Assessing the initial impact of welfare reform: A synthesis of research studies (1998-2002)

Social Policy Journal

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 3-31

  Carnochan, Sarah ^a   Ketch, Virginia ^a   De Marco, Allison ^a   Taylor, Sarah ^a   Abramson, Anne ^a   Austin, Michael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Barriers to employment; PRWORA; TANF; Welfare leavers; Welfare reform; Welfare to work

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248606371     PISSN: 15332942     EISSN: 15332950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J185v04n01_02     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. Acs, G.,&Loprest, P. (2001). Final Synthesis Report of Findings from ASPE “Leavers” Grants: U.S. Department of Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation.
2. Allard, S., & Danziger, S. (2001). Proximity and opportunity: How residence and race affect the employment of welfare recipients. Ann Arbor, MI: The Michigan Program on Poverty and Social Welfare Policy.
3. Bania, N., Coulton, C., Lalich, N., Martin, T., Newburn, M., & Pasqualone, C. J. (2001). The end of welfare as they knew it: What happens when welfare recipients reach their time limits? An executive summary of a comparison of time limited and non-time limited welfare leavers in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. Center on Urban Poverty and Social Change, Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.
4. Bavier, R. (2001). Welfare reform from the Survey of Income and Program Participation. Monthly Labor Review, 124(7), 13-24.
5. Blank, S., & Riccio, J. (2001). Welfare, Housing, and Employment: Learning from the Jobs-Plus Demonstration (Policy Brief). New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
6. Blau, D., & Tekin, E. (2001). The Determinants and Consequences of Child Care Subsidies for Single Mothers (Discussion Paper No. 383): Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
7. Bloom, D., Farrell, M., Fink, B. & Adams-Ciardullo, D. (2002). Welfare Time Limits: State Policies, Implementation, and Effects on Families. MDRC.
8. Bloom, D., & Michalopoulos, C. (2001). How Welfare and Work Policies Affect Employment and Income: A Synthesis of Research (Meta-analysis): Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
9. Bloom, D., & Winstead, D. (2002). Sanctions and welfare reform. (Policy Brief No. 12). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
10. Brauner, S.,& Loprest, P. (1999). Where Are They Now? What States’ Studies of People Who Left Welfare Tell Us (Assessing the New Federalism Series A, No. A-32). Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute.
11. Brock, T., & Harknett, K. (1998). A Comparison of Two Welfare-to-Work Case Management Models. Social Services Review, 72(4), 493.
12. Brooks, J. L., Hair, E. C., & Zaslow, M. J. (2001). Welfare reform’s impact on adolescents: Early warning signs. (Research Brief). Washington, DC: Child Trends.
13. Brooks, M.,&Buckner, J. (1996). Work and welfare: Job histories, barriers to employment, and predictors of work among low-income single mothers. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 66(4), 526-537.
14. Burt, M. (2002). The “hard-to-serve”: Definitions and implications. In A. F. Weil, K. (Ed.), Welfare reform: The next act (pp. 163-177). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
15. Capps, R., Ku, L., Fix, M., Furgiuele, C., Passel, J., Ramchand, R., McNiven, S. & Perez-Lopez, D. (2002). How are immigrants faring after welfare reform? New York: Urban Institute.
16. Carnochan, S. & Austin, M. J. (2002). Implementing welfare reform and guiding organizational change. Administration in Social Work, 26(1), 61-77.
17. Child Trends. (2002). The unfinished business of welfare reform: Improving prospects for poor children and youth. Child Trends.
18. Connelly, R., & Kimmel, J. (2001). The effect of child care costs on the labor force participation and welfare recipiency of single mothers: Implications for welfare reform. Kalamazoo, MI: Upjohn Institute.
19. Danziger, S., Corcoran, M., Danziger, S., Heflin, C., Kalil, A., Levine, J. et al. (2000). Barriers to the employment of welfare recipients. Ann Arbor, MI: Poverty Research and Training Center.
20. Danziger, S., Heflin, C., Corcoran, M., Oltmans, E.,&Wang, H. (2002). Does it Pay to Move from Welfare to Work? Ann Arbor: Poverty Research and Training Center.
21. Danziger, S., Kalil, A., & Anderson, N. (2000). Human capital, physical health, and mental health of welfare recipients: Co-occurrence and correlates. Journal of Social Issues, 56(4), 635-656.
22. Danziger, S., & Seefeldt, K. (2002). Barriers to employment and the “hard to serve”: Implications for services, sanctions, and time limits. Focus, 22(1), 76-81.
23. Dodson, L., Manuel, T., & Bravo, E. (2002). Keeping jobs and raising families in low-income America: It just doesn’t work. Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University.
24. Figlio, Z., & Ziliak, J. (1999). Welfare reform, the business cycle, and the decline in AFDC caseloads. In S. Danziger (Ed.), Economic Conditions and Welfare Reform Buehler C., Orme J., Post J.(pp. 19-47). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
25. Finegold, K., & Staveteig, S. (2002). Race, ethnicity, and welfare reform. In A. F. Weil, K. (Ed.), Welfare reform: The next act. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
26. Garrett, B.,&Holahan, J. (2000). Health Insurance Coverage after Welfare. Health Affairs, 19(1), 175-184.
27. Gennetian, L. A., Duncan, G. J., Knox, V. W., Vargas, W. G., Clark-Kauffman, E., & London, A. S. (2002). How welfare and work policies for parents affect adolescents: A synthesis of research.: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
28. Goldberg, H., & Schott, L. (2000). A compliance-oriented approach to sanctions in state and county TANF programs. Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
29. Gooden, S. (2000). Race and welfare: Examining employment outcomes of white and black welfare recipients. Journal of Poverty, 4(3), 21-41.
30. Gooden, S., & Doolittle, F. (2001). Exceptions to the rule: The implementation of 24-month time-limit extensions in W-2. Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
31. Gritz, R., Mancuso, D., Lieberman, C.,&Lindler, V. (2001). Assessing the Family Circumstances of TANF Applicants and Leavers in Contra Costa and Alameda Counties (Executive Summary). Burlingame: The SPHERE Institute.
32. Grogger, J. (2001). The effects of time limits and other policy changes on welfare use, work, and income among female-headed families. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
33. Growing Up in Poverty Project. (2002). New Lives for Poor Families? Mothers and Young Children Move through welfare reform. (Wave Two Technical Report): Growing Up in Poverty Project.
34. Guyer, J., & Springer, J. (2000). Health Care After Welfare: An Update of Findings from State-Level Leaver Studies. Washington, D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
35. Hagen, J. (1999). Time limits under Temporary Assistance to Needy Families: A look at the welfare cliff. Affilia, 14(3), 294-314.
36. Hagen, J. L.,&Owens-Manley, J. (2002). Issues of implementing TANF in New York: The perspective of frontline workers. Social Work, 47(2), 171-182.
37. Hamilton, G., Freedman, S., Gennetian, L., Michalopoulos, C., Walter, J., Adams-Ciardullo, D. et al. (2001). How Effective are Different Welfare-to-Work Approaches? Five-Year Adult and Child Impacts for Eleven Programs (Final Evaluation): Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC).
38. Harknett, K. (2001). Working and Leaving welfare: Does race or ethnicity matter? Social Service Review, 359-386.
39. Hill, H., Kirby, G., & Pavetti, L. (2002). Transitional Jobs Programs: Stepping Stones to Unsubsidized Employment (Lessons from the Field): Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
40. Holcomb, P.A.&Martinson, K. (2002). Putting policy into practice: Five years of welfare reform. In Welfare Reform: The Next Act. A. Weil & K. Finegold, Eds. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute Press.
41. Holzer, H., & Stoll, M. (2002). Employer demand for welfare recipients by race. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
42. Horwitz, S. M., & Kerker, B. D. (2001). Preschool and school age children under welfare reform. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 32(2), 107-123.
43. Hotz, V. J., Imbens, G., & Klerman, J. (2000). The Long-Term Gains from GAIN: A Re-Analysis of the Impacts of theCalifornia GAIN program. Unpublishedmanuscript.
44. Hutson, R. Q. (2001). Red flags: Research raises concerns about the impact of “welfare reform” on child maltreatment. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy.
45. Jayakody, R., Danziger, S., & Pollack, H. (2000). Welfare reform, substance use, and mental health. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 25(4), 623-651.
46. Jayakody, R., & Stauffer, D. (2000). Mental health problems among single mothers: Implications for work and welfare reform. Journal of Social Issues, 56(4), 617-634.
47. Kalil, A., Born, C., Kunz, J.,&Caudill, P. (2001). Life stressors, social support, and depressive symptoms among first-time welfare recipients. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(2), 355-369.
48. Kalil, A., Schweingruber, H., & Seefeldt, K. (2001). Correlates of employment among welfare recipients: Do psychological characteristics and attitudes matter? American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(5), 701-723.
49. Kirby, D. (2002). Effective Approaches to Reducing Adolescent Unprotected Sex, Pregnancy, and Childbearing. Journal of Sex Research, 39(1), 51-57.
50. Knab, J. T., Bos, J. M., Friedlander, D., & Weissman, J. W. (2000). Do mandates matter? The effects of a mandate to enter a Welfare-to-Work program.: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
51. Knox, V., Miller, C., & Gennetian, L. (2000). Reforming Welfare and Rewarding Work: A Summary of the Final Report on the Minnesota Family Investment Program (Summary of Final Report): Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
52. Lindhorst, T., Mancoske, R. J., & Kemp, A. A. (2000). Is welfare reform working? A study of the effects of sanctions on families receiving temporary assistance to needy families. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 27(4), 185-201.
53. Loprest, P. (1999). Families Who Left Welfare: Who Are They and How Are They Doing? (Assessing the New Federalism: Discussion Paper No. 99-02). Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute.
54. Loprest, P. (2001). How Are Families That Left Welfare Doing? A Comparison of Early and Recent Welfare Leavers (Assessing the New Federalism Policy Brief No. Series B, No. B-36). Washington D.C.: The Urban Institute.
55. Loprest, P. (2002). Making the transition from welfare to work: Successes but continuing concerns. In A. F. Weil, K. (Ed.), Welfare reform: The next act (pp. 17-31). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
56. Loprest, P.,& Zedlewski, S. (1999). Current and Former Welfare Recipients: How Do They Differ? (Assessing the New Federalism Discussion Paper No. 99-17). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
57. Lower-Basch, E. (2000). “Leavers” and diversion studies: Preliminary analysis of racial differences in caseload trends and leaver outcomes. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, US Department of Health and Human Services.
58. Mancuso, D., & Lindler, V. (2001). Examining the Circumstances of Welfare Leavers and Sanctioned Families in Sonoma County (Executive Summary): The SPHERE Institute.
59. McLanahan, S., & Sandefur, G. (1994). Growing Up With a Single Parent. What Hurts, What Helps. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
60. Meyers, M., Riccucci, N. & Lurie, I. (2001). Achieving goal congruence in complex environments: The case of welfare reform. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(2), 165.
61. Miller, C., Redcross, C., & Henrichson, C. (2002). Food Stamp Use Among Former Welfare Recipients: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
62. Mills, B., Dorai-Raj, S., Peterson, E., & Alwang, J. (2001). Determinants of Food Stamp Program Exits. Social Service Review, 75(4), 539-558.
63. Moffit, R., Cherlin, A., Burton, L., King, M., & Roff, J. (2002). The Characteristics of Families Remaining on Welfare (Working Paper No. 02-02): Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study.
64. Moffit, R.,&Roff, J. (2000). The Diversity of Welfare Leavers (Working Paper 00-01): Welfare, Children, and Families: A Three-City Study. Johns Hopkins University.
65. Moore, K. A., Vandivere, S., & Ehrle, J. (2000). Turbulence and child well-being (Series B, No. B-17). Washington, DC: Urban Institute & Child Trends.
66. Morris, P., Knox, V. & Gennetian, L. (2002). Welfare policies matter for children and youth: Lessons for TANF reauthorization. (Policy Brief). New York: MDRC.
67. Moses, A., Mancuso, D.,& Lieberman, C. (2000). Examining Circumstances of Individuals and Families Who Leave TANF: Assessing the Validity of Administrative Data (Executive Summary No. Grant Number 98ASPE-309A): The SPHERE Institute.
68. Murray, C. (2001). Family Formation. In R. Blank & R. Haskins (Eds.), The New World of Welfare (pp. 137-168). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
69. Nathan, R. P., & Gais, T. L. (1999). Implementing the Personal Responsibility Act of 1996: A First Look. Federalism Research Group, The Nelson Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.
70. National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support. (2001). Leaving welfare, left behind: Employment status, income, and well-being of former TANF recipients. National Campaign for Jobs and Income Support.
71. Ng, D. (1999). From war on poverty to war on welfare: The impact of welfare reform on the lives of immigrant women. San Francisco, CA: Equal Rights Advocates.
72. Offner, P. (2001). Reducing Non-Marital Births (Policy Brief No. 5): Brookings.
73. Ong, P. (1996). Work and Car Ownership among Welfare Recipients. Social Work Research, 20(4), 255-262.
74. Peters, E. (2001). How Will Welfare Reform Affect Childbearing and Family Structure Decisions? In R. Plotnick (Ed.): Institute for Research on Poverty.
75. Phillips, K. (2001). Who Knows about the Earned Income Tax Credit? (Assessing the New Federalism Series B, No. B-27). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
76. Polit, D., London, A., & Martinez, J. (2001). The health of poor urban women: Findings from the Project on Devolution and Urban Change (Executive Summary). New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
77. Polit, D., Widom, R., Edin, K., Bowie, S., London, A., Scott, E. et al. (2001). Is Work Enough? The Experiences of Current and Former Welfare Mothers Who Work (The Project on Devolution and Urban Change). New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
78. Quane, J., Rankin, B., & Joshi, P. (2002). Housing Assistance, Housing Costs, and Welfare Reform (Policy Brief No. 02-4): Welfare, Children & Families: A Three-City Study.
79. Ragan, M. & Nathan, R. (2002). Welfare reform and the development of comprehensive human service systems. Paper prepared for the 2002 APSA Conference. Rockefeller Institute of Government.
80. Richardson, P. (2001). Depression and other mental health barriers among welfare recipients-Results from three states. Reston, VA: Maximus.
81. Sandfort, J. (1999). The structural impediments to human service collaboration: Examining welfare reform at the front lines. Social Service Review, 73(3), 314-339.
82. Sawhill, I. (2001). What Can Be Done to Reduce Teen Pregnancy and Out-of-Wedlock Births? (Policy Brief No. 8): Brookings.
83. Schmidt, L., Dohan, D., Wiley, J.,&Zabkiewicz, D. (2002). Addiction and welfare dependency: Interpreting the connection. Social Problems, 49(2), 221-241.
84. Schott, L. (2000). Ways that states can serve families that reach welfare time limits. Washington, DC: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
85. Schumacher, R., & Greenberg, M. (1999). Child Care After Leaving Welfare: Early Evidence from State Studies. Washington, D.C.: Center for Law and Social Policy.
86. Scrivener, S., Walter, J., Brock, T., & Hamilton, G. (2001). Evaluating Two Approaches to Case Management: Implementation, Participation Patterns, Costs, and Three-Year Impacts of the Columbus Welfare-to-Work Program (Executive Summary). Washington, DC: MDRC.
87. Sigle-Rushton, W., & McLanahan, S. (2002). The Living Arrangements of New Unmarried Mothers (Working Paper No. #01-15-FF). Princeton, NJ: Center for Research on Child Wellbeing.
88. Tolman, R., & Rosen, D. (2001). Domestic violence in the lives of welfare recipients. Violence Against Women, 7(2), 141-158.
89. Tout, K., Scarpa, J.,&Zaslow, M. J. (2002). Children of current and former welfare recipients: Similarly at risk. Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
90. Vandivere, S., Moore, K. A.,&Brown, B. (2000). Child well-being at the outset of welfare reform: An overview of the nation and 13 states. (Series B, No. B-23). Washington, DC: Urban Institute & Child Trends.
91. Waller, M. (2001a). High Hopes: Unwed Parents’ Expectations about Marriage. Children and Youth Services Review, 23(6/7), 457-484.
92. Weil, A. (2002). Ten Things Everyone Should Know About Welfare Reform (Assessing the New Federalism Series A, No. A-52). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
93. Wertheimer, R., Long, M., & Vandivere, S. (2001). Welfare recipients’ attitudes toward welfare, nonmarital childbearing, and work: Implications for reform? (Policy Brief). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
94. Yoshikawa, H., Rosman, E. A., & Hsueh, J. (2001). Variation in teenage mothers’ experiences of child care and other components of welfare reform: Selection processes and developmental consequences. Child Development, 72(1), 299-317.
95. Zedlewski, S. (1999). Work-related activities and limitations of current welfare recipients. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
96. Zedlewski, S. (2001). Former Welfare Families Continue to Leave the Food Stamp Program (Assessing the New Federalism Discussion Paper No. 01-05). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
97. Zedlewski, S. (2002). The Importance of Housing Benefits to Welfare Success. Washington, D.C.: Center on Urban & Metropolitan Policy and The Urban Institute.
98. Zedlewski, S., Giannarelli, L., Morton, J., & Wheaton, L. (2002). Extreme Poverty Rising, Existing Government Programs Could Do More (Assessing the New Federalism Series B, No. B-45). Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.