Welfare reform impacts in the SIPP

Monthly Labor Review

Volumn 125, Issue 11, 2002, Pages 23-35

  Bavier, Richard ^a  

^a Office of Management and Budget   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 11244297990     PISSN: 00981818     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. The Current Population Survey is a monthly survey of approximately 60,000 households, which provides data on the labor force status of individuals, including demographic characteristics. Wendell Primus, Lynett Rawlings, Kathy Larin, and Kathyrn Porter, "The Initial Impacts of Welfare Reform on the Economic Well-Being of Single-Mother Families with Children" (Washington, DC, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 1999). Richard Bavier, "Material Well-Being," in Douglas Besharov, ed., Family Well-Being After Welfare Reform (College Park, MD, University of Maryland School of Public Affairs, 2002), available on the Internet at: http:// www.welfare-reform-academy.org.
2. The Current Population Survey is a monthly survey of approximately 60,000 households, which provides data on the labor force status of individuals, including demographic characteristics. Wendell Primus, Lynett Rawlings, Kathy Larin, and Kathyrn Porter, "The Initial Impacts of Welfare Reform on the Economic Well-Being of Single-Mother Families with Children" (Washington, DC, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 1999). Richard Bavier, "Material Well-Being," in Douglas Besharov, ed., Family Well-Being After Welfare Reform (College Park, MD, University of Maryland School of Public Affairs, 2002), available on the Internet at: http:// www.welfare-reform-academy.org.
3. Bruce D. Meyer and James X. Sullivan, "The Effects of Welfare Reform: The Material Well-Being of Single Mothers in the 1980s and 1990s," Working Paper 206 (Chicago, IL, Joint Center on Poverty Research, 2000).
4. Pamela Loprest, "How Are Families That Left Welfare Doing? A Comparison of Early and Recent Welfare Leavers," Assessing the New Federalism Policy Brief B-36 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001).
5. Sheldon Danziger, Colleen Heflin, Mary E. Corcoran, and Elizabeth Oltmans, "Does It Pay to Move From Welfare to Work?" Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Fall 2001, pp. 671-92.
6. Maria Cancian, Robert Haveman, Thomas Kaplan, and Daniel Meyer, "Work, Earnings, and Well-Being after Welfare: What Do We Know?" Working Paper 73 (Chicago, IL, Joint Center on Poverty Research, 1999); Richard Bavier, "Welfare reform data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation," Monthly Labor Review, July 2001, pp. 13-24; and Sheila Zedlewski, "Family Incomes: Rising, Falling, or Holding Steady?" Panel presentation at the Fall 2001 conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.
7. Maria Cancian, Robert Haveman, Thomas Kaplan, and Daniel Meyer, "Work, Earnings, and Well-Being after Welfare: What Do We Know?" Working Paper 73 (Chicago, IL, Joint Center on Poverty Research, 1999); Richard Bavier, "Welfare reform data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation," Monthly Labor Review, July 2001, pp. 13-24; and Sheila Zedlewski, "Family Incomes: Rising, Falling, or Holding Steady?" Panel presentation at the Fall 2001 conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.
8. Maria Cancian, Robert Haveman, Thomas Kaplan, and Daniel Meyer, "Work, Earnings, and Well-Being after Welfare: What Do We Know?" Working Paper 73 (Chicago, IL, Joint Center on Poverty Research, 1999); Richard Bavier, "Welfare reform data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation," Monthly Labor Review, July 2001, pp. 13-24; and Sheila Zedlewski, "Family Incomes: Rising, Falling, or Holding Steady?" Panel presentation at the Fall 2001 conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.
9. The Survey of Program Dynamics and the Panel Study of Income Dynamics are other longitudinal surveys that will enable impact analysis of welfare reform. Sandra Hoffreth, Stephen Stanhope, and Kathleen Mullan Harris have used the Panel Study of Income Dynamics to estimate the impacts of policy and economic conditions on exits and returns through the period of welfare waivers ending in 1996. See, "Exiting Welfare in the 1990s: Did Public Policy Influence Recipients' Behavior?" and "Remaining Off Welfare in the 1990s: The Influence of Public Policy and Economic Conditions" (Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2001).
10. The Survey of Program Dynamics and the Panel Study of Income Dynamics are other longitudinal surveys that will enable impact analysis of welfare reform. Sandra Hoffreth, Stephen Stanhope, and Kathleen Mullan Harris have used the Panel Study of Income Dynamics to estimate the impacts of policy and economic conditions on exits and returns through the period of welfare waivers ending in 1996. See, "Exiting Welfare in the 1990s: Did Public Policy Influence Recipients' Behavior?" and "Remaining Off Welfare in the 1990s: The Influence of Public Policy and Economic Conditions" (Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2001).
11. Several reviews of these efforts are available. See Rebecca Blank, "Declining Caseloads/ Increased Work: What Can We Conclude About the Effects of Welfare Reform?" Economic Policy Review , vol. 7, no. 2 (NY, Federal Reserve Bank, 2001), pp. 25-36; Stephen H. Bell, "Why are Welfare Caseloads Falling?" Assessing the New Federalism, Discussion Paper 01-02 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); Douglas Besharov and Peter Germanis, "Welfare reform - four years later," The Public Interest, 2000, vol. 140, pp. 17-35. Methodological issues for these time-series analyses are addressed in, Robert A. Moffitt and Michele Ver Ploeg, eds., Evaluating Welfare Reform in an Era of Transition (Washington, DC, National Research Council, 2001).
12. Several reviews of these efforts are available. See Rebecca Blank, "Declining Caseloads/ Increased Work: What Can We Conclude About the Effects of Welfare Reform?" Economic Policy Review , vol. 7, no. 2 (NY, Federal Reserve Bank, 2001), pp. 25-36; Stephen H. Bell, "Why are Welfare Caseloads Falling?" Assessing the New Federalism, Discussion Paper 01-02 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); Douglas Besharov and Peter Germanis, "Welfare reform - four years later," The Public Interest, 2000, vol. 140, pp. 17-35. Methodological issues for these time-series analyses are addressed in, Robert A. Moffitt and Michele Ver Ploeg, eds., Evaluating Welfare Reform in an Era of Transition (Washington, DC, National Research Council, 2001).
13. Several reviews of these efforts are available. See Rebecca Blank, "Declining Caseloads/ Increased Work: What Can We Conclude About the Effects of Welfare Reform?" Economic Policy Review , vol. 7, no. 2 (NY, Federal Reserve Bank, 2001), pp. 25-36; Stephen H. Bell, "Why are Welfare Caseloads Falling?" Assessing the New Federalism, Discussion Paper 01-02 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); Douglas Besharov and Peter Germanis, "Welfare reform - four years later," The Public Interest, 2000, vol. 140, pp. 17-35. Methodological issues for these time-series analyses are addressed in, Robert A. Moffitt and Michele Ver Ploeg, eds., Evaluating Welfare Reform in an Era of Transition (Washington, DC, National Research Council, 2001).
14. Several reviews of these efforts are available. See Rebecca Blank, "Declining Caseloads/ Increased Work: What Can We Conclude About the Effects of Welfare Reform?" Economic Policy Review , vol. 7, no. 2 (NY, Federal Reserve Bank, 2001), pp. 25-36; Stephen H. Bell, "Why are Welfare Caseloads Falling?" Assessing the New Federalism, Discussion Paper 01-02 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); Douglas Besharov and Peter Germanis, "Welfare reform - four years later," The Public Interest, 2000, vol. 140, pp. 17-35. Methodological issues for these time-series analyses are addressed in, Robert A. Moffitt and Michele Ver Ploeg, eds., Evaluating Welfare Reform in an Era of Transition (Washington, DC, National Research Council, 2001).
15. Robert F. Schoeni and Rebecca Blank, "What has welfare reform accomplished? Impacts on welfare participation, employment, income, poverty, and family structure," Working Paper 7627 (Boston, MA, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2000).
16. Neeraj Kaushal and Robert Kaestner, "From Welfare to Work: Has Welfare Reform Worked?" Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2001, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 699-719 The authors employ March CPS data from 1995-99 and estimate difference-in-differences with comparison groups thought less likely to be influenced by the policy change.
17. June O'Neill and M. Anne Hill, "Gaining Ground? Measuring the Impact of Welfare Reform on Welfare and Work," Civic Report, no. 17 (NY, The Manhattan Institute, 2001). The authors employ March CPS data for 1983-2000 with the effects of TANF measured by a dummy variable set for the month of implementation.
18. To put that in a way that bears on the current topic, a total of 1,987 people in the 1996 SIPP panel qualify as AFDC/TANF leavers, meaning they received benefits, then did not for at least the next two in-sample months. When these sample cases are projected to the population using the weights they are assigned for their exit months, they represent 5.9 million leavers. (Many returned to TANF at some point, and may have exited more than once. But the 5.9 million counts leavers only once.) Many of the figures presented in this article reflect leavers from 1996-97 who remain in the sample for at least the 24 months following their exit. About 4.0 million people left AFDC/TANF in 1996 or 1997 in the SIPP., However, only 695 sample cases, representing 1.9 million leavers, or about half of all 1996-97 leavers, remained in the sample for 24 post-exit months.
19. Constance Citro and Graham Kalton, eds., The Future of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (Washington, DC, National Research Council, 1993), pp. 103-4.
20. Bavier, "Welfare reform data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation," 2001.
21. Bavier, "Welfare reform data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation," 2001.
22. Descriptive data on welfare leavers presented in this article include all leavers regardless of the sex or marital status of the former recipient. About 9 in 10 SIPP AFDC/TANF leavers are female. In a growing proportion of AFDC/TANF cases, the assistance unit includes only children. In these "child only" cases, the needs of the adult caretaker are not included in the calculation of the grant, and the case is not subject to work and time-limit requirements. SIPP data files did not begin to distinguish these cases directly until wave 8 of the 1996 file. To focus on AFDC/TANF recipients subject to work requirements and time-limits here, both descriptive data and multivariate analysis exclude recipients who also report receiving Supplementary Security Income in their own behalf or who have no natural, step, or adopted children in the AFDC/TANF assistance unit.
23. The income measure displayed in chart 1 does not include rental assistance or the effect of direct taxes, including the Earned Income Tax Credit. Nor does it net out costs of work expenses and child care. The Earned Income Tax Credit has become a major source of Federal cash assistance for low-income working families with children. Despite efforts to encourage low-income parents to receive their Earned Income Tax Credit in advance throughout the year, virtually all Earned Income Tax Credit is received as a lump sum when returns are filed. If an upper-limit estimate of Earned Income Tax Credit amounts (without considering positive income tax liabilities) based on household earnings were spread out across the year on chart 1, along with the employees' share of payroll taxes, the level of the top third would decline. The middle third would see an income gain of a little less than $200 per month in the first year, and a little more than $100 per month in the second. The bottom third's level would increase a little less than $200 the first year and a little more than $200 the second. These rough estimates apply the 1997 Earned Income Tax Credit parameters for two or more qualifying children to annual household earnings separately over the first and second 12 post-exit months. Of course, if incomes were adjusted to reflect the effects of direct taxes, the underlying distribution of leavers into thirds would also change.
24. While those who return to welfare are somewhat more common in the bottom third of all leavers, in any month, only about one-fourth of leavers in the bottom third are receiving TANF. The income tracks of leavers who do not return to welfare within the 24-month follow-up are very similar. The middle third displays a slightly more pronounced incline.
25. Analysis of data from the Three Cities Study also notes the importance of income from other household members. However, the share of household income from the personal earnings of the leaver appears much higher in that urban sample than in the SIPP. Robert Moffitt and Jennifer Roff, "The Diversity of Welfare Leavers," Policy Brief 00-02, Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study, 2000, table 4.
26. Official poverty thresholds are defined for families of various compositions. Census includes on the SIPP public use files a threshold amount that treats household members as if they were all family members. Chart 5 compares monthly household income to 1/ 12 this annual threshold for the household based on household composition that month.
27. Schoeni and Blank, "What has welfare reform accomplished? Impacts on welfare participation, employment, income, poverty, and family structure," 2001, table 3.
28. By selecting female family heads as the unit, the analysis here may understate impacts of welfare reform on families with children if welfare reform had impacts on marriage or fertility. Analysis of persons "never on TANF" finds an indication of one such impact. (See the section in this article, "Families deterred from welfare.") Also see: Schoeni and Blank, 2000; Richard Bavier, "Recent Increases in the Share of Young Children with Married Mothers," 2002, manuscript; David T. Ellwood "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," National Tax Journal, 2000, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1063-1105; Gregory Acs and Sandi Nelson, "Honey I'm Home. Changes in Living Arrangements in the Late 1990s," Assessing the New Federalism, Policy Brief B-38 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); and Alan Dupree and Wendell Primus "Declining Share of Children Lived with Single Mothers in the Late 1990s" (Washington, DC, Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2001).
29. By selecting female family heads as the unit, the analysis here may understate impacts of welfare reform on families with children if welfare reform had impacts on marriage or fertility. Analysis of persons "never on TANF" finds an indication of one such impact. (See the section in this article, "Families deterred from welfare.") Also see: Schoeni and Blank, 2000; Richard Bavier, "Recent Increases in the Share of Young Children with Married Mothers," 2002, manuscript; David T. Ellwood "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," National Tax Journal, 2000, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1063-1105; Gregory Acs and Sandi Nelson, "Honey I'm Home. Changes in Living Arrangements in the Late 1990s," Assessing the New Federalism, Policy Brief B-38 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); and Alan Dupree and Wendell Primus "Declining Share of Children Lived with Single Mothers in the Late 1990s" (Washington, DC, Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2001).
30. By selecting female family heads as the unit, the analysis here may understate impacts of welfare reform on families with children if welfare reform had impacts on marriage or fertility. Analysis of persons "never on TANF" finds an indication of one such impact. (See the section in this article, "Families deterred from welfare.") Also see: Schoeni and Blank, 2000; Richard Bavier, "Recent Increases in the Share of Young Children with Married Mothers," 2002, manuscript; David T. Ellwood "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," National Tax Journal, 2000, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1063-1105; Gregory Acs and Sandi Nelson, "Honey I'm Home. Changes in Living Arrangements in the Late 1990s," Assessing the New Federalism, Policy Brief B-38 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); and Alan Dupree and Wendell Primus "Declining Share of Children Lived with Single Mothers in the Late 1990s" (Washington, DC, Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2001).
31. By selecting female family heads as the unit, the analysis here may understate impacts of welfare reform on families with children if welfare reform had impacts on marriage or fertility. Analysis of persons "never on TANF" finds an indication of one such impact. (See the section in this article, "Families deterred from welfare.") Also see: Schoeni and Blank, 2000; Richard Bavier, "Recent Increases in the Share of Young Children with Married Mothers," 2002, manuscript; David T. Ellwood "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," National Tax Journal, 2000, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1063-1105; Gregory Acs and Sandi Nelson, "Honey I'm Home. Changes in Living Arrangements in the Late 1990s," Assessing the New Federalism, Policy Brief B-38 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); and Alan Dupree and Wendell Primus "Declining Share of Children Lived with Single Mothers in the Late 1990s" (Washington, DC, Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2001).
32. By selecting female family heads as the unit, the analysis here may understate impacts of welfare reform on families with children if welfare reform had impacts on marriage or fertility. Analysis of persons "never on TANF" finds an indication of one such impact. (See the section in this article, "Families deterred from welfare.") Also see: Schoeni and Blank, 2000; Richard Bavier, "Recent Increases in the Share of Young Children with Married Mothers," 2002, manuscript; David T. Ellwood "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," National Tax Journal, 2000, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1063-1105; Gregory Acs and Sandi Nelson, "Honey I'm Home. Changes in Living Arrangements in the Late 1990s," Assessing the New Federalism, Policy Brief B-38 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); and Alan Dupree and Wendell Primus "Declining Share of Children Lived with Single Mothers in the Late 1990s" (Washington, DC, Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2001).
33. th grade; African American; report of a condition that limits the kind or amount of work; never married; presence of three or more children; presence of children under 3 years of age. (To test for the possibility that marital status and the presence of children in the 1998 cohort might be influenced by welfare reform, the model was estimated without these variables with the post-reform dummy remaining significant in each case.) Household and residence binary control variables employed are: residence in a metropolitan area; residence in a State with increasing unemployment during the exit year. In addition, the ratio of the resident State's average monthly civilian unemployment rate over the exit year to the U.S. average for 1993 appears as a variable with four discrete levels. AFDC/TANF policy variables included in some models were: maximum AFDWTANF benefits for a family of three; classification by other researchers as a State with rigorous welfare sanction and time-limit policies.
34. Applying coefficients from appendix table A-1 to means of the independent variables, the later cohort was 9 percentage points less likely to receive welfare during the year and 13 percentage points more likely to have earnings during the year. For a comparable target group, table 1 in O'Neill and Hill, 2001, shows an annual welfare participation impact on single mothers of 6 percentage points in the CPS data and a positive 7 percentage point impact on employment in the week preceding the survey. Several differences in measurement may contribute to the different results. O'Neill and Hill employ data from 1983-2000 and so can employ a trend variable and an interaction of the trend and state variables. The results in table A-1 compare the experience of a post-reform cohort of female family heads to a cohort drawn from a peak period of welfare caseloads, early calendar year 1994. O'Neill and Hill measure employment impacts on point-in-time employment, while in table A-1, the dependent employment variable measures employment at some point during the exit year.
35. Analysis of administrative datasets found declines in the number of entries as well as exits, including declines in entries among parents who had never received welfare. Donald Oellerich, "Welfare Reform: Program Entrants and Recipients," prepared for the Fourth Annual Welfare Reform Evaluation Conference, 2001.
36. The marginal effect of TANF on exits was estimated by applying the coefficient on the dummy TANF variable in the exit model to the proportion of the recipient sample in the January 1997 cohort. That product was multiplied by the proportion of the entire recipient sample that exited within 12 months to estimate the share of all exits that were due to TANF. To estimate the effect of TANF-associated exits on participation rates of female family heads, the share of all exits due to TANF was multiplied by the proportion of the entire sample from January 1993 and January 1997 who were recipients at the start. Entry impacts were calculated by substituting nonrecipient sample and entry values.
37. Only women were included so that the leaver sample would be similar to the other samples employed in this analysis. The same analysis was performed on all leavers of both sexes with no important differences in results. Around 88 percent of research sample leavers were female.
38. Output from this model is available from the author.
39. The following table displays a sensitivity test for placing the post-reform dummy variable at July 1996. Controlling for the changing economy, post-reform welfare leavers were somewhat less likely to have exit-year earnings. The sensitivity test aims to establish the onset of this impact. To screen out effects of earlier and later periods, only 1996 exits are included. It appears that the dummy variable could most reasonably be set for July or August. Test of alternative definitions of July 1996 dummy variable using only 1996 exits: 1996 Coefficient Probability exit month of a large Chi squared Apr. ........................................... -1.6559 .3022 May ........................................... -1.4299 .0151 June ........................................... -1.167 .0088 July ............................................ -1.0606 .003 Aug ............................................ -1.2481 .0003 Sept. .......................................... -.728 .0365 Oct. ........................................... -1.1909 .0005 Nov ............................................ -6707 .0477
40. The impacts identified by the dummy July 1996 variable in appendix table A-4 are quite large, and may reflect interaction with other time-varying factors, such as steady improvement in employment. Tests of interaction between the July 1996 dummy and the state unemployment variable did not yield a significant coefficient. The author is grateful to Brian O'Hara of the Census Bureau for suggesting a further specification test. Control variable coefficients developed from the pre-July 1996 leavers were used to predict the proportion of post-July 1996 leavers who would have earnings during their exit years. This estimate was compared to a similar prediction based on coefficients from a model using post-July data. The preperiod coefficients estimated more employment than the post-period, and the difference was significant at the 90 percent confidence level, indicating that the magnitude of negative impact reflected in the July 1996 dummy in appendix table A-4 is too large. At the same time, the post-period coefficients estimated significantly more employment than actually occurred, indicating that the significance of the July 1996 dummy is not disproved by differences in the coefficients of the pre-reform and post-reform control variables. Additional tables showing these findings are available from the author.
41. It is easy to overlook the early onset of impacts when focusing on the standard administrative data measure, mean monthly caseload, a measure of stock. Mean monthly caseload declines were greatest in 1997. (See Bavier, "Welfare reform data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation," 2002, table A-2.) Welfare exits, a measure of flow, were highest in the second half of 1996 in the SIPP. In the 1993 panel, about 94,000 welfare exits were occurring each month over 1993-94. In the first 6 months of calendar year 1996, the level was about the same (97,000). Then a surge in exits occurred in the second half of 1996, averaging 146,000 per month, before falling back to 110,000 per month in 1997.
42. Amy Brown, Dan Bloom, and David Butler, "The View from the Field: As Time Limits Approach, Welfare Recipients and Staff Talk About Their Attitudes and Expectations" (NY, Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, 1997), pp. 14-15.
43. Besharov and Germanis, "Welfare reform - four years later," 2000.
44. See, for example, Leon Dash's series of eight articles about Rosa Lee Cunningham and her family, The Washington Post, starting Sept. 18, 1994; Thomas Sancton, "How to Get America Off the Dole," Time, May 25, 1992, pp. 44-47; and Ann Blackman, James Carney, Richard N. Ostling, and Richard Woodbury, "Vicious Cycle," Time, June 20, 1994, pp. 25-33.
45. See, for example, Leon Dash's series of eight articles about Rosa Lee Cunningham and her family, The Washington Post, starting Sept. 18, 1994; Thomas Sancton, "How to Get America Off the Dole," Time, May 25, 1992, pp. 44-47; and Ann Blackman, James Carney, Richard N. Ostling, and Richard Woodbury, "Vicious Cycle," Time, June 20, 1994, pp. 25-33.
46. See, for example, Leon Dash's series of eight articles about Rosa Lee Cunningham and her family, The Washington Post, starting Sept. 18, 1994; Thomas Sancton, "How to Get America Off the Dole," Time, May 25, 1992, pp. 44-47; and Ann Blackman, James Carney, Richard N. Ostling, and Richard Woodbury, "Vicious Cycle," Time, June 20, 1994, pp. 25-33.
47. Andrew Cherlin, Linda Burton, Judith Francis, Jane Henrici, Laura Lein, James Quane, and Karen Bogan, "Sanctions and Case Closings for Noncompliance: Who is Affected and Why?" Policy Brief 01-1, Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study (Baltimore, MD, Johns Hopkins University, 2001).
48. Results supporting this finding are available from the author.
49. In a related finding, several data sources show that the concentration of such disadvantages in the residual TANF caseload has not grown, as it might have if exits were concentrated among less disadvantaged recipients. Sheila R. Zedlewski and Donald W. Alderson, "Before and After Welfare Reform: How Have Families on Welfare Changed?" Assessing the New Federalism Policy Brief B-32 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); Robert Moffitt and Andrew Cherlin, "Disadvantage Among Families Remaining on Welfare," 2002, prepared for the Joint Center on Poverty Research Conference, "The Hard to Employ and Welfare Reform." While generally in agreement, the SIPP data do show an increase in the share of TANF recipients reporting a health condition that limits the kind or amount of work they can do. This trend continues in preliminary data from the 2001 SIPP panel. 2001 1996 panel panel Month Month Month Month Month Month 1 12 24 36 48 1 Physical or mental work-limiting condition............. 23 22 26 24 26 33 Work-preventing condition............. 16 16 19 21 21 25
50. In a related finding, several data sources show that the concentration of such disadvantages in the residual TANF caseload has not grown, as it might have if exits were concentrated among less disadvantaged recipients. Sheila R. Zedlewski and Donald W. Alderson, "Before and After Welfare Reform: How Have Families on Welfare Changed?" Assessing the New Federalism Policy Brief B-32 (Washington, DC, The Urban Institute, 2001); Robert Moffitt and Andrew Cherlin, "Disadvantage Among Families Remaining on Welfare," 2002, prepared for the Joint Center on Poverty Research Conference, "The Hard to Employ and Welfare Reform." While generally in agreement, the SIPP data do show an increase in the share of TANF recipients reporting a health condition that limits the kind or amount of work they can do. This trend continues in preliminary data from the 2001 SIPP panel. 2001 1996 panel panel Month Month Month Month Month Month 1 12 24 36 48 1 Physical or mental work-limiting condition............. 23 22 26 24 26 33 Work-preventing condition............. 16 16 19 21 21 25
51. Results are available from the author.
52. The classification of States by the rigor of their sanction and time-limits policies was developed from: Ladonna Pavetti and Dan Bloom, "Sanctions and Time-limits." The New World of Welfare, Rebecca Blank and Ron Haskins, eds. (Washington, DC, Brookings Institute, 2001), pp. 245-69; Robert Rector and Sarah Youssef, "The Determinants of Welfare Caseload Decline" CDA99-44 (Washington, DC, The Heritage Foundation, 1999).
53. The classification of States by the rigor of their sanction and time-limits policies was developed from: Ladonna Pavetti and Dan Bloom, "Sanctions and Time-limits." The New World of Welfare, Rebecca Blank and Ron Haskins, eds. (Washington, DC, Brookings Institute, 2001), pp. 245-69; Robert Rector and Sarah Youssef, "The Determinants of Welfare Caseload Decline" CDA99-44 (Washington, DC, The Heritage Foundation, 1999).
54. Gary Burtless and Larry L. Orr, "Are Classical Experiments Needed for Manpower Policy?" The Journal of Human Resources, 1986, vol. XXI, no.4, pp. 606-39.
55. Howard Bloom, and others, "Recommendations of the Job Training Longitudinal Survey Research Advisory Panel" (Washington, DC., U.S. Department of Labor, 1985), p. 4.
56. Robert Moffitt, "Incentive Effects of the U.S. Welfare System: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, March 1992, vol. XXX, p. 15.
57. For convenience, the text refers to employment-correlated unobservables collectively with the positively-correlated variable motivation. However, other relevant unobservables may be negatively correlated with employment.
58. All of the following papers were presented at a February 28 - March 1, 2002 conference organized by the Joint Center on Poverty Research, "The Hard-to-Employ and Welfare Reform." Copies of the papers are available on the Internet at: www.jcpr.org. Dan Lewis, Bong Joo Lee, and Lisa Altenbernd "Serious Mental Illness and Welfare Reform," 2002; Peter D. Brandon and Denis P. Hogan, "The Effects of Children with Disabilities on Mothers' Exits from Welfare," 2002; Marcia K. Meyers, Henry Brady, and Eva Y. Seto, "Disabilities in Poor Families: The Consequences for Economic Stability and Welfare Use," 2002; Richard Tolman, Sandra Danziger, and Dan Rosen, "Domestic Violence and Economic Well-being of Current and Former Welfare Recipients," 2002; Cynthia Needles Fletcher, Steven Garasky, and Helen Jensen, "Transiting from Welfare to Work: No Bus, No Car, No Way," 2002; and Harold Pollack, Sheldon Danziger, Rukmalie Jayakody, and Kristin S. Seefeldt," Substance Abuse Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses," 2002.
59. All of the following papers were presented at a February 28 - March 1, 2002 conference organized by the Joint Center on Poverty Research, "The Hard-to-Employ and Welfare Reform." Copies of the papers are available on the Internet at: www.jcpr.org. Dan Lewis, Bong Joo Lee, and Lisa Altenbernd "Serious Mental Illness and Welfare Reform," 2002; Peter D. Brandon and Denis P. Hogan, "The Effects of Children with Disabilities on Mothers' Exits from Welfare," 2002; Marcia K. Meyers, Henry Brady, and Eva Y. Seto, "Disabilities in Poor Families: The Consequences for Economic Stability and Welfare Use," 2002; Richard Tolman, Sandra Danziger, and Dan Rosen, "Domestic Violence and Economic Well-being of Current and Former Welfare Recipients," 2002; Cynthia Needles Fletcher, Steven Garasky, and Helen Jensen, "Transiting from Welfare to Work: No Bus, No Car, No Way," 2002; and Harold Pollack, Sheldon Danziger, Rukmalie Jayakody, and Kristin S. Seefeldt," Substance Abuse Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses," 2002.
60. All of the following papers were presented at a February 28 - March 1, 2002 conference organized by the Joint Center on Poverty Research, "The Hard-to-Employ and Welfare Reform." Copies of the papers are available on the Internet at: www.jcpr.org. Dan Lewis, Bong Joo Lee, and Lisa Altenbernd "Serious Mental Illness and Welfare Reform," 2002; Peter D. Brandon and Denis P. Hogan, "The Effects of Children with Disabilities on Mothers' Exits from Welfare," 2002; Marcia K. Meyers, Henry Brady, and Eva Y. Seto, "Disabilities in Poor Families: The Consequences for Economic Stability and Welfare Use," 2002; Richard Tolman, Sandra Danziger, and Dan Rosen, "Domestic Violence and Economic Well-being of Current and Former Welfare Recipients," 2002; Cynthia Needles Fletcher, Steven Garasky, and Helen Jensen, "Transiting from Welfare to Work: No Bus, No Car, No Way," 2002; and Harold Pollack, Sheldon Danziger, Rukmalie Jayakody, and Kristin S. Seefeldt," Substance Abuse Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses," 2002.
61. All of the following papers were presented at a February 28 - March 1, 2002 conference organized by the Joint Center on Poverty Research, "The Hard-to-Employ and Welfare Reform." Copies of the papers are available on the Internet at: www.jcpr.org. Dan Lewis, Bong Joo Lee, and Lisa Altenbernd "Serious Mental Illness and Welfare Reform," 2002; Peter D. Brandon and Denis P. Hogan, "The Effects of Children with Disabilities on Mothers' Exits from Welfare," 2002; Marcia K. Meyers, Henry Brady, and Eva Y. Seto, "Disabilities in Poor Families: The Consequences for Economic Stability and Welfare Use," 2002; Richard Tolman, Sandra Danziger, and Dan Rosen, "Domestic Violence and Economic Well-being of Current and Former Welfare Recipients," 2002; Cynthia Needles Fletcher, Steven Garasky, and Helen Jensen, "Transiting from Welfare to Work: No Bus, No Car, No Way," 2002; and Harold Pollack, Sheldon Danziger, Rukmalie Jayakody, and Kristin S. Seefeldt," Substance Abuse Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses," 2002.
62. All of the following papers were presented at a February 28 - March 1, 2002 conference organized by the Joint Center on Poverty Research, "The Hard-to-Employ and Welfare Reform." Copies of the papers are available on the Internet at: www.jcpr.org. Dan Lewis, Bong Joo Lee, and Lisa Altenbernd "Serious Mental Illness and Welfare Reform," 2002; Peter D. Brandon and Denis P. Hogan, "The Effects of Children with Disabilities on Mothers' Exits from Welfare," 2002; Marcia K. Meyers, Henry Brady, and Eva Y. Seto, "Disabilities in Poor Families: The Consequences for Economic Stability and Welfare Use," 2002; Richard Tolman, Sandra Danziger, and Dan Rosen, "Domestic Violence and Economic Well-being of Current and Former Welfare Recipients," 2002; Cynthia Needles Fletcher, Steven Garasky, and Helen Jensen, "Transiting from Welfare to Work: No Bus, No Car, No Way," 2002; and Harold Pollack, Sheldon Danziger, Rukmalie Jayakody, and Kristin S. Seefeldt," Substance Abuse Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses," 2002.
63. All of the following papers were presented at a February 28 - March 1, 2002 conference organized by the Joint Center on Poverty Research, "The Hard-to-Employ and Welfare Reform." Copies of the papers are available on the Internet at: www.jcpr.org. Dan Lewis, Bong Joo Lee, and Lisa Altenbernd "Serious Mental Illness and Welfare Reform," 2002; Peter D. Brandon and Denis P. Hogan, "The Effects of Children with Disabilities on Mothers' Exits from Welfare," 2002; Marcia K. Meyers, Henry Brady, and Eva Y. Seto, "Disabilities in Poor Families: The Consequences for Economic Stability and Welfare Use," 2002; Richard Tolman, Sandra Danziger, and Dan Rosen, "Domestic Violence and Economic Well-being of Current and Former Welfare Recipients," 2002; Cynthia Needles Fletcher, Steven Garasky, and Helen Jensen, "Transiting from Welfare to Work: No Bus, No Car, No Way," 2002; and Harold Pollack, Sheldon Danziger, Rukmalie Jayakody, and Kristin S. Seefeldt," Substance Abuse Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses," 2002.
64. All of the following papers were presented at a February 28 - March 1, 2002 conference organized by the Joint Center on Poverty Research, "The Hard-to-Employ and Welfare Reform." Copies of the papers are available on the Internet at: www.jcpr.org. Dan Lewis, Bong Joo Lee, and Lisa Altenbernd "Serious Mental Illness and Welfare Reform," 2002; Peter D. Brandon and Denis P. Hogan, "The Effects of Children with Disabilities on Mothers' Exits from Welfare," 2002; Marcia K. Meyers, Henry Brady, and Eva Y. Seto, "Disabilities in Poor Families: The Consequences for Economic Stability and Welfare Use," 2002; Richard Tolman, Sandra Danziger, and Dan Rosen, "Domestic Violence and Economic Well-being of Current and Former Welfare Recipients," 2002; Cynthia Needles Fletcher, Steven Garasky, and Helen Jensen, "Transiting from Welfare to Work: No Bus, No Car, No Way," 2002; and Harold Pollack, Sheldon Danziger, Rukmalie Jayakody, and Kristin S. Seefeldt," Substance Abuse Among Welfare Recipients: Trends and Policy Responses," 2002.
65. Oellerich, "Welfare Reform: Program Entrants and Recipients," 2001.
66. When, as usually was the case, the female family head met the criteria in more than 1 month of the panel, the first month in which the criteria were met was selected for the start of the observation year. Thus an individual can appear only once in the sample.
67. Impacts on marital status were not found for all female family heads, nor for welfare leavers.
68. Data are available upon request from the author.
69. Also see Danziger, and others, "Does it Pay to Move from Welfare to Work?" 2001.
70. th month. Declines among 1993 panel leavers were from 50 percent to 42 percent.