Study Details | Pathways to Work

24977.02-Paycheck Plus Demons

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: Paycheck Plus: Employment Referral Services

Services provided:

Case management, Work readiness activities

Setting: Urban only

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

The study considered in this review is a substudy of the Paycheck Plus Demonstration (considered in another review). In order to be eligible for Paycheck Plus, participants had to (1) be unmarried, (2) have a valid Social Security number, (3) not plan to claim a dependent child on their taxes, (4) be between 21 and 64 years old, (5) have earned less than $30,000 in the prior year, and (6) not receive or be applying to receive Supplemental Security Income or Social Security Disability Insurance. Between September 2013 and February 2014, more than 6,000 eligible participants were recruited and randomly assigned to the group that received Paycheck Plus or to a comparison group that was not eligible for Paycheck Plus but was eligible to receive other existing tax credits. The study further restricted attention to the 5,968 individuals randomly assigned between September 27, 2013, and February 18, 2014. Among individuals assigned to the Paycheck Plus group who earned less than $10,000 per year, half were randomly assigned to an employment referral group that received additional information about, and referrals to, local employment services. This review examines the difference across these two subgroups of Paycheck Plus intervention group members.

Time period of study:

2014 to 2016

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase short-term earnings, Increase long-term earnings, Increase short-term employment, Increase long-term employment

Other outcome domains examined:

None

Study funded by:

The demonstration was funded by the New York City Mayor's Office for Economic Opportunity (NYC Opportunity), the Robin Hood Foundation, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Child Support and Enforcement, and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

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	Annual earnings	2014	High	7,428.00	7,561.00	133.00	2016 dollars	2,137
Increase long-term earnings	Annual earnings	2016	High			168.00	2016 dollars	2,137
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, annual	2014	High	72.80	75.10	2.30	percentage points	2,137
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, annual	2016	High			2.50	percentage points	2,137

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

All study participants were unmarried and had earned less than $10,000 in the year before study enrollment.

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	58%
Another race	12%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	30%

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

Had low incomes

100%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

MDRC and the Food Bank for New York City.

Program history:

The program began with this evaluation.

Intervention services:

The individuals assigned to the intervention group were eligible to receive up to $2,000 in income-based tax credits (including the federal earned-income tax credit and Paycheck Plus credit). Individuals earning less than $29,900 were eligible for at least some credit. The credit was paid based on earnings reported in 2014, 2015, and 2016, at tax time during the subsequent year (that is, in 2015, 2016, and 2017). In addition, individuals were offered information about, and referrals to, employment services in their area.

Mandatory services:

None.

Comparison services:

The individuals assigned to the comparison group received the same income-based tax credits as the comparison group. But the program did not provide them with information about, or referrals to, employment services.

Service receipt duration:

Referrals were provided over several months, and tax credits were provided for three years.

Intervention funding:

NYC Opportunity, the Robin Hood Foundation, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Child Support and Enforcement, and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

Study publications

Miller, Cynthia, Lawrence F. Katz, Gilda Azurdia, Adam Isen, and Caroline Schultz (2017). Expanding the earned income tax credit for workers without dependent children: Interim findings from the Paycheck Plus Demonstration in New York City, New York, NY: MDRC. Available at https://www.mdrc.org/publication/expanding-earned-income-tax-credit-workers-without-dependent-children.

Miller, Cynthia, Lawrence F. Katz, Gilda Azurdia, Adam Isen, Caroline B. Schultz, and Kali Aloisi (2018). Boosting the earned income tax credit for singles: Final impact findings from the Paycheck Plus Demonstration in New York City, New York: MDRC. Available at https://www.mdrc.org/publication/boosting-earned-income-tax-credit-singles.

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 Paycheck Plus: Employment Referral Services—New York City