Skip Navigation

		Frequent Questions Search

Print    Download Reader

This is an archive page. The links are no longer being updated.

"Having data on what programs work for recipients in states' welfare-to-work efforts will help us tremendously as we prepare for reauthorization of the welfare reform legislation in 2002," said Secretary Thompson. "This study provides valuable insight into the types of programs that may more effectively help recipients find and keep jobs, their economic impact and the potential effect on the entire family."

The National Evaluation of Welfare-to-Work Strategies is a comprehensive study, with a five-year follow-up period, of the effectiveness of 11 mandatory welfare-to-work programs. It compared the effects of two strategies to assist welfare recipients make the move to self-sufficiency: 1) programs that emphasize short-term job search assistance and encourage people to find employment quickly (known as Labor-Force Attachment or LFA); and 2) programs that emphasize basic education and skill-building activities (known as Human Capital Development or HCD). The effects of the two strategies were estimated through the random assignment of individuals to one or more program groups (with services) or to a control group (without services).

The study found that the basic education and skill-building approach, which is more expensive to administer, did not produce added economic benefits for clients. Moreover, the early employment approach moved welfare recipients into jobs more quickly than the training approach and was less expensive to operate. The early employment approach did not affect parents' financial well-being or that of their children any differently than the skill-building approach. Overall, there were few indications of harm or benefit to the well-being of children, but these effects varied by the age of the child.

However, the most successful program of all, implemented in Portland, Ore., used an approach that was strongly employment-focused but also emphasized both employment search and education or training. This finding, along with other past research, suggests that a "mixed" approach might be the most effective.

In other findings, in the absence of any welfare-to-work program over a five-year follow-up period, approximately three-quarters of single-parent welfare recipients found jobs and more than half left the welfare rolls. Few of the 11 programs improved on this already-high rate of job finding, but nearly all programs helped single parents work during more quarters of the follow-up period and earn more than they would have in the absence of any program. Family income, however, was not affected by the presence or absence of a welfare-to-work program. Further, families in the programs achieved employment gains without significant spillover effects on such family measures as marriage and household composition.

"This study adds weight to the notions that inspired welfare reform from the beginning -- that parents will find work, that they can do so without a lot of additional training, and that their children are generally not adversely affected by their working outside the home," said Wade F. Horn, HHS assistant secretary for children and families.

The evaluation, which studied programs in seven locations (Atlanta, Ga.; Columbus, Ohio; Detroit and Grand Rapids, Mich.; Oklahoma City, Okla.; Portland, Ore., and Riverside, Calif.), was conducted by the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC) under contract to the Department of Health and Human Services. Data were collected on over 40,000 single parents (mostly mothers) and their children. The in-depth study of young children in three sites (Atlanta, Grand Rapids and Riverside) was conducted by Child Trends under subcontract to MDRC.

A copy of the executive summary of the report can be found at aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/NEWWS.

###