View the full project profile

Project Description

The ASSETS program 1) broadens requirements for clients to participate in employment and training (E&T) services; 2) broadens requirements for clients to cooperate with child support enforcement (CSE); and 3) simplifies and rationalizes welfare administration by consolidating programs (such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children [AFDC] and the Food Stamps Program called Nutrition Assistance [NA] in the ASSETS program) and case worker functions.

Project duration: Jul 1990 - Jan 1997

Sites studied include Limestone County, Alabama
Clarke County, Alabama
Madison County, Alabama
Tuscaloosa County, Alabama
Chilton County, Alabama
Butler County, Alabama

Sample Characteristics and Sites Studied

126,937 welfare recipients (AFDC, AFDC/NA, and NA-only).

(73,207 in research counties: Limestone, Clarke, and Madison;

53,730 in comparison counties: Chilton, Butler, and Tuscaloosa.)

Recent Findings in Brief

01/01/97: Alabama ASSETS Demonstration: Final Report: Evaluation of the Alabama Avenues to Self-Sufficiency through Employment and Training Services (ASSETS) Demonstration

Final Implementation Findings: "Overall, an adult receiving AFDC and /or NA benefits was far more likely to be referred to an E&T activity in the ASSETS counties than in the comparison counties"(vi). "ASSETS did not lead to statistically significant increases in adults’ employment, over three years after entering the demonstration"(vii). "There were no statistically significant increases in annual earnings found for adults in any ASSETS county"(vii). "ASSETS increased the involvement in the CSE system of NA-only families with children"(viii). "ASSETS increased support payments to children in NA-only households over all three years after sample entry in Limestone County, and in the first year in Madison County, but had no impact on support payments in Clarke County"(viii). "ASSETS increased welfare payments in Clarke and Madison Counties, and reduced payments in Limestone County"(ix). "ASSETS generally reduced welfare activity [overall] in Limestone and Madison counties and had no effect on welfare activity in Clarke County"(ix). "ASSETS generally increased activity in AFDC in all three ASSETS counties. ASSETS impacts on NA activity, however, were mixed"(ix). "The proportion of active welfare clients working was lower under ASSETS than in the comparison counties, and the degree to which families combined AFDC and NA benefits was higher under ASSETS"(x). "ASSETS generally did increase Medicaid eligibility, but not in exactly the same pattern as AFDC activity"(x). "For each demonstration county ASSETS consistently reduced the combined administrative costs for the AFDC, food stamp, Medicaid, and E&T program...Assets reduced overall case management administrative costs"(xi). "ASSETS increased the mean monthly costs of active CSE cases, as well as overall administrative CSE costs, in all three demonstration counties"(xi). "Clients’ monthly household incomes were lower, and government costs were higher under ASSETS"(xii).

Contact