The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Essay Example

Justification Report - DRAFT Deserie Larson Adelia Cozart-Amos, Strayer ENG.315 May 22, May 20, Deserie Larson123 Main Street Sacramento, CA 95825 (916)555-1212 Dlarson@gmail.com Congressman Mr. Dan Lungren California Congressman District Office: 2339 Gold Meadow Way, Suite 220 Gold River, CA 95670 Dear Congressman Lungren: Enclosed, please find my analysis performed regarding how to improve the social welfare system in America. Following the continuous complaints from American citizens about the social welfare of the working class, I discovered the issue of primary concern is that the current program falls under the Social Security Act enacted on August 14th, 1935. The nation has formed welfare recipients under the renewed act. The renewed act is the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996 based on work opportunity reconciliation. The institutions that received grants to train their constituents showed the greatest improvement, especially after the training period (Kearns 2000). People became enlightened, and they looked at life differently after the training. They also found better ways to fend for themselves, even after the period of funding had stopped. The grant system is currently supporting several million people and is spending a lot of money per annum. The population is also increasing at an alarming rate and ,with the level of unemployment and emergence of many illnesses in the society, the government grant is facing a big challenge and finds itself restricting the disputed grant period for a period of just five years. Under this approach the period is justified and should be restricted to the five year limitation with a strict adherence to attending work programs within that five year period. Sincerely, Deserie Larson Enclosure: Justification Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………..3 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………...3 Problem Statement………………………………………………………………………4 Method Used…………………………………………………………………………….4-5 Findings………………………………………………………………………………….5 Analysis………………………………………………………………………………….5-7 Conclusion……..……………………………………………………………………….. 7 References……………………………………………………………………………….8 Executive summary The TANF is a block grant designed to assist needy families and provide some childcare assistance. In addition, the grant aims to give individuals job preparation skills and to reduce the dependency of needy parents. Finally, a further goal is to discourage pregnancies out of wedlock, thereby encouraging two parent families (Kean, 2000). Lately, there have been numerous complaints about the grant by the very people that benefit from its intent. Other stakeholders have also voiced concern. These complaints are based largely on the time period that the grant takes in helping needy individuals. This point was raised and observed by those who received the grants in terms of money for their livelihood. This research is based on the level of satisfaction of the grant, and the extent to which the beneficiaries are satisfied with its programs. It also gives the stakeholders an opportunity to give their opinions on what should be done to improve the operation and effectiveness of the grant. The challenges that the grant is facing as a whole were also investigated. The method of data analysis was through observation and the use of questionnaires. The questionnaires were appropriate by providing a general view through closed-ended questions (Corcoran, 2011) and gave the opportunity for further expression by asking open-ended questions. The results were analyzed by the bar graphs for ease of interpretation. Since the grant comes in different forms, those who had the privilege to be trained found it easy to improve their lifestyles by obtaining jobs and sustaining their career, even after the grant period ended. Due to high rate of unemployment in the country, the training offered was designed to give individual skills that could be utilized in a self-employment type of setting. An example would be business and art courses that were easy to comprehend and apply, as opposed to the sciences. Training for such paths would take less than five years, such that one could complete the education required within the grant period. Introduction The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program is a grant that aims to help move recipients into work, and therefore turn the welfare into a temporary assistance program. The report focuses on effecting changes in the social programs of the United States. It targets the branch of the government that deals with temporary assistance for families classified as needy (TANF). The recipients of this report are the various organizations, both governmental and Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), which deal with welfare funding. Following the continuous complaints from American citizens about the social welfare of the working class, the issue of primary concern is that the current program falls under the Social Security Act enacted on August 14th, 1935. The nation has formed welfare recipients under the renewed act. The renewed act is the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996 based on work opportunity reconciliation. Problem Statement According to government statistics, the TANF program is represented by 31% of white families, 33% black, and 29% Hispanic (Kearn, 2000). It is important to note that the aim of the program is to provide funds to needy families with a five-year limit on financial assistance. In fact, total welfare spending for the year ending 2010 reached an astounding $900 billion. The problem arises when, even with the large amounts spent on assisting poor families, more families keep being added to the system. Methodology The main method used for the collection of the data was by use of a questionnaire. Direct observation was used as well (Corcoran, 2011). Observation was conducted via face-to-face interviews, and done hand in hand during the answering of the questionnaires. Visits were made to the families and organizations that were benefiting from the grant. The questions were based on how individuals benefited or saw their lives improve as a result of having received the grant. In additions, question also focused on soliciting opinions as to what was wrong with the system and what could be done to fix it. The questions asked were: Do you receive the grant or not? Do you know anyone who receives the grant? Has your living standard been improved by the grant? Does this grant benefit other stakeholders? What is being done wrong within the grant program? What do you think should be done to make the program better? Observations were made on the living standards if they conferred with the results from the statements of the questionnaire. The living standard was classified as: Middle Low Poor Very poor Since the grant is provided to the needy, the scale begun from a scale of the middle class. The level/standards of living were coded with numerical values for ease of analysis and interpretation. A Random sample of 100 households and organizations were interviewed during the study. Findings From the data collection, the sample provided the following information. Level of satisfaction of the grant, by the stakeholders Description Percentage Satisfied 40% Unsatisfied 60% Living standard improvement Description Percentage Improved greatly 12% Not much improvement 60% Not improved 38% The results show that a good percentage of participants were satisfied with the grant performance. No recommendation was made about improving the lives of stakeholders. Analysis The data analysis was represented on bar graphs as shown below. This served to make the interpretations easier. The level of satisfaction seems to be higher than the level of the unsatisfied stakeholders. Living standard effect by the grant From this analysis, it can be seen that the grant does not have a great impact in the improvement of people’s lifestyle, but rather it maintains the lifestyle of these people, which is not a bad idea. Since the grant stands at five years for each institution, it was observed that those who received the grant in terms of cash as a source of daily livelihood did not have much improvement, while others did not have a change in their lifestyle. This is because the grant received was from hand to mouth, without a mechanism to save for the future. The institutions that received the grant as training to their unit individuals had the greatest improvement, especially after the training period ended (Kearns 2000). People became enlightened; they looked at life differently after the training and found better ways to fend for themselves, even after the period of funding had stopped. Where the grant was received in terms of health emergencies or insurance against such occurrences did not have a positive improvement in their lives. This is likely due to the fact that sometimes these insured chronic illnesses did not occur, but if it occurred it would only take care of the hospital bill, but nothing else. The approach maintained the living standard by ensuring that it was not interfered with by uncertainty. Within the five years that the grant runs for, most of the beneficiaries were against the idea, especially the very poor and old individuals who could not go to school and save the money for education. There would be a frustration in these individuals after they are out of the grant process (Kearns, 2000). Conclusion From the stakeholders themselves, they recommended that the amount of money provided to them should be increased, since with the current global economic crisis, the currency is becoming weaker, yet the government has maintained the grant level where it has been for a long time, without considering the effects of inflation. Personally, as a researcher in this field, I find it unfair for the government to treat all the stakeholders the same. As much as all the stakeholders need help, others need it more than the rest and should be provided for according to their individual needs. Another possibility would be to create a special grant group for those with special needs, like the elderly. For example, this group would require a grant that runs for the remainder of their life. The grant system is currently supporting several million people and is spending a lot of money per annum. The population is also increasing at an alarming rate, and with the level of unemployment and emergence of many illnesses in the society, the government grant system is facing a big challenge. A strict five-year time limit for the grant program seems to be unrealistic for the reason stated above. When limiting individual to five years, you are discounting special needs that families may have. In addition, by allowing everyone to remain for five years, you may be enabling certain individual to take advantage of the system, thereby draining funds that could be better utilized elsewhere. The goal should be to transition people off of social welfare in a dignified and respectable manner. Once that takes place, then benefits should cease. If, however, an individual has a special case, then they should be permitted to remain on the system until such time that the original intent of the grant is met. This is my position and is one that I believe the government should consider. References Kearns, P. K. (2000). Sstrategies for success in the Social Sector. New York: Jossey- Bass Publishing Corcoran, J. (2011). Helping Skills for Social Work based on Direct Practice. New York: Oxford University Press TAFN Report 2011 http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/Report /tanf/about.html Read More