Study Details | Pathways to Work

1196.1196.01-The San Diego Satura

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: The San Diego Saturation Work Initiative Model (SWIM)

Population and employment barriers:

Cash assistance recipients, Parents (Single parents)

Services provided:

Sanctions, Work and work-based learning (Unpaid work experience, Work experience), Work readiness activities (Job search assistance)

Setting: Urban only

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

SWIM served individuals applying for or receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) benefits in two income maintenance offices in San Diego County, CA. Two groups were required to participate in SWIM: single heads of household with children age 6 or older (called the AFDC-Family Group or AFDC-FG) and case heads of two-parent households (called the AFDC-Unemployed Parent Group or AFDC-U). Required enrollees were identified in three ways: (1) the income maintenance office assessed whether AFDC applicants were eligible for SWIM and scheduled these individuals for an enrollment interview at the SWIM office; (2) during regular case status reviews, AFDC recipients who had become eligible for SWIM were referred to the program; and (3) AFDC recipients who were eligible for SWIM when the SWIM demonstration began were enrolled during the first year of the demonstration. From July 1985 to June 1986, eligible individuals were randomly assigned to intervention or comparison groups. This review examines impacts for individuals in the AFDC-FG group; a separate review examines impacts for individuals in the AFDC-U group.

Time period of study:

Random assignment occurred from July 1985 to June 1986. Sample members were followed until September 1991.

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, Decrease very long-term benefit receipt

Other outcome domains examined:

None

Study funded by:

This five-year study was funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Initial funding for the study was also provided by the California State Department of Social Services.

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	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 6	High	547.00	710.00	163.00	1986 dollars	3,210
Increase long-term earnings	Annual earnings	Year 5	High	3,978.00	4,126.00	148.00	1990 dollars	3,210
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	27.50	35.60	8.10	percentage points	3,210
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 20	High	32.00	32.30	0.30	percentage points	3,210
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	1,013.00	866.00	-147.00	1986 dollars	3,210
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	64.80	57.30	-7.50	percentage points	3,210
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, annual	Year 5	High	2,496.00	2,327.00	-169.00	1990 dollars	3,210
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, annual	Year 5	High	41.50	38.90	-2.60	percentage points	3,210
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Amount of AFDC/TANF benefits, quarterly	Quarter 21	High	567.00	527.00	-40.00	1990 dollars	3,210
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Received AFDC/TANF, quarterly	Quarter 21	High	32.40	31.50	-0.90	percentage points	3,210

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

The AFDC-FG sample consisted of case heads of single-parent households, who were mostly female. The majority of the AFDC-FG sample had no prior year earnings (61 percent) and had their own AFDC case for more than two years (69 percent). Most had a high school diploma (56 percent). The racial and ethnic composition of the AFDC-FG sample was 42 percent Black or African American, not Hispanic; 27 percent White, not Hispanic; 25 percent Hispanic or Latino of any race; and 5 percent of another racial or ethnic group.

Age

Young adults

100%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	42%
White, not Hispanic	27%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	25%

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

Single parents

100%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were eligible for or receiving cash assistance

100%

Participant education

Had a high school diploma or GED	56%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	44%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

AFDC offices in San Diego County, CA

Program history:

SWIM was a demonstration program that operated from July 1985 to September 1987.

Intervention services:

People assigned to the intervention group were subject to the requirements of SWIM in order to receive AFDC. Under this model, AFDC recipients were required to participate in a sequence of activities, unless they were already employed at least 20 hours per week in a qualifying education and training activity or were an undocumented parent of a U.S. citizen. The fixed sequence of activities began with a two-week job-search workshop, then three months of unpaid work experience (typically 20 to 30 hours per week) with concurrent biweekly job club sessions, and finally assessments to refer participants to outside education or training programs, if necessary. Part-time employment could substitute for some SWIM activities. If, at any point in the sequence, individuals found employment or left the AFDC program, they were not required to complete the sequence. Starting in September 1987, individuals in the intervention group became subject to requirements of the Greater Avenues for Independence (GAIN) program, which replaced SWIM but was largely similar.

Mandatory services:

Participation in SWIM was mandatory, and nonparticipation could result in a reduction of benefits.

Comparison services:

Individuals assigned to the comparison group did not receive any SWIM services and were not subject to SWIM requirements but could enroll in community education and training programs on their own. Starting in July 1988, individuals in the intervention group became subject to the GAIN program, which replaced SWIM but was largely similar.

Service receipt duration:

Services were available for the two years the program operated (July 1985 to September 1987).

Intervention funding:

AFDC, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and California State Department of Social Services

Cost information:

The average cost of providing the intervention was $1,660 per participant. The average cost of providing comparison group services was $0 per person. The net intervention cost, or difference between the two, was $1,660 per person. This represents how much more it cost to provide intervention services compared to comparison services.

These figures are based on cost information reported by study authors. The Pathways Clearinghouse converted that information to a single amount expressed in 2018 dollars; for details, see the FAQ. This information is not an official price tag or guarantee.

Study publications

Friedlander, Daniel and Gayle Hamilton (1993). The Saturation Work Initiative Model in San Diego: A five-year follow-up study, New York, NY: MDRC. Available at https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED361488

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 The San Diego Saturation Work Initiative Model (SWIM)—Family group

1196.1196.01-The San Diego Satura

Study design

Design:

Study group formation:

Time period of study:

Primary outcome domains examined:

Other outcome domains examined:

Study funded by:

Results

Sample characteristics

Age

Participant race and ethnicity

Family status

Participant employment and public benefit status

Participant education

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Program history:

Intervention services:

Mandatory services:

Comparison services:

Service receipt duration:

Intervention funding:

Cost information:

Study publications