- Log in to post comments
Subgroups
People applying or recertifying for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) first went through an interview with FTP staff and completed some background surveys. Individuals were then randomly assigned to the FTP or AFDC conditions.
People who met the following conditions were exempt from participating in the study: incapacitated or disabled adults; individuals younger than 18 years of age, attending school, or working 30 hours or more a week; adults caring full time for disabled dependents; parents with children 6 months or younger; recipients 62 years old or older; and caretaker relatives with needs not included in the grant.
This study reports on the 2,176 single-parent AFDC applicants randomly assigned from May 1994 through December 1994.
This study reported the results of a 15-month follow-up (for employment and earnings data, an 18-month follow-up (for AFDC and Food Stamps data), and a 60-month follow-up (for earnings, AFDC, and Food stamps data) for single parents randomly assigned to research groups from May 1994 through December 1994.
The Florida Department of Children and Families, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the Ford Foundation funded the evaluation.
The study examined only single parents. Most people in the study were women (97 percent) with an average of two children, and the average age was 29 to 30 years. About 52 percent were Black and not Hispanic, and about 45 percent were White and not Hispanic. More than half (60 percent) had at least a GED, and almost 91 percent had worked at some point. The sample had slightly more applicants of AFDC (52 percent) than recipients (48 percent).
The Florida Department of Children and Families (formerly the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services)
The program began operating in the same year the study began. It was the first program in the United States that cancelled welfare benefits for families that had reached a time limit.
The FTP had four major components. First, most participants were limited to 24 months of cash assistance receipt in any 60-month period. (Some groups had a limit of 36 months in any 72-month period.) Second, participants had financial incentives to work. (For instance, the first $200 plus half of remaining earnings were disregarded from a family’s welfare grant calculation; families were allowed to accumulate more assets without losing their benefit eligibility; and transitional child care was available for two years after recipients left welfare.) Third, FTP offered enhanced services such as case management, enhanced employment and training services, adult education, unpaid work experience, social and health services, child care, and support services. Finally, FTP required parents to ensure that their school-age children attended school regularly, to talk with their children’s teachers each grading period, and to begin any necessary immunizations.
The comparison group received traditional AFDC services and thus was subject to the AFDC rules that existed before FTP was implemented. The comparison group received fewer enriched employment and training services than the FTP group.
Although services were mandatory, relative to the comparison group, the intervention group had fewer exemptions from welfare-services participation mandates. In addition, participants were required to ensure that their school-age children attended school regularly, talk to their teachers each grading period, and begin any necessary immunizations or their grants would be reduced.
Most recipients were limited to 24 months of AFDC receipt in any 60-month period after entering FTP. (Some disadvantaged recipients had a limit of 36 months of receipt in any 72-month period). Subsidized transitional child care was provided for two years after recipients left welfare for work.
Florida Department of Children and Families (formerly the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services)
The study took place in Escambia County, FL.
Housing, Nutrition, Parenting and co-parenting, Family Formation, Couple relationships, Child well-being, Financial assets