Study Details | Pathways to Work

3348.3348.02-Iowa Family Investme

Study quality: Low

Low

Reason for the rating: This study received a low study quality rating because it did not use a method for addressing missing data that is known to limit bias.

Intervention: Iowa Family Investment Program (FIP)

Services provided:

Education, Financial incentives, Sanctions, Supportive services, Training, Work and work-based learning (Unpaid work experience, Work experience), Work readiness activities (Job search assistance)

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Families applying for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) between October 1993 and March 1996 (the applicant FIP sample) were randomly assigned to the intervention group, which was subject to FIP; the comparison group, which was subject to pre-welfare reform policies; or a nonresearch sample, which was subject to FIP but not part of the data collection effort. Twice as many cases were randomly assigned to the intervention group as to the comparison group. Cases with either accepted or denied AFDC applications were included in the study. This review reports results for the full applicant FIP sample, which included families that applied to FIP after welfare reform was implemented on October 1, 1993. The full applicant sample was used by the authors only to estimate impacts on education and training outcomes. Impacts on individuals receiving FIP at the time of random assignment and impacts on employment and earnings outcomes of new FIP applicants (examined only by cohort) are presented elsewhere on this site.

Time period of study:

Random assignment of applicant FIP cases took place between October 1993 and March 1996. For Cohort 1 (randomly assigned between October 1993 and September 1994), outcomes were measured over four years; for Cohort 2 (randomly assigned between October 1994 and September 1995), outcomes were measured over three years; and for Cohort 3 (randomly assigned between October 1995 and March 1996), outcomes were measured over two years. The survey that included education attainment outcomes was administered to all three applicant FIP cohorts between July 1998 and August 1999.

Pathways only reports results from studies with a study quality rating of high or moderate.

Sample characteristics

All individuals were in families that had applied for AFDC benefits at the time of random assignment; the study includes those with approved and denied applications. Across all FIP applicant cohorts, most case heads were female (84 percent), White (80 percent), and never married (55 percent), and most lived in urban areas (87 percent). The average age of case heads was 27 years old, the average case size was three people, and the average age of the youngest person within the case was 4 years old. The average case earnings in the year before random assignment totaled $6,185.

Sex

Female	84%
Male	16%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	12%
White	80%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	8%

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

28%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Had low incomes

100%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Iowa state AFDC and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

Intervention services:

FIP was part of Iowa's welfare reform efforts that began in 1993. FIP had three main components: (1) Making Work Pay: earnings disregards and extended transitional child care; (2) Responsibility with Consequences: requirements for all able-bodied (nonexempt) FIP recipients to take part in employment and training activities, which included developing and signing a Family Investment Agreement (FIA) that specified the steps parents would take to achieve economic self-sufficiency, and participation in the Promoting Independence and Self Sufficiency through Employment, Job Opportunities and Basic Skills program, which provided education, employment (job search assistance, unpaid work experience, and monitoring), and training opportunities; and (3) Family Stability: fewer restrictions on FIP eligibility for families with more than one wage earner in the household.

Mandatory services:

If FIP recipients failed to sign an FIA or did not carry out the signed FIA, they were assigned to the Limited Benefit Plan, which temporarily reduced or eliminated the recipient family’s cash grant.

Comparison services:

The comparison group received AFDC benefits under pre-reform policies, which imposed more earnings restrictions (for the applicant and other adult household member) but less stringent requirements for participation in employment and training activities. In April 1997, all comparison group cases became subject to FIP policies.

Study publications

Fraker, Thomas M., Christine M. Ross, Rita A. Stapulonis, Robert B. Olsen, Martha D. Kovac, M. Robin Dion, and Anu Rangarajan (2002). The evaluation of welfare reform in Iowa: Final impact report, 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-evaluation-of-welfare-reform-in-iowa.

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 Iowa Family Investment Program (FIP)—FIP Applicants