Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "565374850",
    "label": "TANF [Temporary Assistance for Needy Families] - High Performance Bonus - Final Rule [binder] [1]",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565374850"
}

{
    "id": "565374850",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565374850",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "TANF [Temporary Assistance for Needy Families] - High Performance Bonus - Final Rule [binder] [1]",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565374850",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
        "Margy Waller's Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025-001.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025-001.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025-001.jpg",
    "imageCount": 122,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/565374850",
    "naId": 565374850,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "otherTitles": [
        "7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025"
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 70,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-dpc/7367483/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025/7367483-20200317S-023-008-2025-070.jpg",
    "mediaId": "56bc3836dd35f3ab",
    "ocrText": "Andrea Kane\n06/30/2000 07:42 PM\nRecord Type:\nRecord\nTo:\[email protected] @ inet\nCC:\nLauren Wittenberg/OMB/EOP@EOP. Margy Waller/OPD/EOP@EOP, Zoe M.\nNeuberger/OMB/EOP@EOP\nSubject: HPB questions\nAndrea Kane\nWe had a helpful call w/ Howard and Ann to discuss family formation. Here are some follow-up questions:\n1. It looks like the ACS data does have the potential to provide data on a broader group of families then\nmarried couples, by also including children living with a parent and the unmarried partner of the parent\n(the unmarried partner may or may not be the child's parent). Please assess the feasibility of expanding\nheed ASPE\nthe NPRM measure to include this broader group of families from the ACF data, and identify the pros and\ncons of doing so. What do we know from existing Census or other data on how much this expanded\ndefinition would change the proportion of children captured (for example, by 10%, 30% or 50%)? How\ndifferent would this look if this broader definition were applied to families under 200% of poverty or all\nfamilies?\n2. Please assess the feasibility, advisability, and impact of revising the current measure, or a similar\nwill back ext. you. to\nmeasure, to reflect the proportion of families with children that include two-married parents (or some\nbroader definition) vs the proportion of children living in such families.\nWe're interested in seeing how much the proportion of children living in married couple families under ENeed\n3. Please share the most recent data estimates that would be used to calculate the NPRM measure.\nAspe\n200% of poverty actually changes from year to year (nationally and in a few states), as well as how much\nthe proportion of all children living in such families changes.\n4. Ignoring the issue of time lag for now, please confirm whether, and why, state by state teen pregnancy\ndata is not considered reliable enough to give bonuses on.\n5. Please explore the feasibility of a measure based on the proportion of TANF families or adults who are\ncurrently married. It sounds like this could be pulled from existing TANF data elements. Please share\nwhat the latest data would show on this potential measure.\n-will not include 98/99 separate rams state all\nsenate\nand is states 2 in have"
}