---
kind: "section"
citation: "45 C.F.R. § 261.40"
title: "45"
number: "261.40"
heading: "Is there a way for a State to reduce the work participation rates?"
url: "https://uscodex.org/cfr/45/261.40"
---

# §261.40. Is there a way for a State to reduce the work participation rates?

- (a)
  - (1) If the average monthly number of cases receiving assistance, including assistance under a separate State program (as provided at [§ 261.42(b)](/cfr/45/261.42.md?p=b)), in a State in the preceding fiscal year was lower than the average monthly number of cases that received assistance, including assistance under a separate State program in that State in FY 2005, the minimum overall participation rate the State must meet for the fiscal year (as provided at [§ 261.21](/cfr/45/261.21.md)) decreases by the number of percentage points the prior-year caseload fell in comparison to the FY 2005 caseload.
  - (2) The minimum two-parent participation rate the State must meet for the fiscal year (as provided at [§ 261.23](/cfr/45/261.23.md)) decreases, at State option, by either:
    - (i) The number of percentage points the prior-year two-parent caseload, including two-parent cases receiving assistance under a separate State program (as provided at [§ 261.42(b)](/cfr/45/261.42.md?p=b)), fell in comparison to the FY 2005 two-parent caseload, including two-parent cases receiving assistance under a separate State program; or
    - (ii) The number of percentage points the prior-year overall caseload, including assistance under a separate State program (as provided at [§ 261.42(b)](/cfr/45/261.42.md?p=b)), fell in comparison to the FY 2005 overall caseload, including cases receiving assistance under a separate State program.
  - (3) For the credit calculation, we will refer to the fiscal year that precedes the fiscal year to which the credit applies as the “comparison year.”
- (b)
  - (1) The calculations in [paragraph (a)](#a) of this section must disregard caseload reductions due to requirements of Federal law and to changes that a State has made in its eligibility criteria in comparison to its criteria in effect in FY 2005.
  - (2) At State option, the calculation may offset the disregard of caseload reductions in [paragraph (b)(1)](#b-1) of this section by changes in eligibility criteria that increase caseloads.
- (c)
  - (1) To establish the caseload base for FY 2005 and to determine the comparison-year caseload, we will use the combined TANF and Separate State Program caseload figures reported on the Form ACF-199, TANF Data Report, and Form ACF-209, SSP-MOE Data Report, respectively.
  - (2) To qualify for a caseload reduction, a State must have reported monthly caseload information, including cases in separate State programs, for FY 2005 and the comparison year for cases receiving assistance as defined at [§ 261.43](/cfr/45/261.43.md).
- (d)
  - (1) A State may correct erroneous data or submit accurate data to adjust program data or to include unduplicated cases within the fiscal year.
  - (2) We will adjust both the FY 2005 baseline and the comparison-year caseload information, as appropriate, based on these State submissions.
- (e) We refer to the number of percentage points by which a caseload falls, disregarding the cases described in [paragraph (b)](#b) of this section, as a caseload reduction credit.

## Notes

### Source

Source: 73 FR 6824, Feb. 5, 2008, unless otherwise noted.

### Authority

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 601, 602, 607, and 609; Pub. L. 109-171.

### Source

Source: 64 FR 17884, Apr. 12, 1999, unless otherwise noted.