Work Plus allowed newly employed Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients to partially reduce work requirements in order to pursue education and training concurrent with 20 hours of work per week.

Work Plus allowed newly employed Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients to partially reduce work requirements in order to pursue education and training concurrent with 20 hours of work per week.

Program staff encouraged Work Plus participants to pursue education and training activities in addition to a required 20 hours of work per week, with the philosophy that working reinforced the value of education and training and that working while in school or training increased the likelihood of program completion and the use of newly attained skills. Participation in education and training was voluntary, but if participants chose not to pursue education and training, they were required to participate in other permitted activities—including work—for at least 32 hours per week. Participants received intensive case management services, including access and referrals to mental health, domestic violence, and substance use treatment services. Participants were also automatically eligible for supportive services, including child care and transportation assistance, which would otherwise have required enrolling in a separate program. Services continued as long as participants remained employed. If participants became unemployed, they could continue Work Plus services for up to 60 days before being transferred to a separate, job-search services program. The program was available to TANF recipients who had worked at the state minimum wage or higher for at least 20 hours in one or more weeks in the prior month. Participants also had to have completed a preemployment program and expect to be working at least 20 hours per week on average for the next month. Work Plus was implemented in Riverside County, CA. The evaluation also tested a Training Focused intervention and compared the effects of the Work Plus and Training Focused interventions.

Year evaluation began: 2001
Populations and employment barriers: Cash assistance recipients, Employed, Parents
Intervention services: Case management, Education, Substance use disorder treatment and mental health services, Supportive services, Training
Setting(s): Tested in multiple settings

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 Little evidence to assess support favorable $418 per year 0.02 2285
Long-term Little evidence to assess support unfavorable $-418 per year -0.02 2638
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Increase employment Short-term Little evidence to assess support favorable 1% (in percentage points) 0.02 2285
Long-term Little evidence to assess support unfavorable -1% (in percentage points) -0.02 2638
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Decrease benefit receipt Short-term Mixed support favorable $-55 per year -0.02 2285
Long-term Little evidence to assess support unfavorable $55 per year 0.02 2285
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Increase education and training All measurement periods No evidence to assess support

Sample Characteristics

Back to top
State or region: California

Participant race and ethnicity
Black or African American
20%
White, not Hispanic
34%
Hispanic or Latino of any race
43%
Another race
3%

Studies of this Intervention

Back to top
Study Quality Rating Study Counts per Rating
High High 2