Study Details | Pathways to Work

3171.3171.06-WRP Incentives Only

Study quality: High

High

Intervention: Welfare Restructuring Project (WRP) Incentives Only

Population and employment barriers: Parents, Cash assistance recipients

Services provided: Case management, Financial incentives, Health services, Supportive services, Work readiness activities

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study Design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Between July 1994 and December 1996, evaluators randomly assigned applicants for welfare cash assistance in Vermont to one of three groups: the WRP group (60 percent), the WRP Incentives Only group (20 percent), and the Aid to Needy Families with Children (ANFC) group (20 percent). Those already receiving welfare payments during that period were also eligible for the program and were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions at their semiannual eligibility review. Nearly all households applying for or already receiving cash assistance were eligible for random assignment; staff eventually determined that some clients were exempt from the WRP work requirement. This review considers only the comparison of the WRP Incentives Only group with the ANFC group for two-parent households with an unemployed parent. Other reviews on this site examine the WRP group or examine the experiences of other types of households.

Time period of study:

Applicants were randomly assigned between July 1994 and December 1996 and were followed for 24 quarters (6 years).

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase short-term earnings, Increase long-term earnings, Increase very long-term earnings, Increase long-term employment, Increase very long-term employment, Increase short-term employment, Decrease short-term benefit receipt, Decrease long-term benefit receipt, Decrease very long-term benefit receipt

Other outcome domains examined:

Housing, Nutrition, Financial assets, Family formation, Child well-being

Study funded by:

The state of Vermont, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the Ford Foundation funded the evaluation of the program.

Results

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	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Intervention group mean	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase short-term earnings	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 6	High	2,990.00	3,162.00	172.00	1996 dollars	660
Increase long-term earnings	Average quarterly earnings of other parent, follow-up period	Months 1–42	High	1,015.00	1,005.00	-10.00	1998 dollars	1,083
Increase long-term earnings	Average quarterly earnings of both parents, follow-up period	Months 1–42	High	3,221.00	3,265.00	44.00	1998 dollars	1,083
Increase long-term earnings	Average quarterly earnings of principal earner, follow-up period	Months 1–42	High	2,205.00	2,260.00	55.00	1998 dollars	1,083
Increase very long-term earnings	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 24	High	4,608.00	4,820.00	212.00	2001 dollars	660
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	72.40	70.90	-1.50	percentage points	660
Increase long-term employment	Either parent employed, quarterly	Quarter 14	High	72.10	74.40	2.30	percentage points	1,083
Increase long-term employment	Principal parent employed, quarterly	Quarter 14	High	58.90	59.80	0.90	percentage points	1,083
Increase long-term employment	Other parent employed, quarterly	Quarter 14	High	44.70	47.70	3.00	percentage points	1,083
Increase very long-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 24	High	69.90	74.90	5.00	percentage points	660
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received cash assistance, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	37.10	42.40	5.30	percentage points	660
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of cash assistance, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	522.00	634.00	112.00	1996 dollars	660
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	64.30	63.10	-1.20	percentage points	660
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	422.00	437.00	15.00	1996 dollars	660
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP, follow-up period	Months 1–42	High	91.20	90.20	-1.00	percentage points	1,083
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Average quarterly amount of cash assistance, follow-up period	Months 1–42	High	491.00	592.00	101.00	1997 dollars	1,083
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Average quarterly Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, follow-up period	Months 1–42	High	391.00	403.00	12.00	1997 dollars	1,083
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Receive cash assistance, follow-up period	Months 1–42	High	76.50	79.60	3.10	percentage points	1,083
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Amount of cash assistance, quarterly	Quarter 24	High	257.00	233.00	-24.00	2001 dollars	660
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, quarterly	Quarter 24	High	35.20	28.50	-6.70	percentage points	660
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, quarterly	Quarter 24	High	221.00	196.00	-25.00	2001 dollars	660
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Received cash assistance, quarterly	Quarter 24	High	18.40	15.70	-2.70	percentage points	660

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

For the six research districts and two-parent families with an unemployed parent only, about 70 percent of the overall sample was married and living with a spouse. Roughly 28 percent of the overall sample had no earnings for the 12 months before random assignment. More than half (58 percent) of the overall sample had a child younger than 3.

Family status

Parents	100%
Single parents	0%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were eligible for cash assistance

100%

Intervention Implementation

Implementing organization:

Vermont state Aid to Needy Families with Children (ANFC, the state Aid to Families with Dependent Children agency)

Program history:

The program began under a waiver from federal welfare laws, before passage of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. The Vermont legislature approved the program in January 1994, and the program and the study both began in July 1994.

Intervention services:

The WRP provided financial incentives for work by enhancing the amount of earnings disregarded when determining benefits and by providing supportive services to individuals who successfully transitioned from welfare to work. For instance, the first $150 earned and 25 percent of earnings thereafter were disregarded; vehicles of any value were not counted among assets; and people who transitioned from welfare to work could receive three years of Medicaid coverage and transitional child care assistance. During the program, case managers helped clients develop and pursue an employment plan.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

The comparison group, referred to as the ANFC group, received less generous financial incentives through more limited disregard of earnings and less generous supportive services. For example, the first $120 in earnings and 33 percent of earnings were disregarded for the first four months of employment; then, the disregard of earnings decreased over the the first year of employment and was limited to the first $90 after the first year of employment. Only up to $1,500 of a vehicle's value could be excluded from total assets. Individuals who successfully transitioned from welfare to work received only one year of transitional Medicaid.

Service receipt duration:

There was no limit on participants' receipt of cash assistance.

Intervention funding:

The program was implemented and funded by the Vermont Department of Social Welfare, later called the Department of Prevention, Assistance, Transition, and Health Access.

Study Publications

Bloom, Dan, Charles Michalopoulos, Johanna Walter, and Patricia Auspos (1998). WRP: Implementation and early impacts of Vermont's Welfare Restructuring Project, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Hendra, Richard, and Charles Michalopoulos (1999). Forty-two-month impacts of Vermont's Welfare Restructuring Project, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Scrivener, Susan, Richard Hendra, Cindy Redcross, Dan Bloom, Charles Michalopoulos, and Johanna Walter (2002). WRP: Final report on Vermont's Welfare Restructuring Project, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/vt_report.pdf.

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

Study of Welfare Restructuring Project (WRP) Incentives Only—Two-parent households with an unemployed parent