The Role of Policy Devolution in Social and Economic Rights Fulfillment: The Case of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families in Connecticut

Background and Purpose

The United States’ decentralized model of social welfare policy leads to inequality in benefit access and adequacy. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) exemplifies this with its significant implementation discretion left up to states. This inequality is a violation of the social and economic rights of families in poverty and can be difficult to assess quantitatively due to wide variability. Qualitative case studies of state-level policy implementation decision-making illuminate implementation differences due to context often missed by quantitative analysis. This study contextualizes administrative decision-making that shapes TANF and impacts social and economic rights in Connecticut. The research questions are: How do policy makers and administrators at the state level make decisions regarding the implementation of cash assistance programs like TANF? How do these actors view their role in realizing the social and economic rights of families through cash assistance? What factors are necessary for a devolved TANF model to promote the realization of social and economic rights?

Methods

An instrumental case study design was used to develop a deeper understanding of how devolution operates in a decentralized program like TANF. Snowball sampling was used to recruit a purposive sample of current and former advocates (n = 7), legislators and senior administrators (n = 7) who worked on the Connecticut TANF program. Interviews were conducted on WebEx, were recorded, and transcribed. Publicly available documents analyzed included 37 public hearing transcripts from 2019 – 2024 and legislative documents (e.g: state TANF plan, spending reports, legislative research reports.) All data was uploaded to NVivo and coded deductively using a framework of human rights indicators including human dignity, nondiscrimination, equity, participation, accountability, transparency, and adequacy.

Results

Restrictive TANF rules substantially impacted the dignity of TANF participants. Interviewees noted that program policy choices criminalize poor families and create barriers to participation. Advocates described a fundamental mistrust of poor families’ ability to use cash responsibly, leading to strict program requirements. Legislators and advocates noted that families in deep poverty were unable to advocate for a more generous program because they were “busy surviving.” This was demonstrated in public hearing transcripts, which lacked any testimony from TANF participants. Advocates wrestled with the ethical implications of asking families in deep poverty to share stories of their lowest points to prove that they were deserving of assistance. Administrators admitted that the budgeting process was vague and lacked transparency, which was also reflected in public budgeting documents and reports. Program adequacy was compromised by a view that the TANF block grant was part of the state’s general revenue, instead of funding specifically for the TANF program in Connecticut.

Conclusions

A lack of minimum standards in Connecticut’s TANF program violates the obligation of the federal government to ensure equity and adequacy in decentralized anti-poverty programs. Implications for social work include the importance of ethical engagement with lived experience to promote human dignity in policymaking. This study generates a better understanding for advocates and social work educators about TANF decision-making in Connecticut, potentially leading to more impactful policy interventions.