Study Details | Pathways to Work

3313.3091.02-Indiana Welfare Refo

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: Indiana Welfare Reform Initiative

Population and employment barriers:

Parents (Single parents)

Services provided:

Financial incentives, Sanctions, Supportive services, Work readiness activities (Job search assistance)

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

The study reported findings for two cohorts. The early cohort findings are presented for single parents and two-parent families separately, and the later cohort includes only single parents. This review focuses on findings for the later cohort of single parents; other reviews on this site focus on findings for the early cohort. The later cohort of single parents included all single-parent welfare families receiving welfare at any time between March 1998 and February 1999, and who lived in one of 12 counties. This cohort includes 4,954 families, 3,863 of whom were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 1,091 of whom were assigned to the comparison group.

Time period of study:

The later cohort includes all single-parent families who received welfare at some time between March 1998 and February 1999.

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:

Child maltreatment

Study funded by:

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families

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	Year 1	High	4,447.00	4,669.00	222.00	1996 dollars	4,947
Increase long-term earnings	Annual earnings	Year 2	High	6,806.00	6,729.00	-77.00	1997 dollars	4,947
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 4	High	57.60	60.00	2.40	percentage points	4,947
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 8	High	56.60	56.50	-0.10	percentage points	4,947
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, annual	Year 1	High	1,707.00	1,468.00	-239.00	1996 dollars	4,954
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 1	High	1,867.00	1,905.00	38.00	1996 dollars	4,954
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, quarterly	Quarter 4	High	45.00	39.20	-5.80	percentage points	4,954
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, quarterly	Quarter 4	High	58.70	57.00	-1.70	percentage points	4,954
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, annual	Year 2	High	984.00	777.00	-207.00	1997 dollars	4,954
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 2	High	1,451.00	1,361.00	-90.00	1997 dollars	4,954
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, quarterly	Quarter 8	High	32.10	31.30	-0.80	percentage points	4,954
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, quarterly	Quarter 8	High	46.20	46.80	0.60	percentage points	4,954

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

This review examines a later cohort of single-parent families reported in the study, and another review on this site examines an early cohort. Both cohorts of clients were nearly all female and 27 or 28 years old, on average. At the time the study began, most in the later single-parent cohort had never been married (64 percent). Slightly more than half (53 percent) were White, and most of the remaining clients were African American. More than half (57 percent) had 12 or more years of education. Most (87 percent) had one or two children. More than half (58 percent) had at least one child younger than 3 years old. The majority had been employed at some time during the five quarters before random assignment, but average earnings during the previous year were low ($3,753). Fifty-six percent were exempt from work requirements.

Family status

Parents	100%
Single parents	100%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were eligible for or receiving cash assistance	100%
Had low incomes	100%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Indiana Family and Social Services Administration

Program history:

The study began at the same time that welfare reform policies were initiated in Indiana. Compared with the early cohort, the later cohort of families was exposed to the full range of Indiana's welfare reform policies.

Intervention services:

The Welfare Reform group was subject to new welfare reform policies. Members of this group were required to participate in employment and training services that emphasized job search; faced a 24-month time limit on Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) receipt and a provision that held the TANF grant amount constant if a child was born 10 months or more after the family began receiving TANF; and were required to sign a personal responsibility agreement to obtain immunizations for their children, ensure school attendance, and have minor parents on assistance live at home or with a responsible adult. They could face sanctions if they did not participate in work activities for at least 20 hours per week and if they did not uphold the terms of the personal responsibility agreement. This group could also receive work incentives in the form of continued eligibility for Medicaid, child care subsidies, and other supportive services at higher earnings levels; in addition, a policy required the welfare grant amount to remain constant when earnings increased.

Mandatory services:

A subset of the intervention group was mandated to work and could be sanctioned for noncompliance.

Comparison services:

The Traditional Welfare group was subject to pre-reform welfare policies. Members of this group were required to participate in work activities but were less likely to be referred to the work component of the state's welfare program. Staff rarely enforced sanctions for noncompliance with work requirements for Traditional Welfare clients. These clients did not face a time limit on TANF receipt or have to sign a personal responsibility agreement.

Service receipt duration:

Clients in the Welfare Reform group could remain enrolled in TANF for up to 24 months, whereas clients in the Traditional Welfare group were not subject to a time limit.

Intervention funding:

Indiana Family and Social Services Administration.

Study publications

Fein, David, Erik Beecroft, William Hamilton, Wang Lee, Pamela Holcomb, Terri Thompson, and Caroline Ratcliffe (1998). The Indiana Welfare Reform evaluation: Program implementation and economic impacts after two years, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

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 Indiana Welfare Reform Initiative—Later cohort, single parent