|
|
|
Findings Available
Final Implementation Findings
Interim Descriptive/Analytical Findings
Findings
|
04/01/01:
Rural Welfare to Work Strategies Project: Planning and Promoting Welfare to Work Experiments in Rural Areas: Some Lessons of Experience
|
|
Interim Descriptive/Analytical Findings:
“The usual methods to actively engaging clients in employment-oriented activities becomes more expensive…services cost more when it is difficult for clients to get to offices and for agency personnel to reach clients, develop jobs, and coordinate services.”
“The welfare caseload in each rural office may be low, so achieving adequate sizes for meaningfully testing new initiatives will often involve multiple offices, and that means experimenters will need to recruit multiple sites and coordinate them. Dispersed operations complicate random assignment evaluations, because random assignment requires delivering at least two different service packages in each area.”
“While finding jobs accessible to TANF recipients can be a problem in urban areas, the problem can be even more severe for rural areas, and it is complicated when the job are provided by only a few employers. Local outcomes are likely to depend on choices made by a few firms, so incentives exist to specifically tailor innovations to the needs of those specific firms. This in turn complicates general testing across multiple sites. It can also create a vulnerable situation when success depends on the cooperation from a handful of employers. For example, staff in rural Ohio report that a major truck manufacturing plant with starting salaries as high as $14.00/hour (and good benefits) will not hire TANF participants.”
“The problem of choice arises in services as well. In rural areas the number of service providers is probably small, with the consequence that it is difficult to respond to underperformance--and overpricing--by switching to a different service provider. Again, this means that when experiments are undertaken, the sponsoring agency may have to take a much larger hand in ensuring that necessary services are available and delivered in accordance with the intent of the experiment than would be the case if multiple providers were available.”
“In urban areas employers have many opportunities to observe good results when people are hired from groups--including TANF recipients--traditionally judged to be risky. A strong economy has multiplied such examples, which means there are good chances for TANF applicants and recipients to find and keep jobs. In rural areas, the experiences tend to be further away, so welfare agencies need to make more effort to gain cooperation from employers and find ways to communicate the benefits that businesses achieve when the successfully employ workers from more challenging backgrounds.”
“Paradoxically, while the short supply of some kinds of knowledge may be detrimental to rural welfare to work efforts, in some cases the absence of urban anonymity can hurt workers, and the stability of rural populations can make for long memories. Front-line staff tell repeatedly about a problem that “Susan” may have getting a job because employers will remember her “Uncle Bob” as an unproductive employee who causes a lot of resentment among other staff.”
|
| |
|
10/01/02:
Rural Welfare to Work Strategies Demonstration Evaluation: A Summary of the Evaluation Design and Demonstration Programs
|
|
Interim Implementation Findings:
Illinois Future Steps Program: All five counties in the Future Steps service area have participated. Sample enrollment is expected to exceed the target, equaling approximately 660. MPR has created a customized management information system for Future Steps to help gather information on service delivery and, at the same time, provide records that will be useful to Future Steps staff.
Building Nebraska Families Program: As of October 4, 2002, the sample numbered 150, with 81 people in the program group and 69 in the control group. Enrollment will continue through March 2004, or until the target sample of 600 is reached. MPR has developed a database, the BNF Information System (BNFIS), to systematically
record information on service delivery and enable BNF staff to maintain records on participants. Designed in consultation with BNF staff, the BNFIS uses printed forms and Access database software to document participants’ contact and demographic information, their initial and follow up responses to statements on the program checklist, the content of teaching sessions and other contacts with participants, and success marker ratings.
Tennessee First Wheels Program: Sample enrollment for the First Wheels evaluation is expected to begin in October 2002 and continue through March 2004, or until the target sample size of 2,200 is reached. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. has developed the First Wheels Applicant Tracking Information System (FWATIS) to help implement the demonstration evaluation. The central eligibility determination worker will use this database to collect information on each applicant and track application approvals and denials. RC&D staff will collect data on loans—including the amount and terms, the type of vehicle purchased, and repayment activity—in a separate First Wheels program participant database.
|
| |
|
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.
|
| |
|
04/01/04:
Rural Welfare to Work Strategies Demonstration Evaluation: Implementing Welfare-to-Work Programs in Rural Places: Lessons from the Rural Welfare-to-Work Strategies Demonstration Evaluation
|
Interim Implementation Findings:
- Overall, the Rural WtW 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, esp. in Future Steps and BNF, help clients to address a range of specific issues and employment barriers. To varying extents they also identify and refer clients to various 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.
- 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 start up and operation in IL and NE.
- 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 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.
|
| |
|
|
