PFS was designed to increase child support payments, to support improved parenting and involvement, and to increase the employment and earnings of unemployed noncustodial parents of children receiving welfare.

PFS was designed to increase child support payments, to support improved parenting and involvement, and to increase the employment and earnings of unemployed noncustodial parents of children receiving welfare.

PFS was one of the demonstration projects made possible by Section 1115 waivers to the rules in effect at the time for the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. These Section 1115 waivers allowed states to test new approaches to advance the objectives of the AFDC program.

The PFS demonstration had the following four core components that were intended to reinforce one another: (1) peer support that was built around a curriculum called Responsible Fatherhood that was designed to inform fathers of their noncustodial rights and obligations; (2) employment and training activities, including job search assistance and opportunities for education and skills training, occupational training, on-the-job training, and paid work experiences; (3) enhanced child support enforcement, which included steps to expedite the modification of child support awards or flexible rules to allow child support orders to be reduced during PFS participation; and (4) mediation services for parents to resolve their differences. Case management services were also available.

Most sites in the demonstration, which included a combination of state and local agencies and/or community-based organizations, offered peer support concurrently with the other program components.

Most participants were noncustodial fathers who had to satisfy the following criteria: (1) be under- or unemployed, (2) have child support orders in place but not currently be making regular payments, and (3) have children for whom they owed support and who were receiving or had received AFDC.

The demonstration took place in seven urban sites across the United States: Springfield, MA; Trenton, NJ; Los Angeles, CA; Dayton, OH; Grand Rapids, MI; Jacksonville, FL; and Memphis, TN.

Year evaluation began: 1994
Populations and employment barriers: Parents, Noncustodial parents
Intervention services: Case management, Education, Supportive services, Training, Occupational or sectoral training, On-the-job training, Work experience
Setting(s): Urban only

Effectiveness Rating and Effect By Outcome Domain

Back to top
View Table Help Need more context or definitions for the Outcome Domain table below? View the "Table Help" to get more insight into terms, measures, and definitions.

Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns

Outcome domain Term Effectiveness rating Effect in 2018 dollars and percentages Effect in standard deviations Sample size
Increase earnings Short-term Supported favorable $1,401 per year 0.07 5611
Long-term Little evidence to assess support favorable $377 per year 0.02 5020
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Increase employment Short-term Little evidence to assess support 0% (in percentage points) 0.00 5611
Long-term Little evidence to assess support favorable 0% (in percentage points) 0.00 5020
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Decrease benefit receipt Short-term No evidence to assess support
Long-term No evidence to assess support
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Increase education and training All measurement periods No evidence to assess support

Studies of this Intervention

Back to top
Study Quality Rating Study Counts per Rating
High High 1