Study Details | Pathways to Work

3320-Study of Building Ne

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition, suggesting the findings can be attributed to the program.

Program: Building Nebraska Families (BNF)

Characteristics of study participants:

Cash assistance recipients, Public benefits recipients, Unemployed

Services provided:

Basic skills/bridge programs, Case management, Financial education, Legal assistance, Soft skills training

Setting: Rural only

Methods and Standards Protocol version used for review: Version 1.0

Learn about our protocol

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

In more than 65 rural counties across Nebraska, eligible individuals (active or sanctioned TANF recipients identified by case managers as being hard to employ because of skill deficiencies or low personal functioning) were randomly assigned to the program group or the comparison group. The individual was the unit of assignment and the unit of analysis.

Time period of study:

The program served clients from March 2002 through June 2004.

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 receipt

Other outcome domains examined:

Physical health, Mental health, Housing, Family structure, Barriers to work

Study funded by:

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ACF funded the study.

Results

View table definitions

Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Program group mean	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase short-term earnings	Earnings in the month before month 18, $	Month 18	High	528.00	578.00	50.00	2004 dollars	600
Increase short-term earnings	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 6	High	985.00	1,228.00	243.00	2004 dollars	600
Increase long-term earnings	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 12	High	1,205.00	988.00	-217.00	2004 dollars	600
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, annual	Year 1	High	68.90	79.70	10.80	percentage points	600
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 12	High	44.40	42.90	-1.50	percentage points	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Supplemental Security Income or Disability Insurance during the month before month 18, $	Month 18	High	46.00	76.00	30.00	2004 dollars	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of food stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 1	High	257.00	251.00	-6.00	2004 dollars	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of food stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 1	High	180.00	176.00	-4.00	2004 dollars	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Social Security during the month before month 18 $	Month 18	High	27.00	24.00	-3.00	2004 dollars	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Unemployment Insurance during the month before month 18, $	Month 18	High	26.00	3.00	-23.00	2004 dollars	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Receipt of Supplemental Security Income or Disability Insurance during the month before month 18, %	Month 18	High	7.70	12.00	4.30	percentage points	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Receipt of Social Security during the month before month 18, %	Month 18	High	2.40	3.40	1.00	percentage points	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Receipt of Unemployment Insurance during the month before month 18, %	Month 18	High	3.40	1.20	-2.20	percentage points	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, annual	Year 1	High	98.20	95.80	-2.40	percentage points	600
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received food stamps/SNAP, annual	Year 1	High	97.50	97.30	-0.20	percentage points	600
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of food stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 2	High	218.00	207.00	-11.00	2004 dollars	600
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of food stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 2	High	98.00	89.00	-9.00	2004 dollars	600
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, annual	Year 2	High	55.50	51.20	-4.30	percentage points	600
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received food stamps/SNAP, annual	Year 2	High	82.30	82.20	-0.10	percentage points	600

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.

Means are not displayed when not reported or not aligned with the impact estimates. For example, if the impact estimate is regression-adjusted but only unadjusted means are reported in the study, the unadjusted means are not displayed as they are not aligned with the adjusted impact estimate.

Impact estimates are not shown when the estimate units cannot be converted to natural units.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

The findings quality describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the program. 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 program, rather than due to chance. Findings are described as moderate-to-large if the program 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

On average, sample members were 28 years old, and 93 percent were female. Three-quarters were White and non-Hispanic, 13 percent were Hispanic, and 12 percent belonged to another race. Nearly one-third of sample members did not have a high school diploma or GED, and 27 percent had more than a high school diploma or GED. Sixteen percent were working for pay at the time of baseline, and 92 percent reported earnings less than $10,000 in the year before baseline. Ninety-seven percent of sample members had ever received TANF or Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and 88 percent were receiving it at the time of baseline. Fifty-three percent were living in single-adult households, and 60 percent lived in a household in which the youngest child was younger than 3.

Age

Mean age

28 years

Sex

Female	93%
Male	7%

Race and ethnicity

Black or African American	2%
White, not Hispanic	76%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	13%
Unknown, not reported, or other	10%

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.

Employment and public benefit status

Were employed	16%
Were unemployed	84%
Public benefits recipients	92%
Cash assistance recipients	100%

Education

Had some postsecondary education	27%
Had a high school diploma or GED	68%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	32%

Program implementation

Implementing organization:

University of Nebraska-Lincoln Cooperative Extension and the Nebraska Health and Human Services System

Program history:

Building Nebraska Families is a modified version of the Food Stamp Nutritional Educational Program, which was also run by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Cooperative Extension. Building Nebraska Families was designed to better address the needs of rural TANF recipients, who required more life skills education.

Program services:

Program group members received weekly or biweekly home visits during which master’s-level educators delivered curricula designed to improve life skills and family management practices and provided informal counseling and support in accessing needed services and resources. Once they enrolled, members of the program group were required to participate and could be sanctioned if they did not.

Mandatory services:

Individuals voluntarily enrolled in the Building Nebraska Families program; however, once enrolled, individuals were required to participate in the Building Nebraska Families program or face sanctions.

Comparison services:

Comparison group members could not enroll in Building Nebraska Families but could receive all other available services.

Service receipt duration:

Enrollment lasted an average of eight months. Support was available to clients for up to six months after they found employment.

Program funding:

Federal TANF funding.

Cost information:

The average cost of providing the intervention was $9,528 per participant. The average cost of providing comparison group services was $0 per person. The net intervention cost, or difference between the two, was $9,528 per person. This represents how much more it cost to provide intervention services compared to comparison services.

These figures are based on cost information reported by study authors. The Pathways to Work converted that information to a single amount expressed in 2024 dollars; for details, see the FAQ. This information is not an official price tag or guarantee.

Study publications

Meckstroth, Alicia, Quinn Moore, Andrew Burwick, Colleen Heflin, Michael Ponza, & Jonathan McCay (2019). Experimental Evidence of a Work Support Strategy That Is Effective for At-Risk Families: The Building Nebraska Families Program. Social Service Review, 93(3), 389-428.

Meckstroth, Alicia, Andrew Burwick, and Quinn Moore (2008). Teaching self-sufficiency: An impact and benefit-cost analysis of a home visitation and life skills education program. Findings from the rural Welfare-to-Work Strategies Demonstration Evaluation, 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/teaching_self.pdf.

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

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

Study of Building Nebraska Families (BNF)