Do family caps on welfare affect births among welfare recipients? Reconciling efficacy and effectiveness estimates of impact through a blended design strategy

American Journal of Evaluation

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 295-319

  Jagannathan, Radha ^a   Camasso, Michael J ^b   Killingsworth, Mark R ^b  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 4344656144     PISSN: 10982140     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ameval.2004.06.001     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Blank R.M. Analyzing the length of welfare spells Journal of Public Economics 39 1989 45-273
2. Burtless G. The case for randomized field trials in economic and policy research Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 1995 63-84
3. Burtless G. Orr L.L. Are classical experiments needed for manpower policy? Journal of Human Resources 21 1986 606-639
4. Cain G.G. Controlled experiments in evaluating the new welfare programs Focus 18 1997 25-28
5. Camasso M.J. (in press). Isolating the family cap effect on fertility behavior: Evidence from New Jersey's Family Development Program Experiment. Journal of Contemporary Economic Policy.
6. Camasso M.J. Jagannathan R. Harvey C. Killingsworth M. The use of client surveys to gauge the threat of contamination in welfare reform experiments Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 22 2003 207-223
7. Camasso M.J. Jagannathan R. Killingsworth M. Harvey C. New Jersey's family cap and family size decisions: Findings from a five-year evaluation Research in Labor Economics 22 2003 71-112
8. Campbell D.T. & Stanley J.C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
9. Cook T.D. & Campbell D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
10. Ellwood D.T. & Bane M.J. (1994). Understanding welfare dynamics. In M. J. Bane & D. T. Ellwood (Eds.), Welfare realities: From rhetoric to reform (pp. 28-66). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Friedlander D. Robins P.K. Evaluating program evaluations: New evidence on commonly used nonexperimental methods American Economic Review 85 1995 923-937
12. Garfinkel I. Manski C.F. & Michalopoulos C. (1992). Micro experiments and macro effects. In C. F. Manski & I. Garfinkel (Eds.), Evaluating welfare and training programs (pp. 253-273) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Greenberg D. & Shroder M. (1997). The digest of social experiments (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
14. Grissmer D. Flanagan A. Kawata J. & Williamson S. (2000). Improving students achievement. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
15. Gueron J.M. & Pauly E. (1991). From welfare to work. New York: Russell Sage.
16. Heckman J.J. (1992). Randomization and social policy evaluation. In C. F. Manski & I. Garfinkel (Eds.), Evaluating welfare and training programs (pp. 201-230). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Heckman J.J. Hotz V.J. Choosing among alternative nonexperimental methods for estimating the impact of social programs: The case of manpower training Journal of the American Statistical Association 84 1989 862-874
18. Heckman J.J. Smith J.A. Assessing the case for social experiments Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 1995 85-110
19. Heckman J.J. Smith J.A. Clements N. Making the most out of programme evaluations and social experiments: Accounting for heterogeneity in programme impacts Review of Economic Studies 64 1997 487-535
20. Horvath-Rose A. & Peters H.E. (2001). Welfare waivers and nonmarital childbearing. In G. Duncan & P. L. Chase-Lansdale (Eds.), For better and for worse: Welfare reform and the wellbeing of children and families. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
21. Hotz V.J. Imbens G.W. & Mortimer J.H. (1999). Predicting the efficacy of future training programs using past experiences (NBER-238). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
22. Hoynes H.W. (1997). Work, welfare, and family structure: What have we learned? In A. J. Auerbach (Ed.), Fiscal policy: Lessons from economic research (pp. 101-146). London: MIT Press.
23. Jagannathan R. Camasso M.J. Killingsworth M. New Jersey's Family Cap experiment: Do fertility impacts differ by racial density? Journal of Labor Economics 22 2004 431-460
24. Manski C.F. Learning about treatment effects from experiments with random assignment of treatments Journal of Human Resources 31 1996 709-733
25. Manski C.F. The mixing problem in programme evaluation Review of Economic Studies 64 1997 537-553
26. Meyer B. Natural and quasi-experiments in economics Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 13 1995 151-161
27. Moffitt R.A. (1992). Evaluating methods for program entry effects. In C. F. Manski & I. Garfinkel (Eds.), Evaluating welfare and training programs (pp. 231-252). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Moffitt R.A. (1998). The effect of welfare on marriage and fertility. In R. A. Moffitt (Ed.), Welfare, the family, and reproductive behavior (pp. 50-97). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. Moffitt R.A. & Ver Ploeg M. (Eds.). (1999). Evaluating welfare reform: A framework and review of current work. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
30. Moffitt R.A. Ver Ploeg M. (Eds.). (2001). Evaluating welfare reform in an era of transition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. Mohr L.B. (1995). Impact analysis for program evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Nathan P.E. (2004). The clinical utility of therapy research: Bridging the gap between the present and the future. In A. R. Roberts & K. R. Yeager (Eds.), Evidence-based practice manual (pp. 949-960). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
33. Nathan P.E. & Gorman J.M. (2002). Efficacy, effectiveness and clinical utility of psychotherapy research. In P. E. Nathan & J. M. Gorman (Eds.), A guide to treatments that work (pp. 643-654). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
34. O'Neill D.M. & O'Neill J.F. (1997). Lessons for welfare reform: An analysis of the AFDC caseload and past welfare-to-work programs. Kalamazoo, MI: WE Upjohn Institute.
35. O'Neill J.A. Bassi L.J. Wolf D.A. The duration of welfare spells Review of Economics and Statistics 69 1987 241-249
36. Orr L.L. (1999). Social experiments: Evaluating public programs with experimental methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37. Pepper J.V. Using experiments to evaluate performance standards: What do welfare-to-work demonstrations reveal to welfare reformers? Journal of Human Resources 38 2003 860-880
38. Plotnick R. Turnover in the AFDC population: An event history analysis Journal of Human Resources 18 1983 65-81
39. Rank M.R. Exiting from welfare: A life-table analysis Social Service Review 59 1985 358-376
40. Robinson T.M. (1987). Fragments: A text and translation/Heraclitus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press
41. Rosenbaum P.R. (2002). Observational studies (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
42. Rossi P.H. Freeman H.E. & Lipsey M.W. (1999). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43. Shadish W.R. Cook T.D. & Campbell D.T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
44. Sommer A. Zeger S.L. On estimating efficacy from clinical trials Statistics in Medicine 10 1991 45-52
45. Stevens D. (2000). Welfare, employment, and earnings. Memorandum proposal for the panel on data and methods for measuring the effects of changes in social welfare programs. Committee on National Statistics. Baltimore, MD: University of Baltimore.
46. Stock J.H. & Watson M.W. (2003). Introduction to econometrics. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.
47. Toklas A.B. (1963). What is remembered. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
48. Ver Ploeg M. (2002). Preexit benefit receipt and employment histories and postexit outcomes of welfare leavers. In M. Ver Ploeg, R. A. Moffitt, & C. F. Citro (Eds.), Studies of welfare populations: Data collection and research issues (pp. 415-472). Washington, DC: National Academy Press