Study Details | Pathways to Work

3148.3148.02-Study of Minnesota F

Study quality: Low

Low

Reason for the rating: This study received a low study quality rating because the implementation of the randomized controlled trial was compromised and it does not adjust estimated impacts for potentially important differences between the intervention and comparison groups.

Intervention: Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP)

Population and employment barriers:

Age (Adults (age 25+)), Parenting (Parents), Public Benefits Recipients (Cash assistance recipients, Public benefits recipients)

Services provided:

Case management, Childcare and/or early education, Earned income disregards, Education and Training, Job readiness, Job search assistance, Performance- or behavior-based financial incentives, Transportation assistance, Work supports

Setting: Urban only

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

From July 1996 to June 1997, applicants of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and recipients who had scheduled recertification interviews were randomly selected to participate in the Ramsey County variation of MFIP (MFIP-R). The remaining cases were subject to the rules of AFDC. Staff did not keep a list of participants assigned to the comparison group. The comparison group was identified retrospectively from the set of people who were scheduled to have a recertification interview from July 1996 to June 1997 and who who were not assigned to MFIP-R. In some cases, people who were assigned to the MFIP-R condition but who did not show up for their recertification interview were mistakenly assigned to the AFDC group. This review focuses on two-parent families. A review elsewhere on this site focuses on single-parent families.

Time period of study:

Random assignment occurred from July 1996 and June 1997, and participants were followed until January 1998. Outcomes are available for one year following random assignment for the early cohort.

Pathways only reports results from studies with a study quality rating of high or moderate.

Sample characteristics

Age

Mean age	35 years
Young adults	16%
Adults (age 25+)	84%

Sex

Female	94%
Male	7%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	15%
White, not Hispanic	22%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	2%
American Indian or Alaska Native	1%
Another race	60%

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

Parents

100%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Public benefits recipients	100%
Cash assistance recipients	100%

Participant education

Had a high school diploma or GED	33%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	67%
Postsecondary credential	6%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Ramsey County AFDC

Intervention services:

MFIP-R combined the financial incentives of the MFIP with a work-first orientation. The financial incentives included more generous earnings disregard, direct payment of child care expenses to the child care provider (rather than as a reimbursement to participants), and combined cash assistance and food stamp payments. Participants receiving welfare for a year or more and who did not qualify for good cause exemptions were required to participate in a job search workshop and seven weeks of supervised job search activities. Job search workshops included guidance on the job search process, career exploration, resumes, interviews, and workplace challenges. During job search weeks, participants were supposed to spend 20 hours per week (if their youngest child was younger than six years) or 30 hours per week searching for jobs. Participants with part-time employment for fewer than 20 or 30 hours per week were required to engage in job search activities to bring their total to 20 or 30 hours per week. Failure to complete these activities could result in sanctions. MFIP-R participants were not subject to new AFDC rules established during the evaluation.

Mandatory services:

People who failed to comply with mandatory requirements could lose 10 percent of their welfare grants.

Comparison services:

Minnesota’s standard welfare program for two-parent families was AFDC-Unemployed Parent (AFDC-UP). AFDC did not offer the financial incentives MFIP offered. For example, benefits were reduced by almost one dollar for every dollar AFDC clients earned. A portion of a client’s earnings was disregarded when calculating the amount of a household’s AFDC grant, but the disregarded amount decreased over time. AFDC clients could receive assistance with child care costs in the form of reimbursements for incurred expenses. To qualify for AFDC-UP, two-parent families had to have one parent who was incapacitated, unable to work, or working fewer than 100 hours per month. The primary wage earner was required to participate in four weeks of job search as soon as benefits began and faced sanctions for failure to complete the course. Those who did not secure employment were assigned a Community Work Experience Program for 16 hours per week. Participants also faced new AFDC rules that took effect in the second half of 1997 and included a five-year life-time welfare limit, a higher earnings disregard, and other changes.

Study publications

Auspos, Patricia, Cynthia Miller, and Jo Anna Hunter (2000). Final report on the implementation and impacts of the Minnesota family investment program in Ramsey County, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [MFIP-R versus AFDC, single-parents in the early cohort.] Available at Available at https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/resource/mfip-final-report-on-the-minnesota-family-investment-program-in-ramsey.

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.

Return to top

Study of Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP)—Rural, Two-Parent Families in the Early Cohort