Civic Report No. 17 July 2001Gaining Ground? Measuring the Impact of Welfare Reform on Welfare and Work
Appendix A:Table A-1: AFDC/Waiver Policies Implemented in States
% Decline in Caseload 1993–1996
Any Major Waiver (Date Implemented )
Whether State implemented a particular waiver:
Any Time Limit
Medium or High Sanction
Tough Family Cap 1)
Strict Work Exemption 2)
State
Alabama
-17.8
Alaska
1.7
Arizona
-9.4
11/95
x
Arkansas
-14.7
7/94
California
4.3
12/92
Colorado
-16.7
Connecticut
1.4
1/96
DC
3.6
Delaware
-8.8
10/95
Florida
-16.5
Georgia
-7.7
1/94
Hawaii
20.2
2/97
Idaho
13.9
Illinois
-3.1
11/93
Indiana
-27.5
5/95
Iowa
-10.6
10/93
Kansas
-16.9
Kentucky
-13.3
Louisiana
-21.6
Maine
-14.2
Maryland
-7.6
3/96
Massachusetts
-22.7
Michigan
-22.5
10/92
Minnesota
-9.0
Mississippi
-20.1
Missouri
-8.0
6/95
Montana
2/96
Nebraska
-15.0
Nevada
13.8
New Hampshire
-13.6
New Jersey
-11.0
New Mexico
8.3
New York
-0.3
North Carolina
-13.5
7/96
North Dakota
-24.6
Ohio
-19.9
Oklahoma
-20.0
Oregon
2/93
Pennsylvania
-7.4
Rhode Island
-4.5
South Carolina
-14.1
South Dakota
6/94
Tennessee
-8.2
9/96
Texas
-8.5
6/96
Utah
-19.6
1/93
Vermont
Virginia
-11.9
7/95
Washington
-2.4
West Virginia
-11.6
Wisconsin
-24.9
Wyoming
-27.7
1) A tough family cap eliminates all benefits to additional children conceived while on welfare. Some states adopted a milder cap that reduces but does not eliminate benefits to additional children. 2) A strict work exemption exempts only those with a child 6 months of age or under.
[figure 1] [figure 2] [figure 3] [figure 4] [figure 5] [figure 6][figure 7] [figure 8] [figure 9] [figure 10] [figure 11] [figure 12] [table 1] [table 2] [table 3] [table 4] [table 5] [table 6] [table A-1] [table A-2] [appendix B] [figure B-1] [appendix C] [table C-1] [table C-2]