- Log in to post comments
Subgroups
Nearly 21,000 prospective Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) recipients in Los Angeles County who attended a program orientation at a county office from April 1 to September 11, 1996, and who were not exempt from welfare-to-work program participation, were randomly assigned either to Jobs-First GAIN or to the comparison group. Exemptions were granted for individuals who had a disabling condition, were employed full time, or resided in a rural area with no access to services, and for women who were in the second or third trimester of pregnancy. Both single-parent and two-parent households were included in the evaluation; this review focuses on the sample of 5,058 parents from two-parent households. (The first parent in the household to attend the orientation was randomly assigned; the second parent was not included in the research sample.) Most study participants were randomly assigned in order from a wait list, but a few participants requested and were allowed to jump to the top of the list. The participants that jumped to the top of the list were still randomly assigned to either the Jobs-First GAIN group or the comparison group.
The Jobs First-GAIN program began in 1996 and concluded in 1999. The study estimates impacts after two years of follow-up.
The Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services commissioned the evaluation, with support from the Ford Foundation and from the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
The analysis of parents from two-parent families focused on the primary wage earner. (If a household consisted of a married couple, the program required both parents to participate, and the study collected data on the parent who was the first to meet with program staff.) About 47 percent of sample members were female. Fewer than half (40 percent) had earned a high school diploma, GED, or college degree, and 86 percent were unemployed at the time of randomization. Sample members were predominantly Hispanic (47 percent) and White (28 percent); about half (52 percent) demonstrated English proficiency. The average sample member was 36 years old and had two children.
Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services (county AFDC agency)
Starting in 1988, Los Angeles launched a GAIN program focused primarily on basic education rather than job search activities. Evaluations of the original GAIN program indicated that education was costly and did not produce substantial increases in employment or reductions in welfare receipt. As a result, the county Department of Public Social Services modified the program between 1993 and 1995 to emphasize rapid return to work.
Applicants to or recipients of AFDC who were assigned to the GAIN group participated in a program strongly emphasizing a rapid return to work, even in low-wage positions. The program orientation reinforced this message through a six-hour motivational meeting. The program then provided job development activities, including three-week job clubs comprising classroom sessions focused on job application techniques and a supervised job search. Program officials also provided job development, vocational skills assessment, basic education, vocational training, or work experience, depending on the program member's needs.
Applicants to or recipients of AFDC who were not assigned to the GAIN group could not participate in any GAIN-related activities and did not receive the strong work-first motivation. They did remain eligible to receive welfare and Food Stamps payments.
Some participants were required to participate in the study and faced sanctions for noncompliance (though these individuals were still randomly assigned).
The initial job club took place over three weeks. Further job development services were available until the recipient found work, exited the welfare system, or both.
California state; Los Angeles county AFDC.
The program took place in Los Angeles County, CA, through the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services.
Physical health, Housing, Nutrition, Family formation, Child well-being