Program requirements: Implementation of the federal requirement to work for benefits is monitored. Social/Support services: Services such as child care, transportation, and post-employment services are studied. Modification of welfare offices is examined. Time limits: Implementation of the federal 5-year time limit is monitored.

To measure how states vary in their approaches to serving needy families, as reflected by any major differences among them in how they allocate their TANF block grants and maintenance-of-effort funds.

To study what approaches states are using to provide work opportunities in an effort to reduce welfare dependence, and to what extent do states vary in their approaches.

To study the major implementation issues states have encountered in attempting to promote work and how they have addressed these issues.

“Consistent with the thrust of a federal welfare reform law, states are moving away from a welfare system focused of entitlement to assistance to one that emphasizes finding employment as quickly as possible and becoming more self-sufficient. In the seven states GAO visited, welfare offices are generally being transformed into job placement centers, and in some instanced applicants are expected to engage in job search activities as soon as they apply for assistance. Adults with mental and physical impairments and those caring for small children are less likely than before to be exempt from participating in work activities, and adults who fail to participate as required are more likely to have their family’s assistance terminated. In the states GAO reviewed, the average proportion of adult participants required to participate in work activities increased from 44 percent in 1994 to 65 percent in 1997. In addition, to reinforce the expectation that welfare is temporary, states have established time limits on receiving cash assistance — in some cases shorter than 5 years — and have modified various policies to help make welfare recipients financially better off if they obtain jobs than if they do not. States have devised strategies to reduce the need for monthly cash assistance, such as providing one-time, lump-sum payments in lieu of monthly payments and enhancing their efforts to reduce the number of out-f wedlock pregnancies”(3).

“States have also modified their programs to better support welfare recipients in becoming more self-sufficient. In their efforts to change the culture of welfare offices, states are expanding welfare workers’ roles by shifting their priorities from determining eligibility and cash assistance levels to helping recipients obtain work and become more self-sufficient. At the same time, states are using some of the additional budgetary resources available under the welfare reform law to enhance support services, such as transportation and child care, for recipients participating in work activities and poor families who have found jobs and left the welfare rolls. In addition, states are working to enhance thei9r capacity to treat physical and mental health problems. In Oregon, state officials estimated about 50 percent of the welfare caseload requires drug or alcohol treatment. Moreover, some states have given local administrative entities greater flexibility to design welfare-to-work programs tailored to the needs of their recipients. Implementing all these changes has not been quick or easy: among the most challenging and widespread implementation issues reported by the state have been training staff to perform their new roles and finding ways to involve participants with multiple barriers to participation, such as mental and physical health problems and low literacy levels, in work activities” (4).