Submitted by user on
Study Name
Welfare-to-Work Vouchers
Study Sharepoint ID
3170
Evaluation name
Welfare to Work Voucher (WtWV) Program
Intervention (standard name)
Strength of Evidence Tag
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.

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.

Populations targeted
Settings in which the intervention was studied
Characteristics

Subgroups

Subgroup data - Female
No
Subgroup data - Male
No
Subgroup data - White
No
Subgroup data - Black
No
Percent limited work history
19.30
Percent female
91.80
Percent Male
7.70
Percent No high school diploma or GED
35.40
Percent Married
16.50
Percent Employed
44.50
Percent Unemployed
54.40
Percent welfare population
100.00
Percent general low-income population
100.00
Percent Black or African American
49.80
Percent Hispanic or Latino of any race
21.40
Percent White not Hispanic
19.60
Percent Unknown or not reported
1.00
Percent another race
8.20
Mean age
30.70
Group formation formatted

Evaluators examined the Welfare-to-Work Voucher program at six sites, using a multisite experimental design to randomly assign eligible participants to either an intervention or comparison group at each site. A total of 8,732 families were randomly assigned from April 2000 through May 2001. The evaluators conducted a survey of some families in the study. Families were eligible for the survey if they enrolled in one of the five non-Los Angeles sites; completed a baseline survey; and had a dependent, minor child in their household at baseline. Of the 8,731 families that participated in the study, 7,258 met these eligibility criteria, and 5,000 were randomly selected to participate in the survey.

Study timing formatted

2000–2006

Study funding formatted

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funded the study.

Sample Characteristics

To be eligible to receive a Welfare-to-Work voucher, families had to be former or current Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients, or they needed to be eligible to receive TANF benefits. They also had to meet the standard Housing Choice Voucher eligibility requirements. Individual sites might have further specified the eligibility requirements. The individuals in the research sample were predominantly female, never married, and were between 19 and 44 years old. In addition, nearly half of the sample was Black and non-Hispanic, 21 percent was Hispanic, and 20 percent was White and non-Hispanic. Nearly 57 percent had a high school diploma or GED.

Implementing organization formatted

Local housing agencies, as selected by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), partnering with TANF agencies

Program history

The Welfare-to-Work Voucher program was initiated in fiscal year 1999 and allowed 50,000 rental assistance vouchers to be awarded to eligible families by HUD. HUD renewed the vouchers annually until March 2004, when the vouchers were phased out and incorporated into the Housing Choice Voucher program.

Treatment condition formatted

The Welfare-to-Work Voucher program aimed to provide low-income families with housing assistance to help them successfully transition from welfare to work. Participants randomly assigned to the intervention group received rental assistance vouchers that could be used to rent any unit in the private rental market, as long as it met HUD standards and was priced similarly to unassisted units in the same market. Housing agencies could terminate rental assistance if clients did not participate in required work or training activities. In general, any employment-related supports provided in conjunction with the voucher were similar to those available in the broader community.

Comparison condition formatted

Members of the comparison group did not receive housing assistance from the demonstration. However, some members of the comparison group applied for and obtained housing vouchers through the Housing Choice Voucher program, which provided similar assistance.

Mandatory services formatted

None.

Timing of study formatted

The program randomly assigned clients to services from April 2000 to May 2001, and services continued until March 2004

Program funding formatted

Congressional appropriation.

Setting details formatted

The program took place in six sites: (1) Atlanta, GA; (2) Augusta, GA; (3) Fresno, CA; (4) Houston, TX; (5) Los Angeles, CA; and (6) Spokane, WA.

Delivered by public or private entity?
Public
Secondary domains examined

Housing, Child well-being

Earliest publication year
0
Most recent publication year
0
Manuscripts
Check edits flag
No
Primary Service
Sanctions
Enrollment Period
April 2000 to May 2001
Intervention Duration
35.00
Subgroup data - Hispanic
No