SECTION 10. TITLE XX SOCIAL SERVICES BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
CONTENTS
Overview, Allocation Formula, and Funding
Program Goals
Data on Services, Recipients, and Expenditures
Transfer of Funds Among Block Grants
Social Services in Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities
Legislative History
Reference
OVERVIEW, ALLOCATION FORMULA, AND FUNDING
Title XX of the Social Security Act, also referred to as
the Social Services Block Grant, is a capped entitlement
program. Block grant funds are given to States to help them
achieve a wide range of social policy goals. Funds are
allocated to the States on the basis of population. The
allotments for Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands and the
Northern Marianas from the national total are based on their
allocation for fiscal year 1981 adjusted to reflect the new
total funding level. OBRA 1987 (Public Law 100-203) extended
eligibility for title XX funds to American Samoa. The Federal
funds are available to States without a State matching
requirement.
Table 10-1 shows the title XX funding levels, in both
nominal and real 1997 dollars, from fiscal years 1977 through
1997. Over the 20-year period (1977-97), title XX funding has
declined in real terms by $4,993 million, a reduction of 67
percent. Table 10-2 shows the total funds available to each
State and territory under title XX in selected fiscal years
from 1989 through 1997.
PROGRAM GOALS
The purpose of the Title XX Social Services Block Grant
Program is to provide assistance to States to enable them to
furnish services directed at one or more of five broad goals:
--Achieving or maintaining economic self-support to prevent,
reduce, or eliminate dependency;
--Achieving or maintaining self-sufficiency, including
reduction or prevention of dependency;
--Preventing or remedying neglect, abuse, or exploitation of
children and adults unable to protect their own
interests, or preserving, rehabilitating or reuniting
families;
TABLE 10-1.--TITLE XX SOCIAL SERVICES BLOCK GRANT FUNDING LEVELS, 1977-
97
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entitlement ceiling
-------------------------
Fiscal year Nominal 1997
dollars dollars
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1977.......................................... \1\ $2,796 $7,493
1978.......................................... \1\ 2,791 6,978
1979.......................................... \1\ 2,991 6,790
1980.......................................... \2\ 2,791 5,582
1981.......................................... \2\ 2,991 5,384
1982.......................................... \3\ 2,400 4,008
1983.......................................... \4\ 2,675 4,334
1984.......................................... 2,700 4,185
1985.......................................... \5\ 2,725 4,088
1986.......................................... \6\ 2,584 3,773
1987.......................................... 2,700 3,834
1988.......................................... 2,700 3,699
1989.......................................... 2,700 3,510
1990.......................................... \7\ 2,762 3,425
1991.......................................... 2,800 3,304
1992.......................................... 2,800 3,220
1993.......................................... 2,800 3,108
1994.......................................... 2,800 3,052
1995.......................................... 2,800 2,968
1996.......................................... 2,381 2,452
1997 \8\...................................... 2,500 2,500
Change between 1977 and 1997:
Dollar amount............................. -296 -4,993
Percentage change......................... -11 -66.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $16 million for Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands
and $80 million in fiscal year 1977 and $75 million in fiscal years
1978 and 1979 for title XX staff training.
\2\ Includes $16.1 million for Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands and
the Northern Marianas and $75 million for title XX staff training.
\3\ Public Law 97-35 eliminated separate funding for title XX staff
training.
\4\ Includes $225 million appropriated in the emergency jobs bill
(Public Law 98-8).
\5\ Includes $25 million earmarked for training of day care providers,
licensing officials and parents including training in the prevention
of child abuse in child care settings.
\6\ The entitlement ceiling for fiscal year 1986 was $2.7 billion.
However, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings legislation sequestration of funds
for fiscal year 1986 reduced the funding by $116 million to $2.584
billion.
\7\ The entitlement ceiling for fiscal year 1990 was $2.8 billion.
However, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings legislation sequestration of funds
for fiscal year 1990 reduced the funding by $37.8 million to $2.762
billion.
\8\ The entitlement ceiling for 1997 and subsequent years is $2.38
billion; however, Congress appropriated $2.5 billion in fiscal year
1997.
Note.--Nominal dollars converted to constant 1997 dollars using the
fiscal year CPI-U.
Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
TABLE 10-2.--TITLE XX SOCIAL SERVICES BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS BY STATE AND TERRITORY, SELECTED YEARS 1989-97
[In millions, by fiscal year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State 1989 1991 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama..................... $45.1 $46.5 $46.2 $45.1 $45.1 $38.4 $40.3
Alaska...................... 5.9 5.9 6.2 6.3 6.4 5.5 5.8
American Samoa.............. 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Arizona..................... 36.5 39.9 41.0 41.4 41.8 36.1 38.9
Arkansas.................... 26.4 27.1 28.3 26.2 26.2 22.3 23.4
California.................. 300.5 320.7 333.2 335.4 336.9 286.5 300.1
Colorado.................... 36.4 37.4 38.9 37.3 37.9 32.7 34.9
Connecticut................. 35.5 36.6 38.8 36.3 35.8 30.1 31.3
Delaware.................... 7.1 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 6.4 6.7
District of Columbia........ 7.0 7.0 6.8 6.6 6.4 5.3 5.4
Florida..................... 130.0 139.7 144.8 146.6 147.2 125.6 133.2
Georgia..................... 68.0 71.8 72.5 73.1 73.7 63.5 67.4
Guam........................ 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4
Hawaii...................... 11.8 12.4 12.4 12.5 12.7 10.8 11.3
Idaho....................... 11.2 11.4 11.3 11.5 11.6 10.1 10.8
Illinois.................... 128.7 131.6 128.0 127.4 127.0 107.4 112.2
Indiana..................... 61.3 62.9 62.1 61.9 61.8 52.4 54.9
Iowa........................ 31.8 32.1 31.1 30.9 30.7 25.8 27.0
Kansas...................... 27.4 28.3 27.7 27.5 27.5 23.2 24.4
Kentucky.................... 41.5 42.2 41.3 41.0 41.0 34.8 36.5
Louisiana................... 50.1 49.9 47.2 46.9 46.8 39.4 41.2
Maine....................... 13.1 13.7 13.7 13.6 13.5 11.4 11.8
Maryland.................... 49.7 52.4 53.5 53.7 53.6 45.6 47.8
Massachusetts............... 65.0 66.7 67.4 66.2 65.5 55.2 57.7
Michigan.................... 101.9 104.7 104.1 103.4 103.0 87.0 90.7
Minnesota................... 46.9 48.8 49.0 48.9 48.9 41.5 43.6
Mississippi................. 29.2 29.7 28.8 26.6 28.5 24.3 25.5
Missouri.................... 56.4 58.2 57.3 57.0 56.7 48.0 50.4
Montana..................... 9.1 9.1 8.9 8.9 9.0 7.7 8.2
Nebraska.................... 17.8 18.1 17.7 17.6 17.5 14.8 15.5
Nevada...................... 10.7 11.9 13.5 14.2 14.5 12.8 13.9
New Hampshire............... 11.4 12.3 12.4 12.2 12.1 10.3 10.9
New Jersey.................. 84.9 87.5 86.5 85.7 85.0 72.3 75.5
New Mexico.................. 16.5 17.1 17.0 17.1 17.3 14.8 15.8
New York.................... 198.0 202.9 201.4 199.4 197.8 167.1 173.5
North Carolina.............. 70.5 73.5 74.2 74.4 74.7 63.8 67.5
North Dakota................ 7.6 7.6 7.2 7.0 6.9 5.8 6.1
Northern Mariana Islands.... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Ohio........................ 119.8 123.0 121.4 120.8 120.2 101.8 106.0
Oklahoma.................... 36.8 36.7 35.2 35.1 35.1 29.7 31.1
Oregon...................... 30.1 31.3 31.8 32.3 32.5 27.8 29.5
Pennsylvania................ 132.4 135.9 133.0 132.1 131.1 110.5 115.1
Puerto Rico................. 14.0 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 12.3 12.9
Rhode Island................ 10.9 11.2 11.2 11.1 11.0 9.2 9.5
South Carolina.............. 37.6 39.3 39.0 39.3 39.3 33.4 35.0
South Dakota................ 7.9 8.1 7.8 7.8 7.8 6.6 6.9
Tennessee................... 53.5 55.4 54.6 54.7 54.8 46.8 49.4
Texas....................... 185.8 190.7 190.2 191.5 192.7 165.5 175.5
Utah........................ 18.5 19.1 19.3 19.5 19.8 17.1 18.2
Vermont..................... 6.0 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.2 5.3 5.5
Virgin Islands.............. 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4
Virginia.................... 64.5 68.1 69.3 69.4 69.6 59.6 62.6
Washington.................. 49.7 52.6 54.5 55.4 56.1 48.2 51.0
West Virginia............... 21.4 21.3 20.1 19.9 19.8 16.7 17.4
Wisconsin................... 53.3 55.0 54.8 54.7 54.7 46.2 48.5
Wyoming..................... 5.6 5.4 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.3 4.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................... 2,700.0 2,800.0 2,800.0 2,800.0 2,800.0 2,381.0 2,500.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
--Preventing or reducing inappropriate institutional care by
providing for community-based care, home-based care, or
other forms of less intensive care; and
--Securing referral or admission for institutional care when
other forms of care are not appropriate, or providing
services to individuals in institutions.
States are given wide discretion to determine the services
to be provided and the groups that may be eligible for
services, usually low income families and individuals. In
addition to supporting social services, the law allows States
to use their allotment for staff training, administration,
planning, evaluation, and purchasing technical assistance in
developing, implementing, or administering the State social
service program. States decide what amount of the Federal
allotment to spend on services, training, and administration.
Some restrictions are placed on the use of title XX funds.
Funds cannot be used for the following: most medical care
except family planning; rehabilitation and certain
detoxification services; purchase of land, construction, or
major capital improvements; most room and board except
emergency short-term services; educational services generally
provided by public schools; most social services provided in
and by employees of hospitals, nursing homes, and prisons; cash
payments for subsistence; child day care services that do not
meet State and local standards; and wages to individuals as a
social service except wages of welfare recipients employed in
child day care.
DATA ON SERVICES, RECIPIENTS, AND EXPENDITURES
In the past, limited information has been available on the
use of title XX funds by the States. Under the Title XX Social
Services Block Grant Program, each State must submit a report
to the Secretary of Health and Human Services on the intended
use of its funds. These preexpenditure reports are only
required to include information about the types of activities
to be funded and the characteristics of the individuals to be
served.
The Family Support Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-485)
strengthened reporting requirements. That legislation required
States to submit annual reports containing detailed information
on the services actually funded and the individuals served
through title XX funds. The Department of Health and Human
Services published a final rule on November 15, 1993
implementing the reporting requirements and providing uniform
definitions of services. Although all States are now submitting
these reports, HHS has released very little summary
information.
Table 10-3 is a comparison of the primary services offered
by the States taken from a Departmental summary of expenditure
reports for fiscal years 1983 through 1995. Based on these
reports, at least 35 States in 1995 used title XX funds for
each of the following services: protective services for
children; child day care; home-based services; foster care for
children; adoption services; prevention/intervention services;
and adult protective services.
TABLE 10-3.--COMPARISON OF THE NUMBER OF STATES \1\ OFFERING SELECTED SERVICES, SELECTED FISCAL YEARS 1983-95
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Services 1983 1986 1988 1990 1992 1993 1994 1995
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adoption........................................................ 36 39 29 35 34 36 38 35
Case management \2\............................................. .... .... 26 26 33 38 34 33
Counseling...................................................... 30 38 22 21 24 23 30 22
Day care--adults................................................ 37 31 23 26 28 27 28 29
Day care--children.............................................. 50 52 51 45 47 49 45 51
Education/training.............................................. 28 43 19 17 17 19 19 18
Emergency \3\................................................... .... .... 15 16 17 21 19 14
Employment \3\.................................................. .... .... 21 23 22 23 16 19
Family planning................................................. 35 30 26 26 26 23 19 20
Foster care--adults............................................. 25 19 12 10 11 16 14 15
Foster care--children........................................... 34 31 29 30 31 37 41 41
Health-related.................................................. 26 36 22 23 30 34 27 21
Home-based \4\.................................................. 51 55 45 46 46 45 46 45
Home delivered/congregate meals................................. 23 28 20 20 22 20 18 22
Housing services................................................ 14 18 10 16 14 14 14 12
Information and referral........................................ 36 34 23 25 27 26 26 27
Legal........................................................... 17 17 17 13 16 19 14 12
Independent/transitional living services........................ 18 20 17 16 17 16 15 21
Prevention/intervention \5\..................................... 11 35 33 27 31 36 36 42
Protective--adults.............................................. 44 46 34 30 32 36 35 35
Protective--children............................................ 52 54 38 42 46 50 49 44
Residential care/treatment...................................... 19 29 21 25 29 27 31 26
Social support \6\.............................................. 2 25 27 45 37 35 37 27
Special services for children................................... 19 28 27 19 18 22 15 16
Special services for the disabled............................... 36 41 39 34 38 38 34 33
Special services for youth at risk \2\.......................... .... .... 16 14 18 17 16 19
Substance abuse services........................................ 7 13 10 11 15 12 13 12
Services for unmarried parents.................................. 10 10 13 13 14 20 15 17
Transportation.................................................. 25 33 30 25 27 30 27 29
Other \7\....................................................... 5 36 20 19 19 13 18 32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the 5 eligible insular areas.
\2\ Identified as separate service for the first time in 1987. This is not meant to imply that the service was
first available in 1987.
\3\ Identified as a separate service for the first time in 1988. This is not meant to imply that the service was
first available in 1988.
\4\ Home-based services include: homemaker, chore, home health, companionship, and home maintenance.
\5\ Prevention/intervention services include: investigation/assessment, family centered early intervention, home
evaluation and supervision, preventive and restorative.
\6\ Social support services include: socialization, recreation, camping, physical activity, living skills (money
management), day treatment, family development, social adjustment, community living services, family
management, life skills education, personal and financial management.
\7\ Other services include: social services in correctional facilities, services to Hispanics, homeless
services, Indian reservation services, and refugee minority programs.
Source: Fiscal Year Post-expenditure Reports, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Table 10-4 shows the percentage of title XX expenditures
for each category of service. The table is based on an
unpublished analysis conducted by the Congressional Research
Service and the Committee on Ways and Means of the 1995
expenditure data submitted to HHS from 50 States and the
District of Columbia. Although the majority of States used a
common form for reporting these data, some discretion was used
in categorizing expenditures on a national basis. While every
category may not be absolutely comparable in every State, the
table provides a reasonably accurate picture of the use of
title XX funds across the country.
TABLE 10-4.--USE OF TITLE XX FUNDS, BY EXPENDITURE CATEGORY, FISCAL YEAR
1995
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
Service category of funds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adoption services............................................. 1.1
Case management............................................... 4.3
Congregate meals.............................................. 0.1
Counseling services........................................... 1.3
Day care--adults.............................................. 0.8
Day care--children............................................ 14.8
Education/training services................................... 0.9
Employment services........................................... 1.1
Family planning services...................................... 1.1
Foster care services--adults.................................. 0.7
Foster care services--children................................ 10.4
Health-related services....................................... 0.6
Home-based services........................................... 10.3
Home-delivered meals.......................................... 0.6
Housing services.............................................. 0.2
Independent/transitional living services...................... 0.4
Information and referral services............................. 0.8
Legal services................................................ 0.4
Pregnancy and parenting....................................... 0.4
Prevention/intervention....................................... 6.8
Protective services--adults................................... 2.1
Protective services--children................................. 11.0
Recreation services........................................... 0.1
Residential treatment......................................... 3.9
Special services--youth at risk............................... 2.0
Special services--disabled.................................... 3.9
Substance abuse services...................................... 0.3
Transportation................................................ 0.6
Other services................................................ 5.6
Other expenditures............................................ 0.4
Administrative costs.......................................... 12.9
---------
Total..................................................... 100.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service and Committee on
Ways and Means staff from data submitted by 50 States and the District
of Columbia to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).
The table indicates that the single largest category of
spending in fiscal year 1995 was child day care, accounting for
almost 15 percent of expenditures. However, child welfare-
related services are shown in several categories (adoption
services, foster care services for children, and protective
services for children), which, when added together, represent
more than 22 percent of title XX expenditures. Home-based
services also are a significant category of expenditure,
accounting for more than 10 percent of spending. States devoted
almost 13 percent of their expenditures to administrative
costs.
TRANSFER OF FUNDS AMONG BLOCK GRANTS
Public Law 97-35, which created the title XX block grant,
gave States the authority to transfer up to 10 percent of their
annual allotment to one or any combination of the three health
care block grants and the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance
Block Grant. (The three health care block grants are: the
Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant; the Maternal
and Child Health Services Block Grant; and the Alcohol, Drug
Abuse, and Mental Health Services Block Grant.) In turn, most
other block grant statutes allow States to transfer funds to
the title XX program.
According to the fiscal year 1993 preexpenditure reports
submitted to HHS by States, two States planned to transfer
title XX funds to other programs. Florida planned to transfer
funds to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration Block Grant Program, and North Carolina planned
to transfer funds to the Maternal and Child Health Services
Block Grant and the Preventive Health and Health Services Block
Grant Programs. Sixteen States planned to transfer funds from
the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Block Grant to supplement
title XX funds. However, the Augustus F. Hawkins Human Services
Reauthorization Act of 1990 eliminated the authority to
transfer LIHEAP funds to other block grants, beginning for
fiscal year 1994.
Welfare reform legislation enacted in 1996 (Public Law 104-
193) replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children
(AFDC) Program with a block grant to States called Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The welfare reform law
authorized States to transfer up to 30 percent of their TANF
allotments to title XX or to the Child Care and Development
Block Grant (CCDBG). However, as originally enacted, Public Law
104-193 required that, for every dollar transferred to title
XX, States must transfer $2 to the CCDBG. This provision was
revised by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33)
so that States are allowed to transfer up to 10 percent of
their TANF allotment to title XX, regardless of how much, if
any, they transfer to the CCDBG. The welfare reform law
stipulates that any TANF funds transferred to title XX must be
used for families with incomes no higher than 200 percent of
the Federal poverty guidelines, and may be used to provide
vouchers for families who are not eligible for cash assistance
under TANF because of time limits, or for children who are
denied cash assistance under TANF because they were born into
families already receiving benefits for another child.
SOCIAL SERVICES IN EMPOWERMENT ZONES AND ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 made $1
billion available on an entitlement basis under title XX for
the Secretary of HHS to make grants to States for social
services in qualified empowerment zones and enterprise
communities (the legislation also provided certain tax
incentives for zones and communities). On December 21, 1994,
President Clinton selected 105 designees to participate in this
program (6 urban and 3 rural empowerment zones, 60 urban and 30
rural enterprise communities, 2 supplemental empowerment zones
and 4 enhanced enterprise communities).
An empowerment zone or enterprise community is qualified
for purposes of the title XX grant if it has been designated a
zone or community under part I, subchapter U, chapter I of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and if its strategic plan
(required in an application for designation under the Internal
Revenue Code) is qualified.
A qualified plan is a plan that: (1) includes a detailed
description of the activities proposed for the area that are to
be funded with the grant; (2) contains a commitment that the
funds provided will not be used to supplant Federal or non-
Federal funds for services and activities which promote the
purposes of the grant; (3) to the extent a State does not use
the funds on certain program options, explains the reasons why
not; and (4) explains how the plan was developed in cooperation
with the local government or governments with jurisdiction over
the zone or community.
With respect to each empowerment zone, the Secretary was
required to make one grant ($50 million if urban, $20 million
if rural) to each State in which the zone lies on the date of
its designation, and a second grant of the same amount on the
first day of the following fiscal year. With respect to each
enterprise community, the Secretary made one grant of up to $3
million to each State in which the community lies on the date
of its designation. States have up to 10 years from the date of
their designation in which to expend these additional title XX
funds, although they must be obligated within the first 2
years.
States, in conjunction with the local governments with
jurisdiction over the zone or community, have broad discretion
in the use of grant funds. Funds must be used for social
services directed at three goals of the basic title XX grant
program: achieving or maintaining economic self-support to
prevent, reduce or eliminate dependency; achieving or
maintaining self-sufficiency, including reduction or prevention
of dependency; or preventing or remedying neglect, abuse, or
exploitation of children and adults unable to protect their own
interests, or preserving, rehabilitating or reuniting families.
The funds also must be used in accordance with the strategic
plan and on activities that benefit residents of the zone or
community.
Despite the similar purposes for which funds may be used,
the range of allowable services is narrower in some respects,
and broader in others, under the title XX empowerment zone
provisions relative to the basic title XX program. For example,
the basic title XX program includes a broader range of purposes
than those outlined above for the empowerment zone program. On
the other hand, certain restrictions of the basic title XX
program (e.g., restrictions that limit drug treatment services
to initial detoxification, and restrictions on the use of funds
for the payment of wages) are waived under the empowerment zone
program, in order to carry out certain specified program
options.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Social services for recipients of public aid were not
funded under the original Social Security Act of 1935, although
it was later argued that cash alone would not sufficiently
address the needs of the poor. State social services
expenditures for welfare recipients became eligible for 50
percent Federal funding in 1956, but many States chose not to
participate. In 1962, States were given additional incentive to
provide social services, especially preventive and
rehabilitative services, to poor families when Congress
increased the Federal matching rate to 75 percent. The 1962
amendments also expanded eligibility for social services to
both former and potential welfare recipients. No limit was
placed on the Federal expenditure level (Spar, 1981).
In 1967, the Social Security Act again was amended to
authorize funding for so-called ``hard'' social services, such
as job training and child care, in a more aggressive effort to
move people from welfare to work. The new legislation also
required States to establish a single organizational unit in
the State agency responsible for administering social services,
and provided an enhanced match of 85 percent for social
services provided during the first year after the law took
effect.
Administration of the Federal social services program was
formally separated from administration of the Federal Cash
Assistance Program in 1967, as part of a reorganization within
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. In 1972,
States were required by regulation to separate the
administration of cash assistance and social services.
Federal spending for social services increased from $281.6
million in fiscal year 1967 to $1.688 billion in fiscal year
1972, prompting legislation (Public Law 92-512) which placed a
ceiling on Federal expenditures for social services of $2.5
billion and directed that funds be divided among States
according to their relative populations. The law also limited
to 10 percent the amount of funds that could be spent on
services to former or potential welfare recipients.
Legislation signed into law on January 4, 1975, established
title XX of the Social Security Act. Under title XX, the $2.5
billion ceiling on Federal social services expenditures was
retained, along with the population-based allocation formula.
The legislation was designed to give maximum flexibility to the
States in designing their social services programs, but
included public participation planning requirements,
limitations on the use of funds for certain activities, and
certain eligibility requirements.
By fiscal year 1981, the entitlement ceiling for the title
XX social services program was $2.9 billion. An additional
$16.1 million was available apart from title XX for social
services expenditures by the territories, and $75 million was
available to the States for staff training costs related to
title XX activities, bringing the total for all Federal social
services expenditures to $2.991 billion. Under Public Law 96-
272, enacted in 1980, the title XX entitlement ceiling was
scheduled to increase to $3 billion for fiscal year 1982, and
by $100 million a year until it reached $3.3 billion in fiscal
year 1985.
However, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of
1981 (Public Law 97-35) amended title XX to establish a block
grant, under which funding for social services and for staff
training for those providing social services were combined. The
legislation also reduced the title XX entitlement ceiling to
$2.4 billion for fiscal year 1982 and provided for increases to
$2.45 billion for fiscal year 1983, $2.5 billion for fiscal
year 1984, $2.6 billion for fiscal year 1985 and $2.7 billion
for fiscal year 1986 and years thereafter. The law also
eliminated Federal mandates regarding priority recipients, and
eliminated provisions relating to the targeting of services to
low-income individuals and families.
The emergency jobs bill (Public Law 98-8), enacted in March
1983, appropriated an additional $225 million for the title XX
block grant for fiscal years 1983-84. These additional funds
were allocated to the States on the basis of a formula intended
to respond to the needs of the unemployed served by the jobs
bill. Half of the funds were allocated on the basis of
population; one-third based on the number of unemployed
individuals in the State; and one-sixth among States with an
average unadjusted unemployment rate from June 1982 through
November 1982 of 9.4 percent or higher. In October 1983, as
part of legislation to extend the Federal Supplemental
Compensation Program (Public Law 98-135), the title XX ceiling
was increased by $200 million for fiscal year 1984 to $2.7
billion and by $100 million for fiscal year 1985 to $2.8
billion.
Because of Congressional concern about reports of child
sexual abuse in day care centers, a $25 million increase in
title XX funding for fiscal year 1985 was appropriated for use
by the States in providing training of child day care staff,
State licensing and enforcement officials, and the parents of
children in child day care. The earmarked funds were included
in the continuing resolution for fiscal year 1985 (Public Law
98-473). States were required to have in effect by September
30, 1985, procedures for screening and conducting background
and criminal history checks of child care staff, or one-half of
the day care training allotment was to be deducted from the
regular State title XX allocation in fiscal year 1986 or 1987.
According to HHS, only six States enacted such procedures by
the required date. As required by Public Law 98-473, in January
1985, the Secretary of HHS distributed to States a Model Child
Care Standards Act that addressed staff training and
supervision, employment history checks, and parent visitation.
The 1987 Budget Reconciliation Act (Public Law 100-203)
included a $50 million increase in the title XX entitlement
ceiling for fiscal year 1988, but these funds were not
appropriated.
The Medicare and Medicaid Patient and Program Protection
Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-93) amended title XX to exclude
individuals and entities that committed acts of fraud or abuse
under the Medicaid, Medicare, Maternal and Child Health, or the
title XX programs from receiving title XX funds.
OBRA 1989 (Public Law 101-239) included a permanent $100
million increase in the title XX entitlement ceiling to $2.8
billion, beginning for fiscal year 1990.
OBRA 1993 (Public Law 103-66) made $1 billion available to
states under title XX for those places designated as qualified
empowerment zones or enterprise communities (see above).
Although $2.8 billion was the permanently authorized
entitlement ceiling at the time, Congress appropriated only
$2.381 billion for title XX in fiscal year 1996 (Public Law
104-134). The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act (Public Law 104-193) subsequently set the
annual entitlement ceiling for title XX at $2.38 billion in
each of fiscal years 1997-2002. Under this legislation, the
entitlement ceiling is scheduled to return to the permanent
level of $2.8 billion in fiscal year 2003. Despite the newly
established ceiling of $2.38 billion, Congress appropriated
$2.5 billion for title XX in fiscal year 1997 (Public Law 104-
208).
REFERENCE
Spar, K. (1981). Title XX of the Social Security Act: Program
description, current issues (81-58 EPW). Washington,
DC: Congressional Research Service.