Strategies for TANF Agencies to Identify and Address Domestic Violence

When Congress enacted the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in 1996, many advocates were concerned about the ability of women who are victims of domestic violence to safely meet the new work requirements under welfare reform. Responding to these concerns, the Family Violence Option (FVO) amended PRWORA to allow states to screen and assess for domestic violence, offer domestic violence services, and grant waivers from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) requirements when such requirements would endanger an individual client. As of June 2001, 40 states have implemented the FVO, and all states that have not adopted the FVO have implemented policies and procedures to address domestic violence (State Plan Database, 2001).

Addressing domestic violence poses several challenges for TANF agencies. Clients may not feel safe or comfortable disclosing such personal information to caseworkers. Caseworkers, in turn, may also be uncomfortable discussing domestic violence for various reasons. This Issue Note describes the effect of domestic violence on low-income women’s employment and discusses issues that states and localities may want to address when implementing services for this population. (For more information on domestic violence and TANF, visit the Welfare Information Network web page on Domestic Violence at http://www.welfareinfo.org/domestic.htm.)

Why invest state and local resources in domestic violence programs for the TANF-eligible population? First, domestic violence is a significant problem for many TANF recipients. Women from all socioeconomic levels are victims of domestic violence, but poor women are more likely than women in general to experience domestic violence and the odds are even higher for women who receive welfare. Among welfare recipients, it is estimated that 50 percent to 60 percent have experienced domestic violence over their lifetimes, and 20 percent to 30 percent of welfare recipients report being recent or current victims of abuse (Tolman and Raphael, 2000). These rates of domestic violence are three times higher than those reported for all low-income women (Johnson and Meckstroth, 1998).

Second, victims of domestic violence are more likely to be long-term welfare recipients (i.e., receiving welfare for more than five years) and are more likely to cycle on and off welfare (Lyon, 2000). The ways in which domestic violence acts as a barrier to women’s employment are numerous and well documented. Victims of domestic violence are more likely to have physical or mental health concerns—broken bones, low self-esteem, anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder—that make it difficult to find and keep a job. Abusers often undermine their partners’ advances toward employment and self-sufficiency. Abusers may prevent their partners from completing education and training, threaten or attack them at their workplace, keep them up the night before a test or job interview, and intimidate them in ways that undermine their self-esteem and their own and their children’s safety. Unless these issues are addressed, some domestic violence victims may reach their time limit on the receipt of welfare benefits without having achieved self-sufficiency, and will need extensions or face the loss of benefits.

Third, many women who experience abuse want to find jobs, and may even have extensive work experience. However, without assistance, these women may have a harder time keeping a job and, as a result, experience periods of unemployment and high job turnover. A spotty employment record makes “good jobs” that pay well that much less attainable for victims of domestic violence.

Finally, domestic violence has costs for employers, too. One estimate places the annual cost of family violence to employers at $13 billion, including time abused women spend arranging for legal, medical, and personal support (National Governors Association, 2000). This clearly suggests that employers have a stake in working with TANF agencies to develop strategies to help women address barriers that result from abuse. Some states, such as New York, have identified employers as important partners in addressing domestic violence.

Has the Family Violence Option Been Effective? Almost all states have implemented the Family Violence option (FVO) or similar policies and procedures to address domestic violence. As it was first conceived, the FVO sought to ensure that women experiencing domestic violence were identified, received needed domestic violence services, and were exempted from TANF requirements when necessary. However, implementation of the FVO has demonstrated that the needs of domestic violence victims are variable and complex.

Studies of FVO implementation have found that most women who are victims of domestic violence, or who have been abused in the past, want to find jobs and do not request waivers from work requirements. Some are beginning to think that the Family Violence Option and similar policies may be more valuable as a vehicle for delivering preventive services and interventions that address clients’ unique needs than as a means for exempting clients from TANF requirements (Tolman and Raphael, 2000). As states and localities consider changes to their domestic violence programs, they may want to look more closely at the services they provide and offer various support services.

What challenges do TANF agencies face in addressing domestic violence? Domestic violence has been an “invisible” barrier, not unlike mental illness, substance abuse, or learning disabilities, that may not be immediately obvious and may cause victims shame or embarrassment if they are pressed to disclose the abuse. State TANF agencies estimate that between 5 percent and 10 percent of their caseload is victimized by domestic violence, far below the 20 percent to 30 percent that researchers estimate (Tolman and Raphael, 2000). Several factors help explain this discrepancy. Researchers may have more training and demonstrate more sensitivity in asking TANF clients about domestic violence than do caseworkers. TANF recipients may be reluctant to disclose domestic violence to their caseworkers because they feel ashamed, they fear the information will not be kept confidential, or they do not feel a need to disclose the abuse (Tolman and Raphael, 2000).

Creating an environment in which clients feel comfortable disclosing domestic violence is a challenge for TANF agencies and requires considerable sensitivity on the part of caseworkers. In addition to clients’ reluctance to disclose abuse, caseworkers may not be comfortable discussing domestic violence with their clients because they do not understand the abuse, they have unresolved domestic violence issues of their own, or they have not received sufficient training (Burt, Zweig, and Schlicter, 2000). However, it is important that caseworkers know how to offer services to women who are victims of domestic violence to better ensure these women’s safety and help them make the transition from welfare to work.

How do TANF agencies identify clients with domestic violence issues? Nearly every state reports having procedures to identify victims of domestic violence (State Plan Database, 2001). Agencies typically screen and assess clients in need of services. Screening involves gathering information that would indicate a barrier to employment. Assessment is a more involved and in-depth process, and constitutes an ongoing process to determine what the client needs to become self-sufficient (Brawley, Cyphers, and Cohen, 2001). The discrepancy between the rates of domestic violence reported by researchers and the rates reported by TANF agencies suggests that agencies may need to improve their screening and assessment practices to create an environment in which clients feel comfortable disclosing their victimization and can receive services.

Agencies must be sensitive when screening for domestic violence. Safety must always be a primary consideration, because even screening for domestic violence may place clients at risk. Agencies should only screen and assess when clients are alone, clearly explain clients’ confidentiality rights, assist with safety planning, and inform clients about available services (Brawley, Cyphers, and Cohen, 2001). The American Public Human Services Association publication Charting the Path to Employment: States’ Client Assessment Policies and Practices to Support Welfare Reform provides information on specific screening and assessment tools and is available from Gary Cyphers at gcyphers@aphsa.org.

Domestic violence is often disclosed outside of the initial screening and assessment process. Therefore, many experts stress the importance of screening for domestic violence at multiple stages of client interaction, including during the initial application process, throughout job preparation and placement activities, before sanctioning, and when a client has difficulty maintaining employment or returns to the cash assistance rolls. Notifying clients of safeguards and waivers in the context of child support cooperation requirements is also critical.

What strategies can states and localities use to address domestic violence? Once clients with domestic violence issues have been identified, states and localities utilize a number of strategies to provide them services. All but seven states report that they offer intensive services targeted to address domestic violence issues (State Plan Database, 2001). States and localities with strong systems to respond to the needs of low-income abused women often combine strategies.

Collaboration with domestic violence service providers is a key strategy for TANF agencies. Clients are more likely to reveal domestic violence to a domestic violence advocate than to a TANF caseworker. Other effective strategies are collocation of services, service coordination, and cross-agency training. Domestic violence service providers can provide specialized services that are beyond the scope of most human service agencies, such as shelter for women who are leaving their abusers, group and individual counseling, and advanced safety planning.

Measures to preserve client confidentiality can facilitate a client’s efforts to become self-sufficient. For example, in the New Beginnings program in Seattle, Washington, survivors of domestic violence who cannot for safety reasons disclose their address can list the program’s address as their own when seeking employment. In South Carolina, the social services department will relocate a woman as many times as are necessary to ensure her safety.

Enhanced case management can include intensive service teams, peer support groups, the organization of specialized caseloads, and the collocation of domestic violence advocates or counselors in welfare offices.

Coordination, collaboration, or contracting with other systems or service providers helps ensure that victims of domestic violence can access a wide range of support services. Agencies and organizations that TANF agencies should consider as partners include law enforcement, child welfare, and child support enforcement agencies; health care providers; schools; child care providers; education and training providers; substance abuse counselors and treatment providers; legal services organizations; and the courts.

Specialized training to TANF caseworkers on the use of screening and assessment instruments is necessary for these instruments to be used effectively. This training can help caseworkers better recognize the various forms abuse can take, such as economic coercion as well as verbal, physical, sexual, and psychological threats and abuse. The training can also help caseworkers understand the decisions that domestic violence victims make about leaving and staying in violent relationships. Finally, the training can increase caseworkers’ comfort in asking clients sensitive questions related to domestic violence.

Other policies that states and localities can consider are improving screening and assessment protocols, making employment leave and unemployment insurance laws more responsive to the needs of domestic violence victims, and issuing emergency payments (National Governors Association, 2000). The Innovative Practices section details state and local practices that incorporate some of the strategies described in this Issue Note.

The findings are fairly consistent among researchers who have studied how the TANF program addresses domestic violence. Women with domestic violence issues tend to underreport to their caseworkers. The client may feel that the caseworker does not need to know about the domestic violence and/or the caseworker may not have adequate training or the comfort level to elicit the disclosure. Women who are victims of domestic violence generally want to find employment. However, abuse can sabotage their efforts to keep a job or complete an education and training program, and it may negatively impact the duration and sustainability of employment. Finally, research suggests that domestic violence victims’ needs and concerns are complex and variable, underscoring the need for individualized assessment of clients’ situations and for a range of supports.

Tolman and Raphael (2000) reviewed the available research on welfare receipt and domestic violence. They report that the prevalence of domestic violence seems to be unchanged from pre-welfare-reform estimates, but they note that few domestic violence victims disclose the abuse to welfare caseworkers. Tolman and Raphael also indicate that many domestic violence victims on welfare want to work and are not necessarily interested in receiving waivers. Therefore, these women may not see the need to disclose domestic violence issues to their caseworkers. The researchers examined the early data on the effectiveness of FVO interventions. Although they conclude that these interventions are producing positive outcomes, they also identify a need for more research.

Lyon (2000) also reviewed research that explores the linkages among welfare, poverty, and domestic violence. She notes that poor women have higher rates of physical and mental health problems than women in general and that these rates are even higher for domestic violence victims. In addition, women who have had difficulties with program compliance report higher rates of domestic violence. Lyon examined the relationship among work, welfare, and domestic violence and, similar to Tolman and Raphael (2000), indicates that domestic violence victims are more likely to be long-term welfare recipients and are more likely to cycle on and off welfare. Domestic violence victims have higher rates of employment than other welfare recipients, but they have comparatively lower rates of sustained employment.

Raphael and Haennicke (1999) reviewed state policies to assist domestic violence victims in the TANF program. They suggest that the “major issue . . . in the implementation of domestic violence policies is effective assessment of domestic violence.” They stress the importance of notifying the TANF client about the FVO or domestic violence policies and of providing her with the opportunity to disclose the abuse at any point in the process. In reviewing state notification and assessment policies, Raphael and Haennicke observe that some states’ policies are inadequate, for example, because the font size on the part of the TANF application notifying clients about the FVO is small and client assessment only consists of one or two questions on a form.

Assessment of domestic violence is a sensitive issue and a challenge for TANF caseworkers. Raphael and Haennicke suggest that the most effective assessment strategies ask about domestic violence as it relates specifically to employment, training and work activities, and child support enforcement, rather than ask general questions that may be perceived as too personal or intrusive.

Burt, Zweig, and Schlicter (2000) visited seven counties to assess strategies for addressing the needs of domestic violence victims in the TANF program. They note that the programs deemed best at identifying domestic violence focus more on identifying barriers to self-sufficiency and use a “carrot” approach rather than a “stick” approach to case management. The researchers identify several tools that are helpful in identifying and addressing domestic violence issues. One tool is communicating that the TANF office is a “safe place” in which to disclose domestic violence through office ambience, the use of antiviolence posters, and the posting of information about services. Another tool is using clearly phrased screening questions that are followed up by more extensive assessments, when appropriate. Yet another tool is telling clients how the information they provide will be used and ensuring confidentiality. Still another tool is counting domestic violence activities as “allowable” work activities. Perhaps the most important tool is giving caseworkers sufficient training so they are comfortable asking clients about domestic violence and understand the responses.

Burt, Zweig, and Schlicter identify strategies that can assist TANF agencies in providing domestic violence services. These include offering onsite domestic violence expertise; using TANF funds to offer support services to domestic violence victims, including services to address co-occurring substance abuse and mental health problems; developing relationships with community partners; improving the credentials and experience of staff in addressing domestic violence issues; and organizing cases so that caseworkers can concentrate on specialized issues such as domestic violence.

The Anne Arundel County (Maryland) Department of Social Services began developing its domestic violence assessment in 1995 as part of an early “culture-change” approach to welfare reform. The county worked with a local domestic violence service agency to develop a curriculum and provide ongoing training to all county staff, including job counselors and eligibility, child support, and child care caseworkers. Women who come to the county office for services are first interviewed by a child support caseworker. The caseworker describes the support that a noncustodial parent is legally required to provide and explains the services that the county can provide. The issue of domestic violence is raised, and the caseworker explains that if a client fears for her or her children’s safety, she can receive a good-cause exemption from child support cooperation requirements. In subsequent interviews with an eligibility caseworker and a job counselor, the issue of domestic violence is also raised, especially as it relates to employment, relocation, and injuries.

The county’s strategy is to have multiple interviewers raise the issue of domestic violence, so that women have several opportunities to identify someone to whom they feel comfortable confiding their victimization. In addition, raising the issue repeatedly is seen as an effective means to raise public awareness of, and provide education on, domestic violence. Women receive information that they can pass along to friends or relatives in abusive situations. When a woman discloses domestic violence, all involved staff meets with the client to discuss how to proceed. Elements such as safety planning and counseling can be incorporated into a client’s TANF plan, and staff discuss the feasibility of work requirements given the client’s situation. A legal advocate from the domestic violence service agency informs victims of their rights and guides them through any necessary court proceedings. For more information, contact Vesta Kimble, deputy director, at 410/269-4603.

In South Carolina, the South Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (SCCADVASA) and the South Carolina Department of Social Services (DSS) collaborate to provide training to DSS case managers. The collaboration began when the Family Violence Option was enacted, and it is now in its second year. In the first year, a domestic violence advocate was identified at each shelter. These advocates were educated on TANF program requirements and case manager needs. The advocates then provided training to the case managers at 16 two-day regional training sessions. The domestic violence advocates were able to increase the case managers’ awareness of, and comfort with, discussing domestic violence. Case managers were given statistics on domestic violence and discussed what constitutes domestic violence. They learned why women stay in violent relationships and what “red flags” to look for when a client does not disclose abuse. The case managers also received tools to use with clients as well as information on available services.

In the second year of the collaboration, an advocate from each county will visit each county’s DSS office for a three-hour follow-up training session. Advocates will work to build relationships with case managers; review information on available services, how to refer clients, and whom to contact; and answer questions from case managers. This collaboration has led to close working relationships between coalition and DSS staff and has resulted in some policies being changed to better respond to the needs of domestic violence survivors. For more information, contact Vicki Bourus, coalition executive director, at 803/256-2000, or Diane Randolph, DSS program coordinator, at 803/737-9271.

Funded by the Kraft Foods Domestic Violence/Self-sufficiency Grant Program, the Houston (Texas) Area Women’s Center, a domestic violence and sexual assault service provider, has formed a collaboration with HoustonWorks USA, a one-stop career center. This collaboration draws from research indicating that women are more likely to disclose abuse to a domestic violence counselor who can offer complete confidentiality rather than to a caseworker. The domestic violence counselor works full time in the one-stop center and becomes a familiar face to clients. During orientation, clients receive information about domestic violence services through a half-hour presentation by a domestic violence counselor, and they are afforded multiple opportunities to disclose current or past domestic violence. Women who disclose abuse are offered services that include ongoing individual counseling and support groups for domestic violence survivors. Because abusers often become controlling and violent when their victims are succeeding, an employment advancement component provides targeted services to women who are employed. The program has operated for one year and currently serves 98 women. Between 65 percent and 80 percent of the women have requested services from the domestic violence counselor; of these, between 50 percent and 65 percent have experienced intimate partner violence. For more information, contact Kelly Young, vice president of community education, at 713/528-6798, ext. 264.

Also with funds from the Kraft Foods Domestic Violence/Self-sufficiency Grant Program, New Beginnings, a domestic violence agency in Seattle, Washington, and TRAC Associates, a vocational and job training agency, are collaborating to provide services to help women with domestic violence issues prepare for and retain employment. A domestic violence coordinator from New Beginnings is present at the job training center three to four days per week. Clients are given ongoing opportunities to disclose domestic violence. Caseworkers screen women for domestic violence and make referrals to the domestic violence coordinator for confidential services. The domestic violence coordinator visits training classrooms to inform participants about domestic violence and available services. These services include individual advocacy, safety planning, help in navigating other systems (e.g., housing), children’s advocates, legal advocates, legal consultation on family issues, and support groups. Services are provided at the job training center or domestic violence agency. They may even be provided at clients’ workplaces or training sites to address their safety or confidentiality concerns.

The domestic violence counselor can also refer women to specialized providers, such as a provider who shares the client’s ethnic or religious background. The counselor works closely with caseworkers to help them develop and feel comfortable using appropriate screening tools. Caseworkers are encouraged to routinely raise domestic violence and safety issues. In feedback sessions, clients have emphasized the importance of this coordinated model vis à vis their ability to obtain needed services. For example, at client option, the domestic violence counselor and caseworker can jointly develop a plan to ensure the client’s safety from abuse while working; the plan may even involve the employer. For more information, contact Kelly Starr, community advocate, at 206/926-3026.

In both Seattle and Houston, intake is completed on all clients. After three months, a follow-up interview is conducted that includes questions about employment status, barriers the client is facing, the status of the domestic violence situation, and services still needed. Additional follow-up interviews are conducted every six months for two years.

New York’s Family Violence Option provides for domestic violence liaisons in all social services districts, and women who identify themselves as victims of domestic violence are referred to a liaison. Domestic violence liaisons assess clients for credibility, assess for and grant waivers, and refer clients to community resources. They also are charged with emergency safety planning for clients who are in crisis. All liaisons and their back-ups participate in a mandatory four-day training session. The training is provided by the Professional Development Program at the University of Albany’s Rockefeller College and the state’s Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, and the Office of Children and Family Services. It includes specific units on domestic violence, temporary assistance programs in the state, and the job responsibilities of the domestic violence liaison. For more information, contact Kathleen Corley at 518/486-7637 or kcorley@opdv.state.ny.us.

In New York, the state Department of Labor and the Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence have developed tools to increase private employers’ understanding of and ability to respond to domestic violence in the workplace. The initiative builds on the success of a model domestic violence employee awareness and assistance policy for state agencies. Domestic Violence: It Is Your Business—Employer Handbook & Resource Guide includes a model policy, information to help employers understand domestic violence as a workplace issue, and a comprehensive list of community resources throughout the state. The handbook is designed to better prepare employers should an employee be the victim of domestic violence. Information and technical assistance is available to employers from the domestic violence prevention office. The office plans to survey employers to assess the usefulness of these tools to them. For more information, contact Cindy Knights, Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, at 518/486-7795; or visit http://www.opdv.state.ny.us.

The Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services is addressing the impact of domestic violence and sexual assault on TANF families through a domestic violence/sexual assault work component called Orientation, Assessment, Referral and Safety (OARS) within the TANF/KansasWorks employment services structure. The initiative aims to help welfare families become independent of cash assistance. The state began piloting OARS in the Topeka area office in 1999, and for fiscal 2001, the legislature provided funds specifically for continued expansion of this program. The OARS model fits well with the KansasWorks service design. Under that design, case managers operate as service brokers, creating multidisciplinary teams tailored to reflect the needs of each participant and composed of experts who specialize in whichever employment barriers are preventing the participant’s success, such as substance abuse, mental health, education, or domestic violence. Kansas TANF participants who are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault develop an employment plan, which includes goals for resolving these issues, and are placed in the OARS work component while they implement their plan. As of January 2001, OARS and related support services became available statewide to TANF recipients.

Some welfare offices can purchase assessment and case management services from local domestic violence and sexual assault agencies, while others must rely on existing information and referral processes. All staff has access to web-based domestic violence and sexual assault training materials. Features contributing to OARS’ success include a focus on safety; extensive local pre-implementation planning; continuous oversight and policy support; and universal screening and notification. Others include contracted domestic violence advocates on site in the welfare office; special support for advocates, including a listserv for daily communication; a full-day initial training component for welfare and child support caseworkers; clearly delineated roles and responsibilities; and clear, written confidentiality guidelines and rules. For more information, contact Katie Evans, research and special projects manager, Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services, at 785-296-6756 or kxe@srskansas.org.

Center for Law and Social Policy, contact Vicky Turetsky, 202/328-5140; or visit http://www.clasp.org.

Family Violence Prevention Fund, contact Ester Solar, 415/252-8900; or visit http://www.fvpf.org.

Institute for Women’s Policy Research, call 202/785-5100; or visit http://www.iwpr.org.

National Association of Counties, call 202/393-6226; or visit http://www.naco.org/.

National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, call 303/839-1852; or visit http://www.ncadv.org/.

National Conference of State Legislatures, contact Sheri Steisel (federal issues), 202/ 624-5400, or Stephanie Walton (state issues), 303/ 830-2200; or visit http://www.ncsl.org/.

National Governors Association, call 202/ 624-5300; or visit http://www.nga.org.

National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, contact Anne Menard, 800/537-2238.

Brawley, Scott, Gary Cyphers, and Elena Cohen. Charting the Path to Employment: States’ Client Assessment Policies and Practices to Support Welfare Reform. Washington, D.C.: American Public Human Services Association, June 2001. Available from Gary Cyphers at gcyphers@aphsa.org.

Burt, Martha R., Janine M. Zweig, and Kathryn Schlichter. Strategies for Addressing the Needs of Domestic Violence Victims within the TANF Program: The Experience of Seven Counties. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, June 30, 2000. Available at http://www.urban.org/welfare/dv_tanf.html.

California Institute for Mental Health. The CalWORKS Project Screening Guide for Substance Abuse, Mental Health and Domestic Violence Issues in Welfare-to-Work Programs. Sacramento, Calif.: California Institute for Mental Health, March 2001. Available at http://www.cimh.org/downloads/ScreeningGuide.pdf.

Davies, Jill. Recommendations for Training TANF and Child Support Enforcement Staff about Domestic Violence. Harrisburg, Pa.: National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, 2000. Available at http://www.vawnet.org/VNL/library/general/WELprac3.htm.

Johnson, Amy, and Alicia Meckstroth. Ancillary Services to Support Welfare to Work: Domestic Violence. Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., June 22, 1998. Available at http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/isp/ancillary/DV.htm.

Jons, Pamela. Monitoring Domestic Violence Policy and Practice in State Welfare Programs: The Role of Community-Based Groups and Providers (A How-to-Guide). Chicago, Ill.: Taylor Institute, March 1999. Available at http://www.ssw.umich.edu/trapped/pubs_monitor.pdf.

Lyon, Eleanor. Welfare, Poverty, and Abused Women: New Research and its Implications. Harrisburg, Pa.: National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, October 2000. Available at http://www.vawnet.org/vnl/library/general/BCS10_POV.htm.

Moore, Thomas, and Vicky Selkowe. Domestic Violence Victims in Transition from Welfare to Work: Barriers to Self Sufficiency and the W-2 Response. Milwaukee, Wis.: Institute for Wisconsin’s Future, September 1999. Available at http://www.wisconsinsfuture.org/reports/DVAbstract.pdf.

NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund. Time Running Out On Welfare: How the Family Violence Option Can Help Victims of Violence In Need Of Additional Months On Welfare. New York, N.Y. NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, 2001. Available at http://www.nowldef.org/html/issues/wel/fvopreface.htm.

National Governors Association. Building Bridges Across Systems: State Innovations to Address and Prevent Family Violence. National Governors Association, Washington, D.C.: National Governors Association, October 17, 2000. Available at http://www.nga.org/center/divisions/1,1188,C_ISSUE_BRIEF^D_314,00.html.

Raphael, Jody, and Sheila Haennicke. Keeping Battered Women Safe Through the Welfare-to-Work Journey: How Are We Doing? Chicago, Ill.: Taylor Institute, September 1999. Available at http://www.ssw.umich.edu/trapped/pubs_fvo1999.pdf.

Sachs, Heidi. Domestic Violence as a Barrier to Women’s Economic Self-Sufficiency. Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, December 1999. Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/domesticviolence.htm.

State Plan Database, a joint project of the Administration for Children and Families, the American Public Human Services Association, the National Governors Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, and the Welfare Information Network. Washington, D.C., 2001. Visit http://www.welfareinfo.org/SPD_reports.htm.

Tolman, Richard M., and Jody Raphael. A Review of Research on Welfare and Domestic Violence. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Project for Research on Welfare, Work, and Domestic Violence, 2000. Available at http://www.ssw.umich.edu/trapped/jsi_tolman_final.pdf.

United States Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. Screening and Assessment in TANF/Welfare-to-Work: Ten Important Questions TANF Agencies and Their Partners Should Consider. Washington, D.C., March 2001. Available at http://www.urban.org/pdfs/screening_and_assessment_TANF-WtW.pdf.

United States General Accounting Office. Domestic Violence: Prevalence and Implications for Employment Among Welfare Recipients. Washington, D.C., November 1998. Available at http://www.gao.gov/AIndexFY99/abstracts/he99012.htm.

The Welfare Information Network is supported by grants form the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

VISIT: WWW.WELFAREINFO.ORG

“The grande dame of welfare information sources, this site covers everyone and everything and then some.”

Corine Iteglano
National Journal

52 TOPICS – 17,000 Link’s