Study Details | Pathways to Work

2.3096.05-Work Plus (Two Paren

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 the findings can be attributed to the program.

Program: Work Plus

Characteristics of study participants:

Cash assistance recipients, Parents

Services provided:

Case management, Job search assistance, Post-employment participant follow-up, Unconditional cash transfers

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Methods and Standards Protocol version used for review: Version 1.0

Learn about our protocol

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Clients who had participated in a Phase 1 (pre-employment) Riverside County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS) program, who had reported obtaining a job, and who met a series of eligibility requirements, were eligible for random assignment into Phase 2 (post-employment). These eligibility criteria included the following: working 20 or more hours for at least one week during the past 30 days, earning an hourly wage greater than or equal to the state minimum ($6.75), and expecting to work an average of 20 or more hours per week for at least 30 days. The evaluation excluded clients who, at the time of random assignment, were (1) already enrolled in Phase 2, (2) New Visions (another evaluation) sample members, or (3) Post-Assistance Self-Sufficiency members. Among the people eligible for random assignment, 72 percent were placed in a non-research group; 7 percent were placed in each of the Training Focused and comparison (Work Focused) groups; and 14 percent were placed in the Work Plus group. Sample members were enrolled from January 2001 to October 2003. This review focuses on the contrast between Work Plus and Work Focused group members for two-parent families. Only one parent in each two-parent family is included in the sample, though both could have received program services. Other reviews on this site examine the contrast of Training Focused and Work Focused and of Work Plus and Training Focused and all contrasts for single-parent families.

Time period of study:

Random assignment began in January 2001 and concluded in October 2003. Outcome data were collected for four years after random assignment.

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase long-term earnings, Increase long-term employment

Other outcome domains examined:

None

Study funded by:

The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation in ACF at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services funded the study, with support from the U.S. Department of Labor.

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	Findings	Sample size
Increase long-term earnings	Average annual earnings, follow-up period	Years 1–4	High	10,189.00	11,425.00	1,236.00	2004 dollars		353
Increase long-term employment	Employed at any time in follow-up period	Years 1–4	High	92.40	96.90	4.50	percentage points		353

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

Clients were recipients of TANF benefits who worked 20 or more hours a week but earned too little to leave public assistance. All clients were members of two-parent families. Across study groups and ERA sites including two-parent families, the sample included 1,283 men and 1,536 women. The average age was 31 years, and 38 percent lacked a high school diploma or equivalent. About half (50 percent) were White, 12 percent were Black, and 32 percent were Hispanic.

Age

Mean age

32 years

Sex

Female

90%

Race and ethnicity

Black or African American	16%
White, not Hispanic	32%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	49%
Unknown, not reported, or other	3%

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	77%
Cash assistance recipients	100%

Education

Had a high school diploma or GED	57%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	43%

Program implementation

Implementing organization:

Work Plus was implemented by the Riverside County DPSS (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families [TANF] agency) in California.

Program history:

In 1998, the Riverside County DPSS created a post-employment program, which focused on encouraging clients to attend training or education courses outside of work. In subsequent years, DPSS staff worked with education and training providers to create variations of this post-employment program (one of which is Work Plus). The Work Plus program started in January 1998.

Program services:

Work Plus clients could receive intensive case management and enhanced support services aimed at encouraging employment stability. To continue to receive benefits, participants were required to engage in employment-related activities for 32 hours per week. Program staff encouraged Work Plus participants to decrease work hours per week to 20 hours to pursue education and training activities, with the philosophy that working reinforced the value of education and training and that working while in school or training increased the likelihood of program completion and the use of newly attained skills. Participation in education and training was voluntary, but if participants chose not to pursue education and training, they were required to participate in other permitted activities—including work—for at least 32 hours per week. The program also provided clients with support services (for example, child care, transportation, and ancillary payments to participate in program activities), social services (for example, mental health, domestic violence, and substance abuse), referrals to public assistance programs (for example, TANF, Food Stamps, and Medi-Cal), and job search services.

Mandatory services:

Participants had to meet requirements for hours of work or other authorized activities per week; otherwise, they could be sanctioned.

Comparison services:

The comparison condition was known as Work Focused. Clients in this condition were eligible to receive TANF, Food Stamps, child care and transportation assistance (only if the client self-enrolled in an eligible program), and Medi-Cal. They also received limited and reactive case management.

Service receipt duration:

Work Plus staff worked with unemployed clients for up to 60 days after the date of job loss and then referred them back to Phase 1 job search services.

Program funding:

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; U.S. Department of Labor.

Study publications

Williams, Sonya, and Stephen Freedman (2010). The Employment Retention and Advancement project: Background characteristics and patterns of employment, earnings, and public assistance receipt of adults in two-parent families, 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.mdrc.org/publication/background-characteristics-and-patterns-employment-earnings-and-public-assistance.

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 Work Plus (Two Parent)