
Study design
Design:
Study group formation:
Time period of study:
Primary outcome domains examined:
Increase short-term earnings, Increase long-term earnings, Increase short-term employment, Increase long-term employment, Decrease short-term benefit receipt, Decrease long-term benefit receiptOther outcome domains examined:
Transportation, Work environment and job characteristics, Benefits received at work, Household income and composition, Child care, Health care coverageStudy funded by:
Results
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 | Findings | Sample size |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Increase short-term earnings | Annual earnings | Year 1 |
High ![]() |
6,008.00 | 6,221.00 | 213.00 | 2003 dollars |
![]() |
1,728 |
Increase short-term earnings | Weekly earnings | Year 1 |
Moderate ![]() |
159.00 | 167.00 | 8.00 | 2003 dollars |
![]() |
598 |
Increase long-term earnings | Annual earnings | Year 4 |
High ![]() |
7,511.00 | 8,135.00 | 624.00 | 2006 dollars |
![]() |
1,728 |
Increase short-term employment | Currently employed | 12 months |
Moderate ![]() |
67.60 | 67.80 | 0.20 | percentage points |
![]() |
598 |
Increase short-term employment | Employed for four consecutive quarters | Year 1 |
High ![]() |
43.10 | 45.20 | 2.10 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
Increase short-term employment | Ever employed, annual | Year 1 |
High ![]() |
66.20 | 69.70 | 3.50 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
Increase long-term employment | Currently employed | 42 months |
High ![]() |
67.70 | 66.60 | -1.10 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,023 |
Increase long-term employment | Employed for four consecutive quarters | Year 4 |
High ![]() |
43.10 | 44.60 | 1.50 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
Increase long-term employment | Ever employed, annual | Year 4 |
High ![]() |
64.30 | 65.40 | 1.10 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
Decrease short-term benefit receipt | Received AFDC/TANF, annual | Year 1 |
High ![]() |
88.10 | 85.10 | -3.00 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
Decrease short-term benefit receipt | Received Food Stamps/SNAP, annual | Year 1 |
High ![]() |
98.80 | 99.50 | 0.70 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Average annual amount of AFDC/TANF benefits | Years 1–3 |
High ![]() |
1,010.00 | 778.00 | -232.00 | 2004 dollars |
![]() |
1,728 |
Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Average annual amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits | Years 1–3 |
High ![]() |
3,959.00 | 4,111.00 | 152.00 | 2004 dollars |
![]() |
1,728 |
Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Received AFDC/TANF, annual | Year 3 |
High ![]() |
28.20 | 20.50 | -7.70 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Received Food Stamps/SNAP, annual | Year 3 |
High ![]() |
84.00 | 86.00 | 2.00 | percentage points |
![]() |
1,728 |
High
Moderate
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.
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
Sample characteristics
Participants in the study were single-parent recipients of TANF cash assistance benefits who worked 30 hours or more per week for at least six months but were still eligible for TANF. More than 87 percent of participants were Black and non-Hispanic. Nearly all (99 percent) were female, and 100 percent had children in their household. More than half (56 percent) were high school dropouts. About 55 percent had some employment covered by unemployment insurance in the two quarters before random assignment.
Age
Mean age | 33 years |
Sex
Female | 99% |
Male | 1% |
Participant race and ethnicity
Black or African American | 87% |
White, not Hispanic | 4% |
Unknown or not reported | 1% |
Hispanic or Latino of any race | 8% |
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.
Family status
Parents | 100% |
Single parents | 100% |
Participant employment and public benefit status
Were employed | 100% |
Were eligible for or receiving cash assistance | 100% |
Participant education
Had a high school diploma or GED | 44% |
Intervention implementation
Implementing organization:
Program history:
Intervention services:
Mandatory services:
Comparison services:
Service receipt duration:
Intervention funding:
Cost information:
These figures are based on cost information reported by study authors. The Pathways Clearinghouse converted that information to a single amount expressed in 2018 dollars; for details, see the FAQ. This information is not an official price tag or guarantee.
Study publications
Redcross, Cindy, Victoria Deitch, and Mary Farrell. (2010). Benefit-Cost Findings for Three Programs in the Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) Project. MDRC. Available at: https://www.mdrc.org/publication/benefit-cost-findings-three-programs-employment-retention-and-advancement-era-project.
Bloom, Dan, Richard Hendra, and Jocelyn Page (2006). The Employment Retention and Advancement project: Results from the Chicago ERA site, 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.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/full_544.pdf.
Bloom, Dan, Richard Hendra, Karin Martinson, and Susan Scrivener (2005). The Employment Retention and Advancement project: Early results from four sites, 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/early_results.pdf.
Hendra, Richard, Keri-Nicole Dillman, Gayle Hamilton, Erika Lundquist, Karin Martinson, Melissa Wavelet, Aaron Hill, and Sonya Williams (2010). The Employment Retention and Advancement project: How effective are different approaches aiming to increase employment retention and advancement? Final impacts for twelve models, New York: MDRC. Available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/resource/the-employment-retention-and-advancement-project-how-effective-are.
View the glossary for more information about these and other terms used on this page.
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.
3094.01-Employment Retention