The social worker provided individuals assigned to the comparison group with a list of the area’s education providers that they could contact on their own. They could also receive childcare assistance from the welfare department if they enrolled in an employment-related activity. Comparison group members did not receive daily allowances.
Oklahoma City’s ET&E program cost $1,951 per participant. Oklahoma City’s gross cost per person was $2,969. Data limitations prevented Oklahoma City from being included in the five-year cost-benefit analysis. The total return on Oklahoma City’s investment might become evident only after several years.
Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) applicants in Oklahoma City were randomly assigned to two groups between 1991 and 1993, and impacts were measured two years after each participant was randomly assigned. Oklahoma City discontinued home visits in July 1993.
At initiation, the social worker reviewed the ET&E program participant’s education and work history and would then ask the client to identify primary and secondary employment goals. The client chose the activities and providers, with suggestions from the social worker. Case managers helped participants identify education and job development opportunities that were appropriate for them. The possibilities for education or training activities were wide-ranging, and time spent on these was limitless. ET&E supported participation in a variety of activities, including the following:
- Education. Education opportunities included life-skills workshops, adult basic education, GED courses, or English-as-a-second-language courses. ET&E participants generally attended these classes at adult education schools, public vocational technical schools, and community colleges. Almost all college attenders enrolled at community colleges.
- Job development. Job development opportunities included vocational skills training, work experience (including internships), on-the-job training in the private sector, or unpaid work in the public or private sector (in exchange for the participant’s welfare grant). Job developers led two-week group workshops. Some participants were then assigned to up to 60 days of independent job search.
- Supportive services. Although individuals received AFDC, ET&E covered 100 percent of the cost of child care. Oklahoma City also paid ET&E participants a daily allowance to cover transportation costs ($6 for a full day and $3 for a half day) and made funds available for work-related expenses, such as uniforms and work-required medical exams.
- Case management. Case management activities included developing an employability plan, connecting individuals to service providers in the area, monitoring progress, arranging supportive services, and making recommendations to social workers who specialized in decisions related to sanctioning clients for noncompliance. Case management activities were initially carried out by social workers; later, because of an increase in caseload, the case management responsibilities fell on job developers.
The study did not discuss any tools to measure fidelity to the intervention model.
The study was funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, ACF with support from the U.S. Department of Education. More than half (55 percent) of funds went toward services to AFDC recipients who were deemed to be at greatest risk of long-term welfare dependency. ET&E was hampered by limited funding, and administrators and staff did not strongly enforce the program’s mandate to participate.
Between 1990 and 1995, Oklahoma City’s population grew by 5 percent. Between 1991 and 1995, its employed labor force grew by 6 percent, and the unemployment rate fell from 6 percent to 4 percent. Oklahoma City’s AFDC caseload grew from about 12,000 families in 1991 to about 14,000 families in 1995.
The Oklahoma Department of Human Services (DHS) and the Oklahoma, Cleveland, and Pottawatomie County DHS offices implemented ET&E.
Oklahoma City ET&E could refer participants to community organizations for services such as basic education. Participants generally attended basic education classes at adult educations schools, public vocational technical schools, and community colleges. In addition, ET&E made licensed childcare and supportive services available, such as the employment-related day care program, called at-risk childcare for low-income working families.
AFDC applicants in Oklahoma City were eligible to participate in ET&E if they (1) were single parents, (2) had not received AFDC in Oklahoma in the preceding 60 days, (3) had children older than 1, and (4) were not members of the Sac and Fox American Indian tribes. Individuals were also eligible if they were ages 16 to 19 and did not have a high school diploma or GED, even if they had a child younger than 1. Eligibility for ET&T was resolved at the home visit. Home visits typically occurred 25 days after individuals submitted their application.
Almost all ET&E participants were female. Teen parents (younger than 19) accounted for about 10 percent of the participants. Roughly two-thirds of all individuals in the study had preschool-aged children (younger than 6) and close to half (41 percent) had a child younger than 2. The study did not provide information about the race and ethnicity of the population served.
Oklahoma ET&E was a low-enforcement, education-focused intervention, because of limited program and staff resources. Participants spent an average of six months in ET&E activities. ET&E’s two-year impacts showed that having a high school diploma or GED at application did not substantially increase participation in any employment-related activity.
ET&E participants were assigned to case managers, job developers, and social workers. The study does not provide information on the number of staff or their training, degrees, or certifications.
Oklahoma City’s ET&E program’s case management strategy merged the income maintenance and the employment services functions of caseworkers into one position, in response to statewide budget cuts and caps. Social workers’ caseloads almost tripled from an approximate average of 65 in 1991 to 174 in 1993. Because of growing caseloads, social workers focused on the income maintenance functions of their case management role at the expense of the ET&E functions. As social workers’ caseloads rose, job developers took over more ET&E responsibilities. Social workers would refer some of their ET&E clients to job developers. As a result, just 39 percent participated in any ET&E activity within two years.