Filed Under: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Time Limits

Time Limits

Updated 11/19/2023

Time Limit Basics

Federal law sets a 60-month lifetime time limit on receipt of federally-funded TANF benefits; states can extend the limit beyond the 60 months for up to 20 percent of the caseload based on hardship (as defined by the state). States can set their own time limit policies as long as they comply with the federal restrictions.  A state can set a limit that is shorter than 60 months and it can use hardship extensions or state MOE funds to support families beyond 60 months. Some states have two time limits – a lifetime limit and an intermittent time limit, under which a family is eligible for TANF for a period of time followed by a period of ineligibility, after which the family can receive benefits again until they reach the lifetime limit. Nearly all states provide exemptions from or extensions to the time limits. States can also provide cash benefits beyond 60 months by creating a separate state program which uses only state MOE funds that are not comingled with federal funds to provide benefits to families. (See this document for an explanation of which policies apply to separate state programs: Guide-to-Use-of-TANF-Funds.pdf (clasp.org).)

The files attached at the right provide examples of materials to eliminate or extend time limits.

What do we know about families most affected by time limits?

Here is what we know about families reaching the time limits:

  • Many families who reach a time limit experience significant barriers to employment. Numerous studies have found families reaching time limits are far more likely than other TANF recipients to experience employment barriers such as physical and mental health problems, suffer from substance abuse, and to have lower levels of cognitive functioning and education (Pavetti and Kauff 2006; DeMaster 2008; Seefeldt and Orzol 2005).
  • Families that reach a time limit are more likely to have an eligible adult who is a minority and is older than the rest of the state’s TANF population. (DeMaster 2008; Farrell et al 2008)
  • Families that reach time limits have limited employment prospects and few find employment after they lose benefits due to time limits. Researchers from the University of Maryland’s School of Social Work found that compared to other welfare leavers, time limit leavers in Maryland had less employment history while on TANF and worked fewer quarters in the year after leaving assistance. Families who left TANF in Kansas because of a time limit had the lowest rates of employment among all TANF leavers. A Maine report observed that those families who were lucky enough to find employment after reaching the time limit did not see a significant increase in wages or hours worked after losing TANF.   
  • Families that reach time limits are likely to experience high levels of hardship after leaving welfare. In Maine, Butler found that families kicked off due to time limit experienced increased reliance on food banks, inability to pay utilities and other bills, and overcrowded housing conditions or reliance on homeless shelters. A Washington State study also showed an increase in homelessness among families affected by the time limit changes.

Time limit implementation issues

Processes for implementing time limits can have a big effect on the impact of a state’s time limit policies.  Nearly all states have time limit extensions for certain families, and many states have exemptions as well.  Many of families that may reach the time limit are those for whom the time limit is inappropriate.   

Often, the actual details of the policies – the duration of the time limit and the exemption or extension criteria – get close scrutiny and the implementation processes do not get as much attention. It is important to consider whether state policies and procedures provide appropriate services and determinations for families that are approaching time limits, particularly whether those who should receive an extension (or should have been exempted but were not) are not cut off due to time limits. States should also assess whether there are racial disparities in the implementation of time limits.

Here are some questions to consider when thinking about the extension determination process:

  • When and how are families made aware of how many months they have left on TANF?  What steps does the state take in the 3-6 month period before a family reaches the time limit?
  • Does the state review all cases to determine if an extension should be granted before taking closure action or put the burden on the family to apply for an extension?  Are these separate processes rather than leaving a family simply to appeal a closure due to the time limit being reached?  Does a state notify families of what type of information they could submit to support an exemption or extension, in advance of a termination notice?
  • What happens in the situation when the individual should have been exempted from the time limit running, but that did not happen?  Can they later (as time limit is reached) be protected from case closure, whether by exemption or extension?
  • Who makes the determination on an extension?  Is there a staffing that involves review by other persons beyond a single caseworker?
  • What happens when a family that has previously reached a time limit and exited TANF needs aid in the future, perhaps after loss of a job or a change in circumstances?  Does the extension policy and process allow such a family to reapply for benefits after having previously left TANF?

CBPP Papers:

Research Note: Contrary to Maine Officials’ Claims, TANF Time Limit Leaves Most Families Without Work or Cash Assistance | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (cbpp.org)

Life After TANF in Kansas: For Most, Unsteady Work and Earnings Below Half the Poverty Line | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (cbpp.org)

Other State Studies

Butler, Sandra (2013).TANF Time Limits and Maine Families: Consequences of Withdrawing the Safety Net. University of Maine.

DeMaster, Dana. (2008). “At the Limit: December 2006 Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP) Cases that Reached the 60 Month Time Limit.” Minnesota Department of Human Services. https://edocs.dhs.state.mn.us/lfserver/Legacy/DHS-5092B-ENG

Hetling, Andrea, Kathryn Patterson, and Catherine Born (2006).  The TANF Time Limit: Comparing Long-Term and Other Welfare Leavers.  Family Welfare Research and Training Group. timelimitleavers.pdf (umaryland.edu)

Pavetti, LaDonna and Jacqueline Kauff (2006). When Five Years Is Not Enough: Identifying and Addressing the Needs of Families Nearing the TANF Time Limit in Ramsey County, Minnesota. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/publications/when-five-years-is-not-enough-identifying-and-addressing-the-needs-of-families-nearing-the-tanf-time-limit-in-ramsey-county-minnesota

DSHS Economic Services Administration and DSHS Research and Data Analysis Division (2012). The Circumstances of Families after Time Limits: Adults and Children Terminated from TANF in February 2011. (Washington State)