Study Details | Pathways to Work

24963.03-Study of Transitions

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 that findings can be attributed to the program.

Program: TransitionsSF

Characteristics of study participants:

Adults (age 25+), Noncustodial parents, Parents, Unemployed

Services provided:

Case management, Child support assistance, Job development, Job readiness, Job search assistance, Performance- or behavior-based financial incentives, Post-employment participant follow-up, Soft skills training, Subsidized employment/transitional jobs

Setting: Urban only

Methods and Standards Protocol version used for impact review: Version 2.0

Learn about our protocol

Cost: This study includes cost information reviewed by Pathways to Work (under the cost standards in Methods and Standards Protocol Version 2.0).

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

The Division of Child Support Services (DCSS) identified a sample of eligible individuals from their database each month and invited them to participate in the study. Individuals were eligible if they were a noncustodial parent between the ages of 18 and 60; were living in San Francisco; were either unemployed or underemployed; and were behind in child support payments by 121 or more days, had made child support payments of less than $100 in the past 120 days, had zero or reserved orders because of low income, or were required to have child support orders established within 30 days. To reach their target recruitment number, DCSS staff reached out to custodial parents for help contacting noncustodial parents and also advertised the program in the community, including in halfway houses, jails, and community centers. Interested individuals attended an orientation at a public library and, if they agreed to participate, attended a random assignment appointment two days later where they were randomly assigned to either the TransitionsSF program or a comparison group. A total of 995 people were randomly assigned, with 502 individuals assigend to the program group and 493 individuals assigned to the comparison group.

Time period of study:

The study ran from November 2011 to July 2022. Study enrollment ran from November 2011 to December 2013. Data collection occurred from November 2011 to July 2022, with outcomes measured using administrative data over an eight-year follow-up period and using survey data at 12-month and 30-month follow-ups.

Primary outcome domains examined:

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

Other outcome domains examined:

Child support, family relationships, criminal justice, material hardship, physical health, economic well-being, personal well-being, social support

Study funded by:

This study was funded by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (Contract Number GS-10F-0245N) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (Contract Number HHSP233201000029YC).

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	Annual earnings, NDNH data	Year 1	High	5,038.00	7,151.00	2,113.00	2013 dollars	994
Increase long-term earnings	Annual earnings, NDNH data	Year 5	High	12,922.00	14,554.00	1,632.00	2015 dollars	993
Increase very long-term earnings	Annual earnings, NDNH data	Year 8	High			141.00	2022 dollars	994
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly, NDNH data	Quarter 4	High	39.90	45.90	6.00	percentage points	994
Increase short-term employment	Number of quarters employed, annual, NDNH data	Year 1	High	1.30	2.10	0.80	quarters	994
Increase long-term employment	Currently employed, survey data	Month 30	High	45.70	51.50	5.80	percentage points	655
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, annual, NDNH data	Year 5	High	53.10	63.00	9.90	percentage points	993
Increase long-term employment	Number of quarters employed, annual, NDNH data	Year 5	High	1.70	2.00	0.30	quarters	993
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received food stamps/SNAP, monthly, survey data	Month 30	High	43.00	38.00	-5.00	percentage points	655

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

The study examined noncustodial parents with low income who were currently unemployed or underemployed. Most participants were male (88 percent). The majority of participants had prior justice involvement (79 percent), a high school diploma or GED (72 percent) and were Black (67 percent).

Characteristics may sum to greater than 100 percent due to rounding.

Age

Mean age	40 years
Young adults (age 16-24)	5%
Adults (age 25+)	95%

Sex

Female	12%
Male	88%

Race and ethnicity

Black or African American	67%
White, not Hispanic	3%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	19%
Asian	5%
Unknown, not reported, or other	5%

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	8%
Parents	100%
Noncustodial parents	100%

Employment and public benefit status

Were unemployed	100%
Public benefits recipients	45%

Education

Had some postsecondary education	4%
Had a high school diploma or GED	72%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	29%
Postsecondary credential	4%

Specific employment barriers

Were involved with the justice system	79%
Were fomerly incarcerated	28%
Were experiencing homelessness	14%
Were military veterans	1%

Program implementation

Implementing organization:

Goodwill Industries; San Francisco Department of Child Support Services

Program history:

The program is based on a subsidized employment program that the city's Human Services Agency funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Program services:

The TransitionsSF program served unemployed and underemployed noncustodial parents. The program included three phases. The first, which typically lasted three weeks, was a pre-transitional job period, during which participants took assessments to determine whether they needed substance abuse services, mental health services, or other services. If participants needed such services, case managers made appropriate referrals. During this time, participants also received job-readiness training to help them develop their soft skills. In the second phase, participants were placed in subsidized transitional jobs for five months. Participants were placed at a nonprofit (Goodwill), in the public sector, or in the private sector, depending on their readiness. Near the end of the transitional job, participants received job search assistance. In the third phase, staff assisted participants for one year with job searching if the participant had not found a job, or with retention and advancement if they had found a job. During each phase, participants received case management services. As an incentive to continue participation in the program, participants had suspended driver's licenses reinstated, and their child support payments were reduced while they continued participating in the program.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

Comparison group members could participate in other programs, including the San Francisco Department of Child Support Services' Custodial and Noncustodial Employment Training Program.

Service receipt duration:

The pre-transitional jobs period lasted three weeks; participants were then placed in transitional jobs for five months. Participants received support for one year after the transitional job ended. In total, participants received services for about a year and a half.

Program funding:

This program was funded by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration through a grant for the Enhanced Transitional Jobs Demonstration.

Study publications

Barden, Bret, Randall Juras, Cindy Redcross, Mary Farrell, and Dan Bloom (2018). New perspectives on creating jobs – Final impacts of the next generation of subsidized employment programs, 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/opre/resource/the-enhanced-transitional-jobs-demo-new-perspectives-creating-jobs-final-impacts-next-generation-subsidized-employment-programs

Bloom, Dan (2015). Testing the next generation of subsidized employment programs: An introduction to the Subsidized and Transitional Employment Demonstration and the Enhanced Transitional Jobs Demonstration, OPRE Report #2015-58, 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/opre/resource/testing-next-gen-subsidized-employ-intro-enhanced-trans-jobs-demo

Cummings, Daniella (2023). Effects of the subsidized and transitional employment demonstration on earnings after eight years, OPRE Report 2023-204, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at https://acf.gov/opre/report/effects-subsidized-and-transitional-employment-demonstration-earnings-after-eight-years

Cummings, Danielle, and Dan Bloom (2020). Can subsidized employment programs help disadvantaged job seekers? A synthesis of findings from evaluations of 13 programs. OPRE Report 2020-23. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at https://acf.gov/sites/default/files/documents/opre/sted_final_synthesis_report_feb_2020.pdf

Fink, Barbara (2018). Findings from in-depth interviews with participants in subsidized employment programs, OPRE Report #2018-120, 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/sted_topics_qualitative_508.pdf

Redcross, Cindy, Bret Barden, and Dan Bloom (2016). The Enhanced Transitional Jobs Demonstration: Implementation and early impacts of the next generation of subsidized employment programs, 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/opre/resource/the-enhanced-transitional-jobs-demonstration-implementation-early-impacts-next-generation-subsidized-employment-programs

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 TransitionsSF