HighStudy 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:
Physical health, Job characteristicsStudy funded by:
Results
View table definitionsScroll 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 | Findings | Sample size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Increase short-term earnings | Annual earnings | Year 1 |
High
|
4,095.00 | 3,840.00 | -255.00 | 2003 dollars |
|
1,504 |
| Increase short-term earnings | Average weekly earnings in past year | Year 1 |
High
|
132.00 | 120.00 | -12.00 | 2003 dollars |
|
300 |
| Increase long-term earnings | Annual earnings | Year 3 |
High
|
6,873.00 | 6,593.00 | -280.00 | 2005 dollars |
|
1,504 |
| Increase short-term employment | Currently employed | Month 12 |
High
|
44.30 | 40.40 | -3.90 | percentage points |
|
300 |
| Increase short-term employment | Employed for four consecutive quarters | Year 1 |
High
|
22.00 | 19.20 | -2.80 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
| Increase short-term employment | Ever employed, quarterly | Quarter 4 |
High
|
42.10 | 39.80 | -2.30 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
| Increase long-term employment | Employed for four consecutive quarters | Year 3 |
High
|
34.20 | 30.90 | -3.30 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
| Increase long-term employment | Ever employed, annual | Year 3 |
High
|
61.70 | 58.60 | -3.10 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
| Decrease short-term benefit receipt | Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, annual | Year 1 |
High
|
1,954.00 | 2,319.00 | 365.00 | 2003 dollars |
|
977 |
| Decrease short-term benefit receipt | Amount of Food Stamp/SNAP benefits, annual | Year 1 |
High
|
2,579.00 | 2,739.00 | 160.00 | 2003 dollars |
|
977 |
| Decrease short-term benefit receipt | Received AFDC/TANF, annual | Year 1 |
High
|
57.70 | 64.40 | 6.70 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
| Decrease short-term benefit receipt | Received Food Stamps/SNAP, annual | Year 1 |
High
|
92.30 | 93.50 | 1.20 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
| Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Average annual amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, follow-up period | Year 1–3 |
High
|
1,304.00 | 1,602.00 | 298.00 | 2004 dollars |
|
1,504 |
| Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Average annual amount of Food Stamp/SNAP benefits, follow-up period | Year 1–3 |
High
|
2,212.00 | 2,305.00 | 93.00 | 2004 dollars |
|
1,504 |
| Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Received AFDC/TANF, annual | Year 3 |
High
|
26.60 | 29.80 | 3.20 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
| Decrease long-term benefit receipt | Received Food Stamps/SNAP, annual | Year 3 |
High
|
70.70 | 69.60 | -1.10 | percentage points |
|
1,504 |
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.
High
Moderate
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.
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 were TANF-eligible single parents (though 4 percent reported not having any children). Most (90 percent) were female, U.S. citizens (98 percent), and native English speakers (98 percent). The majority of participants were White (70 percent) or Hispanic (15 percent). Forty-one percent had not received TANF before the study. The average age was between 29 and 30 years old, and 69 percent of participants had at least a high school degree or equivalent certification.
Age
| Mean age | 30 years |
Sex
| Female | 90% |
| Male | 10% |
Race and ethnicity
| Black or African American |
3%
|
| White, not Hispanic |
70%
|
| Hispanic or Latino of any race |
15%
|
| Unknown, not reported, or other |
12%
|
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% |
Employment and public benefit status
| Were employed | 43% |
| Were unemployed | 57% |
| Cash assistance recipients | 59% |
Education
| Had a high school diploma or GED | 69% |
| Did not have a high school diploma or GED | 32% |
Program implementation
Implementing organization:
Program history:
Program services:
Mandatory services:
Comparison services:
Service receipt duration:
Program funding:
Study publications
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, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families. Available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/resource/the-employment-retention-and-advancement-project-how-effective-are.
Molina, Frieda, Wan-Lae Cheng, Richard Hendra, and MDRC (2008). The Employment Retention and Advancement project: Results from the Valuing Individual Success and Increasing Opportunities Now (VISION) program in Salem, Oregon, New York: MDRC. Available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/resource/results-from-the-valuing-individual-success-and-increasing-opportunities.
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.
1003.1003-Study of Valuing Ind