Skip to sections below

Share this intervention

PrintEmail

  • 0.07,1.00
  • 0.07,2.00
  • 0.05,1.00

Summary

Florida’s Project Independence aimed to help people eligible for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) join the workforce and become more self-sufficient.

Project Independence centered on two different service tracks: one focused on immediate job search, and the other on meeting individual goals and educational needs through education or training or an extended job search. After an orientation, participants were assigned to one of the two service tracks depending on their past education and work histories.

In the first service track, participants who were deemed “job ready”—those who had completed at least 10th grade or had worked for at least 12 of the past 36 months—conducted a 2-week job search during which they contacted at least 12 employers. Those who were unable to find employment through the job search were assigned to a two- to three-week job club in which staff provided guidance on best practices in finding a job. This included help developing résumés and interview skills. If the participant was still unable to obtain a job, a case manager formally assessed the participant’s employment goals and educational needs. The case manager then helped the participant develop an employability plan, and referred the participant to one or both of the following: additional education or training available in the community or an extended job search period.

In the second service track, participants who were deemed “not job ready” worked with a case manager who conducted a formal assessment to discuss career interests, helped develop an employability plan, and referred the participant to basic education or training programs consistent with the plan.

Participants had to fulfill participation requirements or risked losing part or all of their AFDC benefits. All participants received or were referred to supportive services as needed, including child care, tuition assistance, transportation, tools, and uniforms.

Participants could receive Florida’s Project Independence services for two years. People were eligible if they qualified for AFDC, were younger than 60, were working fewer than 30 hours per week, were not in the second or third trimester of pregnancy, did not have a child younger than 3, and were not permanently ill or incapacitated.

Florida’s Project Independence was implemented in 9 counties in Florida, randomly selected from the state’s 25 counties with the largest caseloads of welfare receipt. (These counties collectively represented about 90 percent of the state’s AFDC caseload.)

3338-Florida's Project In
Populations and employment barriers: Parents

Effectiveness rating and effect by outcome domain

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

View table help

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 0.020 18233
Long-term Little evidence to assess support favorable $314 per year 0.015 18233
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Increase employment Short-term Supported favorable 2% (in percentage points) 0.051 18233
Long-term Little evidence to assess support favorable 0% (in percentage points) 0.007 18233
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Decrease benefit receipt Short-term Little evidence to assess support favorable $-187 per year -0.068 18233
Long-term Little evidence to assess support favorable $-190 per year -0.069 18233
Very long-term No evidence to assess support
Increase education and training All measurement periods Little evidence to assess support favorable 3% (in percentage points) 0.051 1029
* This intervention was assessed as supported for this domain, meaning it achieved one or more statistically significant, favorable effects. However, the intervention has an average effect size that is unfavorable because the average includes all effects in this domain - both statistically significant and favorable effects and statistically insignificant but unfavorable effects.

Effectiveness rating key:

  • Well-supported Well-supported   
  • Supported  Supported   
  • Not supported  Not supported   
  • Mixed support  Mixed support   
  • Insufficient evidence  Insufficient evidence   
  • No evidence  No evidence
Effectiveness rating terms?

Studies of this intervention

Study quality rating Study counts per rating
High High 1
Back to top

Implementation details

Dates covered by study

Project Independence began in 1987. Study enrollment started between July 1990 and October 1990 in each of the nine counties involved in the study and continued until August 1991. The evaluators measured effects up to two years after enrollment.

Organizations implementing intervention

The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) developed and operated Project Independence, which was Florida’s Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training program. Project Independence implemented services in 9 Florida counties that were randomly selected from the pool of 25 counties with the largest AFDC caseloads: Bay, Broward, Dade, Duval, Hillsborough, Lee, Orange, Pinellas, and Volusia. Each county had 1 to 8 Project Independence units, for a total of 26 units. Starting in 1992, HRS subcontracted responsibility for operations to the Florida Department of Labor and Economic Security (LES).

Populations served

Project Independence’s participants consisted of people applying for or receiving AFDC benefits who were considered nonexempt from mandatory participation. To be nonexempt, people had to meet all the following criteria: (1) have a child age 3 or older; (2) be younger than 60; (3) be working fewer than 30 hours per week, including not working at all; (4) not be pregnant or in the first trimester of pregnancy; and (4) not be permanently ill or incapacitated. At first, Project Independence was mandatory for all participants randomized into the program group, but after 1991, program group members were exempt from mandatory participation if their child care needs were not met. The study evaluated outcomes of single parents with preschool-age children.

Thirty-four percent of the sample members were White, not Hispanic; 38 percent were Black, not Hispanic; and 22 percent were Hispanic of any race. The majority spoke English (76 percent). Sample members were, on average, 32 years old. About half (51 percent) of participants reported their youngest child was age 6 or older. At the time of random assignment, 39 percent of participants were first-time AFDC applicants. Fifty-two percent of participants had their high school diploma or GED. Most Project Independence participants (82 percent) were considered job ready.

Description of services implemented

Florida’s Project Independence was an employment-first program aimed at enhancing partnerships between state agencies and other organizations to increase employment, earnings, and income of AFDC participants and reduce welfare assistance costs.
Regional public assistance specialists referred all nonexempt AFDC applicants and participants undergoing eligibility redetermination to attend a required Project Independence orientation. During the orientation, staff conducted an initial assessment to determine participants’ job-readiness status and to place them into a service track. In the first service track, job-ready participants conducted an individual job search, and if they did not find employment, they joined a group job club. Participants who continued to be unemployed after completing job club were referred to the second service track, which consisted of a formal assessment with a case manager to create an employability plan and referrals to employment and training activities. Participants who were not job ready went immediately into the second service track. Project Independence services entailed the following:

  • Individual job search. Job-ready participants engaged in a two-week individual job search as an initial activity. Participants who did not find employment during that period or during the job club (or who did not participate in an individual job search) engaged in extended job search for up to four more weeks. Participants in the initial or extended job search completed at least six employment applications per week and documented and reported their applications to a case manager biweekly.
  • Job club. Program staff conducted job clubs in two phases. During Phase 1, participants received classroom-based instruction for two to three weeks to learn about labor market trends, conduct job searches, prepare a résumé, complete job applications, conduct interviews, and learn soft skills. During Phase 2, participants could practice contacting employers and scheduling job interviews over the phone during a supervised group job search.
  • Education and training. Participants could be referred to high school and adult basic education, GED preparation, and English-as-a-second-language classes. Participants could also engage in community-based vocational or classroom-based occupational skills training, on-the-job training, customized training, employment preparation, community college, or work experience activities, as consistent with their employability plan. These trainings and activities were held at local adult schools, community colleges, and subcontracted local Job Training Partnership Act agencies. Participants engaged in the high school and adult basic education activities for an average of three months and the skills training or community college activities for an average of six and a half months.
  • Supportive services. Participants could receive additional support or assistance to ensure engagement in program activities or secure employment. These services included subsidies for formal and informal child care, tuition for training or college classes, transportation, tools, and uniforms.

Participants received sanctions that reduced their AFDC grant for not attending orientation and not proving good cause for their absence. Failure to attend the orientation led to deregistration of the participant from Project Independence by the end of the 12-month follow-up period. Participants could also receive sanctions for failing to attend any mandated program activity.

HRS changed the intervention in some ways during the study period. In 1991, the “not job ready” criteria expanded to include participants who did not have a high school diploma or GED and who had worked fewer than 12 months in the 2 years before random assignment. Furthermore, because of budget constraints in 1991, HRS reduced the availability of child care services for Project Independence participants, which, in turn, excused participants who could not secure formal or informal child care from mandated participation in the program.

Challenges. Hiring freezes during state budget cuts prevented Project Independence leaders from filling open jobs. The remaining staff in the program had to take on additional caseloads, meaning there were caseloads of up to 200 per staff. The increase in caseload size reduced case managers’ ability to monitor and enforce participation and provide individualized case management to participants. To address this challenge, program staff were allowed to decrease enforcement of the program requirements after participants attended orientation and completed a job search activity.

Service intensity

The program model called for job-ready participants to be involved in job search activities for two weeks or extended individual job search activities for two to four weeks. Job-readiness skills training (job club) was generally held for at least 20 hours per week for 2 to 4 weeks.

Within 12 months of random assignment, most participants (77 percent) attended the orientation. Excluding the orientation and initial assessment that determined their service track, 43 percent of participants engaged in at least 1 program activity. Close to one-third participated in any job search or job club activity, and 18 percent of participants participated in any education or training activity, with training or community college having the highest participation rate (7 percent) and self-initiated activities having the lowest (5 percent).

Comparison conditions

The comparison group was not eligible to receive Project Independence services, including case management and employment and training services, for two years following random assignment. However, participants in the comparison group were eligible for subsidized child care and tuition assistance for training or community college courses under the same guidelines as intervention participants, and they received a list of employment and training services in the community.

Partnerships

Various partners played roles in implementing Project Independence:

  • HRS handled policy development, planning, and administration of the employment services for participants in Project Independence. The HRS public assistance specialists evaluated and determined the eligibility of prospective program participants, introduced the program and the evaluation to new clients, collected information from participants, helped complete the random assignment process, and referred participants to Project Independence.
  • The state and regional LES administrators hired staff for each Project Independence site.
  • Subcontracted local Job Training Partnership Act agencies provided job-readiness skills training.
  • A consortium of local school districts, Job Training Partnership Act agencies, and community colleges provided education and training services.

Staffing

Most Project Independence sites had HRS and LES staff. The number of staff at each Project Independence site varied by county. On average, each county had 21 staff, with an average of 7 staff per Project Independence site. In total, there were 190 Project Independence staff members, including 137 HRS staff, 48 LES staff, and 5 staff employed by other health and human services agencies. The average age of staff was 41. Most staff (80 percent) had a bachelor’s degree or higher.

The staffing at Project Independence generally consisted of the following: 

  • One HRS unit supervisor per site who trained, directed, and evaluated program staff. 
  • HRS employment counselors (that is, case managers) who provided case management services, orientation, assessments, and referrals; coordinated supportive services; and monitored participants.
  • LES employment specialists who assisted with case management activities, engaged participants on job development activities or job clubs, and helped participants find employment.

Fidelity measures

The study did not discuss any tools to measure fidelity to the intervention model.

Funding source

The Project Independence evaluation received funding from HRS, The Ford Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training program supplied federal matching funds for state welfare-to-work initiatives, including Project Independence.

Funding for subsidized child care provided for more than 30 days came from Children and Families Child Care Title IV-A. Short-term child care for fewer than 30 days was funded by the Project Independence supportive services budget.

Cost information

The average cost per participant was $3,214 in 2018 dollars.

This figure is based on cost information reported by authors of the study or studies the Pathways Clearinghouse reviewed for this intervention. The Pathways Clearinghouse converted that information to a single amount expressed in 2018 dollars; for details, see the FAQ. Where there are multiple studies of an intervention rated high or moderate quality, the Pathways Clearinghouse computed the average of costs reported across those studies.

Cost information is not directly comparable across interventions due to differences in the categories of costs reported and the amount of time interventions lasted. Cost information is not an official price tag or guarantee.

The information contained here reflects how the intervention was implemented at the time of the evaluation.

Local context

The 9 counties selected for the Project Independence intervention included 58 percent of the state’s AFDC caseload in 1990. The selected counties consisted of suburban and rural areas and the eight largest cities in Florida: Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa, St. Petersburg, Hialeah, Orange, Fort Lauderdale, and Hollywood.

The official poverty rate in 1989 was 9.6 percent. The counties with the highest percentage of poverty were Dade (14.2 percent), Bay (11.2 percent), and Duval (9.8 percent).

Characteristics of research participants
Black or African American
38%
White
34%
Unknown, not reported, or other
7%
Hispanic or Latino of any race
22%

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if the authors reported race and ethnicity separately; in these cases, we report the category White, rather than White, not Hispanic.

State(s) where implemented

AL AK AZ AR CA CO CT DE DC FL GA HI ID IL IN IA KS KY LA ME MD MA MI MN MS MO MT NE NV NH NJ NM NY NC ND OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VT VA WA WV WI WY Canada

The Pathways Clearinghouse refers to interventions by the names used in study reports or manuscripts. Some intervention names may use language that is not consistent with our style guide, preferences, or the terminology we use to describe populations.

Back to top