Not a neutral safety net: Mapping racialized welfare policy onto the Public Health Law Research logic model through qualitative analysis

Context: Although ostensibly race-neutral, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program (a U.S. federal block grant providing financial and work-related support to low-income families) is marked by stark inequities due to its punitive, racialized policy design. ​Methods: We explore how structural racism permeates TANF’s laws, frontline practices, and downstream health consequences by drawing on semi-structured interviews with welfare recipients, caseworkers, and policy experts in Georgia (n=20) using qualitative thematic analysis. We then use the findings to extend the PHLR framework by embedding a structural racism lens across all pathways: from lawmaking and statutory design, to implementation and health outcomes. Results: Using the Public Health Law Research (PHLR) logic model, we mapped five themes: (1) historical legacy of racialized welfare, (2) policy provisions (e.g., work requirements and restrictions) rooted in racialized assumptions (3) racist barriers in policy implementation (4) unequal benefit distribution along geographic and racial lines, and (5) systemic and inequitable health implications. Our findings reveal that TANF not only mirrors existing racial and economic hierarchies, but actively entrenches them through interrelated legal, administrative, and environmental mechanisms.  Our updated PHLR framework unveils how racialized institutional structures, norms, and policy logics shape each stage of the TANF process. Conclusion: Our analysis underscores the need to move beyond race-neutral assessments toward approaches that more deliberately examine policies as structural exposures. We conclude with policy recommendations to dismantle racially discriminatory requirements, reduce administrative barriers and redesign benefit structures to promote equity.