The Impacts of a Home Visitation and The Impacts of a Home Visitation and Life Skills Education Program for Life Skills Education Program for Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients Hard-to-Employ TANF Recipients Findings from the Rural Welfare-to-Work Evaluation Findings from the Rural Welfare-to-Work Evaluation Alicia Meckstroth Alicia Meckstroth Andrew Burwick Andrew Burwick Quinn Moore Quinn Moore APPAM Research Conference APPAM Research Conference November 3, 2006 November 3, 2006
Rural WtW Evaluation: Rural WtW Evaluation: Purpose and Background Purpose and Background ! Build knowledge base about programs designed ! Build knowledge base about programs designed to address challenges in rural areas to address challenges in rural areas ! Evaluate programs using random assignment ! Evaluate programs using random assignment - Nebraska – home visitation & life skills education - Nebraska – home visitation & life skills education - Illinois – employment-focused case management - Illinois – employment-focused case management 2 NOT FOR CITATION
Building Nebraska Families (BNF) Building Nebraska Families (BNF) ! Individualized life skills education and mentoring ! Individualized life skills education and mentoring via home visits (in addition to regular TANF program) via home visits (in addition to regular TANF program) ! Hard-to-employ TANF recipients ! Hard-to-employ TANF recipients (most disadvantaged 1/3 of nonexempt caseload) (most disadvantaged 1/3 of nonexempt caseload) ! University extension and state welfare agency ! University extension and state welfare agency ! Masters’ level educators with very small caseloads ! Masters’ level educators with very small caseloads ! 11 service areas throughout Nebraska ! 11 service areas throughout Nebraska 3 NOT FOR CITATION
BNF Curriculum BNF Curriculum “Survive, Strive, Thrive” “Survive, Strive, Thrive” ! Curriculum addresses a range of topics ! Curriculum addresses a range of topics - Communication skills - Goal setting - Stress management - Strong families - Time management - Making good decisions - Developing good character - Building healthy relationships - Positive parenting - Building self-esteem - Child development - Money management - Nutrition skills - Creating a healthy home - Anger/conflict management ! Educators work with participants to develop an ! Educators work with participants to develop an individualized learning plan individualized learning plan 4 NOT FOR CITATION
Nebraska Policy Context Nebraska Policy Context ! Supportive, work-oriented TANF program ! Supportive, work-oriented TANF program ! Targeted education and training ! Targeted education and training ! Two-year time limit ! Two-year time limit ! Various services available in target areas ! Various services available in target areas 5 NOT FOR CITATION
Research Questions Research Questions ! Program implementation? ! Program implementation? ! Effects on employment, earnings, welfare ! Effects on employment, earnings, welfare dependence, and well-being? dependence, and well-being? ! Implications and lessons? ! Implications and lessons? 6 NOT FOR CITATION
Evaluation Methods Evaluation Methods ! Experimental design (358 Ts, 242 Cs) ! Experimental design (358 Ts, 242 Cs) ! 18-month follow-up telephone survey ! 18-month follow-up telephone survey (87 percent completion rate) (87 percent completion rate) ! Administrative records ! Administrative records ! Program service use and participation data ! Program service use and participation data ! Site visits and focus groups ! Site visits and focus groups 7 NOT FOR CITATION
Client Experiences in BNF Client Experiences in BNF ! Individualized education focused most on: ! Individualized education focused most on: – Parenting and relationships – Parenting and relationships – Personal and family management skills – Personal and family management skills – Goal-setting, problem-solving, decision-making – Goal-setting, problem-solving, decision-making ! Participation over 8 months, on average ! Participation over 8 months, on average ! 19 teaching contacts, 3 service coordination ! 19 teaching contacts, 3 service coordination contacts, 25 hours total time, on average contacts, 25 hours total time, on average ! About 8 in 10 clients received 5 or more contacts ! About 8 in 10 clients received 5 or more contacts 8 NOT FOR CITATION
Well-Implemented Program Well-Implemented Program ! Strong, well-tested partnership ! Strong, well-tested partnership ! Effective leadership and ongoing staff ! Effective leadership and ongoing staff development development ! Active use of performance management tools ! Active use of performance management tools ! Improvements to curriculum and service ! Improvements to curriculum and service delivery delivery 9 NOT FOR CITATION
More Program Group Members Received More Program Group Members Received Skill-Building Services, Mentoring, & Advocacy Skill-Building Services, Mentoring, & Advocacy Percentage 70 64** 60 55 48** 50 42** 39 40 33 24** 30 16 14** 20 8 10 0 Training Formal Any Help Finding Mediation on Life Education or Mentoring or Housing Management Vocational Informal Skills Training Counseling Program Group Control Group 10 SOURCE: Rural Welfare-to-Work Evaluation's 18-Month Follow-up Survey of BNF sample members. NOTE: The estimates were adjusted using multivariate regression methods and the data were weighted to account for survey nonresponse and to equalize the size of the program and control groups. NOT FOR CITATION */**/***Significantly different from zero at the .10/.05/.01 level, two-tailed test.
Some Evidence that BNF Some Evidence that BNF Improved Employment Status Improved Employment Status Percentage Who Were Employed in Month 60 Program Group 50 40 Control Group 30 20 10 0 ** *** 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Control Group Program Group 11 SOURCE: Rural Welfare-to-Work Evaluation's 18-Month Follow-up Survey of BNF sample members. NOTE: The estimates were adjusted using multivariate regression methods and the data were weighted to account for survey nonresponse and to equalize the size of the program and control groups. NOT FOR CITATION */**/***Significantly different from zero at the .10/.05/.01 level, two-tailed test.
Some Evidence that BNF Some Evidence that BNF Improved Earnings Improved Earnings Average Earnings per Month Program Group $600 $500 Control Group $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ** 17 ** 18 Control Group Program Group 12 SOURCE: Rural Welfare-to-Work Evaluation's 18-Month Follow-up Survey of BNF sample members. NOTE: The estimates were adjusted using multivariate regression methods and the data were weighted to account for survey nonresponse and to equalize the size of the program and control groups. NOT FOR CITATION */**/***Significantly different from zero at the .10/.05/.01 level, two-tailed test.
Number of Hours Worked Number of Hours Worked Explains Earnings Gains Explains Earnings Gains ! No significant difference in wages earned ! No significant difference in wages earned ! Program group members more likely to ! Program group members more likely to work in full-time jobs work in full-time jobs 13 NOT FOR CITATION
No Evidence that BNF Improved No Evidence that BNF Improved Quality of Life Quality of Life ! BNF did not reduce welfare dependence ! BNF did not reduce welfare dependence or poverty or poverty ! Program group members more likely to ! Program group members more likely to experience some hardships experience some hardships
Impacts on Employment and Earnings Impacts on Employment and Earnings More Pronounced for Subgroups More Pronounced for Subgroups ! Sample members during BNF’s 2 nd year ! Sample members during BNF’s 2 nd year (stronger program implementation) (stronger program implementation) ! Sample members who were very ! Sample members who were very disadvantaged or “very hard-to-employ” disadvantaged or “very hard-to-employ”
Definition of “Very Hard-to-Employ” Definition of “Very Hard-to-Employ” ! Met 2 or more of these criteria at baseline: ! Met 2 or more of these criteria at baseline: - Lack of high school credential - Lack of high school credential - Health-limiting condition (self or HH member) - Health-limiting condition (self or HH member) - Transportation barrier (no driver’s license or - Transportation barrier (no driver’s license or regular access to vehicle) regular access to vehicle) - No earnings in prior year - No earnings in prior year - Received TANF/AFDC for 2+ years in lifetime - Received TANF/AFDC for 2+ years in lifetime ! 43 percent were very hard-to-employ ! 43 percent were very hard-to-employ
BNF Improved Employment BNF Improved Employment for the Very Hard-to-Employ for the Very Hard-to-Employ Percentage Who Were Employed in Month 60 50 Program Group 40 30 Control Group 20 10 0 * ** * * ** 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Control Group Program Group 17 SOURCE: Rural Welfare-to-Work Evaluation's 18-Month Follow-up Survey of BNF sample members. NOTE: The estimates were adjusted using multivariate regression methods and the data were weighted to account for survey nonresponse and to equalize the size of the program and control groups. NOT FOR CITATION */**/***Significantly different from zero at the .10/.05/.01 level, two-tailed test.
Recommend
More recommend
