Minnesota Work First and MFIP Programs Evaluation

General Information

View a brief abstract of this project.

View a complete, printer-friendly profile of this project.

Evaluator(s) MAXIMUS, Inc.
Investigator(s) Robert Bleimann (MAXIMUS, Inc.)
Sponsor(s) State of Minnesota Department of Human Services
Funder(s) State of Minnesota Department of Human Services
US Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families
 
Domain Income Security/TANF
Status Completed (final report released)
Duration Jan 1998 - Mar 2003
Type Research and/or Program Evaluation
Goal To conduct an impact evaluation of two distinct approaches to welfare reform in Minnesota. The treatment program was called WorkFIRST while the comparison (or counterfactual) program was represented by the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), the state’s TANF program. The research design was quasi-experimental because the study subjects in the comparison counties were selected non-randomly. Inclusion in the study was limited to first-time applicants to public assistance in the state.

The following research questions were addressed in the study.

  • Was WorkFIRST a more effective front end than MFIP in terms of moving new welfare applicants off welfare and into employment? What were the effects of the different time triggers on welfare participation?
  • Did the immediacy of the work message embodied by WorkFIRST result in applicants spending less time receiving employment services?
  • What effect did WorkFIRST sanctions have on clients?
  • What effect did participation in WorkFIRST and MFIP have on client outcomes after exiting MFIP and at their 1-year and 18-month anniversaries?
Program/Policy Description The WorkFIRST program was authorized in 1995 when the Minnesota Legislature enacted welfare reform legislation. The state obtained an 1115 waiver from DHHS and implemented the program in two small counties, Carver and Clay, in November 1996. In 1997, the Legislature passed a law that authorized MFIP as the statewide TANF program. This same legislation also reauthorized the WorkFIRST program for a further 5 years. The law stipulated that WorkFIRST applicants were subject to the eligibility and benefits requirements that guided MFIP, Food Stamps, and Medical Assistance. Thus, WorkFIRST was embedded within MFIP with respect to eligibility and benefits. The programs differed in the requirements for employment and training and in the severity of sanctions for non-compliance. The WorkFIRST was discontinued by the two counties in March 2001.

WorkFIRST targeted “first-time applicants” to public assistance -- those who had not previously received welfare benefits in the state. The purpose of the program was to: (1) ensure that the participant was working as early as possible; (2) promote greater opportunity for economic self-support, participation, and mobility in the work force; and (3) minimize the risk for long-term welfare dependency. WorkFIRST embodied the concepts that work should be the “primary means of economic support” and that applicants should be required to aggressively approach the job market.

Key WorkFIRST policies included the following:
1. The “work” requirement for eligible applicants was almost immediate as applicants were required to start a job search within 5 days of applying for assistance.
2. Work activities focused on job search and employment. Job training and employment training were very limited.
3. Employment services were made available to applicants, even before eligibility was determined. Post - placement services available to clients for 180 days.
4. Non-compliance with key program requirements could lead to a unit 6-month sanction. Non-compliance with other requirements could lead to an individual sanction.
5. Childcare and transportation assistance were available immediately for job search and employment activities; even before eligibility was determined.
6. Transitional child care/transportation assistance were available if the recipient left the program due to increased earnings.

The Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP) is Minnesota’s implementation of the TANF program. The purpose of this program was to (1) encourage and enable all families to find employment; (2) help families increase their income; and (3) prevent long-term dependence on welfare as a primary source of family income. MFIP was similar to WorkFIRST in that it required clients to participate in work and work-related activities whose object was to place them on the most direct path to unsubsidized employment.

MFIP also provided financial incentives that were designed to “make work pay” for welfare recipients who actually worked. This was achieved through a combination of income disregards and higher income thresholds that permitted working clients to retain more income. The philosophy that best characterized MFIP was progressive labor force attachment. Welfare recipients were encouraged to make a progressive transition from dependency toward self-sufficiency by promoting entry into the workforce and supplementing or replacing welfare as the primary source of family income.

For the purposes of this study, individual participation in the MFIP comparison counties was limited to first-time applicants. Recipients who had ever received AFDC or other assistance were excluded from the study.

Key MFIP policies included the following:
1. Counties were given the option of requiring applicants to engage in work activities anywhere from the same month all the way up to 6 months after the applicant was found to be eligible for assistance. This is called the “time trigger” and applied to single parents only. The time trigger was 1 month for two parents families. The legislature changed the time trigger policy in the four comparison counties to 1 month for all parents in January 2001.
2. Childcare and transportation assistance were immediately available for job search and employment activities; transitional assistance was available only after three months on welfare.
3. Job activities included work, training, limited post-secondary programs, and other activities.
4. Job retention services available at county option.
5. Graduated sanctions for non-compliance; 10% of grant for first occurrence; vendor payment of rent and 30% of other cash assistance thereafter.

Notes No notes reported
 
Last Updated 03/30/04
Type of Summary Reviewed
External Reviewer(s) Robert Bleimann (MAXIMUS, Inc.)
Contact(s) Robert Bleimann (not reported)
MAXIMUS, Inc.
11419 Sunset Hills Road
(T) (703) 251-8500
(F) (703) 251-8240
Submitter(s) Research Forum Staff (info@researchforum.org)
National Center for Children In Poverty
215 West 125th St, 3rd Fl
(T) (646)284-9600
(F) not reported

Populations Studied

Target Population Recipients/participants/clients
Applicants
Subgroups Analyzed None
Sample Size and Unit N= 500 first-time applicants in WorkFIRST counties;
N= 477 first-time applicants 1-month MFIP counties;
N= 388 first-time applicants in the 6-month MFIP counties.
Total = 1365 eligible first-time applicant cases in the study

Various criteria were used for inclusion in the study:
1. The applicant applied for and was found to be eligible to receive cash assistance between January 1, 1998 and December 31, 2000.
2. The applicant had never received AFDC, MFIP, refugee assistance or Family General Assistance prior to the application date.
3. One or more caretakers had to be eligible in the assistance unit and the applicant could not be a minor caretaker who was deferred from work requirements.

Sites Studied

WorkFIRST Program:
Carver, Clay counties, MN

MFIP Program:
1-month Time Trigger: Kandiyohi, McLeod counties, MN.
6-month Time Trigger:Blue Earth, Nicolett counties, MN.