WashingtonLow
Ranking 47 of 50 states and DC, with its cliff severity (65th percentile) as the strongest driver. 12% of the population — 957,612 people — earns in the income range where benefit phase-outs overlap. Medicaid is the primary cliff driver. Each dimension below shows its component score, the underlying metrics, and how Washington compares to all 50 states and DC.
A score of 78 means cliff conditions are more severe than in 78% of U.S. counties. State policy can shift the overall score by up to 25%. Even communities with low scores have families facing steep cliffs — the score measures how a place compares, not what any individual family experiences. Full methodology →
Population Exposure
How many people earn in the income range where benefit phase-outs concentrate — and who they are. 957,612 people in Washington earn in the cliff zone — between 100% and 200% of the federal poverty level — where SNAP, Medicaid, childcare subsidies, and other major programs phase out.
Population by family type across income bands. Use the tabs to see how this splits by working status or program enrollment — families enrolled in more programs face steeper compound cliffs when income rises.
Cliff Severity
How steeply benefits drop when families earn more. The chart below shows the share of each additional dollar lost to benefit reductions and taxes at each wage level. When the line exceeds 100%, a raise leaves the family worse off. Medicaid creates the largest benefit loss at the cliff point in 92% of Washington’s counties.
Rates are averaged over a $2.50/hr raise, matching the Upward Mobility Act’s proposed 50% cap. This chart uses Washington’s program rules and local costs. Rates assume full program enrollment — most families are not enrolled in all programs simultaneously. Hover to see which programs drive each peak.
The Upward Mobility Act of 2026 uses this same measure — Marginal Effective Tax Rate — and proposes capping it at 50% for families receiving means-tested benefits.
Economic Vulnerability
Whether the local economy positions families where benefit phase-outs are most likely to trigger — and whether advancement is realistic. The chart below shows what cliff-zone industries actually pay, compared to what each family type needs to earn to clear benefit phase-outs.
Policy Environment
State policies that moderate or amplify cliff severity. Each sub-score runs 0 to 100 — lower means the state does more to mitigate cliffs in that area. The four combine into a multiplier that shifts the overall CLIFF Score by up to 25%. Same for all counties in a state.
Washington has taken 28 policy actions addressing benefit cliffs across 5 legislative periods.
2024-2025
- TANF asset limit set to $6,000. Unrestricted allowable assets now have no limit and include education accounts, purchase of a first home, capitalization of a small business, retirement funds,...
- TANF recipients now allowed to use income received from cash assistance and income that was used to determine eligibility in order to build up cash reserves.
- Extensions beyond the TANF 5-year time limit now allowed to be granted in specific cases
- New treatment of income expectations in TANF. If other agencies or organizations provide housing or food benefits then they aren't counted as income.
- Unlimited child care transitional benefits now offered to TANF exiters who are under 200% FPL, assuming families pay a co-payment to contribute to the cost of child care (levels vary based on...
- Transitional Medicaid for up to 6 months now offered to TANF exiters (disregards child support income when determining eligibility).
- Consolidated emergency assistance (CEAP) now offered to TANF exiters for as long as a dependent under the age of 18 is in the home (limited to 1 payment in a 12 month period)
- Transitional Food Assistance (TFA) now offered to TANF exiters for up to five months via the Transitional Benefits Alternative in SNAP
- PENDING IMPLEMENTATION: Some TANF clients now allowed to maintain Housing Essential Needs assistance upon receipt of SSI (which terminates state ABD)
- PENDING IMPLEMENTATION: Washington eliminated recovery of state ABD benefits (beginning in Oct 2028) when ABD recipient is approved for SSI
2022-2023
- Retirement funds, pension plans, and retirement accounts exempt from TANF asset considerations
- Expanded TANF time limit to include households caring for a child in a homeless situation (McKinney Vento definition)
- Eliminated TANF time limits for households with parents who are ineligible for aid, due to receipt of SSI, their legal status or immigration status; these households continue to receive TANF cash...
- Increased TANF earned income disregard to disregard first $500 of earned income/50% disregard of remaining earned income
- Eliminated TANF mid-certification requirement in Aged, Blind, Disabled and Housing Essential Needs program
2020-2021
- Eliminated TANF supplied shelter grant standard
- Expanded TANF time limit extension criteria to:; exclude the number of months that a recipient received TANF during a month (after March 2020) in which the unemployment rate was higher than 7%,...
- 15% TANF grant standard increase
- Expanded TANF time limit extension category to include "hardship" through June 2022
- Reduced negative impact of TANF sanction policies - now allowed 2 months of non-compliance before grant reduction and additional 10 months on reduced grant before sanction termination
- UpdatedTANF need standard to match state's self-sufficiency standard
- Child Support pass-through policy established - $50/one child; $100/multiple children
2018-2019
- Increased TANF asset and resource limits to $10K for one vehicle and $6K for other resources
- Increased TANF grant increase by 9.3% (2.5% and subsequent 6.8%)
- Eliminated permanent TANF disqualification for non-compliance sanction
- Eliminated TANF means testing for cash assistance provided to nonparental caregivers
2016-2017
- 9% TANF grant increase
- Expand TANF "infant exemption" to include families with children under the age of 2
Economic Impact
About 69,943 working families in Washington earn in the cliff zone. Based on a 2025 survey of benefit recipients, we estimate roughly 1 in 6 are actively limiting their earnings to protect their benefits — declining raises, refusing hours, or passing up better-paying jobs. Each family foregoes an estimated $2,100 per year. Those lost wages mean less economic activity in local communities — and benefit spending continues because families remain below eligibility thresholds. The total: an estimated $62M per year.
That figure captures only what we can measure. It doesn't capture years of stalled careers, children growing up in financial instability, or families for whom entering the workforce would mean losing more in benefits than they gain in wages.
Estimated annual cost
$62M
Modeled from survey-reported behavioral rates (CSD/Washington University 2025) and Census ACS population data. Click any row for methodology.
69,943 families × 16% avoidance × ~$2,100/yr × multiplier + benefit continuation = $62M
What this excludes: Multi-year career stagnation, health impacts of benefit loss, educational outcomes for children in families navigating benefit phase-outs, and families for whom entering the workforce would mean losing more in benefits than they gain in wages. This estimate captures only the measurable portion — the actual cost to Washington is substantially higher. Full methodology →
Geographic Data
Explore cliff severity across Washington’s 39 counties and 10 congressional districts. The map is shaded by CLIFF Score by default — use the tabs to switch views. Click any county to inspect, or click a second to compare. Toggle to Congressional to see district-level cliff-zone data.
Composite severity score (0–100) combining exposure, severity, vulnerability, and policy.
Click any county to inspect
| CountyCounty↕ | CLIFF ScoreScore↓ | PopulationPopulation↕ | Cliff Zone %Cliff Zone %↕ | Families at RiskFamilies↕ | Peak METRPeak METR↕ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Douglas County | 73High | 44,366 | 17.7% | 1,838 | 250% |
| Chelan County | 70High | 80,172 | 18.4% | 2,879 | 250% |
| Yakima County | 65High | 257,152 | 24.4% | 13,065 | 250% |
| Franklin County | 60High | 98,902 | 20.7% | 4,402 | 250% |
| Pacific County | 54Elevated | 23,994 | 23.0% | 1,378 | 250% |
| Cowlitz County | 52Elevated | 112,360 | 16.6% | 4,125 | 250% |
| Walla Walla County | 49Elevated | 62,161 | 15.9% | 1,578 | 250% |
| Ferry County | 48Elevated | 7,387 | 22.5% | 392 | 236% |
| Benton County | 43Elevated | 212,905 | 14.6% | 6,144 | 250% |
| Pierce County | 42Elevated | 930,319 | 11.7% | 22,697 | 365% |
| Skamania County | 39Moderate | 12,402 | 14.7% | 393 | 250% |
| Grays Harbor County | 33Moderate | 77,053 | 18.7% | 2,791 | 250% |
| Clark County | 31Moderate | 516,959 | 12.8% | 12,752 | 250% |
| Snohomish County | 27Moderate | 844,430 | 10.1% | 16,421 | 238% |
| Wahkiakum County | 27Moderate | 4,658 | 21.7% | 283 | 250% |
| Kitsap County | 26Moderate | 277,881 | 10.4% | 5,934 | 365% |
| Klickitat County | 26Moderate | 23,411 | 14.0% | 692 | 250% |
| Lewis County | 25Moderate | 85,154 | 16.1% | 2,989 | 250% |
| Pend Oreille County | 25Moderate | 14,050 | 21.2% | 743 | 238% |
| Thurston County | 24Moderate | 299,067 | 11.1% | 6,441 | 250% |
Data Explorer
Interactive demographic breakdowns of Washington’s cliff-zone population — by race, education, industry, age, and family type. Sourced from Census PUMS microdata.
Who is in Washington’s cliff zone?
The chart below shows every person in Washington’s cliff zone — the income range where benefit phase-outs from multiple programs overlap — broken down by who they are. Each bar is a 10-point income band (100–109% FPL, 110–119%, etc.). The colored segments show how that income band breaks down by the selected dimension.
Use Color by to switch between race, education, industry, age, family type, and other dimensions. Use Filter to focus on a specific group — single mothers, workers in a particular industry, households with children. The data table below the chart shows exact counts and percentages.
Source: Census ACS PUMS 2020–2024, individual-level records weighted to reflect the full population. This shows who is structurally exposed to cliffs based on where their income falls — not who has actually experienced a benefit loss.
Get notified when we update Washington’s data or scoring methodology.
Get notified when we add new geographies, scoring updates, or validation results.