Three States' Approaches Show Promise of Increasing Work Participation

General Information

View a brief abstract of this project.

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

Evaluator(s) US Government Accountability Office
Investigator(s) Margaret Boeckman (US Government Accountability Office)
Sponsor(s) US Government Accountability Office
Funder(s) Not reported
Subcontractor(s) Abt Associates, Inc.
 
Domain Income Security/TANF
Status Completed (final report released)
Duration Mar 1996 - Mar 1997
Type Research and/or Program Evaluation
Goal To get an early indication of states’ progress in meeting work participation requirements as well as issues facing welfare administrators under the new welfare law (P.L. 104-193).
Program/Policy Description The programs in Massachusetts, Utah, and Michigan were selected because these states had programs in operation long enough to have generated data for preliminary analysis and each state took a distinctly different approach towards increasing participation. Recent policy changes included: 1) their participation requirements, 2) activities that count as participation, 3) exemptions, 4) sanction processes, 5) amount of earned income excluded from benefit calculation, 6) transitional child care and transitional Medicaid, and 7) time limits (in some cases).
Notes GAO received comments on a draft of this report from the three case study states: Massachusetts, Michigan, and Utah. These states provided technical clarifications about their programs and additional interpretations about certain data, which were incorporated as appropriate. Comments were requested from HHS, but none were received.
 
Last Updated 03/24/98
Type of Summary Reviewed
External Reviewer(s) Mark Nadel (US Government Accountability Office)
Contact(s) Mark Nadel (not reported)
US Government Accountability Office
441 G Street NW
(T) (202)-512-7125
(F) not reported
Publications Department GAO Publications (info@gao.gov)
US Government Accountability Office
P.O. Box 37050
(T) (202) 512-6000
(F) (202) 512-6061

Populations Studied

Target Population Recipients/participants/clients
Local government
Subgroups Analyzed None
Sample Size and Unit Massachusetts’ Welfare Reform ’95
Michigan’s Family Independence Program (FIP)
Utah’s Single Parent Employment Demonstration Program

Sites Studied

Massachusetts
Utah
Michigan