Study Details | Pathways to Work

3153.04-Wider Opportunities

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the intervention.

Intervention: Wider Opportunities for Women’s (WOW’s) Minority Female Single Parent (MFSP) Program

Population and employment barriers: Female, Parents, Single parents

Services provided: Case management, Education, Supportive services, Training, Occupational or sectoral training, Unpaid work experience, Work experience, Job search assistance

Setting: Urban only

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

This study was a randomized controlled trial. The Minority Female Single Parent (MFSP) evaluation took place in four community-based organizations across the United States. This review focuses on the program operated by WOW. Between November 1984 and December 1987, the study randomly assigned low-income, minority single mothers to the intervention condition—in which evaluators offered study members the opportunity to participate in the program—or to the comparison group—in which study members were ineligible to participate in the MFSP but could seek other training programs or support services. Participants did not need to be collecting welfare (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) payments in order to be eligible. The WOW randomized sample included 1,415 participants, the 12-month follow-up analysis sample included 1,324 participants, and the 30-month follow-up analysis sample included 1,225 participants. The timing of the surveys is with respect to sample members’ application to receive services. Information on the time between application and random assignment or service receipt is not available.

Time period of study:

Enrollment occurred between 1982 and 1987. The program received funding through 1988.

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase long-term earnings, Increase long-term employment, Increase short-term employment

Other outcome domains examined:

Mental health, Family formation, Job characteristics

Study funded by:

The Rockefeller Foundation supported the evaluation.

Results

View table help Need more context or definitions for the table below? View the table help to get insight into terms, measures, and definitions.

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

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Intervention group mean	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase long-term earnings	Total earnings over follow-up period	Months 1-30	High	11,104.00	11,318.00	214.00	1987 dollars	1,225
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 4	High	43.80	43.50	-0.30	percentage points	1,272
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, annual	Quarters 7–10	High	66.30	71.10	4.80	percentage points	1,225

Short-term outcomes are those measured 18 months or fewer after participants are first offered services. Long-term outcomes are those measured between 18 months and 5 years after participants are first offered services. Very long-term outcomes are those measured 5 years or more after participants are first offered services.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

The findings quality describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the intervention. We do not display findings that rate low.

Findings key:

A moderate-to-large favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large favorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that might be due to chance
A favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A favorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that might be due to chance
An unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
An unfavorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size or direction
A finding of no effect that might be due to chance

Favorable findings are impacts in a direction that is socially desirable. Statistical significance indicates the likelihood that a study finding is due to the intervention, rather than due to chance. Findings are described as moderate-to-large if the intervention produced a sufficiently large change in the outcome. An impact receives this designation if the standardized effect size is equal to or greater than 0.25 or equal to or less than -0.25.

Sample characteristics

Participants enrolled in the study were single-parent, female minorities. On average, intervention-group respondents to the 30-month survey were 28 years old at baseline; about 96 percent were African American, and 4 percent were Hispanic. Fewer than half of these participants had received a high school diploma (40 percent), about 11 percent had a GED, and 71 percent of participants reported receiving public assistance in the year before the baseline survey.

Age

Mean age

28 years

Sex

Female

100%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	96%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	4%

Family status

Parents	100%
Single parents	100%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were eligible for or receiving cash assistance

71%

Participant education

Had a high school diploma or GED	51%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	49%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Wider Opportunities for Women

Program history:

WOW had a history as a policy advocate for women in the workplace, equal pay for women, and greater opportunities for women in nontraditional occupations. But the specific program examined in this review was developed for this study.

Intervention services:

The MSFP program implemented by WOW emphasized general employability preparation rather than training for specific occupations, although it aimed to introduce women to nontraditional careers. For participants with strong academic skills, WOW provided opportunities to participate in general technical courses that would lead to nontraditional, high-paying occupations. The program included selective placement into training courses based primarily on standardized testing. Participants who scored at the sixth- or seventh-grade level enrolled in an 11-week course focused on basic educational skills, employability development, and a 3-week period of unpaid work. Participants who scored at the eighth-grade level or above enrolled in a 22-week course that covered basic elements of electromechanics as well as the employability topics that were covered in the 11-week course. Counselors helped clients set employment and training goals and overcome life crises. The program helped find and pay for child care.

Mandatory services:

None.

Comparison services:

Comparison group participants were able to obtain services available in the community but did not receive specific referrals or support from WOW for 30 months.

Service receipt duration:

The duration of service receipt varied depending on needs; as of the 12-month follow-up, 10 percent of participants were still receiving the MFSP services.

Intervention funding:

The Rockefeller Foundation; matching funds from other sources

Study publications

Burghardt, John, and Anne Gordon (1990). The Minority Female Single Parent demonstration: More jobs and higher pay—how an integrated program compares with traditional programs, New York: The Rockefeller Foundation.

Burghardt, John, Anu Rangarajan, Anne Gordon, and Ellen Kisker (1992). Evaluation of the Minority Female Single Parent demonstration: Volume I—Summary report, Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research. Available at https://www.mathematica.org/our-publications-and-findings/publications/evaluation-of-the-minority-female-single-parent-demonstration-volume-i.

Gordon, Anne, and John Burghardt (1990). The Minority Female Single Parent demonstration: Report on short-term economic impacts, Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.

Kerrachsky, Stuart (1994). The Minority Female Single Parent demonstration: Making a difference—does an integrated program model promote more jobs and higher pay?, Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.

View the glossary for more information about these and other terms used on this page.

Study of Wider Opportunities for Women’s (WOW’s) Minority Female Single Parent (MFSP) Program