Means-tested programs provide cash and services to people whose income and other financial assets fall below a certain level. Individuals in need must meet certain requirements to receive benefits. Along with monetary restrictions, means-tested programs may also include nonfinancial categories of eligibility such as pregnant women, children, parents with dependent children, individuals with disabilities, and the aged. Although state and local entities administer some programs, the majority of and most comprehensive means-tested programs come from the federal government. The initiation and management of these programs fall under numerous federal departments: Health and Human Services (HHS), Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Labor, Education, and Treasury.

Among the most well-known means-tested programs are Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF); food stamps; Supplemental Security Income (SSI); Medicaid; public housing or Section 8; Women, Infants & Children (WIC); school lunches; job training; home energy assistance; Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC); and special Social Service Block Grants (SSBG). Between 50 and 100 means-tested programs exist on the federal, state, and local levels. Program benefits include income maintenance, food, health care, rent and mortgage payments, shelter, child care, utility payments, tax credits, legal services, and more. An individual or family may receive assistance from multiple programs at the same time. For example, a family may receive TANF, food stamps, and Medicaid and additionally live in public housing, take advantage of a school lunch program, and receive WIC services. Likewise, a single individual may participate in a job training program, receive food stamps, and qualify for the EITC.

Although there are numerous means-tested programs, the rules of eligibility are not uniform and differ according to the regulatory mandates of the governmental agencies from which they emanate. As a result, accessing benefits from these programs often becomes complicated, technical, redundant, and bewildering. Likewise, administration of these programs can be cumbersome, unwieldy, and complex. Most variations in eligibility criteria center around the calculation of income and valuation of assets. In determining who meets the test of need, programmatic variables include what assets to count or exclude in calculations, what amount of assets is acceptable, what income is counted or disregarded, what level of income or assets causes ineligibility, whose income is counted, and whether household or individual finances are the determining factor.

Means-tested programs lie at the core of our social welfare system. Directed at helping the poor and those with low income, they seek to address the ills of poverty. As with most programs designated for the poor, they are highly debated and somewhat controversial. Effectiveness, price, value promotion, and perceived recipient characteristics are all part of the discourse. Many see some programs for the poor as social problems themselves. The issue of poverty and its remedy, as with other social problems, is subject to different understandings and theories of intervention. With means-tested programs, disagreements arise as to what level benefits should be set at, what types of benefits should be advanced, how the benefits should be offered, and who should be allowed to apply. A prime consideration with these programs, as with all other components of the social welfare system, is the cost. How expensive will the program be and what effect will it have on federal, state, and local budgets? Could the monies be spent better in other ways or on other problems? Many citizens, though sympathetic to the plight of the poor, are apprehensive about what they perceive as bloated and inefficient government bureaucracies that contribute to higher taxes.

Another issue is the long-range effectiveness of these programs in combating poverty. Are the benefits too generous? Do they foster dependence? Do they breed a culture of deviance? At the other end of the spectrum are those who see these programs as stigmatizing and thus worry about hindering full participation by all those in need. An impersonal and bureaucratic service delivery system also concerns present and future beneficiaries by its lack of access and humane conveyance of benefits. Most of the debate about means-testing programs or the social safety net usually focuses on what most people view as welfare: TANF. Although it is a large component of the social welfare system, it is but one of many interrelated initiatives. Means-tested programs have a wide range and function among the institutional measures designed to assist the economically disadvantaged.

Bibliography:

1) Dolgoff, Ralph and Donald Feldstein. 2006. Understanding Social Welfare. 7th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

2) Moffitt, Robert A., ed. 2003. Means Tested Transfer Payments in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

3) Trattner, Walter I. 1999. From Poor Law to Welfare State: A History of Social Welfare in America. 6th ed. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Free term papers are not written to satisfy your specific instructions. You can use our professional writing services to buy a custom written research paper, term paper, or essay on Argumentative Topics at affordable price. CustomTermPapers is the best solution for those who seek help in writing term papers, essays, and research papers related to Argumentative Topics and other relevant topics.