Study Details | Pathways to Work

27859-Michigan Goal Progre

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: Michigan Goal Progress Success (MI-GPS)

Population and employment barriers:

Cash assistance recipients

Services provided:

Work readiness activities (Employment coaching)

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Study participants were recruited through the Family Independence Program, Michigan's state Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. Five local offices agreed to participate in the evaluation. Staff at these offices recruited applicants and returning recipients who were eligible for cash assistance and who were subject to mandatory work requirements. Staff offered these people the opportunity to participate in the study when they arrived for orientation. Staff randomly assigned people who agreed to participate in the study and had not previously been randomly assigned. The study randomly assigned 2,081 people to the MI-GPS group (1,037) or a comparison group (1,044) from October 2016 to August 2017. After random assignment, participants attended the orientation for the group to which they were randomly assigned (MI-GPS or services as usual). Assignment and analysis occurred at the individual level.

Time period of study:

The pilot project randomly assigned people from October 2016 to August 2017, and examined information on outcomes for up to 15 months following random assignment.

Primary outcome domains examined:

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

Other outcome domains examined:

Grit, self-efficacy, perception of job search skills, motivation to work, barriers to work, and job characteristics

Study funded by:

This research was funded by ACF, Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

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 short-term earnings	Total earnings over follow-up period	Quarters 1–5	High	9,137.00	9,772.00	635.00	2017 dollars	1,908
Increase short-term employment	Currently employed	Month 6	High	43.80	41.40	-2.40	Percentage points	1,323
Increase short-term employment	Employed at any time in follow-up period	Quarters 1–5	High	82.70	82.70	0.00	Percentage points	1,908
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 5	High	62.20	62.30	0.10	Percentage points	1,907
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits	Quarters 1–3	High	1,318.00	1,388.00	70.00	2017 dollars	2,053
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits	Quarters 1–3	High	3,123.00	2,965.00	-158.00	2017 dollars	2,053
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF	Quarters 1–3	High	63.40	66.00	2.60	Percentage points	2,053
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP	Quarters 1–3	High	93.70	92.80	-0.90	Percentage points	2,053

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

A majority (92 percent) of participants were female. Sixty percent of participants were Black or African American, and 33 percent were White. The average age was 28. Almost all sample members (90 percent) had children in their household. All sample members received or were eligible and had applied for TANF; about half (55 percent) had never received TANF before applying, and one-quarter (22 percent) had received TANF for less than one year before applying.

Age

Mean age

28 years

Sex

Female	92%
Male	8%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	60%
White, not Hispanic	33%
Another race	3%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	4%

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

Married

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were employed	13%
Were eligible for or receiving cash assistance	100%

Participant education

Had some postsecondary education	36%
Had a high school diploma or GED	72%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	28%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Five local workforce agencies oversaw implementation. The program was operated jointly by the Michigan state TANF agency, which provided cash assistance, and the Michigan state workforce agency, which provided employment services.

Program history:

MI-GPS is a pilot that did not exist before the start of the study.

Intervention services:

People assigned to the intervention condition received a goal-oriented coaching approach called MI-GPS. Major components of MI-GPS included a redesigned program orientation focused on collaborative work between participants and staff. This orientation helped participants set employment-related goals and achieve their goals. In addition, all participants were assigned to a coach. Coaches worked with participants to set goals and support participants' progress. Coaching focused on identifying and achieving small activities to move toward goals, and letting participants have ownership of their goal-setting process and activities. Finally, MI-GPS offered flexible work activities outside of those mandated by federal TANF work participation requirements.

Mandatory services:

People were required to participate to continue receiving public benefits.

Comparison services:

People assigned to the comparison condition received standard state TANF services, which started with a standard orientation focused on program rules and compliance and a three-week Application Eligibility Period (AEP) focused on identifying and addressing barriers to employment. Applicants who completed the AEP began receiving cash assistance and participating in the Partnership, Accountability, Training, Hope (PATH) program, which included assigned work activities. Throughout AEP/PATH, people worked with a career development facilitator who assigned and tracked participation in work activities and worked with the participant to identify and address barriers to work.

Service receipt duration:

MI-GPS did not specify a duration. People were required to participate to continue receiving TANF cash assistance, which is subject to a 48-month lifetime limit in Michigan. Coaches typically encouraged people to develop incremental goals that they could accomplish in three to six months. For many participants, program duration was relatively short. Only about one two-thirds of applicants were still engaged after three weeks, and about three-quarters of applicants were not receiving cash assistance nine months after random assignment.

Intervention funding:

Michigan TANF

Study publications

Martinson, Karin, Eleanor Harvill, and Deena Schwartz (2020). The effectiveness of different approaches for moving cash assistance recipients to work: Findings from the Job Search Assistance Strategies Evaluation, OPRE Report #2020-113, 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/documents/opre/jsa_cross_site_paper_sep_2020.pdf.

Martinson, Karin, Karen Gardiner, Eleanor Harvill, and Rachel Cook (2020). Implementation and impact of a goal-oriented coaching program for cash assistance recipients in Michigan: The Job Search Assistance Strategies Evaluation, OPRE Report #2020-73, 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/documents/opre/jsa_michigan_report_6_10_final.pdf.

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.

Study of Michigan Goals Progress Success (MI-GPS)