| Source |
Administrative data
|
| Title |
Quarterly earnings from the UI database
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
Universe of study subjects
|
| Sites |
Minnesota Department of Economic Security
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Not applicable.
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
Used for quarterly earnings data.Data from DataFlex the database run by the Dept of Economic Security.
|
| |
| Source |
Field Research
|
| Title |
Site Visits
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
MAXIMUS staff conducted numerous interviews with a variety of supervisors and line workers in the welfare offices and in the employment services providers. Also attended welfare orientations, employment services overviews, job clubs, selected workshops, and reviewed program documents.
|
| Sites |
Blue Earth, Carver, Clay, Kandiyohi, McLeod, and Nicollet Counties
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Not applicable.
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
Conducted annually for the first four years of the study. A comprehensive site report was produced each year. Each visit lasted 1-2 days per county.
MFIP was implemented in the state on January 1, 1998 and the site visits that year focused on documenting how the program was implemented in each of the study counties. MAXIMUS developed a model of the various case processing and employment procedures and initially filled in the template for each county. In 1999-2000, the site visits reexamined the model and noted any changes in the study counties. Of particular note, we found that the immediacy of the WorkFIRST message and procedures were diluted during the transition to MFIP statewide. MAXIMUS recommended ways to improve the model, which we documented in 2000. In 2001, MAXIMUS compiled a county narrative that documented how the program was implemented over the four year period. The narrative was sent out for review and comment by various financial work staff and supervisors and by employment services supervisors and staff.
|
| |
| Source |
Focus Group
|
| Title |
Client Focus groups
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
Sample of clients who had participated in the program.
In 1999, MAXIMUS conducted two focus groups in each of the study counties. One group was composed of active clients and the second included welfare leavers. The total N was 41 participants. In 2000, MAXIMUS conducted only one focus group in each county, composed of welfare leavers. The total N was 30 participants. Focus groups were dropped from the last site visit round at the request of DHS.
|
| Sites |
Blue Earth, Carver, Clay, Kandiyohi, McLeod, and Nicollet Counties
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Not applicable.
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
The focus group sessions were designed to elicit in-depth information from participants about their experiences and impressions about the program. MAXIMUS organized and conducted each focus group. We used a semi-structured interview guide to ensure that each issue was thoroughly discussed yet did not impose too much structure to restrict a free-flowing discussion. The target number for each focus group was five to six participants. Each session lasted 2 hours. The focus groups in 1999 focused primarily on the participants’ experiences with employment services and their overall assessment of the program. In 2000, they focused on the experiences of welfare leavers, such as employment stability, income security, self-sufficiency, food insecurity, and access to health care.
|
| |
| Source |
Interview
|
| Title |
Semi-structured interviews:
Interviews with welfare workers and employment services providers
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
Typically the financial worker supervisor and one or two line workers and the employment services supervisor and one or two counselors
|
| Sites |
All study counties
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Not applicable.
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
Conducted during the site visits in each county. The interviews focused on documenting the case processing and employment services procedures, changes in these processes and procedures over time, and impressions about the effectiveness of the program. The interviews also were tailored to address specific topics of interest to DHS staff.
|
| |
| Source |
Administrative data
|
| Title |
Welfare participation and public assistance receipt data
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
Universe of study subjects
|
| Sites |
Minnesota Department of Human Services
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Not applicable
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
Obtained from the MAXIS cash assistance database operated by DHS. Used to obtain data on welfare eligibility and participation and receipt of various forms of public assistance after leaving welfare (e.g., Food Stamps and medical assistance).
|
| |
| Source |
Administrative data
|
| Title |
Employment services and post-exit employment and earnings data
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
Universe of study subjects
|
| Sites |
Minnesota Department of Economic Security
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Not applicable.
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
Obtained from Dataflex Database run by the Department of Economic Security. Used to obtain data on employment services participation, services utilization, and job outcomes and wages.
|
| |
| Source |
Interview
|
| Title |
Client Intake Interview/ Telephone Intake Interview
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
N= 1366 valid cases in the study.
|
| Sites |
All study sites
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Response rate: 78.1%
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
MAXIMUS initially collected information on client intake using a data collection form that was distributed to clients during the application process. The data collection began Oct-Nov 1998. MAXIMUS shifted to contacting the clients by telephone in mid-1999 after it became clear that the procedures developed to complete the paper forms were too burdensome for some of the study counties. Both and paper form and telephone interview were identical and collected data on the respondent's situation and history including whether they have held employment previous to application, why they applied for assistance (both personal and financial), their plans for the future, and their attitudes regarding their present situation.
|
| |
| Source |
Interview
|
| Title |
Client Exit Interview:
Telephone interview upon exiting assistance
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
N=1,080 cases exited MFIP, although 139 were excluded for a variety of reasons
N=1,024 valid cases who exited MFIP;
|
| Sites |
All study sites
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Response Rate: 66%
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
MAXIMUS attempted to conduct an exit interview with each client who left assistance within a few months of their exit date. This interview was conducted to identify the reasons why clients exited MFIP. In addition, it collected data about the respondent's experiences while on assistance, how they were able to become self-sufficient, what employment services were utilized to accomplish this goal, and what they think their ability is to remain self-sufficient.
|
| |
| Source |
Interview
|
| Title |
Client One-year Anniversary Interview
12 Month Anniversary Telephone Interview
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
N=1,366 cases reached 12-month anniversary, of which 309 were excluded.
N=1,057 valid cases that reached their 1 year anniversary;
|
| Sites |
All study sites
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Response rate: 73.9%
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
MAXIMUS conducted telephone interviews with all clients one year after they applied for welfare. Two separate interviews were developed, depending on the client’s welfare status in their anniversary month. Core questions included questions regarding utilization of employment services and attitudes toward welfare. Specialized questions included questions about the respondent's experiences over the past twelve months, including employment services received, work history and wages, additional assistance needed, personal or family issues that prevent departure from the system, and their attitudes regarding their financial situation.
|
| |
| Source |
Interview
|
| Title |
Client 18-Month Anniversary Interview
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
N=1,366 cases reached 18-month anniversary, although 408 were excluded for a variety of reasons. N=958 valid cases reached their 18 month anniversary.
|
| Sites |
All study sites.
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Response rate: 71.4%
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
MAXIMUS conducted telephone interviews with all clients 18 months after they applied for welfare. Two separate interviews were developed, depending on the client’s welfare status in their 18th month. Core questions included questions about changes in their family situation and personal lives, educational attainment of their children, utilization of health services, and child care issues. Specialized questions included information about the respondent's work history and wages and unmet needs of the clients.
|
| |
| Source |
Administrative data
|
| Title |
Welfare participation and public assistance receipt data
|
| Sample Characteristics/Data Collection |
Universe of study subjects
|
| Sites |
Minnesota Department of Human Services
|
| Response Rate/Attrition Notes |
Not applicable
|
| Additional Execution Notes |
Obtained from the MAXIS cash assistance database operated by DHS.
Used to obtain data on welfare eligibility and participation and receipt of various forms of public assistance after leaving welfare (e.g., Food Stamps and medical assistance).
|
| |
