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
- Introduction
- A Conceptual Framework for Examining Diversion Programs
- Study Methods
- Overview of States' Formal Efforts to Divert Families from TANF
- Roadmap to the Rest of the Report
CHAPTER TWO
LUMP SUM PAYMENT PROGRAMS
- Introduction
- Twenty States Currently Operate Lump Sum Payment Diversion Programs
- Who Is Eligible for Lump Sum Payments
- What is Required for the Application Process
- The Lump Sum Payment
- Cost/Trade-offs Associated with Receiving Lump Sum Payments
- State Approaches to Lump Sum Payment Programs As Formal Diversion
CHAPTER THREE
LINKING TANF APPLICANTS WITH ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES
- Introduction
- Examples of State Approaches to Alternative Resources Diversion
- Implications for Cash Assistance Eligibility Procedures
CHAPTER FOUR
MANDATORY APPLICANT JOB SEARCH
- Introduction
- Target Populations for Mandatory Applicant Job Search
- Job Search Requirements
- Job Search Assistance and Job Search Documentation
- Applicant Job Search As Formal and Informal Diversion
CHAPTER FIVE
POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DIVERSION PROGRAMS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR MEDICAID
- Introduction
- Medicaid Changes under PRWORA
- Potential Impact of Lump Sum Diversion Programs on Medicaid
Eligibility
- States' Experiences with Lump Sum Payment Diversion: Consequences
for Medicaid
- Potential Impact of Other Formal Diversion Programs - Mandatory
Applicant Job Search and Alternative Resources - on Medicaid Eligibility
- Potential Impact of Informal or Indirect Diversion on Medicaid
Eligibility
- Medicaid Linkage and Diversion: Implementation and Policy Issues
CHAPTER SIX
WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT DIVERSION AND WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW
- Introduction
- Summary of Findings and Implications - What We Have Learned About
Diversion
- What States Know About The Effects of Their Diversion Programs
- 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]