DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT OF STATE APPROACHES TO DIVERSION PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES UNDER WELFARE REFORM

An Interim Report of the Findings of the First Phase of the Research

The George Washington University Center for Health Policy Research, August 1998
Kathleen A. Maloy, JD, PhD
LaDonna A. Pavetti, PhD1
Peter Shin, MPH
Julie Darnell, MHSA2
Lea Scarpulla-Nolan, MA
Funded By
The Administration for Children and Families and The Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation
US Department of Health and Human Services

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CHAPTER ONE
AN OVERVIEW OF THE DIVERSION STUDY:
CONCEPTUAL AND METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES

  1. Introduction
  2. A Conceptual Framework for Examining Diversion Programs
  3. Study Methods
  4. Overview of States' Formal Efforts to Divert Families from TANF
  5. Roadmap to the Rest of the Report

CHAPTER TWO 
LUMP SUM PAYMENT PROGRAMS

  1. Introduction
  2. Twenty States Currently Operate Lump Sum Payment Diversion Programs
  3. Who Is Eligible for Lump Sum Payments
  4. What is Required for the Application Process
  5. The Lump Sum Payment
  6. Cost/Trade-offs Associated with Receiving Lump Sum Payments
  7. State Approaches to Lump Sum Payment Programs As Formal Diversion

CHAPTER THREE 
LINKING TANF APPLICANTS WITH ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES

  1. Introduction
  2. Examples of State Approaches to Alternative Resources Diversion
  3. Implications for Cash Assistance Eligibility Procedures

CHAPTER FOUR 
MANDATORY APPLICANT JOB SEARCH

  1. Introduction
  2. Target Populations for Mandatory Applicant Job Search
  3. Job Search Requirements
  4. Job Search Assistance and Job Search Documentation
  5. Applicant Job Search As Formal and Informal Diversion

CHAPTER FIVE 
POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DIVERSION PROGRAMS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR MEDICAID

  1. Introduction
  2. Medicaid Changes under PRWORA
  3. Potential Impact of Lump Sum Diversion Programs on Medicaid Eligibility
  4. States' Experiences with Lump Sum Payment Diversion: Consequences for Medicaid
  5. Potential Impact of Other Formal Diversion Programs - Mandatory Applicant Job Search and Alternative Resources - on Medicaid Eligibility
  6. Potential Impact of Informal or Indirect Diversion on Medicaid Eligibility
  7. Medicaid Linkage and Diversion: Implementation and Policy Issues

CHAPTER SIX 
WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT DIVERSION AND WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW

  1. Introduction
  2. Summary of Findings and Implications - What We Have Learned About Diversion
  3. What States Know About The Effects of Their Diversion Programs
  4. What Do We Want To Know Now- Next Steps for Research

TABLE AND FIGURES

TABLE I-1
TABLE I-2
FIGURE I-I
FIGURE I-2
TABLE I-3
TABLE II-1
TABLE IV-1
TABLE IV-2
TABLE IV-3
TABLE V-1
TABLE V-2


Acknowledgments

Many people contributed to the completion of this preliminary study.  Most important among them are the numerous state officials who gave their time, granted interviews, and furnished materials.  We appreciate their time and assistance; without their participation this study would not have been possible.

We also appreciate the assistance and support from federal officials with the Administration for Children and Families and the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the US Department of Health and Human Services.  We are grateful for the opportunity, which they gave to us, to explore this important area of welfare reform.

We are grateful to The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation for providing additional support to assist in the completion of this phase of the project and the production of this report.

Finally, we appreciate the efforts of Soeurette Cyprien, Research Assistant on the project.  Without her tireless efforts in arranging interviews, developing and managing files, and providing production assistance, completion of this study and report would not have been possible.

This report was reviewed by federal officials with the Administration for Children and Families, the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, and the Health Care Financing Administration in the US Department of Health and Human Services, by staff of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, and by state officials from 30 states.  We appreciate their valuable comments and the report benefited from their review.  The opinions expressed in this report belong solely to the authors, however, and we are also responsible for any errors or omissions. 


1 Dr. Pavetti is a Senior Researcher at Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., Washington, DC.

2 Ms. Darnell is a Research Associate at The Institute for Health Services Research and Policy Studies, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.


[Top of Page] [ASPE Home Page] [HHS Home Page]