Have food stamp program changes increased participation?

Social Service Review

Volumn 79, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 537-561

  Zedlewski, Sheila R ^a   Rader, Kelly ^a  

^a URBAN INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27744538873     PISSN: 00377961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/431268     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Abi-Habib, Natalie, Adam Safir, and Timothy Triplett. 2004. "NSAF Survey Methods and Data Reliability." Assessing the New Federalism Methodology Report no. 1. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
2. Bartlett, Susan, Nancy Burstein, and William Hamilton. 2004. Food Stamp Program Access Study: Final Report. E-FAN report no. 03013-3. Washington, DC: USDA, Economic Research Service.
3. Brick, J. Michael, Teresa Strickler, and David Ferraro. 2004. "2002 NSAF Variance Estimation." Assessing the New Federalism Methodology Report no. 4. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
4. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 2005. "States' Vehicle Asset Policies in the Food Stamp Program." Report. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Washington, DC.
5. Council of Economic Advisers. 2004. Economic Report of the President. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
6. Cunnyngham, Karen. 2004. "Trends in Food Stamp Program Participation Rates: 1999 to 2002." Report submitted to U.S. Department of Agriculture. Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC.
7. Dean, Stacy, and Ray Horng. 2002. "States' Vehicle Asset Policies in the Food Stamp Program." Report. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Washington, DC.
8. Farrell, Mary, Michael Fishman, Matthew Langley, and David Stapleton. 2003. "The Relationship of Earnings and Income to Food Stamp Participation: A Longitudinal Analysis." Report to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Lewin Group and Cornell Center for Policy Research, Fairfax, VA.
9. Fix, Michael E., and Jeffrey Passel. 1994. "Immigration and Immigrants: Setting the Record Straight." Research report. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
10. Fix, Michael E., and Jeffrey Passel. 1999. "Trends in Noncitizens' and Citizens' Use of Public Benefits Following Welfare Reform, 1994-1997." Report. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
11. Fossett, James, Thomas Gais, and Frank Thompson. 2003. "New Systems of Social Programs? Local Implementation of Health Care, Food Stamp, and TANF Programs." Focus (journal of the Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin-Madison) 22 (3): 44-49.
12. Hanson, Kenneth, and Craig Gundersen. 2002. Issues in Food Assistance: How Unemployment Affects the Food Stamp Program. Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Report no. 26-7. Washington, DC: USDA, Economic Research Service.
13. McConnell, Sheena, and Michael Ponza. 1999. "The Reaching the Working Poor and Poor Elderly Study: What We Learned and Recommendations for Future Research." Report. Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC.
14. McKernan, Signe-Mary, and Caroline Ratcliffe. 2003. "Employment Factors Influencing Food Stamp Participation." Research report. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
15. NBER (National Bureau of Economic Research), Business Cycle Dating Committee. 2003. The NBER's Business Cycle Dating Procedure. Report, October 21. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at http://www.nber.org/cycles/recessions.pdf.
16. Oaxaca, Ronald. 1973. "Male-Female Wage Differentials in Urban Labor Markets." International Economic Review 14 (3): 693-709.
17. Pavetti, LaDonna, Kathleen Maloy, and Liz Schott. 2002. "Promoting Medicaid and Food Stamp Participation: Establishing Eligibility Procedures That Support Participation and Meet Families' Needs: Final Report." MPR report no. 8661-403. Mathematica Policy Research, Washington, DC.
18. Ponza, Michael, James C. Ohls, Lorenzo Moreno, Amy Zambrowski, and Rhoda Cohen. 1999. "Customer Service in the Food Stamp Program: Final Report." Report no. 8243-140 to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Mathematica Policy Research, Princeton, NJ.
19. Quint, Janet, and Rebecca Widom. 2001. "Post-TANF Food Stamp and Medicaid Benefits: Factors That Aid or Impede Their Receipt." Report, Project on Devolution and Urban Change. Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, New York.
20. Rosenbaum, Dorothy. 2000. "Improving Access to Food Stamps: New Reporting Options Can Reduce Administrative Burdens and Error Rates." Report. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Washington, DC.
21. Super, David, and Stacy Dean. 2001. "New State Options to Improve the Food Stamp Vehicle Rule." Report. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Washington, DC.
22. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture), Food and Nutrition Service. 2003. Characteristics of Food Stamp Households: Fiscal Year 2001. Food Stamp Program Report no. FSP-03-CHAR. Alexandria, VA: USDA, Food and Nutrition Service.
23. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture), Food and Nutrition Service. 2004a. Characteristics of Food Stamp Households: Fiscal Year 2003. Food Stamp Program Report no. FSP-04-CHAR. Alexandria, VA: USDA, Food and Nutrition Service.
24. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture), Food and Nutrition Service. 2004b. Research Grants to Improve Food Stamp Program Access through Partnership and Technology: 2001 Program Evaluation Summary. Report. Alexandria, VA: USDA, Food and Nutrition Service.
25. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture), Food and Nutrition Service. 2005a. "Food Stamp Program: Monthly Data - National Level." Summary of Food Stamp Program participation and benefits, FY 2002 through February 2005. Available at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/ fsmonthly.htm (accessed July 20, 2005).
26. USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture), Food and Nutrition Service. 2005b. "Food Stamp Program Participation and Costs." Summary of Food Stamp Program participation and costs, 1969-2004. Available at http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fssummar.htm (accessed July 20, 2005).
27. USGAO (U.S. General Accounting Office). 1999. Various Factors Have Led to Declining Participation. GAO-99-185. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
28. USGAO (U.S. General Accounting Office). 2002. States' Use of Options and Waivers to Improve Program Administration and Promote Access. GAO-02-409. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
29. USGAO (U.S. General Accounting Office). 2004. Food Stamp Program: Steps Have Been Taken to Increase Participation of Working Families, but Better Tracking of Efforts Is Needed. GAO-04-346. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
30. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means. 2004. The 2004 Green Book: Background Material and Data on the Programs within the Jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. House Ways and Means Committee Print no. 108-6. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
31. Wegener, Victoria. 1999. "Food Stamp Education and Outreach Working to Provide Nutrition Benefits to Eligible Households." WIN Issue Notes, vol. 3, no. 11. Welfare Information Network, Washington, DC.
32. Wheaton, Laura, and Linda Giannarelli. 2000. "Underreporting of Means-Tested Transfer Programs in the March CPS." 236-41 in American Statistical Association 2000 Proceedings of the Section on Government Statistics and Section on Social Statistics. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
33. Wilde, Parke, Peggy Cook, Craig Gundersen, Mark Nord, and Laura Tiehen. 2002. The Decline in Food Stamp Program Participation in the 1990s. Research report no. 7. Washington, DC: USDA, Economic Research Service.
34. Zedlewski, Sheila, and Sarah Brauner. 1999. "Declines in Food Stamp and Welfare Participation: Is There a Connection?" Assessing the New Federalism discussion paper no. 99-13. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
35. Zedlewski, Sheila, and Amelia Gruber. 2001. "Former Welfare Families Continue to Leave the Food Stamp Program." Assessing the New Federalism discussion paper no. 01-05. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.
36. Zedlewski, Sheila, and Sandra Nelson. 2003. "Families Coping without Earnings or Government Cash Assistance." Assessing the New Federalism occasional paper no. 64. Urban Institute, Washington, DC.