Study Details | Pathways to Work

3313.3091.01-Indiana Welfare Refo

Study quality: High

High

Intervention: Indiana Welfare Reform Initiative

Population and employment barriers: Cash assistance recipients, Parents, Single parents

Services provided: Financial incentives, Sanctions, Supportive services, Work readiness activities, Job search assistance

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study Design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

The study reported findings for two cohorts and two types of households. This review focuses on findings for the early cohort of single parents; other reviews on this site focus on the findings for the late cohort of single parents and the early cohort of two-parent households, respectively. For the early cohort, evaluators randomly assigned single-parent families who had received welfare at some time between May 1995 and April 1996 to the Welfare Reform or Traditional Welfare group. Most were welfare clients already on welfare when welfare reform began. Indiana's welfare eligibility computer system assigned clients randomly to groups, and caseworkers informed clients of their assignment. New applicants were randomly assigned at the point they were determined to be eligible for cash assistance.

Time period of study:

The early cohort includes all single-parent families who received welfare at some point between May 1995 and April 1996. Evaluators measured impacts during the five years after random assignment, between May 1995 and June 2001.

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase short-term earnings, Increase long-term earnings, Increase long-term employment, Increase short-term employment, Decrease short-term benefit receipt, Decrease long-term benefit receipt, Increase education and training

Other outcome domains examined:

Child maltreatment Other child outcomes, Family structure, Sources of incomes, Material hardship, Financial strain

Study funded by:

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families

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	Annual earnings	Year 1	High	2,647.00	2,878.00	231.00	2001 dollars	66,415
Increase long-term earnings	Annual earnings	Year 5	High	6,320.00	6,889.00	569.00	2001 dollars	66,417
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 4	High	45.10	47.60	2.50	percentage points	66,413
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 20	High	51.00	54.60	3.60	percentage points	66,413
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, quarterly	Quarter 4	High	52.40	48.90	-3.50	percentage points	66,440
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, annual	Year 5	High	2,031.00	1,928.00	-103.00	2001 dollars	66,440
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received any Food Stamps, quarterly	Quarter 20	High	69.00	66.50	-2.50	percentage points	66,440
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 5	High	2,338.00	2,273.00	-65.00	2001 dollars	66,440
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, annual	Year 5	High	696.00	410.00	-286.00	2001 dollars	66,444
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, quarterly	Quarter 20	High	36.60	34.50	-2.10	percentage points	66,446
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 5	High	1,150.00	1,062.00	-88.00	2001 dollars	66,448
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, quarterly	Quarter 20	High	21.90	16.70	-5.20	percentage points	66,442
Increase education and training	Received a trade license or certificate	Year 5	High	10.20	12.60	2.40	percentage points	2,359
Increase education and training	Received a high school diploma	Year 5	High	3.00	4.50	1.50	percentage points	2,359
Increase education and training	Received a GED	Year 5	High	5.50	4.30	-1.20	percentage points	2,359
Increase education and training	Received an associate's degree	Year 5	High	3.40	2.90	-0.50	percentage points	2,359
Increase education and training	Received a bachelor's degree	Year 5	High	0.90	1.50	0.60	percentage points	2,359
Increase education and training	Received graduate degree	Year 5	High	0.20	0.20	0.00	percentage points	2,359

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

This review examines an early cohort of single-parent families reported in the study, and another review on this site examines a later cohort. Both cohorts of clients were nearly all female and 27 or 28 years old, on average. At the time the study began, most in the early single-parent cohort had never been married (59 percent). More than half (58 percent) were White, and most of the remaining clients were African American. More than half (59 percent) had 12 or more years of education. Most (79 percent) had one or two children. Slightly less than half (47 percent) had at least one child younger than 3 years old. The majority had been employed at some time during the five quarters before random assignment, but average earnings during the previous year were low ($2,799). Forty-three percent were exempt from work requirements.

Family status

Parents	100%
Single parents	100%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were eligible for cash assistance	100%
Had low incomes	100%

Intervention Implementation

Implementing organization:

Indiana Family and Social Services Administration

Program history:

The study began at the same time that welfare reform policies were initiated in Indiana.

Intervention services:

The Welfare Reform group was subject to new welfare reform policies. Members of this group were required to do the following: participate in employment and training services that emphasized job search; face a 24-month time limit on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) receipt and a provision that held the TANF grant amount constant if a child was born 10 months or more after the family began receiving TANF; and sign a personal responsibility agreement to obtain immunizations for their children, ensure school attendance, and have parents who are under 18 and on assistance live at home or with a responsible adult. They could face sanctions if they did not participate in work activities for at least 20 hours per week and if they did not uphold the terms of the personal responsibility agreement. This group could also receive work incentives in the form of continued eligibility for Medicaid, child care subsidies, and other supportive services at higher earnings levels; in addition, the welfare grant amount remained constant when earnings increased.

Mandatory services:

A subset of the intervention group was mandated to work and could be sanctioned for noncompliance.

Comparison services:

The Traditional Welfare group was subject to pre-reform welfare policies. Members of this group were required to participate in work activities but were less likely to be referred to the work component of the state's welfare program. Staff rarely enforced sanctions for noncompliance with work requirements for Traditional Welfare clients. These clients did not face a time limit on TANF receipt or have to sign a personal responsibility agreement.

Service receipt duration:

Clients in the Welfare Reform group could remain enrolled in TANF for up to 24 months, whereas clients in the Traditional Welfare group were not subject to a time limit.

Intervention funding:

Indiana Family and Social Services Administration.

Study Publications

Beecroft, Erik, Kevin Cahill, and Barbara Goodson (2002). The impacts of welfare reform on children: The Indiana Welfare Reform evaluation, Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/indiana_welfare_reform.pdf.

Beecroft, Erik, Wang Lee, David Long, Pamela Holcomb, Terri Thompson, Terri, Nancy Pindus, Carolyn O'Brien, and Jenny Bernstein (2003). The Indiana Welfare Reform evaluation: Five-year impacts, implementation, costs and benefits, Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [Early cohort, single parent.] Available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/indiana_5yr_rpt.pdf.

Fein, David, Erik Beecroft, William Hamilton, Wang Lee, Pamela Holcomb, Terri Thompson, and Caroline Ratcliffe (1998). The Indiana Welfare Reform evaluation: Program implementation and economic impacts after two years, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

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

Study of Indiana Welfare Reform Initiative—Early cohort, single parent