| County | Employment Services Caseload on June 30, 1999 | Maximum Sanction for One-Parent Families (as a percentage of the payment standard) | Maximum Sanction for Two-Parent Families (as a percentage of the payment standard) |
| Aitkin | 83 | 100 | 100 |
| Anoka | 1,215 | 100 | 100 |
| Becker | 223 | 30 | 30 |
| Beltrami | 468 | 100 | 100 |
| Benton | 136 | 30 | 50 |
| Big Stone | 26 | 30 | 30 |
| Blue Earth | 252 | 30 | 30 |
| Brown | 88 | Don't Know | Don't Know |
| Carlton | 177 | 50 | 50 |
| Carver | 56 | 100 | 100 |
| Cass | 120 | 100 | 100 |
| Chippewa | 41 | 50 | 50 |
| Chisago | 128 | 30 | 30 |
| Clay | 433 | 50 | 50 |
| Clearwater | 68 | 50 | 50 |
| Cook | 6 | 100 | 100 |
| Cottonwood | 35 | 30 | 50 |
| Crow Wing | 343 | 100 | 100 |
| Dakota | 861 | 30 | 30 |
| Dodge | 42 | 30 | 50 |
| Douglas | 129 | 50 | 50 |
| Faribault/Martin | 204 | 50 | 75 |
| Fillmore | 43 | 50 | 50 |
| Freeborn | 179 | 50 | 100 |
| Goodhue | 85 | 30 | 30 |
| Grant | 25 | 50 | 50 |
| Hennepin | 7,845 | 30 | 30 |
| Houston | 47 | 10 | 30 |
| Hubbard | 146 | 50 | 75 |
| Isanti | 141 | 30 | 30 |
| Itasca | 204 | 30 | 30 |
| Jackson | 38 | 50 | 75 |
| Kanabec | 60 | 100 | 100 |
| Kandiyohi | 236 | 50 | 50 |
| Kittson | 14 | 50 | 100 |
| Koochiching | 96 | 30 | 30 |
| Lac qui Parle | 10 | 30 | 30 |
| Lake | 36 | 100 | 100 |
| Lake of the Woods | 10 | 100 | 100 |
| LeSueur | 85 | 30a | 30a |
| Lincoln/Lyon/Murray | 92 | 30 | 30 |
| McLeod | 110 | 50 | 50 |
| Mahnomen | 44 | 50 | 75 |
| Marshall | 39 | 50 | 50 |
| Meeker | 64 | 100 | 100 |
| Mille Lacs | 133 | 30b | 50b |
| Morrison | 172 | 100 | 100 |
| Mower | 180 | 50 | 50 |
| Nicollet | 157 | 10 | 10 |
| Nobles | 117 | 30 | 30 |
| Norman | 45 | 30 | 50c |
| Olmsted | 664 | 30 | 30 |
| Otter Tail | 269 | 30 | 100 |
| Pennington | 75 | d | d |
| Pine | 157 | 30 | 30 |
| Pipestone | 36 | 100 | 100 |
| Polk | 296 | 100 | 100 |
| Pope | 36 | 30 | 30 |
| Ramsey | 5,882 | 30e | 30e |
| Red Lake | 11 | 10 | 30 |
| Redwood | 49 | 30 | 30 |
| Renville | 71 | 30 | 30 |
| Rice | 129 | Don't Know | Don't Know |
| Rock | 22 | 10 | 30 |
| Roseau | 23 | 30f | 50f |
| St. Louis | 1,759 | 30 | 50 |
| Scott | 148 | 30 | 50 |
| Sherburne | 149 | 50 | 50 |
| Sibley | 46 | 30 | 50 |
| Stearns | 511 | 50 | 50 |
| Steele | 158 | 100 | 100 |
| Stevens | 35 | 50 | 75 |
| Swift | 35 | 30g | 50g |
| Todd | 196 | 50 | 50 |
| Traverse | 44 | 100 | 100 |
| Wabasha | 66 | 50 | 50 |
| Wadena | 101 | h | h |
| Waseca | 101 | 30 | 50 |
| Washington | 468 | 50 | 75 |
| Watonwan | 50 | 100 | 50 |
| Wilkin | 91 | 30 | 30 |
| Winona | 211 | 30 | 30 |
| Wright | 175 | 30i | 30i |
| Yellow Medicine | 13 | 50 | 50 |
| Statewide | 27,664j |
NOTE: We asked county human services directors, "Currently, counties may sanction MFIP participants for as much as 30 percent of the payment standard for failing to comply with program requirements. In your opinion, what (if any) change in the maximum available sanction should be implemented for: (A) One-parent MFIP households, [and] (B) Two-parent households." We provided seven possible answers, "(1) Decrease to zero -- no sanction should be allowed under MFIP, (2) Decrease to 10 percent, (3) Remain at 30 percent, (4) Increase to 50 percent, (5) Increase to 75 percent, (6) Increase to 100 percent, [and] (7) Don't Know."
a. LeSueur County added the comment: "When clients do not actively complete their job search and are sanctioned for more than 2 or 3 months, they need to face tougher consequences -- such as supervision or closure for 1 month."
b. Mille Lacs County commented: "Sanctions need to be in place -- do not decrease, or give food portion only until compliance."
c. Norman County commented: "Limit the number of months a 2-parent household can be at the 30% sanction, i.e. close case.
d. Pennington County did not choose one of the listed options but specified an alternative. "Other -- Child only grant -- protective payee."
e. Ramsey County commented: "There is a significant belief of some that a larger sanction should be imposed after X(6?) months."
f. Roseau County commented: "MFIP households that have been in sanction status for 6 months should be terminated from the program unless there are extenuating circumstances."
g. Swift County commented: "If client has been sanctioned at 30% sanction for 6 months and is still not cooperating -- case should be closed."
h. Wadena County did not choose one of the listed options but commented: "Depends on reason for noncompliance -- 1-parent household[s] [that] choose not to comply because significant other (not MFIP eligible) has income -- should not be eligible if not complying."
i. Wright County commented: "Have a limitation as to how long a household can remain on a sanction and still receive MFIP."
j. Does not include 1,218 employment services clients that live on Indian reservations.