View the full project profile

Project Description

This multi-year national evaluation is designed to learn how best to help TANF and other low-income rural families move from welfare to work. The evaluation will lead to increased information on well-conceived rural welfare-to-work strategies and lessons about the operational challenges and methods to address them that can be used by state and local TANF agencies and others. During the initial phase of this initiative, 10 states received planning grants to develop strategies targeted to serve rural TANF populations. These states received assistance from a Federal technical assistance contractor. In FY 2001, MPR was selected to evaluate the implementation phase of the demonstration and the first participating state, Illinois, began implementation in a five-county site.

Project duration: Sep 2000 - Sep 2005

Sites studied include Phase 1:
Iowa,
Illinois,
Louisiana,
Maryland,
Minnesota,
Mississippi,
Missouri,
New York,
Vermont,
Washington.

Phase 2:
Illinois,
Nebraska,
and
Tennessee

Sample Characteristics and Sites Studied

Phase 1: States used planning grants to develop strategies targeted to serve rural populations.

Phase 2: Visits are conducted in each site 14 months after demonstration start-up. Using random assignment, individuals eligible for scarce program slots are being assigned to either the WtW program group (who are offered WtW services) or a control group (who are not offered WtW services but who may use all other available services). Follow-up interviews will be conducted with participants 15 months after program entry.

Illinois: 300 program and 300 control group participants sampled from July 2001 - December 2002.
Nebraska: 330 program and 270 control group participants sampled from April 2002 - March 2004.
Tennessee: 1,320 program and 880 control group participants sampled from October 2002 - March 2004.

Recent Findings in Brief

04/01/04: Rural Welfare-to-Work Strategies Demonstration Evaluation: Final Program Implementation Report

Final Implementation Findings:

• Overall, the RWtW programs’ implementation has conformed to their models. The programs all developed and benefited from earlier pilot projects that were refined by state welfare agencies and their partner organizations.
• Program staff members, especially in Future Steps and BNF, help clients address a range of specific issues and employment barriers. To varying extents, they also identify and refer clients to various outside service providers, resources, and potential employers.
• Although clients’ employment cannot necessarily be attributed to their participation in the demonstration programs, program records suggest that many participants in Future Steps and BNF do have some success in securing jobs. (Most First Wheels clients must already be employed to qualify for a loan.)
• Independent partner organizations bring the advantages of location, reputation, and staff expertise to their programs. Previous collaboration experience between the state welfare agencies and their partners helped smooth program startup and operation in Illinois and Nebraska.
• Future Steps and BNF served at least as many clients as planned. First Wheels has had difficulty reaching its goals, largely because of competing priorities in local offices and insufficient coordination on outreach between the state welfare agency and its partner organization.
• Program staff members typically work in locations distant from program administrators and exercise substantial discretion and autonomy in their daily work. The programs have sometimes found it challenging to identify and hire people who have the combination of desired staff qualifications and who are familiar with the rural communities the programs serve.

Contact