements.

In states where couples and families may apply for benefits, income limits usually vary according to family size. To a lesser extent, states vary income limits by living arrangements, eligibility category, applicant or recipient status, and location of residence. In states that vary income limits according to these criteria, higher income limits are usually associated with persons who pay shelter costs, persons who are eligible due to a permanent disability, persons who are already receiving assistance, and persons who live in areas with a high cost of living. In contrast to income limits, resource limits are less likely to vary by family size, eligibility category, or residence.

Across state and county programs, income and resource eligibility limits vary considerably, but a majority limit assistance to only the "severely poor," that is, those with incomes less than one-half of the federal poverty level ($335 per month for an individual, $569 for a family of three). In one state with a state GA program (New Hampshire) and in two county programs (Dade County, Florida, and Jefferson County, Kentucky), only those who have no income at all are eligible for benefits. In contrast, Hawaii's program has the most generous income limits, awarding financial eligibility to individuals who have a monthly income up to $1,239 and to couples with a monthly income up to $1,674. Overall, most states set income eligibility limits between $100 and $400 per month for an individual and between $300 and $600 for a family of three. Several state GA programs and most county programs set resource limits at zero or count resources against the income limits. The majority of states, however, model their resource limits after the SSI program, the former AFDC program, or their current TANF programs, usually allowing $1,000 to $2,000 in resources.

States and counties usually exempt certain types of income and resources when determining eligibility, and states often model both income and resource exemption rules after their SSI and TANF programs. Income exemptions may include all or certain types of unearned income, a portion of earned income, or some combination of the two. Exempted unearned income generally includes a wide range of federally provided financial benefits including Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) payments, benefits from the supplemental food program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and income from tribal land settlements. By providing earned income exemptions, states and counties create incentives for work by allowing recipients to gain employment without immediately losing their benefits. Resource exemptions typically include a home, an auto, property, and smaller items.

Residency Requirements

Nearly all of the GA programs have residency requirements. All but one of the state GA programs and all of the county GA programs require recipients to reside in the state, county, or municipality where they apply for benefits. Only New Hampshire does not have a residency requirement. In addition, 7 of the 35 state GA programs and 3 of the 7 county programs require applicants to prove residency for a specified period of time before they become eligible for full benefits.¹³ These durational residency requirements range from 15 days to 12 months. Most durational residency requirements apply to all applicants and deny all benefits until the durational residency requirements are met, although there are two exceptions. In Connecticut, only immigrants are subject to the durational residency requirement. In New York, recipients subject to the durational residency requirement receive 50 percent of New York's benefit or the benefit amount from their previous state, whichever is greater.

Citizenship Requirements

In the 1996 Urban Institute survey of General Assistance programs, most states reported providing GA benefits to citizens and legal immigrants, while a few states reported providing benefits regardless of citizenship or immigration status. The passage of PRWORA dramatically changed immigrant eligibility for financial assistance. While PRWORA focused primarily on immigrant eligibility for federal benefits, it also permitted states to exclude certain immigrants for the purpose of determining GA eligibility. In response, many states now distinguish immigrants according to classifications created under PRWORA.

Fourteen of the 35 state programs, but none of the county programs, restrict benefits to citizens and qualified immigrants only.¹⁴ In addition, eight of these states distinguish between qualified immigrants who arrived on or before August 22, 1996 (the date PRWORA was signed into law), and qualified immigrants who arrived after August 22, 1996. These states either completely deny eligibility to immigrants arriving after August 22, 1996, or allow immigrants who arrived after that date to become eligible only after five years in the country. Twenty state GA programs and 6 county programs provide benefits to citizens and most legal immigrants, although 2 of these states restrict some benefits to only citizens and qualified immigrants, and one of these states does not provide benefits to legal immigrants who arrived after August 22, 1996. Only one of the 35 state GA programs and one of the 7 county GA programs provide benefits to illegal immigrants in addition to legal immigrants and citizens. Six of the states with state GA programs, but none of the county programs, also require that eligible immigrants take steps to become citizens in order to remain eligible for benefits.¹⁵

Drug Screening Requirements

As shown in table 5, 3 of the 35 state GA programs include drug screening as a requirement for eligibility, while none of the county programs include such requirements. In each of the three states, recipients testing positive for drug use are required to participate in a treatment program as a condition of eligibility, usually in a state-sponsored or state-licensed treatment facility. In addition, 18 of the 35 state GA programs and 2 of the 7 county programs require drug or alcohol abuse treatment if an applicant or recipient is found to be dependent on drugs or alcohol. Rather than screening all applicants for drugs, most of these programs refer persons suspected of or known to be chemically dependent to an appropriate facility for assessment. Payments to recipients participating in a substance abuse treatment program are often only made through vendors for specific services provided, or through protective payees.

Work Requirements

In addition to requirements that must be met at the time of initial application, many states impose requirements necessary to maintain benefits. Participation in work or training programs is perhaps the most common of these. Work requirements are found in those states that provide assistance to employable adults with and without children, although not all of these states impose work requirements. As shown in table 5, 15 of the 18 state programs that extend eligibility to employable adults with or without children require participation in work or training programs. The one county program that provides assistance to employable adults does not require participation in a work or training program.

The work requirements and training programs vary considerably by state, as shown in table 6. Those required to meet work requirements or participate in work programs generally include all able-bodied recipients, with some exemptions for caretakers, mothers with small children, elderly persons, students, and persons already employed. Although 10 states provide some opportunities for job training, counseling, or education, the emphasis in most states is on finding private sector employment or "working off" the benefit amount through public sector employment. Recipients who fail to comply with the work requirements are sanctioned in most states, usually losing their entire benefit for a specified period of time. In some states, each instance of noncompliance results in sanctions of progressively longer duration. The duration of sanctions ranges from seven days to one year. Many GA recipients are also receiving Food Stamp benefits and thus are subject to Food Stamp work requirements. However, only 10 of the programs with work requirements coordinate their requirements with Food Stamp employment and training programs.

---

General Assistance Program Benefits and Duration

Low-income persons and families who meet the eligibility criteria for General Assistance programs receive a monthly financial benefit meant to help cover basic needs such as rent, food, and clothing. The form, amount, and duration of GA benefits vary considerably across state and county programs. In addition, medical assistance is available through some GA programs. This section describes how GA financial and medical benefits vary across states. Detailed state-by-state comparisons of this information are provided in tables 7 and 8.

Form of Benefits

General Assistance financial benefits may be in the form of cash, in-kind benefits such as vouchers or vendor payments, or a combination of these. The most common form of GA benefits is cash, which may come either as a check payable to the recipient or through electronic benefit transfer (EBT). EBT allows recipients to access their benefits through ATMs or point-of-sale (POS) machines in commercial outlets. Due in part to a federal mandate on states to switch from coupons to EBT for the Food Stamp program, EBT is increasingly becoming the method of transferring benefits to GA recipients.¹⁶ Vendor payments, another form of financial assistance, are payments made by the GA agency to a person or business such as a landlord or utility company in exchange for services provided to the GA recipient. Similarly, vouchers are used to pay for specific items such as food or transportation. The recipient presents a voucher to the service provider, and the GA agency later pays the provider directly.

Twenty-four of the 35 state GA programs provide cash benefits to nearly all recipients, 6 through the use of EBT. Fourteen of these states provide benefits as vendor payments or vouchers rather than cash in certain circumstances. For example, recipients may request vendor payments or vouchers as a cash management tool. In other cases, the state requires that certain recipients receive benefits in the form of vouchers or vendor payments, especially if the recipient is in a substance abuse treatment program.

Six of the 35 state GA programs provide only vendor payments or vouchers for all recipients. In many cases, the vouchers and vendor payments are limited to certain items such as rent or utilities. Of the five remaining state GA programs, two provide a combination of cash and in-kind assistance and three provide cash to some recipient categories and in-kind assistance to others.

County programs are more likely than state programs to provide in-kind benefits. Only two of the seven county programs provide cash benefits, both of which provide vendor payments in some circumstances. The remaining five county programs provide only vendor payments or vouchers.

Benefit Maximums

As with GA income eligibility limits, GA benefit schedules often vary by family size, living arrangement, eligibility category, and county or region of residence. Nearly all GA programs, whether cash or in-kind programs, limit the benefits provided to each recipient to a maximum monthly dollar amount. Only 3 of the 35 state GA programs and 1 of the 7 county GA programs do not have maximum dollar amounts; instead, each provides benefits in the form of voucher or vendor payments that cover the specific costs of goods or services provided. In addition, one state GA program does not have a monthly maximum dollar amount but does have a yearly maximum.

Among the 27 state GA programs that provide cash benefits, the average benefit maximum for an individual is only 37 percent of the federal poverty level ($248 per month).¹⁷ Missouri has the lowest cash benefit maximum for individual recipients at $80, or 12 percent of the poverty level. Except for Nebraska, whose benefit maximum for disabled individuals is $645, or 96 percent of poverty, all states set benefit maximums for individuals below 55 percent of poverty. Among the 22 states that provide cash benefits for couples, the average benefit maximum for a couple is 38 percent of poverty ($340), with benefit maximums ranging from 18 percent of poverty ($159) in Ohio to 68 percent of poverty ($596) in Oregon. Among the 12 states that provide cash benefits for families of three, the average benefit maximum for a family of three is 39 percent of poverty ($411), with benefit maximums ranging from 18 percent of poverty ($193) in Ohio to 54 percent of poverty ($577) in New York. Only two of the seven county programs provide cash benefits to individuals, couples, or families of three. In both programs, benefit maximums are less than 40 percent of poverty.

GA benefit maximums are generally lower than benefit maximums for comparable federal assistance programs, especially for unemployable individuals. All but one of the state GA programs that provide cash benefits to unemployable individuals set GA benefit maximums lower than the combined SSI and state supplement benefit maximums in their state. On average, state GA benefit maximums for unemployable individuals were less than 50 percent of combined SSI and state supplement benefit maximums in each state. For families of three, GA benefit maximums were either the same as or lower than TANF benefit maximums in each state. Of the 12 state GA programs that provide cash benefits to families of three, 7 set benefit maximums equal to the TANF benefit maximum in that state, with the remaining 5 state GA programs setting benefit maximums lower than the TANF benefit maximum. On average, state GA benefit maximums for a family of three were less than 90 percent of TANF benefit maximums in each state.¹⁸

Importantly, not all GA recipients receive the maximum monthly benefit. Most programs determine a recipient's monthly benefit by subtracting the amount of the recipient's net income (income after exemptions) from the maximum benefit level. Thus, for every dollar of nonexempt income added, recipients lose an offsetting dollar of GA benefits. Some other programs, especially those that provide in-kind benefits, determine monthly benefit amounts by covering the costs of specific needs of the recipient, such as rent.

Duration of Assistance¹⁹

The duration of General Assistance benefits varies by program. Twenty-five of the 35 state GA programs and 3 of the 7 county programs provide assistance without time limits as long as recipients continue to meet the eligibility requirements. Eight of the 35 state GA programs, but none of the 7 county programs, impose time limits on only a portion of recipients, such as employable individuals and chemically dependent recipients, but provide benefits to all other recipients without time limits. Two of the 35 state GA programs and 4 of the 7 county GA programs impose time limits on all recipients.

Time limits may be either periodic, limiting assistance to a certain number of months within a given time period, or absolute, specifying the total number of months of assistance allowed. For instance, Utah subjects employable recipients to a periodic time limit that limits assistance to 7 months in an 18-month period. New Jersey, however, has an absolute time limit that limits assistance to a total of 60 months in a recipient's lifetime. Time limits may also differ by the degree to which recipients' benefits are reduced. All but one of the GA time limits are "termination" time limits, which terminate the entire benefit once they are reached by the recipient. The exception is New York, whose time limit does not terminate or reduce recipients' benefits, but instead requires that recipients who reach the time limit receive vouchers or vendor payments in place of a cash benefit.

States may also limit the duration of benefits in ways other than time limits. For instance, some states that provide assistance for disabled persons awaiting SSI determination terminate benefits once the final SSI determination is made. Those who are not awarded SSI must qualify for GA according to some other criteria or face losing benefits. All state and county programs also periodically review each case or require that recipients reapply every one, three, or six months, regardless of whether they have time limits. In some states, the duration of assistance may be limited based on the discretion of administrators in renewing benefits. In Indiana (Center Township of Marion County), for instance, renewals for assistance after six months are up to the discretion of the township trustee. In New Hampshire (city of Manchester), assistance is generally provided on a short-term basis even though there is no set time limit. Some programs, such as Iowa's, require persons to apply for vouchers for each separate need, and assistance is only provided as each new need arises.

Medical Assistance

In addition to receiving financial assistance, many General Assistance recipients receive medical assistance. While GA recipients in some states are eligible for Medicaid or a Medicaid waiver program, most GA recipients who receive medical assistance are covered by GA medical assistance--a state-funded medical assistance program for persons not covered by Medicaid. In some states, these state medical assistance programs provide assistance for persons in addition to GA recipients, by setting less restrictive categorical or financial eligibility requirements. Table 8 provides detailed state-by-state information on GA medical assistance programs.

In 5 of the 35 state GA programs, all GA recipients are eligible for medical assistance under that state's Medicaid program or Medicaid waiver program. Of the remaining 30 states, 26 provide medical assistance to some or all GA recipients, either through a formal state or county GA medical program or by providing benefits to cover certain medical expenses. Only 2 of the 7 county programs, however, provide medical assistance to GA recipients. In some states and counties, eligibility requirements for GA medical assistance are less stringent than the eligibility requirements for GA financial assistance. In these states, therefore, medical assistance coverage is available to needy persons not receiving GA financial assistance. In a few states and counties, medical coverage is limited to life-threatening conditions. Among the 26 state and 2 county programs that provide medical assistance other than Medicaid, benefits are usually less comprehensive than Medicaid and vary widely in the types of services covered.

Most of the states and counties in which GA programs do not include medical assistance components have alternative medical assistance available to some or all GA recipients. For example, some states and counties have indigent health care programs or charity hospital systems that are independent of their GA programs, but for which some GA recipients are eligible. States without GA programs may also have alternative medical care programs for some or all of their residents. For instance, Tennessee operates a Medicaid waiver program that provides medical assistance to a wide range of eligible recipients.

---

General Assistance Program Caseloads and Expenditures

It is particularly difficult to obtain data on General Assistance caseloads and expenditures that are comparable across states. Statewide caseload and expenditure information was obtained from most states with uniform statewide GA programs, but from few others. For most of the state GA programs that vary by county, data were either available only for the specific county we surveyed or not available at all. For the seven county programs, data was collected from the particular county we contacted. Statewide program data are included in table 9 state GA program data limited to a particular county are included in table 10 and data on the county programs are included in table 11.

It is necessary to apply caution when comparing the caseload and expenditure data across states. As indicated, reporting periods vary across states. Also, some states have implemented program changes since these dates, and the caseload and expenditure data may not reflect current program design. Reporting methods also vary across states. Some states record their caseloads as the number of recipients while others record them as cases, in which a single case may include a family of three. While we have tried to separate the data on the number of recipients from the data on the number of cases, this was not possible in all states. In addition, some caseload and expenditure figures include medical assistance recipients while others do not, and most interim assistance expenditures do not reflect any federal reimbursements from SSI.

Statewide Program Data

Among state GA programs in which state caseload data was obtained, caseloads and expenditures vary widely (table 9). Average monthly caseloads range from 92 cases in Oregon's Temporary Assistance Program to 190,000 cases in New York. However, when compared to the total state population, the population in poverty, or participation in other safety net programs, the number of persons assisted by GA is quite small. Most of the states with General Assistance programs provide GA benefits to less than 15 percent of the number of persons served by TANF assistance in their state. In New York, which has the most extensive program as a percent of the total population, GA program recipients represent less than 8 percent of those living in poverty. GA is also small compared with other federal assistance programs. In New York, the number of GA recipients is less than one-quarter of the number of recipients receiving TANF and about one-third of the number of SSI recipients.

Annual spending on General Assistance ranges from about $2.8 million in Delaware to almost $738 million in New York. Average monthly benefits range from $80 in Missouri per individual to $520 per individual in Nebraska, although most states have average monthly benefits between $100 and $350 per case.

County Program Data

Table 10 contains information for the focal county in state GA programs where we were unable to obtain statewide data. Table 11 contains information on county programs. Although intrastate variability of county-based GA programs makes interstate comparisons of these programs less appropriate, available caseload and expenditure information may provide some indication of how many persons are served by GA in each state.

---

Major Changes to General Assistance Programs Since 1996

The last major survey of General Assistance programs conducted by the Urban Institute in the summer of 1996 coincided with the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). Since then, General Assistance programs have undergone a multitude of changes, many of which are related to changes made to the federal welfare system as a result of PRWORA. Of the 35 state General Assistance programs, 33 have made a change since 1996 in one of the program areas surveyed in this report. Of the seven county programs surveyed, five have undergone changes since 1996. In addition, one county surveyed in 1996 (Harris County, Texas) made such substantial changes to its General Assistance program since 1996 that the program no longer meets the definition of General Assistance for this report. All of the major changes are described in state-by-state comparisons in table 12, which categorize the changes into three groups: (1) benefit level changes, (2) eligibility changes, and (3) miscellaneous other changes.

Benefit Level Changes

Few states or counties increase GA financial benefits to adjust for inflation, with the result that most benefit maximums have remained unchanged since 1996. In other words, benefits have decreased in real terms. Of the few changes that did occur, though, most were increases. Seven of the 35 state GA programs and two of the seven county programs increased benefit maximums. Among the 35 state GA programs, Hawaii enacted the largest percentage increase in benefit maximums, increasing benefit maximums by about 27 percent. Among the seven county programs, Jefferson County, Kentucky, enacted the largest percentage increase in benefit maximums, increasing benefit maximums by 118 percent for individuals. In addition, New Jersey increased the housing benefit maximum for GA recipients who are eligible for housing assistance. Two of the seven state GA programs lowered benefit maximums, while none of the county programs lowered benefits. The District of Columbia lowered benefit maximums for an unattached child by about 9 percent, and Connecticut lowered benefit maximums by about 8 percent.

PRWORA's Impact on GA Eligibility

The majority of changes in General Assistance provisions captured by this survey were changes to eligibility criteria, many of which were related to changes PRWORA made to federal assistance programs. Although PRWORA did not specifically address General Assistance programs, it nonetheless made an impact on General Assistance programs because of the new restrictions it placed on federal assistance, especially regarding immigrants, and the flexibility it provides states to expand TANF assistance to two-parent families and pregnant women.

The new restrictions on federal cash assistance stipulated in PRWORA are numerous, including a limitation of federal TANF assistance to 60 months per family, restrictions on immigrant eligibility for federal TANF assistance, and restrictions on immigrant eligibility for SSI assistance. The impact of these new restrictions on each state GA program differed based on a number of factors, including whether populations no longer eligible for federal assistance as a result of PRWORA would have become eligible for a state GA program as of August 1996 and whether a state chose to provide benefits to those groups no longer eligible for federal assistance. For those states that chose to provide benefits to groups no longer eligible for federal assistance, the effect on GA also depended on whether states chose to provide assistance to these groups through their GA program or through an alternate state-funded program.

Of the new eligibility restrictions, the immigrant restrictions have had the greatest impact on General Assistance program policy in the states, especially the immigrant restrictions on SSI applicants. As previously noted, PRWORA dramatically altered immigrant eligibility for federal SSI, which appears to have resulted in considerable changes to GA program policies. Before PRWORA, most state GA programs provided benefits to immigrants in accordance with the federal SSI or AFDC rules, granting eligibility to most legal immigrants. Those programs that provided interim assistance to persons applying for SSI, for instance, determined the eligibility of immigrants according to the same criteria that would be used in determining their SSI eligibility. With the passage of PRWORA and the creation of new restrictions on immigrants, GA programs that provided assistance to aged and disabled individuals thus faced the prospect of providing assistance to immigrants who were now ineligible for SSI, but still eligible for GA. Many states chose to avoid an increase in their GA caseload and costs by imposing parallel eligibility for GA. Eighteen of the 34 states that provide assistance to aged, disabled, or other unemployable persons increased restrictions on immigrant eligibility.

States that chose to provide assistance to immigrants who are no longer eligible for SSI did so in a variety of ways, such as providing General Assistance that was already available to these populations, creating or expanding GA programs to serve immigrants no longer eligible for SSI assistance, or providing these immigrants the optional state supplement to SSI (despite the fact that immigrants would not receive the federal SSI benefit). The state of Washington, for instance, made no changes to its immigrant eligibility GA requirements, which allowed citizens and most legal immigrants to obtain benefits. As a result, the program now serves legal immigrants who are no longer eligible for SSI. Oregon decided to limit eligibility for its GA program to those immigrants whose immigrant status does not make them ineligible for SSI, but also created a separate GA program for some disabled legal immigrants who are no longer eligible for SSI.

The new restrictions on eligibility for TANF have had a lesser impact on GA programs. This is partly because most of the new restrictions to federal TANF assistance do not apply to state TANF Maintenance of Effort (MOE) funds.²⁰ Thus, states that chose to provide assistance to those families ineligible for federal TANF assistance (because of the new immigrant restrictions, time limits, or other restrictions) did not need to change their GA program policy to accommodate this new population, but instead could provide TANF assistance to these families using state funds that count toward the MOE requirements. However, three states (Alaska, New Mexico, and New York), which chose to continue benefits to at least some of the families ineligible for federal TANF assistance, provide assistance to such families through their GA programs. In both cases, funding for these families' benefits count toward the MOE requirements in these states.

Although there was some speculation after the passage of PRWORA that families now ineligible for federal TANF assistance would apply for General Assistance programs, most states do not provide GA to families, as noted in "General Assistance Eligibility Criteria and Program Requirements." Those that do provide General Assistance to families often provide it to only very specific categories, such as families with unattached children. Therefore, many states that chose not to continue assistance to families ineligible for federal TANF assistance, such as immigrant families, did not need to make changes to their General Assistance programs. Most immigrant families ineligible for TANF assistance would not be eligible for General Assistance based on other categorical requirements. Still, some states were providing assistance to a wide range of families ineligible for federal assistance at the time PRWORA passed, and some of these states chose to follow the federal lead and increase their eligibility restrictions based on immigrant status. In addition, some states changed immigrant eligibility for GA families to provide consistency across programs. Although PRWORA did not require states to use the federal TANF immigrant eligibility requirements when providing GA to children ineligible for TANF, such as unattached children, some states did just that. In the District of Columbia, for example, the immigrant restrictions for unattached children were changed to match the immigrant restrictions for TANF families so that children are subject to the same immigrant eligibility criteria, whether they are living with a relative and receiving TANF or living with a nonrelative and receiving GA. Eleven of the 24 programs that provide assistance to children or children in families increased the restrictions on immigrants.

Since most GA programs have only one policy regarding citizenship and eligibility requirements, most changes states made to reflect SSI immigrant eligibility criteria or TANF immigrant eligibility criteria affected all categories of assistance. Overall, 19 of the 35 state GA programs increased eligibility restrictions based on immigrant status.

Although PRWORA placed new and significant restrictions on federal assistance, PRWORA also allowed states to expand eligibility for federal cash assistance to families with children to include some groups that were previously ineligible for AFDC. While the eligibility expansions have received little attention, they have made notable impacts on GA program policy in some states. These lesser-known provisions of PRWORA allow states to shift some populations that may have received General Assistance in the past to the new TANF program created under PRWORA. Under AFDC, two-parent families were ineligible for assistance unless they met specific work history and unemployment requirements. In addition, pregnant women were eligible for assistance under AFDC, but only during the third trimester of pregnancy. A number of states thus provided General Assistance to two-parent families and pregnant women ineligible for AFDC. Under TANF, however, all two-parent families and pregnant women are categorically eligible to receive federal assistance. They are not entitled to assistance, but states may choose to use federal TANF funds and/or state MOE funds to provide assistance to these groups.

Some states that traditionally provided General Assistance to pregnant women or two-parent families ineligible for AFDC are continuing to provide these groups assistance through their GA program. In doing so, these states may count the funding for these groups toward the TANF MOE requirement. Washington State and Ohio, for instance, continue to provide assistance to pregnant women through their GA program, and such assistance now counts to these states' MOE requirements for TANF. In addition, although Pennsylvania still excludes pregnant women from its TANF program, it expanded its GA eligibility criteria to include pregnant women. Other states that have traditionally provided assistance to these groups have moved these populations into their state's TANF program or a TANF MOE program, both of which generally provide a higher benefit. Nine states, in fact, changed the GA eligibility criteria for two-parent families and/or pregnant women, transferring responsibility for these populations to their TANF or TANF MOE program.

Other Eligibility Changes

As often noted, PRWORA allows states to set time limits and impose durational residency requirements on federal TANF assistance. State interest in these issues seems to have spilled over to General Assistance programs. Four of the 35 state GA programs and 1 county program established or increased time limits, including both California and New York. In addition, Harris County, Texas, imposed a new time limit on assistance allowing receipt of benefits in 1 month out of a 12-month period. As a result, its program no longer meets the qualifications of a GA program for this report. Two states, however, removed time limits for disabled persons. Three of the 35 state GA programs and 1 county program increased or established durational residency requirements. Two states, Illinois and Pennsylvania, eliminated their durational residency requirements, although this was primarily the result of court findings that the durational residency requirements were unconstitutional.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s many states have tightened nonfinancial eligibility requirements for GA, some eliminating GA programs altogether. A few eligibility changes to General Assistance programs between 1996 and 1998 appear to have no relationship with changes at the federal level, but continue this trend of tightening nonfinancial eligibility requirements. Connecticut eliminated a category of assistance of employable persons without children, although it did create an additional category for persons with an impairment that interrupts employment. The District of Columbia eliminated its General Public Assistance program for persons awaiting SSI, and Fulton County, Georgia, eliminated assistance for elderly persons. Two states, Hawaii and Connecticut, lengthened the time a person must be disabled in order to qualify for General Assistance as temporarily disabled. Pennsylvania now bars persons receiving health-sustaining medication from cash assistance, although the state still provides medical assistance to this category of persons.

Finally, most income eligibility limits and resource limits remained unchanged, failing to adjust for inflation. However, eight of the state GA programs and two of the county programs did increase income limits, and one state decreased income limits. In addition, six state GA programs increased resource limits, seven states increased the exemption for an automobile, and four states altered their earned income disregards.

Other Miscellaneous Changes

Considerable speculation has occurred since the passage of PRWORA concerning "second-order devolution," that is, devolution of administrative and policy control of safety net programs from states to counties. While counties are already more likely to have greater authority over GA programs than TANF programs, we found no evidence that states are devolving more authority to their counties in the area of General Assistance. One state, in fact, made changes in the opposite direction. Connecticut, the only state to make a major change in the administration of its GA program, is now moving from a county-administrated system to a state-administrated system.

Eight states indicated making changes to their work program within the past two years, including five states that eliminated their work program. In each of these five states, however, the work program was removed because the GA program no longer serves employable persons in families with children (such as two-parent families) because of transferring the responsibility for these persons to their state TANF program, as described earlier.

Six states report changes to their medical assistance programs, including the elimination of GA medical assistance in Indiana and the creation of a medical assistance program for immigrants in Oregon.

Finally, one state GA program added a fingerprinting requirement and three state GA programs added a drug screening or treatment requirement.

---

References

---

About the Authors

L. Jerome Gallagher is a research associate with the Urban Institute's Income and Benefits Policy Center. His research interests include welfare reform, general assistance, and poverty. For the Assessing the New Federalism project, he conducted case studies on income support and social services in Mississippi and Texas. He is also the co-author of One Year after Federal Welfare Reform: A Description of State Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Decisions as of October 1997.

Cori E. Uccello is an actuary and research associate in the Urban Institute's Income and Benefits Policy Center. Her work focuses on income security during retirement and health insurance policy.

Alicia B. Pierce is a former research intern with the Urban Institute's Income and Benefits Policy Center. She is currently a graduate student at the University of Michigan School of Public Policy. Her research interests include social welfare policy, the sociology and history of race and ethnicity in America, and the intersection of law and policy.

Erin B. Reidy is a former research intern with the Urban Institute's Income and Benefits Policy Center. She is currently a doctoral student in sociology at the University of Michigan. Her research interests include social demography, gender, and health.

---

Notes

---

Figures and Tables

Table 1: Summary of General Assistance Programs, by State, Summer 1998
		Categorical Eligibility2
States with State GA Programs1	GA Program Availability and Variability Within State	Disabled, Elderly, and Other Unemployable	Children and Families with Children	Employable Adults Without Children	Maximum Individual Cash Benefit as a Percentage of Poverty3	Time Limits4	Medical Assistance5
Alaska	Uniform Statewide	X	X	X	33%		X
Arizona	Uniform Statewide	X			26%	All
California (Los Angeles County)	Statewide/County Variability	X	X	X	33%	Some	X
Colorado	Uniform Statewide	X			34%	Some
Connecticut	Uniform Statewide	X	X		52%		X
Delaware	Uniform Statewide		X		18%