View the full project profile

Project Description

Indiana’s welfare reform is a comprehensive initiative that made substantial changes to both the overall AFDC program and the AFDC employment and training program, IMPACT (Indiana Manpower Placement and Comprehensive Training Program). Welfare recipients are required to participate in IMPACT if they meet federal qualifications for participation in the JOBS program ( including if the youngest child is older than 1 year, which was changed in 1997-1998 from 3 years).

Indiana’s welfare reform’s main provisions are currently organized under three broad headings: 1) new requirements to foster personal responsibility, including a social contract- the Personal Responsibility Agreement (PRA)-; 2) a shift in employment and training services to a “Work First” approach; and 3) special work incentives and supports.

Project duration: Jun 1995 - Jun 2002

Sites studied include Indiana- statewide

Sample Characteristics and Sites Studied

Approximately 66,000 welfare applicants and recipients. Of these, 63,000 are program group (reformed AFDC and IMPACT) and 3,000 are control group (traditional AFDC and IMPACT) members.

Recent Findings in Brief

09/01/03: Indiana Welfare Reform Evaluation: The Indiana Welfare Reform Evaluation: Five-Year Impacts, Implementation, Costs and Benefits

Final Implementation Findings

• Indiana implemented a strong work first program.
• The switch to an integrated worker model posed challenges.
• Welfare reform led to increased local control over service delivery and reliance on contracting for services.
• Indiana made ongoing changes to its performance-based contracting process.

• For both the first-year and later cohorts, Indiana’s program produced positive and statistically significant impacts on overall IMPACT participation rates and on rates of participation in each of the three IMPACT activity types.
• Only about 7% of Welfare Reform group members reached the 24 month adult time limit within five years of follow up.
• Compared to their likelihood of reaching the time limit, Welfare Reform group members were twice as likely to have had a family cap birth.
• For the first year cohort, the Personal Responsibility Agreement (PRA) sanctions were more likely to be applied than the family cap or the 24 month limit.

First Cohort
• Indiana's program reduced receipt of TANF and food stamps.
• Indiana's welfare reform program increased earnings and employment rates in each of the follow-up years.
• Welfare reform did not affect total income.
• Welfare reform did not affect health insurance rates for adults or children.
• Indiana's program did not affect reported child maltreatment.

Later Cohort
• TANF payments for the later cohort were larger than the former cohort.
• Indiana’s program increased the average employment rate across the eight follow-up quarters but did not significantly increase earnings.
• Indiana’s program did not produce impacts on income (measured as the sum of earnings, TANF payments, and food stamp benefits).
• Welfare reform may have decreased substantiated child maltreatment reports.

• The economic benefits of welfare reform of families, resulting mainly from increased employment, slightly outweighed the loss of welfare payments and other income.
• Welfare reform benefited tax payers because savings more than offset welfare expenditures.

Contact