This is the final report following the conclusion of the Behavioral Interventions to Advance Self-Sufficiency (BIAS) project sponsored by the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE); the goal of the report was to learn how tools from behavioral science could be used to deliver program services more effectively and, ultimately, improve the well-being of low-income children, adults, and families. The report outlines the findings from 15 human service agencies, all of which saw statistically significant changes in outcomes in at least one measured intervention. The domains covered within the 15 sites were child care, child support, and work supports.

Please join the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) for a webinar reaffirming and renewing its partnership with the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) and between the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), Head Start (HS), and Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) programs. The webinar will go over a recently signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that describes how WIC, CACFP, HS, and CCDF can work together to promote and support regional, State, and local efforts to improve program coordination and service delivery for low-income children and their families. When: Wednesday, January 31, 2018; 2:00 – 3:00 p.m. (EST) Presented by: FNS & ACF Headquarters Staff. Short remarks to be provided by FNS and ACF Senior Leadership. Log-on information will be provided at a later date. This webinar will be recorded, and the presentation will be made available following the webinar date.

This Urban Institute brief examines the experiences of clients applying for work supports, such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, Medicaid, and child care assistance. Applying for these benefits can be a daunting process for low-income families, so six states participated in the Work Support Strategies initiative to streamline and improve the application and service delivery process. The authors describe the experiences of families applying for work supports, then they identify three areas where the process could be improved. Those areas include minimizing wait times so families can receive their benefits sooner, improving customer service so families applying for benefits are treated with respect, and providing clearer information about the process of applying for benefits. The authors recommend that states provide a range of options for applying for benefits and aim for providing benefits on the same day that a client applies.

Senate Resolution 2013-62 (Appendix A) directed the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to consider the effect of major federal and state programs in assisting low-income families to achieve self-sufficiency and reduce the number of families living in poverty. In particular, the Committee was asked to determine if and how such programs mitigate the “cliff effect.” “Cliff effects” occur when program benefits are not phased out on a sliding scale basis, or increased earnings are not sufficient to cover the full cost of the lost benefit. With one exception, the Committee focused on programs available to all that apply and meet eligibility requirements: TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), SNAP/Food Stamps (Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program), several federal tax credits, and Pennsylvania’s Special Tax Forgiveness Program. The one exception, the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), is a discretionary federal program offering child care subsidies for low- income families, with the number of eligible individuals served limited by available funding.

The goal of workforce development efforts serving individuals in poverty is to provide them with the skills and credentials they need to increase their earnings in the labor market and advance to self-sufficiency. It is important for workforce stakeholders to understand that low-income families’ household income is often partly comprised of public benefits (such as supports for housing, child care, and health care) that phase out as increases in earnings are made through higher wages and/or more hours on the job. Rapid phaseouts of benefits – what are known as “benefits cliffs” – can have the effect of canceling out large portions of a family’s earnings gains, or even make a family substantially worse off from a self-sufficiency standpoint that prior to its earnings gains. This latest research by the Seattle Jobs Initiative examines the impact of benefits cliffs on low-income Washington families. The goal is to support workforce and social service providers in their efforts to better help these families to navigate the potential loss of benefits as they assist them to make earnings gains.

In this report from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, data on young children who have stayed in emergency homeless shelters is examined to measure child well-being 20 months after a stay in a shelter. The report considers pre-reading skills, pre-math skills, developmental delays, and behavior challenges to see if homelessness has an impact on these indicators of child well-being, using national norms for young children as a comparison. Also considered are links between a lack of housing or child care stability and well-being.

Investments in early childhood programs are on the rise due to a growing emphasis on their benefits for supporting childhood development. In this report, the RAND Corporation analyzes the benefits and economic returns of three early childhood interventions in New Hampshire: early home visiting, high-quality child care, and high-quality preschool. The report found that many New Hampshire children are at risk for facing early adversity and future achievement gaps, but the intervention programs studied do offer benefits. Also included are recommendations to guide State investment in early childhood programs.

Between 2012 and 2016, the Capital One Foundation’s Human Capital Innovation Fund supported five workforce organizations in an effort to develop new strategies for serving unemployed and underemployed individuals. This report from the Aspen Institute describes the experiences of the five organizations, located in Washington, D.C., New Orleans, Louisiana, and New York, New York, as they developed and implemented their new strategies. Topics discussed include partnerships with other organizations and building employer relationships.