Prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Office of Policy Development, Evaluation and Research by The Center for Youth and Communities and the Sillerman Center for the Advancement of Philanthropy, Heller School for Social Policy and Management, Brandeis University, this report details the implementation of the Recovery Act summer youth employment initiative in four communities. Researchers conducted interviews and site visits in Chicago, Illinois; Detroit, Michigan; Indianapolis and Marion County, Indiana; and Phoenix and Maricopa County, Arizona. Authors provide information on implementation, innovation utilized by the sites, and best practices for future program development.

This report summarizes the final impact results for the national Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) project. This project tested, using a random assignment design, the effectiveness of numerous programs intended to promote steady work and career advancement. All the programs targeted current and former welfare recipients and other low-wage workers, most of whom were single mothers. Given that earlier retention and advancement initiatives studied for these groups were largely not effective, ERA sought to examine a variety of programs that states and localities had developed for different populations, to determine whether effective strategies could be identified. In short, nine of the twelve programs examined in this report do not appear to be effective, but three programs increased employment levels, employment stability, and/or earnings, relative to control group levels, after three to four years of follow-up.

Key Findings:

 - Out of the twelve programs included in the report, three ERA programs produced positive economic impacts; nine did not. All three programs increased employment retention and advancement. Increases in employment retention and earnings were largest and most consistent over time in the Texas ERA program in Corpus Christi (one of three sites that operated this program); the Chicago ERA program; and the Riverside County, California, Post-Assistance Self-Sufficiency (PASS) ERA program. These programs increased annual earnings by between 7 percent and 15 percent relative to control group levels. Each of them served a different target group, which suggests that employment retention and advancement programs can work for a range of populations. However, three-fourths of the ERA programs included in this report did not produce gains in targeted outcomes beyond what control group members were able to attain on their own with the existing services and supports available in the ERA sites.

 - Increases in participation beyond control group levels were not consistent or large, which may have made it difficult for the programs to achieve impacts on employment retention and advancement. Engaging individuals in employment and retention services at levels above what they would have done in the absence of the programs was a consistent challenge. In addition, staff had to spend a lot of time and resources on placing unemployed individuals back into jobs, which made it difficult for them to focus on helping those who were already working to keep their jobs or move up.

Before the ERA project began, there was not much evidence about the types of programs that could improve employment retention and advancement outcomes for current or former welfare recipients. The ERA evaluation provides valuable insights about the nature of retention and advancement problems and it underscores a number of key implementation challenges that a program would have to address. In addition, it reveals shortcomings in a range of common approaches now in use, while identifying three distinct approaches that seem promising and worthy of further exploration. (author abstract)

Phased in during a time of strong economic expansion, welfare reform and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program have been associated P with an unprecedented drop in the welfare rolls and commensurate increases in employment. While the nation’s rural areas have shared in the benefits of economic prosperity and welfare reform, poverty continues to be more prevalent and persistent in rural areas than in nonrural ones. The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) is funding the Rural Welfare-to-Work (WtW) Strategies Demonstration Evaluation to learn how best to help TANF and other low-income rural families move from welfare to work. Under contract to ACF, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (MPR), along with Decision Information Resources, Inc. (DIR), is conducting the evaluation. Economic and geographic conditions in rural areas make it especially difficult for welfare recipients and other low-income families to enter, maintain, and advance in employment and secure longer-term family well-being. Unemployment and underemployment rates are higher, and average earnings are lower, in rural labor markets than in urban ones. The lower population densities and greater geographic dispersion that characterize most rural areas result in severe transportation problems and limited employment options. Key services, such as education, training, child care, and other support services, are often unavailable or difficult to access. Many evaluations have focused on rural populations and employment strategies, but few, if any, have been rigorous. The Rural WtW Evaluation will lead to increased information on well-conceived rural WtW programs. Distinctive, innovative programs in three states—Illinois, Nebraska, and Tennessee—were selected as evaluation sites. A rigorous evaluation of each will greatly contribute to knowledge about what rural strategies work best for different groups of welfare recipients and other low-income families. It also will highlight lessons about the operational challenges associated with these programs, provide recommendations for improving them, and guide future WtW programs and policies related to the rural poor. (author abstract)

Chapin Hall and the Urban Institute hosted this Thursday’s Child policy forum on how large public agencies as well as smaller community-based organizations can best meet the needs of their target populations and improve service delivery. Recent studies on five services- mental health care, substance abuse treatment, foster care, adult incarceration, and juvenile incarceration-show that 23 percent of Illinois families using multiple services accounted for 86 percent of the funding spent on those services.

This report provides an executive summary of the Rapid Response Technical Assistance event in Chicago, Illinois, sponsored through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance. In response to a joint technical assistance request from Regions V (Chicago) and VII (Kansas City), the Rapid Response project team conducted secondary research and telephone discussions on a variety of TANF issues, identified as being of concern to the constituent States of these regions, to present at the event. This report includes an overview of the meeting as well as the descriptions of TANF promising practices from around the country that were discussed by participating States.

This paper summarizes findings from MAXIMUS studies about the awareness and use of the EITC among welfare recipients, leavers, and applicants. The findings are based on surveys conducted in five states: California, Illinois, New Mexico, North Carolina, and South Carolina.

The Peer Technical Assistance (TA) Network, funded by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Family Assistance (OFA), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) coordinated this rural workshop involving select representatives from twelve States from across four ACF Regions. State agency representatives were present from a variety of agencies including TANF, WTW, transportation, economic development, and domestic violence. Private sector speakers included a town mayor, a chief executive officer for a mass transit district, directors of several State coalitions against domestic violence, and key individuals from various private state-wide welfare service organizations. States represented included Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Mississippi, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

The purpose of this one-day workshop was to promote the sharing of ideas and innovative practices designed to assist rural communities to effectively collaborate and utilize community resources to move welfare recipients toward employment and self-sufficiency. During the workshop, participants examined partnership building and the importance of collaboration among and between state, local, and community agencies as a key element in addressing many welfare reform issues. Collaboration among the following agencies was discussed: welfare, transportation, domestic violence, and economic, community, and housing development.

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) and Emergency Assistance programs wit the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Under TANF, the nature of public assistance changed from an entitlement program to one that requires individuals to work in order to receive time-limited support. This change in the welfare delivery system was accompanied by an increase in State-level flexibility in program design and operation. Welfare reform required no less than a redefinition of the role of decision makers at the Federal, State and local level, including the role played by front line workers when interacting with welfare recipients. In the journey toward reinventing the social safety net, States have met a variety of formidable challenges. Five years after the passage of welfare reform, this report takes stock of the past and current challenges that States have encountered. This report focuses on the policies and services provided to the hardest-to-serve and on the network of collaborations that States have developed to address the needs of these populations.

The National Healthy Marriage Academy, held January 8 and 9, 2003,  in Arlington, VA, provided an opportunity for representatives from several States to learn more about the Administration for Children and Families' (ACF) Healthy Marriage Initiative. The Academy afforded States an opportunity to hear presentations from nationally recognized speakers, researchers, and Federal policy makers, as well as from other States with successful Healthy Marriage Initiatives.