Research & Data > Research Reports > 6 > 29c

1986 Study of the Characteristics of State General Assistance Programs

Executive Summary

This report compares Washington's General Assistance­Unemployable (GA-U) program with general assistance programs in other states. The GA-U program provides financial as­sistance and medical treatment to people with medically verifiable incapacities which last at least 60 days and which prevent employment.

The report examines the design of general assistance pro­grams in other states, general assistance caseload trends, and factors predicting participation in the federally-funded Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Disability program.

The SSI-Disability program provides cash and medical bene­fits to people with disabilities that are expected to pre­vent work for at least 12 months or to cause death. Most states try to move as many general assistance recipients as possible to the SSI-Disability program to save state funds and provide disabled residents with more generous benefits.


Findings on General Assistance Program Design:

• Thirty-six states had general assistance programs in all or virtually all jurisdictions. The remain­ing states either had no general assistance pro­grams or had programs provided by local governments at local option.
• General assistance programs can be classified into four groups, by type of eligibility requirement:
  1. Income-Based Programs. A needs test and coop­eration with work requirements, if applicable, are the only eligibility criteria (8 states).
  2. Categorical Programs. Recipients must fall into one of several categories of eligible individual in addition to meeting a needs test (7 states). Categories may include incapacitated adults, adults over a set age (40 to 60), children not eligible for AFDC, and so on. Some of these states offer short-term assistance to employable recipients.
  3. Incapacity-Based Programs. Similar to categori­cal programs, except that over 90 percent of all cases are eligible due to incapacity (8 states). Washington's GA-U program is in this group.
  4. Mixed Programs. Four states had programs that varied by county or municipality in ways that made categorization difficult. However, some program was available in all jurisdictions within those states.
• General Assistance payments were higher in Washington State than anywhere else in the United States, with the exception of Suffolk County, New York.
• One state -- Wisconsin -- adopted a 60 day residen­cy requirement with qualifications designed to overcome Supreme Court challenges. State officials expected the limit to be overturned in court when challenged.
• States relied on a number of methods for moving disabled general assistance recipients to the SSI­Disability program, including:
  1. Specialized general assistance staffs such as Washington's incapacity specialists (Rhode Island, Utah, Washington) ;
  2. Specialized staffs for SSI referral (Oregon and Pennsylvania);
  3. Specialized consultants and trainers for regular eligibility staffs (Michigan and New York);
  4. Contingency fees for attorneys representing SSI applicants (Illinois, Oregon, and Washington), and;
  5. Contracts with legal services organizations representing SSI applicants (Maryland, Massa­chusetts, Montana, and New York).

Findings on General Assistance Caseloads:

• Caseloads per 1,000 residents were generally higher in states with income-based and categorical programs than in states with incapacity-based programs. Incapacity­based programs that treated alcohol and drug addiction as qualifying incapacities had higher caseloads than those that did not.
• Washington's caseload per 1,000 residents has been rising to levels observed in other states treating drug and alcohol addiction as qualifying incapacities.
• Washington's SSI-Disability caseload per 1,000 resi­dents dropped by 15 percent between December 1978 and December 1982. This reduction, associated with feder­ally-mandated Continuing Disability Reviews, was the third largest experienced by any state. Incapacity­based general assistance programs grew faster in states with large SSI-Disability cutbacks than in states with milder SSI reductions.

Findings on October 1986 SSI-Disability Caseloads :

• Almost 80 percent of the variation in state SSI­Disability caseloads per 1,000 residents was explained by differences in the size of state disabled popula­tions and the size of SSI payments made to disabled recipients living at home.
• Washington State's SSI-Disability caseload per 1,000 residents was lower than the national average, ranking 29th out of the 50 states. However, Washington also had fewer residents with disabilities preventing work than the national average. Washington's SSI-Disabili­ty caseload was very close to that predicted from the size of its disabled population and SSI payment stan­dard.
• Only two states -- Louisiana and Mississippi -- had SSI-Disability caseloads significantly higher than predicted. Neither state had a general assistance program.
• None of the states with special programs to move general assistance recipients to the SSI program had SSI-Disability caseloads that were significantly higher than predicted. Only New York, New Mexico, and possibly Illinois, had SSI-Disability caseloads even moderately higher than expected.
• The difference between Washington's GA-U payment standard and SSI-Disability payment was $30 to $50 per month, depending on location. The average difference nationwide was $188 per month for states whose general assistance payment standards were known. However, the difference between general assistance and SSI payment standards did not have a statistically measurable impact on SSI-Disability part

Modified: Friday May 19 2006

For more ways to get in touch with the Department of Social and Health Services, go to the DSHS Contact Information Web page. Technical Site Comments: DSHS Webmaster. Copyright 2004 Washington State Department of Social and Health Services.