2024: A Year of Unique Opportunities to Change Lives and Help Our Neighbors

2024: A Year of Unique Opportunities to Change Lives and Help Our Neighbors

Safety-net reform discussion in progress Georgia Promise Scholarship advocates Raising Highly Capable Kids program session Collaborative community safety planning Economic empowerment through BETTER WORK Educational opportunity supporters in action Community leaders addressing employment barriers Policy reform meeting on public safety Family stability and well-being empowerment Networking for local job opportunities

2024: A Year of Unique Opportunities to Change Lives and Help Our Neighbors

Key Points

  • Building off our success in 2023, the new year presents unique opportunities to build better lives for our neighbors through the power of work, education, family, and safer communities.

  • Our goal is for 2024 to be the year that safety-net reform takes hold in states across the country, while educational freedom becomes a reality at home here in Georgia as Promise Scholarships finally become a reality.
  • We hope this year will also bring safer communities in big and small cities alike through key public safety reforms.

One word that often comes to mind at the beginning of a new year is “hope.” As 2024 dawns, the Georgia Center for Opportunity (GCO) is working hard to help everyone — especially the poor and disadvantaged — experience the wonder of hope by envisioning a better future for themselves and their loved ones. They can live better. They can become better.

Time and time again, government has proven that it can’t help people escape systemic, generational poverty. While the safety net is important, viewing it as a way of life saps people of their humanity and unfairly limits their potential. The poor deserve to know that poverty is escapable, not just survivable. And they deserve a helping hand to escape.

These solutions come from homes, neighborhoods, and local communities. This is where aspirations and dreams are born. No handout can substitute for this.

With this vision in mind, we will be dedicating 2024 to making positive changes in a few key areas that greatly affect the quality and trajectory of life for those who are most vulnerable. We built significant momentum last year on a range of issues, and that’s setting the stage for even bigger impact this year.

Here’s some of what’s on tap for us in the new year.

Safety-net reform will yield new opportunities

We’re taking on the safety-net system by advancing reforms in Congress, Georgia, and states across the country to create a more humane system that rewards work and creates a bridge to self-sufficiency.

We should look to Utah as an example of a state in the nation that is leading the way on safety-net reforms. The Beehive State’s One Door policy has integrated human services with workforce services and provides citizens with a single program to work through. Welfare becomes work support, and people have a clear path to get the help they need while receiving education, training, and other support to find employment.

This year, working with our Alliance for Opportunity partnership as a platform, we are advancing federal legislation to allow all states to adopt the One Door model—something that federal law currently prohibits. In Georgia, we are working with state policymakers to create a One Door task force so that our state is prepared to implement more holistic safety-net policies, especially when federal law is no longer a barrier. 

On a similar front, we are working to educate lawmakers and the public on the problem of benefits cliffs. Put simply, benefits cliffs are when an individual, family, or household loses more in net income and benefits from governmental assistance programs than it gains from additional earnings. This net loss is a perverse incentive that undermines the natural desire to earn more income. Thanks to GCO’s original research, we are crafting program-specific solutions to reduce benefits cliffs in food stamps/SNAP and childcare assistance. 

These solutions will build off the momentum created in states like Missouri, which became the first last year to address public assistance provisions, breaking ground in reforming safety-net benefits.

Safety-net programs have a role in helping the most vulnerable in our society. Ultimately, reforms are not about making government more efficient. They are about ensuring safety-net progams serve as a bridge, not a barrier, to better opportunities and futures.

 

Expanding educational opportunity will benefit all students

Could 2024 be the year that—finally—education opportunity is extended to all of Georgia’s students, not just a privileged few?

Our hope is the answer is yes. We’re fighting to give every child in Georgia access to a quality education as the Georgia Promise Scholarship bill comes back for a final vote in the recently convened 2024 legislative session. Promise Scholarships would give parents $6,500 per student per year to find the right education option for their kids. The bill cleared the state Senate in 2023 but stalled in the House. 

Promise Scholarships are the cornerstone of our education agenda in 2024, but they are not the only priority. We are also encouraging lawmakers to expand the ceiling on the tax-credit scholarship, to free up families to transfer students between public schools within districts and in separate districts entirely, and make key improvements to charter school laws.

It’s well past time Georgia caught up with the rapidly growing list of other forward-thinking states that are expanding educational opportunity to all.

 

Support for parents will strengthen families

This year is an exciting phase for our Raising Highly Capable Kids (RHCK) program, which we launched in 2023 to give communities a better resource for nurturing family stability and well-being.   

RHCK is a 13-week evidence-based parenting program designed to build stronger families by empowering parents with the confidence, tools, and skills they need to raise healthy, caring, and responsible children.

A driving factor of long-term poverty is a lack of connection and supportive relationships, especially at home. That’s why we are prioritizing RHCK. At its heart is a curriculum that teaches the building blocks of healthy child development. In 2024, we’re working with partners and schools to expand RHCK. We believe the program will be a powerful way to give parents, caregivers, and educators tools and support to improve kids’ academic achievement, relationships, and overall success in life.

In 2024, the Georgia Center for Opportunity spearheads transformative initiatives, ranging from safety-net reforms and educational advancements to family support and community safety, all geared towards breaking the cycle of poverty and fostering a brighter, more empowered future for individuals and families.

In 2024, the Georgia Center for Opportunity spearheads transformative initiatives, ranging from safety-net reforms and educational advancements to family support and community safety, all geared towards breaking the cycle of poverty and fostering a brighter, more empowered future for individuals and families.

Key reforms will lead to safer communities

Community violence is another barrier to economic opportunity and healthy communities. Individuals and families can only truly thrive when neighborhoods and streets are safe. 

Through community collaborations with law enforcement, policymakers, and community leaders, we’ll help Georgia cities like Atlanta and Columbus reverse the tide of rising violence that has been damaging the family bonds, work opportunities, and educational pathways needed to break the cycle of poverty.

In Columbus, the Columbus Empowerment Network is leading to crime reductions, and we expect more local policy reforms to be adopted in 2024. While much of the focus on increasing crime rates centers on large metro areas, smaller cities like Columbus are still important and have seen concerning upticks in crime.

Our team is also active in moving forward policy in other states, including California, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Washington State, and Kentucky. In Louisville, for example, our work has helped shape an omnibus crime solution bill, which is expected to pass their state House this year. Louisville is important as a national example because it’s one of the most challenging public safety environments in the country, and solutions that work in this city have a good probability of working elsewhere—including Georgia. 

 

Breaking down employment barriers will transform generations

For those who struggle in poverty, an upwardly mobile job is often the first and best step toward self-sufficiency. That’s why we will continue to work through our BETTER WORK initiative in Gwinnett County and Columbus to build our local support systems to empower men and women to find work. We’ll also cultivate an environment of community safety where business and job opportunities abound.

In Columbus, a new focus for 2024 will be on partnering with local leaders and law enforcement to keep crime from driving away businesses and job opportunities. Meanwhile in Gwinnett, we’re laser focused on building out our network of employer partners, nonprofits, schools, and other community organizations to provide a bridge to a better life for the disadvantaged. And overall, we will continue our partnership with Jobs for Life as well as our mentor program.

The cost of Christmas is up, especially for the poor

The cost of Christmas is up, especially for the poor

The cost of gifts, meals, and trips to see family and friends have gone up, inflation, debt, low-income

The cost of Christmas is up, especially for the poor

Key Points

  • The blog underscores the significant impact of inflation on Christmas expenses, encompassing gifts, meals, and travel, affecting Americans, particularly those from lower economic classes, hindering their enjoyment of the holiday’s relational aspects.
  • Emphasizing a recent inflation surge due to pandemic-related factors, the post characterizes it as an “inflation tax” disproportionately affecting the poorest Americans, creating challenges in accessing opportunities crucial for a meaningful life.
  • Supported by statistical evidence, the blog reveals the financial hardships caused by inflation, with the average American household spending $11,434 more annually since January 2021, particularly impacting the poor who face significant debt obstacles. 

This year, inflation is threatening to put a dent in Christmas festivities. The cost of gifts, meals, and trips to see family and friends have gone up, to name a few common items. And Americans are noticing.

The pinch is particularly painful for those from the lower classes. Putting aside the greater cost of material items, a more expensive holiday means that those who are struggling will have a more challenging time enjoying the relational aspects of the holiday, including being with family while celebrating treasured traditions and connecting around meals.

What’s clear from these data points is that America’s recent burst of high inflation—which soared to a 40-year high in the aftermath of pandemic-related shutdowns, supply chain disruptions, and government stimulus overspending—has driven up the cost of goods and services and inflicted an “inflation tax” that disproportionately hits the poorest Americans the hardest.

At the Georgia Center for Opportunity, our mission is built around promoting human flourishing—especially for those on the margins. The high cost of Christmas this year matters because it reflects the reality that high inflation reduces people’s ability to access the opportunities that shape a meaningful life.

 

By the numbers: Inflation’s effect on household budgets

Just how bad is it this year? Nationally, a recent report found that the average American household now spends $11,434 more annually to maintain the same standard of living they enjoyed in January 2021. Worse, they’re using credit cards to finance everyday purchases—running up debt and leaving very little extra for the holidays. 

For the poor, debt can become an insurmountable obstacle to moving up the economic ladder. Low-income households spend around 26% of their income each month on debt, compared to around 4% for wealthy households (even though wealthy households carry far more debt on average).

 On a personal level, this decreased purchasing power means that more families teetering on the economic edge are struggling to put food on the table during the normal year—let alone for special meals around the holidays. A recent survey found that 50% of Americans say Santa will be less generous this Christmas due to inflation—and that one in three won’t be getting presents this year.

Even for those who plan to spend money this holiday season, 28% say it will be less than last year. And nearly 20% will apply for new credit cards to finance their purchases—despite the fact that nearly 25% still carry holiday debt from last year.

So how expensive are traditional items that Americans associate with the holidays in 2023? PNC Bank’s Christmas Price Index (CPI) shows the overall cost for Christmas festivities has gone up nearly 20% since 2021. For example, Christmas breakfast classics like bacon and eggs are up 24% and 41%, respectively, since 2021, while Christmas dinner pork chops are up 20%.

Gas prices are up 55% over the same time period, making transportation to and from work even more difficult for the poor. Meanwhile, the price to buy a used car has jumped by 22%.

Even home energy costs have risen so much that some families must decide between heating their homes and buying presents. Since September 2021, the cost to heat homes and keep lights on has risen 20% for electricity and 18% for gas.



It is a complex problem caused by a myriad of systems and choices but the implications are substantial. Inflation is having a catastrophic impact on those living in poverty. We discuss what is causing it and what we must do to address it.

It is a complex problem caused by a myriad of systems and choices but the implications are substantial. Inflation is having a catastrophic impact on those living in poverty. We discuss what is causing it and what we must do to address it.

Finding joy in the season

A recent Financial Times–Michigan Ross poll found that 82% of Americans say that price increases are their biggest source of financial stress. So even as the jobless rate improves and inflation cools, many consumers simply aren’t feeling it. And this translates into pessimism about the economy as we move into the 2023 holiday shopping season.

It doesn’t have to be that way. During the holiday season, the GCO message of giving hope and opportunity to those who most need it couldn’t be more needed. It’s painful to realize how much many of our neighbors are struggling with the high cost of inflation. But it’s a great invitation for communities to come together and offer support in ways the government can’t.

We can make the biggest difference by starting small and close to home.

Missouri is first state to pass law addressing benefits cliffs

Missouri is first state to pass law addressing benefits cliffs

Missouri lawmakers<br />
Senate Bill 82<br />
public assistance provisions<br />
benefits cliffs<br />
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)<br />
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)<br />
child care subsidy programs<br />
transitional benefits program<br />
poverty level<br />
state median family income<br />
welfare programs<br />
fiscal note<br />
Medicaid<br />
self-sufficiency<br />
workforce solutions<br />
government assistance<br />
economic opportunity<br />
dependence on the government<br />
benefits cliff phenomenon<br />
social and economic opportunity

Missouri is first state to pass law addressing benefits cliffs

Key Points

  • Missouri Leads the Way: The enactment of Senate Bill 82 establishes Missouri as the first state in the nation to address public assistance provisions, breaking ground in reforming safety-net benefits and combating the cycle of dependence on government support.

  • Benefits Cliff Challenge: The legislation acknowledges the pervasive issue of benefits cliffs, where individuals and families face a sudden loss of government assistance as their income increases. The law aims to mitigate this challenge by introducing transitional benefits programs in TANF, SNAP, and childcare subsidy programs.

  • Incomplete Solution: While the Missouri law is a commendable first step, there are concerns about its comprehensive effectiveness. The legislation, utilizing new funds, creates a supplemental program to ease the loss of benefits but doesn’t address underlying program variables contributing to benefits cliffs. Additionally, potential underfunding and the absence of Medicaid in the scope raise questions about the long-term sustainability and impact of the solution.

Missouri lawmakers recently took an important step toward helping poor and working-class residents escape safety-net benefits cliffs and experience the dignity and opportunity of work. By enacting Senate Bill 82, the Show Me State is now the first in the nation to address public assistance provisions that often entrap program participants by punishing work and perpetuating dependence on the government.

It’s no secret that many Americans rely on government assistance programs to make ends meet. But they often get caught in a Catch-22 situation—a benefits cliff—which disincentivizes them from looking for more meaningful work and gaining independence.

These benefits cliffs occur when an individual, family, or household experiences a sudden, steep loss of government assistance as income increases. Perversely, this net loss undermines the natural desire to earn more income because it takes a huge pay bump to overcome the cliff. The unintended consequences of a benefits cliff can be devastating—trapping individuals and families in a cycle of poverty.

 

How the new law works

This new Missouri law modifies benefits cliffs to enable residents to more easily earn additional income and experience the fulfillment and belonging that comes with social and economic opportunity. It does so by easing the loss of benefits in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and child care subsidy programs for families that lose income eligibility for these programs.

Specifically, this law establishes a transitional benefits program for TANF and SNAP—subject to funding from the state legislature—to help the transition off of benefits and reduce the impact of the program cliffs. The benefit is stepped down on a one-to-one basis as income increases.

It also helps to alleviate the loss of benefits from the child care subsidy program by creating a transitional benefits program using a sliding scale that steps down transitional benefits until the household reaches 300 percent of the poverty level or 85 percent of the state median family income.

When funded and implemented, this law will positively impact all individuals and families on the SNAP and childcare subsidy programs whose income exceeds program limits—but remain under income limits for the transitional benefits. It would not, however, impact TANF recipients because the program’s cash assistance tampers to zero, which means there would be no transitional benefits. 

And building upon the foundation laid in Missouri, other states should similarly experiment with creative solutions to the cliffs problem.

And building upon the foundation laid in Missouri, other states should similarly experiment with creative solutions to the cliffs problem.

The next step

While the new Missouri law is a commendable first step by a state to correct design flaws in benefit cliffs, there is still more work to do. For example, this legislation fails to address the variables in each program that drive the benefits cliff phenomenon in the first place. Instead, it uses new money to create a bridge that eases the loss of benefits when coming off designated programs.

Precisely because it uses new money, this solution represents a potentially huge and expensive expansion of welfare programs in Missouri. Indeed, the fiscal note accompanying the legislation estimates a cost of around $200 million per year in state revenue.

So rather than a comprehensive and holistic resolution to the benefits cliff problem, this new law essentially creates a supplemental program at risk of being underfunded in years when the legislature fails to fully fund at levels to meet demand—creating challenges for state agencies charged with program implementation. Moreover, the law doesn’t address Medicaid at all—the biggest driver of benefit cliffs in terms of dollar impact to families.

Despite these limitations, this new law recognizes that benefits cliffs are a real problem in need of a solution. And it attempts to address design flaws in two of the biggest-offending programs—SNAP and childcare. Finally, it recognizes the need to step down benefits in ways that eliminate cliffs as people earn additional income and learn to stand on their own with increasingly less dependence on the government.

In tackling the challenge of benefits cliffs, Missouri lawmakers have set the bar for other states to consider solutions to welfare systems that prevent people from becoming self-sufficient by holding them back from working as much as they could or should.

And building upon the foundation laid in Missouri, other states should similarly experiment with creative solutions to the cliffs problem. This includes waivers and other steps to address systemic program flaws. It also includes pilot projects to demonstrate how to eliminate cliffs with a net positive impact on those who work more, earn additional income and become self-sufficient faster than would otherwise be possible.

The two-parent privilege and how it helps families escape poverty

The two-parent privilege and how it helps families escape poverty

Two-parent households<br />
Income inequality<br />
Social mobility<br />
Poverty reduction<br />
Marriage<br />
Economic well-being<br />
Single mothers<br />
Single fathers<br />
Education outcomes<br />
Behavioral tendencies<br />
American Dream<br />
Economic security<br />
Social challenges<br />
Family structure<br />
Economic performance<br />
Government intervention<br />
Grassroots change<br />
Cultural change<br />
Fathers' role<br />
Labor force participation<br />
Marriage penalties<br />
School choice<br />
Social agnosticism

The two-parent privilege and how it helps families escape poverty

Key Points

  • The decline in two-parent households is a major driver of income inequality and decreased social mobility in the United States.
  • Two-parent households provide a significant “privilege” for children, leading to better educational and economic outcomes, lower rates of incarceration, and improved chances of achieving the American Dream.
  • To alleviate poverty and strengthen two-parent households, policy proposals and grassroots cultural changes are needed, along with addressing the importance of fathers in society and promoting stable marriages and families without stigmatizing single parents.

Addressing Income Inequality

Income inequality is on the rise. Social mobility is on the decline. Politicians focus a lot of firepower on these two realities, but they too often ignore a major driver of these trends—one that might surprise you. That’s the drop in the percentage of stable, two-parent households.

At the Georgia Center for Opportunity, our goal is to reduce poverty and encourage human flourishing. Healthy families are a key part of that. What often gets shunted to the side in this discussion, however, is how much family composition matters.

Family Matters

Bravely entering into this political fray is Brookings Institution economist Melissa Kearney with her new book, The Two-Parent Privilege: How Americans Stopped Getting Married and Started Falling Behind. Coming from a centrist (if not center-left) worldview, Kearney provides a refreshing and clear-eyed assessment of the powerful role that marriage plays in reducing poverty and bolstering economic well-being for children, adults and the nation as a whole.

Kearney even frames her book title in terms progressives better understand by using the term “privilege”—precisely what two-parent households afford children across a spectrum of metrics ranging from educational outcomes to behavioral tendencies, rates of incarceration and the likelihood of achieving the American Dream.

Here, Kearney asserts, “The decline in the share of US children living in a two-parent family over the past 40 years has not been good—for children, for families, or for the United States.”

Going further, she says, “Based on the overwhelming evidence at hand, I can say with the utmost confidence that the decline in marriage and the corresponding rise in the share of children being raised in one-parent homes has contributed to the economic insecurity of American families, has widened the gap in opportunities and outcomes for children from different backgrounds, and today poses economic and social challenges that we cannot afford to ignore—but may not be able to reverse.”

Of course, nobody seeks to stigmatize or deny the heroic efforts that loving and dedicated single parents sacrificially pour out to raise their children in difficult circumstances. Indeed, Kearney argues for strengthening the safety net for all families—regardless of structure.

But as she shows, the data can’t be so easily dismissed by those who resist policy discussions involving family formation distinctions.

  

The data backs it all up

Consider: 2019 US Census statistics reveal that families headed by a single mother were five times more likely to live in poverty than families headed by a married couple, while families headed by a single father were nearly twice as likely to live in poverty.

Further, research shows that 40% of Millennials who grew up in two-parent homes graduated from college by their mid-20s, compared to 17% for Millennials from non-intact homes. Moreover, 77% of Millennials who grew up with the two-parent privilege attained a middle-class or higher lifestyle by their mid-30s, compared to 57% from non-intact families.

And then there are many studies from Utah, where—more than any other state—marriage and two-parent households are encouraged. Indeed, Utah ranks at the top of economic performance—including GDP growth, favorable business climate, work environment and high rates of economic mobility. And Utahns experience lower child poverty and criminality rates, while enjoying enviable levels of emotional and physical wellbeing, healthy behaviors, life evaluation, student educational performance, and median family income.   

Taken together, these data suggest that stable, intact, two-parent marriages lay the foundation for strong families, which in turn create thriving communities of men, women and children. 

To alleviate poverty by strengthening two-parent households, Kearney suggests several policy proposals:

  • Work to restore and foster a norm of two-parent homes for children
  • Work to improve the economic position of men without a college level of education so they are more reliable marriage partners and fathers
  • Scale up government and community programs that show promise in strengthening families and improving outcomes for parents and children from disadvantaged backgrounds
  • Have a stronger safety net for families, regardless of family structure

Stronger Families Create Thriving Communities

Our vision is one where everyone has the support that comes from healthy thriving relationships and family.

Stronger Families Create Thriving Communities

Our vision is one where everyone has the support that comes from healthy thriving relationships and family.

The Policy Prescription

In offering these policy prescriptions, however, she adds that economics and government intervention can only do so much. There must also be grassroots, cultural change at the neighborhood and community levels. That’s why marriage enrichment and parenting classes like Raising Highly Capable Kids are crucial to reducing poverty.

Commendably, Kearney addresses a related—and also politically sensitive—topic: The important role that fathers play in society. She writes, “The absence of a father from a child’s home appears to have direct effects on children’s outcomes—and not only because of the loss of parental income. Nonfinancial engagement by a father has been found to have beneficial effects on children’s outcomes.”

Indeed, a father’s presence in the home is particularly important for boys. As Kearney notes, “Boys and young men are faring worse than girls and young women on a host of behavioral, educational, and economic dimensions. This gender gap in outcomes has been linked to the heightened disadvantage boys face when growing up without a father figure in their home.”

Of course, this creates a vicious cycle: Boys growing up without their fathers have a higher likelihood of themselves falling into traps of poverty: “The more boys struggle and fall behind, the less prepared they will be as adults to be reliable economic providers as husbands and dads,” Kearney writes.

Here, she points to our country’s crisis of masculinity and how declining labor force participation rates by prime-age men contribute to the marriage problem. Recent cultural shifts have “stripped many men of their traditional role as breadwinner for the family and, in simple terms, made them less desirable marriage partners,” she writes.

Clearly, the challenge is how to promote stable marriages and families when males increasingly remain in perpetual adolescence and fail to assume adult responsibilities that lead to success in work, marriage, and family.

Where do we go from here?

So how can we build more two-parent homes? Certainly investing more in vocational education and apprenticeships for men will help—as will implementing criminal justice reform and addressing the pandemic of untreated mental illness and opioid addiction among men.

Beyond these, we should expand school choice so that impoverished children stuck in failing public school districts have an opportunity to achieve a good education. And we need to eliminate marriage penalties in programs like Medicaid and public housing that punish marriage and encourage single-parenthood.

But perhaps most of all we need to have a frank national discussion about the importance of two-parent families “without coming across as shaming or blaming single mothers,” as Kearney writes. “By being honest about the benefits that a two-parent family home confers to children, we can break the pattern in which social agnosticism treats all households as the same in terms of the benefits they deliver children.”



Solving the food stamp benefits cliffs

Solving the food stamp benefits cliffs

Shopping Cart in aisle

Solving the food stamp benefits cliffs

Many Americans rely on SNAP benefits to afford food, but these same individuals and families face a trap that keeps them mired in dependency. It’s called the SNAP benefits cliff. A new report from the Georgia Center for Opportunity analyzes some possible solutions for addressing the benefits cliffs still present in safety-net programs like SNAP. 

What are benefits cliffs?

A benefits cliff is when an individual, family, or household loses more in net income and benefits from governmental assistance programs than it gains from additional earnings. This net loss is a perverse incentive that undermines the natural desire to earn more income.

At an individual level—or in the case of SNAP, at a household level—the impact has to do with the ability of the individual or household to overcome the cliff. If the household can increase its earnings (and other income) sufficiently relative to the loss in benefits and taxes, the cliff will have no impact on that specific individual or household.

Who is hurt the most by benefits cliffs?

Our computational analysis shows that it is mathematically possible for some one-member households, where the individual is disabled or elderly, to overcome a benefits cliff with a pay raise of less than 5%. However, almost all other households will require percentage income increases in the double digits or worse.

Larger families, especially those without elderly or disabled members of the household, fare much worse. For example, a family of four (where a single mom is raising three kids, for example) would require a pay raise of between 37% and 121%, assuming the family doesn’t have housing costs. For larger households with disabled or elderly members, that pay raise ranged from 30% to 109%.

Snap Benefits paper cover

 Access the Report:

SOLVING THE FOOD ASSISTANCE (SNAP) BENEFITS CLIFFS

Our comprehensive report on the SNAP Benefits Cliffs outlines the pitfalls in the current structure of the program and steps that can be made at a federal, state, and agency level.

Running the numbers: the impact of benefits cliffs

A family of four would begin experiencing SNAP benefits cliffs when their household income exceeds $36,084. This family would lose around $462.42 in SNAP benefits each month. To overcome those lost benefits, that same family would need to earn $58,280 a year, a 61.5 percent increase in income.

What is the marriage penalty? 

Another example of benefits cliffs’ detrimental impacts lies in the marriage penalty. For instance, a couple choosing to marry would leave them worse off financially by getting married than by staying single. Instead, many couples decide to remain unmarried to avoid the financial burden of the marriage penalty. 

SNAP benefits cliffs are at a 20-year high

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the SNAP maximum allotments were raised significantly—between 45% and 51%. The Thrifty Food Plan was recalculated by the USDA, which impacted these increases. However, SNAP’s current benefits cliffs are at a 20-year high and may be the highest they’ve ever been. 

The situation is getting worse

Setting aside COVID-19 and the emergency allotment program, SNAP benefits cliffs are getting worse and, based on twenty years of data, have never been higher. This was not always the trend. The benefits cliffs cycled up to a high in 2009, slowly came down, and then leveled off for a few years. However, since the pandemic, they have all shot up to record highs.

Policy goals for improvement

We recommend approaching change from a policy perspective, and engaging Congress and the states to solve the problems with SNAP’s benefits cliffs. 

As a public policy goal, it would make sense to design a safety-net assistance program in such a manner that it minimizes potential cliffs for most cases. We believe that it should be relatively easy for individuals and households to overcome benefits cliffs by earning additional income. 

Our recommendations include: 

  • Limiting how long future emergency allotment programs last 
  • Requiring the USDA to recalculate the Thrifty Food Plan
  • Permanently eliminating benefits cliffs that a typical pay raise can’t mitigate
  • Implementing strategies to prevent marriage penalties 
  • Amending U.S. code to test potential solutions via demonstration projects
  • Opening the floor for the Secretary of Agriculture to work with states to solve benefits cliffs
  • Allowing states to conduct §2026 demonstration projects