The “child only” TANF grant is one of the few sources of cash assistance for kinship families: those relatives who take in children who cannot remain with parents, thus bypassing the Foster Care system, relieving the state of the much greater expense—and, for local departments of social services, the case-loads—of caring for these children in foster care

In Virginia, over 55,000 children live with a relative with no parent present. 133,887 children live with grandparents; of these, 67,534 grandparents are householders financially responsible for grandchildren who live with them. While 41,128 of these grandparents are in the workforce, 9,927 are in poverty; 16,241 have a disability. Federal ACF figures indicate that child-only TANF supported only 13,359 of these children in Virginia in 2018. Grandparents who have retired and live on fixed incomes are in danger of depleting the resources they need as they age. The amount of the child-only TANF grant is not enough to cover the costs of raising a child, no matter what locality one lives in; but every little bit helps.

While the intent behind the groupings, created in the 1970’s, seems logical, it also creates inequities: the per-child amount of TANF is so small-- even with the 2019 increase-- that it barely makes a dent in a family’s budget. Every dollar a kinship family receives -- whether they receive the Group II slightly under $200 a month per child, or the Group III small amount more than that--goes to help these relatives meet the considerable needs of these children. There is not such a significant difference between the amounts per child in Group II vs Group III to justify maintaining them-- especially when the amounts in either grouping are so negligible.

Additionally, the administrative costs to determine what the current cost of living is in the localities, or which localities should be moved to another grouping, only takes funds away from those in need.

Under the existing regulations, one reason a locality may request to move into a lower grouping is if it perceives families are moving to their locality to qualify for a higher monthly payment. It is doubtful many kinship families are doing this -- or that it would even be logical to do so, since their increased costs would be higher than the few additional dollars they'd gain in such a move if they moved to a higher-cost-of-living locality -- but nonetheless, eliminating the groupings would also eliminate any such incentive.

A single statewide standard would also be consistent with nearly all major public benefits and health programs such as SNAP, Medicaid, and WIC, which pay the same even though the cost of food and other necessities vary among localities -- and is one measure of the cost of living.