Prevention
of Welfare Dependency -- An Overview
By Jan Kaplan
Background
As welfare caseloads steadily decrease,
states now have the opportunity to focus resources on efforts that may prevent
working families and disadvantaged youth from needing cash assistance.
The boundary between families who are
in need of public assistance and those who are not is tenuous. In many of these families, at least one adult is working but
is earning wages that are too low to lift the family above the federal poverty
level or to ensure economic self-sufficiency.
One in six nonelderly Americans lives in a family with an income less
than 200 percent of poverty (Acs,
2000). In addition, young
children growing up in poor families without appropriate interventions are at
higher risk of experiencing poverty as adults.
Between nine and sixteen million children and youth are growing up in
disadvantaged environments that may compromise their chances for successful
lives (MacLellan, 2000). Changes
in employment or family situation could lead any of these families or youth to
enter the welfare system.
There are, in fact, many specific,
contributing factors that can lead a family to become welfare-dependent.
While the risk factors often are interrelated, they can be grouped as
follows: 1) inadequate wage and non-wage supports, 2) lack of employment
supports, and, 3) disadvantages in childhood and youth.
Without timely and appropriate supports, families with one or more of
these risk factors are more likely to enter, and become dependent upon, the
welfare system.
Policy
Issues
Coordinated, multi-faceted
interventions are necessary to address the complexity of risk factors that can
lead to welfare dependency. As
states develop programs to prevent welfare dependency and to support long-term
self-sufficiency, they may want to consider the following issues.
Can
income be supplemented to assist low-wage workers to avoid welfare dependency?
Supplementing
wages through income and benefit supports can raise living standards and
improve the likelihood that a low-wage worker will find work more attractive
than welfare, remain in a job, and advance up the career ladder.
The various approaches to income and benefit supports are described
below. Also, see http://www.makingwageswork.org
and http://www.welfareinfo.org/earningsupp.htm.
Increase the minimum wage.
Minimum wage supporters believe that a higher minimum wage can be an
effective work incentive for low-wage workers, particularly when complemented
with other income supports, and can give poor families a stronger economic
base. Opponents believe that teenagers working in the service sector, the
majority of whom are not impoverished, would benefit the most from any
increase in the minimum wage. They also believe that higher employer costs associated with
a higher wage would result in fewer job opportunities for low-wage workers and
in higher consumer prices. Ten
states have raised their minimum wage higher than the current federal wage of
$5.15 per hour. Other states
considering a minimum wage increase may want to assure the adequacy of other
income supports to maximize the effect of the increase on overall income.
They also may want to consider the empirical evidence regarding the
effects of a wage increase both on family income and on employers.
Living wage.
More than 40 cities across the country require employers doing business
with them to pay their workers at least a "living wage," which
provides a full-time worker with dependents an income that is just above the
federal poverty line. Advocacy groups now are focusing on establishing
"self-sufficiency standards" that include the costs of health
benefits, vacation days, community hiring goals, child care, transportation,
geographical differences in the cost of living, etc. For sample methodologies that may be used to determine a
living wage or self-sufficiency standard, visit http://www.epinet.org,
call 202/331-5537 or see Bernstein, 2000.
Increase the
number of hours worked. Increasing
the number of hours worked from part-time to full-time and from seasonal to
year-round will yield more income and improve the economic situation of a
working poor family, particularly if that family takes advantage of other
government benefit programs, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (see below).
However, many single mothers are unable to balance the responsibilities
of a full-time job with family responsibilities without adequate supports,
including child care and transportation.
Therefore, states interested in working with the business community to
create more full-time jobs targeted to low-wage workers will need to increase
the availability of child care, transportation and other employment supports.
Unemployment benefits.
For low-income workers who have lost jobs through no fault of their own,
unemployment insurance (UI) may be a source of enough temporary income to
avoid cash assistance. However,
many low-wage workers may not meet state eligibility requirements as they
frequently change jobs and are not employed full-time.
States interested in expanding UI availability while meeting federal
requirements have several options. For
example, an alternative base period allows workers to count their most recent
earnings in order to qualify for UI benefits.
In addition, eligibility based solely upon the number of hours worked
could replace monetary criteria. Also,
under new federal regulations, states may provide UI benefits to workers on
family leave and a number of states are expanding UI eligibility to cover
workers who leave jobs as a result of domestic issues, as well as for
part-time workers. Some states
are increasing benefits for individuals with dependent children or elders in
their household, and are simplifying the application and job search
requirements. Finally, in
response to employer concerns, a number of states are considering cuts in
employer UI tax rates, in light of the current strength of state trust funds.
(Also, visit http://www.nelp.org/action1.htm.)
Earned Income Tax Credit.
The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), the primary source of federal tax
relief for the working poor, enables low-income workers to retain more
earnings by supplementing wages for workers earning the minimum wage and
offsetting taxes for those who earn more.
The success of the federal EITC has led 15 states and one local
government (Montgomery County, MD) to enact their own EITC.
States or localities considering an EITC will need to determine if the
credit should be refundable (families receive a refund if the size of the
credit is more than its tax bill) or nonrefundable (income tax is reduced or
waived, but any excess credits are not refunded); the amount of the credit and
its relationship to the federal credit; and, a revenue source
(see Johnson, November 2000 and Friedman, 2000.)
Changes to the state tax codes.
The state tax burden on the working poor can be substantially reduced
through tax credits and changes to state income tax thresholds.
Child and dependent care tax credits and deductions can offset child
care costs not covered by subsidies and can assist with costs for families
ineligible for subsidies (see Johnson, October 2000.).
States also may modify their income tax rates to increase net earnings
for low-wage workers and encourage labor market participation.
For example, fewer than half of the states impose income taxes on
families with incomes below the federal poverty level and many states have
raised the income tax threshold, the income level at which families start
paying taxes, through changes in standard deductions, and other modifications.
States also can use the tax code
to encourage employers to offer certain benefits to low-income workers.
Several states have enacted tax credits for businesses that establish
on-site child care facilities, supplementing federal tax policy.
Others provide tax credits to employers who offer child care subsidies
to their employees. Some states
also are considering tax subsidies for employer-provided health benefits. However, the effectiveness of these tax advantages has not
been determined and state experience with them is extremely limited.
Finally, states might consider ways to lessen the burden of sales and
use taxes, particularly on necessary items such as food, clothing, heating
fuel, and other utilities. Setting a dollar limit on these exemptions can control state
costs and the potential impact of lost revenues on local services, and targets
the exemptions to low-income families. For
example, a clothing exemption could be limited to purchases under $100. (Also,
see Palladino, 2000 or visit http://www.welfareinfo.org/incometax.htm.)
Earning supplements.
Providing supplemental wages to the working poor is another option for
policymakers interested in encouraging work and increasing economic stability
for low-income workers. For example, the New Hope Project in Milwaukee, Wisconsin
provided financial support along with social supports to low-income workers
who were not eligible for cash assistance and who were willing to work
full-time. New Hope's success in encouraging work and increasing financial
well-being illustrates the importance of combining earnings supplements with
social supports and participation mandates, such as full-time work.
Benefit supplementation.
Family income can be enhanced and stabilized through non-cash benefits,
including health care, child care, nutrition, housing and transportation
assistance. As described above,
state and federal tax policies can support employer decisions to offer certain
benefits to their employees. In
addition, public subsidies for child care, housing, and transportation
assistance can ease this large financial burden on low-wage working families.
Strengthening Medicaid, food stamps, and the Women's, Infants and
Children (WIC) nutrition program in order to cover the working poor also will
decrease out-of-pocket costs and eliminate disincentives to work.
Child support enforcement and assurance.
Child support can be an important source of income for families
attempting to avoid welfare dependency. Data
from the National Survey of America's Families (NSAF) show that only 29
percent of poor children with a nonresident parent actually receive child
support due both to difficulties with enforcement and to financial hardship
among the parent responsible for child support payments (Sorenson, 2000).
State and federal policymakers will need to continue to explore
creative ways to increase child support payments, either through formal
support orders or through informal agreements.
Child
Support Assurance (CSA) can be another source of financial support for single
parent households. States that
have established demonstrations or are implementing CSA programs include New
York, California, Virginia, Minnesota and Colorado.
Under a CSA program, children for whom a child support order has been
obtained are guaranteed a set income each month. These payments supplement the custodial parent's earnings and
bring the family income above the federal poverty level
(see Roberts, 1999 or visit http://www.clasp.org/pubs/childassurance/child_support_assurance.htm).
What types of supports are needed to
assist low-income families to secure and retain employment?
Public/private collaborations are needed to build a system of comprehensive
life and work skills programs to help low-income women balance work and family
situations and avoid welfare dependency.
In addition to the key employment-related supports described below,
they will need a wide range of social services, as well as parenting
education, time and financial management training, peer support, and mentoring
assistance. Also, see Johnson,
1998
Workforce development.
Workforce development agencies, businesses, educational organizations,
and social service agencies need to provide a full range of job preparation
and career advancement services to meet the needs of this population.
Pre-employment services, such as Adult Basic Education, literacy classes,
English as a Second Language, and vocational education, combined with
on-the-job training and apprenticeship programs can greatly improve job
potential and earnings capacity. Pre-employment
programs also should provide "soft skills" training to develop
interpersonal and problem-solving skills, as well as "life skills"
training on personal money management, goal setting, and contingency planning
for family emergencies to help prevent job loss.
Post-secondary education can promote career advancement for employed
workers and increase earnings. Finally,
job placement assistance that focuses on growth-potential jobs and rapid
reemployment programs that address the frequent job loss typical among
low-wage workers, are critical to state efforts to support employment and
prevent welfare dependency.
Child care. Policymakers should consider ways to increase the
accessibility of child and care services that meet the particular needs of
low-income families who may work rotating shifts or have extremely long
commutes that extend beyond the normal child care hours.
Changes in state tax policies and subsidies can encourage the
development of work-based child care facilities and can provide incentives for
child care providers to increase the supply of off-hours and back-up child
care. Expansions of child care
subsidies, tax credits and sliding fee schedules also can reduce long waiting
periods that confront nonwelfare families seeking financial assistance.
Finally, strong child care licensing standards will ensure that
facilities are safe and staff is appropriately trained.
Transportation. Transportation
to and from work can be a serious barrier for low-income families trying to
sustain stable employment. Any
state effort to support employment for low-wage workers will need to include
public transportation systems to serve the business sectors that are primary
employers of low-income workers, such as service industries, and to bring
workers from urban areas to jobs located in suburban or rural areas.
States also may want to identify ways to increase vehicle ownership for
low-income workers living in areas without public transportation.
Health care, mental health, and
substance abuse services.
Expansion of public and private health insurance for the working poor
is critical to their successful employment and welfare avoidance.
Research has shown that the availability of health insurance coverage
positively affects decisions to move from welfare to work and will affect
decisions of low-income workers to remain in the workforce. Furthermore, the
lack of health insurance can be a strong disincentive to enter or remain in
the workforce and places these families at risk of serious health problems
that can impact their ability to retain employment.
However, too few low-income workers are offered insurance through the
workplace and most have incomes that are above the eligibility threshold for
existing public programs. Approaches
to expanding health insurance coverage are summarized in Kaplan, 2000.
Mental health and substance abuse
problems also can lead to lower rates of labor force participation as well as
reduced work hours. Individuals
with mental health and substance abuse problems may not have access to
screening and treatment services until they seek cash assistance.
To assist individuals to overcome mental health problems and retain
employment, mental health treatment should be integrated with the full range
of job-related services. There
also is evidence that individuals who complete a residential substance abuse
treatment program are more likely to obtain and maintain employment.
States may want to consider ways to increase treatment options through
changes in insurance coverage and provider incentives.
Disability-related services. Without adequate workplace accommodations, individuals with
disabilities also are likely to experience problems obtaining and maintaining
employment and may receive lower wages than individuals without disabilities.
To provide the needed skills training, as well as assistance with ways
to compensate for a disability in the workplace, vocational rehabilitation
needs to be coordinated with employment-related services, work-based learning,
and assessment programs. However,
under federal law, vocational rehabilitation programs must give priority to
individuals with severe disabilities. They,
therefore, only serve a small percentage of individuals with work-related
limitations. States may want to
explore additional funding streams to allow vocational rehabilitation programs
to provide services to individuals with work-related disabilities outside of
federal requirements (see Johnson 1998).
In addition, states should explore ways to secure cash resources other
than TANF for those individuals with more severe disabilities who may be
unable to sustain employment. Social
Security Income (SSI) may be an option for some of these individuals and may
link them to more appropriate services and long-term income support.
Housing assistance. High
housing costs, poor quality housing, crowded living conditions, homelessness,
and blighted neighborhoods with high levels of crime, scarce governmental
services, and lack of employment opportunities can lead to unemployment and
family stressors that are precursors to welfare dependency.
States might consider ways to assist clients with housing costs through
rent freezes and cash assistance for security deposits or by providing
vouchers or subsidies for housing in alternative, cleaner neighborhoods that
are near employment sites.
Domestic violence services. Women suffering from domestic violence are at particular risk
of welfare dependency as a result of both the physical effects and the
emotional stress associated with their domestic situations. Meeting the daily requirements of employment may be
impossible for victims of domestic violence leading to job loss and lower
personal income. The complexity
of domestic violence situations necessitates a strong state commitment to
collaboration among police and probation offices, courts, domestic violence
shelters, advocates, health care providers, other social service providers,
employers and employment-related services.
What services do children and youth
need to become self-sufficient as adults?
Programs such as Head Start and universal pre-kindergarten have
demonstrated the role that quality early childhood care and education can play
in future academic achievement and subsequent outcomes, particularly for
low-income children. As a result,
many states are expanding their support for a wide variety of early childhood
programs. (Visit http://www.welfareinfo.org/childhoodpovwelfref.htm
for examples of state programs.) However,
there are many environmental and familial factors that may counteract the
positive long-term impact of these programs.
In particular, children and youth who grow up in poverty often live in
situations characterized by family instability that may stem from substance
abuse, health and mental health issues, inadequate housing, single-parenthood,
domestic violence, etc. The most effective programs for disadvantaged children,
therefore, need to be multi-faceted in nature and should provide a range of
health, mental health, academic and social services beginning at an early age
and continuing through school age.
In addition, disadvantaged teen-agers
are more likely to engage in behaviors that are detrimental to their future
wellbeing and can lead to future welfare receipt.
Teens who grow up in more stable family environments and engage in
these same behaviors are at higher risk of future welfare dependency, as well.
The difference between the future outcomes for these two cohorts may
depend on the timeliness and appropriateness of interventions that address the
behaviors. Programs serving
"at-risk youth" can be effective in moving teens away from
self-destructive behaviors that ultimately leads to welfare dependency.
The intent of any youth development program should be to prevent and
remediate risky behavior, build self-esteem, and emphasize positive
development to enhance the potential for self-sufficiency.
Programs should include: the integration of education, health, mental
heath, substance abuse, employment, and vocational services through
community-based collaborations; family and peer support; mentoring programs;
linkages with private business to foster work-based learning; and community
service opportunities. Programs
may target youth living in families that are receiving cash assistance, as
those youth are at higher risk of welfare dependency as adults.
Programs also may target pregnant teens, runaway and homeless youth,
juvenile delinquents, school dropouts, etc., or they can serve all youth
(also, see MacLellan, 2000; Kaplan, 1999 or visit http://www.welfareinfo.org/youth.htm).
What can states do to assist families
to find alternatives to welfare?
States may provide cash or other assistance to families under an
"applicant diversion" policy designed as an alternative to welfare.
States with diversion policies may offer one-time lump-sum payments,
possibly equal to several months welfare benefits, to meet short-term
emergency needs, thereby "diverting" the applicant away from
welfare. The payment may be of
cash, vouchers or third party payments to assist with costs associated with
car repairs, child care, utility payments, rental assistance,
employment-related expenses, etc. Under many diversion policies, a recipient
of short-term assistance relinquishes her right to apply for and receive
welfare benefits for some time period. Diversion
payments appear to be effective in preventing dependency as very few
recipients of the short-term assistance return to the welfare agency to apply
for welfare (Johnson, 1998). States
will need to train staff to ensure that they screen potential applicants to
determine their eligibility for the one-time assistance and that they provide
correct information to applicants about this option and its requirements.
What federal funds are available to
support states' efforts to prevent welfare dependency?
A number of federal funding streams can support state efforts to
prevent welfare dependency. Under federal regulations, states may spend TANF block grant
funds on any services that support employment and encourage self-sufficiency
among low-income families with at least one child. Examples of allowable expenditures include transportation and
child care assistance, housing subsidies, state earned income tax credits,
wage supplements, job training, career counseling, and employer incentives.
In addition, states can use the funds to provide short-term financial
assistance to needy families and for a variety of services targeting at-risk
youth. States also may fund these
services outside the TANF program using maintenance of effort (MOE) dollars.
In addition, federal regulations allow states to fund prevention
services by transferring a portion of their TANF block grant to the Child Care
and Development and the Social Services block grants (also, see Greenberg,
1999 and Cohen, 2000).
States may use funds available through the Workforce
Investment Act (WIA) for employment retention and advancement services for
low-income adults and youth (see Brown, 1998).
Federal Welfare-to-Work grants may be used for job development and job
training strategies aimed at noncustodial parents of children receiving
assistance through TANF, SSI, Medicaid, Food Stamps or the Children's Health
Insurance Program. These funds
may only be used to support noncustodial parents who are having trouble
meeting child support obligations and who are willing to enter into a personal
responsibility contract obligating them to assist in their child's financial
support.
Other federal funding streams available to states
include grant programs in the Department of Education that support
post-secondary education and youth development programs, such as Work-Study,
Pell grants, School-to-Work, and others. Federal funding for youth development
programs also comes from the Social Services and Community Development block
grants, Americorps USA, the Juvenile Mentoring Program in the Department of
Justice, the Adolescent Family Life Program in the Department of Health and
Human Services, Youthbuild in the Department of Housing and Urban Development,
4-H Youth Development in the Department of Agriculture, and Youth Fair Chance
in the Department of Labor. Also,
visit http://www.reeusda.gov/pavnet/ff/ffnative.htm.
In addition, there are a number of
sources of federal support for child care programs.
Depending on the intended use of the funds, states may access any of
the following: Head Start, Child Care and Development Funds, the Child and
Dependent Care Tax Credit, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, the Social
Services block grant, TANF, WIA, and the Job Training Partnership Act.
The majority of federal funds for
transportation comes from the Access to Jobs program in the U.S. Department of
Transportation. States also can
allocate TANF and MOE dollars and can use federal Welfare-to-Work grant funds
to support transportation initiatives. Several programs in the Department of
Housing and Urban Development provide funding for transportation, including
Bridges to Work and Empowerment Zones. Also,
visit http://www.ctaa.org or call
202/628-1480.
Finally, states may be able to use the
TANF block grant, Welfare-to-Work funds, the Social Services and the Community
Services block grants and Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program
to support a wide range of other services.
These include substance abuse and mental health treatment, housing
assistance, case management, career counseling, peer support, parenting
education, life skills training, and programs for people with work-related
disabilities. For additional
information, visit the program and management issue area pages on the WIN web
site at http://www.welfareinfo.org.
Research Finding
A recent review of analyses of the
low-wage labor market found a rising trend in the proportion of low-wage
earners and found that poverty is more prevalent among those workers who are
minorities, are less-educated or are women with families (Kaye, 2000).
Demographic analyses also show that only one-tenth of working
low-income families are headed by a college graduate, compared to one-third of
nonpoor families, and that those workers typically are younger and less likely
to be married. The same study indicates that these low-income workers have
less stable jobs with fewer benefits and little growth opportunity, all
indicators of potential future low earnings and risk of welfare dependency
(Acs, 2000). A large body
of research has looked at other risk factors, particularly the relationship of
teenage pregnancy and childbearing to future welfare dependency, and has found
that early childbearing results in lower educational status and affects future
employment opportunities, marital options and family structure (Advocates for
Youth, 1999).
Research on the effects of a minimum
wage increase has found no significant negative effect on employment
opportunities and a positive impact on family income (Lazare, 1998).
Simulations of the effects of increases in the minimum wage and in
hours worked have found that both would raise some families' incomes.
However, increases in hours worked may result in more families
experiencing higher incomes (Acs, 2000).
Researchers looking at other wage supports have documented the
effectiveness of the EITC and other tax credits in increasing labor force
participation and income (Kaye, 2000). Finally,
evaluation results of the New Hope project found that wage supplements coupled
with work supports resulted in increased employment and income, and in
improvements in the well-being of the children in participating families
(Berlin, 2000).
A literature review of workforce
development research concluded that work experience should be linked with
education and training in order to prepare entry-level workers for better
paying jobs (Golonka, 1998). A
recent study of the impact of work/family responsibilities on employment
decisions by low-income women highlights the importance of adequate child and
after-school care for low-income women entering or reentering the workforce.
The study concluded that inadequate supervision before and after school
and after regular child care hours could deter some women from working early
or late shifts, resulting in less flexibility in finding employment (Scott,
2000).
Evaluation results from the Gatreaux
Program in Chicago, which provided vouchers to poor families to allow them to
relocate from public housing to areas closer to jobs, strongly suggest that
having a choice of housing location can have a positive impact on employment
as well as on childhood outcomes. Other research also has found a positive
relationship between improvements in neighborhoods and childhood outcomes
(Duncan, 2000).
An overview of research on early childhood care and
education programs finds that quality programs with adequate financial support
can have a significant effect on school readiness and future potential for
self-sufficiency (Currie, 1998). Researchers
also have found that quality youth development programs which include holistic
services and involve the community and parents/guardians can be successful in
building self-esteem and wide-ranging competencies (Kaplan, 1999 and American
Youth Policy Forum, 1999).
Additional research findings regarding approaches to
preventing welfare dependency are summarized in the WIN publications
referenced in this Issue Note and at
http://www.researchforum.org.
Innovative Practices
The following programs are illustrative of the range
of state and local approaches to assisting low-income families to avoid
welfare dependency. For
additional examples, please refer to the WIN publications and electronic
resources identified throughout this Issue
Note.
California -- Winning New Jobs (WNJ) workshops focus on promoting
reemployment in high-quality jobs and preventing poor mental health among
the unemployed by improving job search skills and increasing self-esteem,
confidence and motivation in job search.
The California program replicates a highly successful
program of the Michigan Prevention Research Center and has been
operating in three California locations since 1997.
Contact David Navarro at 415/781-3800 or vdnavarro@mdrcsf.org;
or visit http://www.winningnewjobs.org.
Maryland -- The state's benefit diversion program
assesses applicants for their reasons for applying for cash assistance or
their continued reliance on assistance, with special emphasis on their skills,
needs, and job readiness, and offers Welfare Avoidance Grants to individuals
who are employed or near employment, but are in need of short-term aid.
The grants do not duplicate any period of cash assistance.
Contact Mark Millspaugh at 410/767-7338.
New York --
After county-level pilot Child Assistance Programs (CAPs) were found to
increase employment and earnings and lower public assistance expenditures, New
York state expanded its program to allow any county to establish a program as
an alternative to TANF. Under
CAP, custodial parents who agree to leave the traditional welfare system have
lower income tax rates and are guaranteed a child support payment regardless
of whether the non-custodial parent is able to pay. As an incentive to work, CAP pays less cash assistance to
those individuals who are not working, but substantially more to those who
have earnings. CAP also places no
restrictions on savings and separates the program from county welfare offices
as a way to promote self-sufficiency. Contact
Chris Hamilton at 617/492-7100.
Ohio
-- WIRE-Net (the Westside Industrial Retention
and Expansion Network), a nonprofit network of residents, employers, and
employees serves Cleveland’s westside and offers
training for entry-level and incumbent employees.
The program provides pre-apprenticeship machinist and math remediation
training, interviewing and job retention skills, and leadership development
for first-time supervisors. In
addition, WIRE-Net refers residents to local companies for interviews and
potential full-time employment and has linked employers to sources of funding
to support training programs. Contact
Joan Cook at 216/631-7330 or visit http://www.wire-net.org.
Santa Cruz and Berkeley, CA
-- Recent living wage ordinances set a new precedent for wage level and
scope. The new Santa Cruz
ordinance established the highest living wage in the country -- $11 an hour
with health benefits and $12 an hour without benefits. Contact Sandy Brown at
831/457-1741 or visit http://members.cruzers.com/cab/livingwage/livingwage.html.
The Berkeley ordinance created the nation's first area-based living wage by
requiring all employees at the Berkeley Marina, a city-owned facility, to
receive a living wage of $9.75 an hour with health benefits and $11.37 without
benefits. For information about
Berkeley and other living wage ordinances, visit http://www.afscme.org/livingwage/livchart.htm.
Communities in Schools, Inc. (CIS)
is a nationwide, independent network of 154 local and 15 state offices that
provides stay-in-school programs through collaborations with the
private and public sectors at the national, regional, state and local levels.
Partnering organizations provide resources and skills to local schools
to support programs that include mentoring, tutoring, parental involvement,
mental health counseling, drug abuse education, after-school activities,
health and dental exams, teen parenting services, violence and gang
prevention, technology training, career counseling and employment skills
training, community service opportunities, and college preparation, as well as
referrals to social services for students at risk of academic failure.
Contact CIS at 800/247-4543 or visit http://www.cisnet.org.
Women in Community Service (WICS)
offers support services, mentoring and workforce preparation programs
in order to reduce poverty by promoting self-reliance and economic
independence. Local programs nationwide serve more than 150,000 low-income
individuals through: customized programs to help companies hire, train and
retain entry-level workers; partnerships with public and private agencies to
deliver lifeskills, job readiness and support services to low-income women;
and training and technical assistance to public and private youth-serving
organizations on successful approaches to youth development.
Contact WICS at 703/671-0500 or visit http://www.wics.org.
Resource Contacts
·
Center
for Law and Social Policy, Julie Strawn, Mark Greenberg, 202/328-5140.
·
Center
on Budget and Policy Priorities, Ed Lazare, 202/408-1080.
·
Economic
Policy Institute, Nan Gibson, 202/775-8810 or ngibson@epinet.org;
Chauna Brocht, 202/331-5537 or cbrocht@epinet.org;
or http://www.epinet.org.
·
U.S.
Employment and Training Administration, http://wdr.doleta.gov/contacts/.
·
Living
Wage Resource Center, Jen Kern, 202/547/2500 or natacorncam@acorn.org;
or
http://www.livingwagecampaign.org
·
Urban
Institute, Gregory Acs, 202/833-7200 or gacs@ui.urban.org
·
National Governors' Association, Scott Palladino, 202/624-5392; Thomas
MacLellan, 202/624-5300.
Publications and Electronic Resources
ACORN.
National Living Wage Resource Center.
Washington, D.C.: ACORN. Visit http://www.livingwagecampaign.org/
Acs,
Gregory, et al. On the Bottom Rung: A Profile of Americans in Low-Income Working
Families. Washington, D.C.:
Urban Institute. October 2000.
Available at http://newfederalism.urban.org/html/anf_a42.htm.
Acs,
Gregory, et al. Does Work Pay? An Analysis of the Work Incentives under TANF.
Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, December
1998. Available at http://newfederalism.urban.org/html/anf28.html.
Advocates
for Youth. Adolescent Childbearing and Educational and Economic Attainment.
Washington, D.C.: Advocates for Youth, 1997.
Available at http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/factsheet/FSADLCHD.HTM.
American
Youth Policy Forum.
The More Things That DO Make a
Difference for Youth. Washington, D.C.: American
Policy Youth Forum, 1999. Visit http://www.aypf.org/pressreleases/pr19.htm
Annie
E. Casey Foundation and Welfare Information Network. Making Wages Work Web
Site. Baltimore, MD: Annie E.
Casey Foundation. Visit http://www.makingwageswork.org.
Berlin,
Gordon. Encouraging Work, Reducing Poverty: The Impact of Work Incentive
Programs. New York City, NY: Manpower
Development Research Corporation. March 2000.
Available at http://www.mdrc.org/Reports2000/EWORK-RPOVERTY.pdf.
Blank,
Helen, et al. Child Care Falling Short for Low Income Working Families.
College Park, MD: Welfare Reform Academy,
March 23, 1998. Available
at http://welfare-reform-academy.org/conf/papers/blank_pa.htm.
Brown,
David E. Advancing Youth Development under the Workforce Investment Act.
Washington, D.C.: National Youth Employment Coalition, 1998.
Available at http://www.nyec.org/yd&wia.htm.
Coe,
Norma B., et al. Does Work Pay? A Summary of
the Work Incentives under TANF. Washington,
D.C.: Urban Institute, December
1998. Available at http://www.newfederalism.urban.org/html/anf28.html.
Cohen,
Marie and Mark Greenberg. Tapping
TANF for Youth: When and How Welfare Funds Can Support Youth Development,
Education and Employment Initiatives.
Washington, D.C.: Center for Law and Social Policy, January 2000.
Available at http://www.clasp.org/pubs/jobseducation/Tapping%20TANF%20for%20Youth1.htm.
Currie,
Janet. What We Know About Early Childhood Interventions.
Ill.: Joint Center for Poverty Research, May 25, 2000.
Available at http://www.jcpr.org/wp/WPprofile.cfm?ID=176.
Duncan,
Greg. J., et al. Can Housing Vouchers Help Poor Children? Washington, D.C.: Brookings
Institution, 2000. Available at http://www.brookings.edu/comm/ChildrensRoundtable/Issue3/Issue3.htm.
Economic
Policy Institute. EPI Issue Guides. Living Wage; Minimum Wage.
Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute. Visit http://www.epinet.org/
Friedman,
Pamela. Post-Secondary Education Options for Low-Income Adults. Washington,
D.C.: Welfare Information Network, December 1999. Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/postseced2.htm.
Friedman,
Pamela. The Earned Income Tax Credit. Washington,
D.C.: Welfare Information Network, April 2000.
Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/friedmanapril.htm
Golonka, Susan. Strategies
to Promote Education, Skill Development, and Career Advancement Opportunities
for Low-Skilled Workers. Washington,
D.C.: National Governors' Association, July 28, 1998.
Available at http://www.nga.org/Pubs/IssueBriefs/1998/980728Career.asp.
Greenberg,
Mark H. Beyond Welfare: New
Opportunities to Use TANF to Help Low-Income Working Families. Washington,
D.C.: Center for Law and Social
Policy, July 1999. Available at http://www.clasp.org/pubs/TANF/markKELLOGG.htm.
Hamilton,
et al. Using Incentives in Welfare
Reform: The New York State Child Assistance Program.
Cambridge, Mass: Abt Associates, Inc., February 1998.
Available at http://www.makingwageswork.org/monogr1.pdf.
Johnson,
Amy, et al. Ancillary Services to Support Welfare to Work.
Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., June 1998.
Available at http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/isp/ancillary/front.htm.
Johnson,
Nicholas. A Hand Up. How State Earned
Income Tax Credits Help Working Families Escape Poverty.
2000 Edition. Washington, D.C.: Center
on Budget and Policy Priorities, November 4, 2000. Available at http://www.cbpp.org/11-4-00sfp.pdf.
Johnson,
Nicholas. TANF Funds May be Used to Create or Expand Refundable State Child Care
Tax Credits. Washington,
D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, October 11, 2000.
Available at http://www.cbpp.org/10-22-00stp.htm.
Kaplan,
April. Financial Resources for Child Care. Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, April 1998.
Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/Issuechild.htm.
Kaplan, April and Heidi Sachs.
Financing School-Age
Out-Of-School Time Programs with Welfare Related Funding.
Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, August 1999.
Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/financingschoolissuenote.htm.
Kaplan,
Jan. State Options to Increase Health Insurance for the Working Poor.
Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, June 2000.
Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/janjune.htm.
Lazare,
Ed. New
Findings from Oregon Suggest Minimum Wage Increases Can Boost Wages for
Welfare Recipients Moving to Work. Washington,
D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,
May 29, 1998. Available at http://www.cbpp.org/529ormw.htm.
Lazere, Ed, et al.
States and Counties Are Taking
Steps to Help Low-Income Working Families Make Ends Meet and Move up the
Economic Ladder. Washington,
D.C.: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, November 27,
2000. Available at http://www.cbpp.org/11-27-00sfp.htm.
MacLellan,
Thomas. State Youth Development Strategies to Improve Outcomes for At-Risk
Youth. Washington, D.C.:
National Governors’ Association, July 27, 2000.
Available at http://www.nga.org/Pubs/IssueBriefs/2000/000727YouthDev.asp
National
Economic Council. The Minimum Wage: Increasing the Reward for Work.
Washington, D.C.: National Economic Council, March 2000.
Available at http://www.chn.org/minimumwage/minwagereport000208.pdf.
National
Employment Law Project. Unemployment
Insurance Safety Net Project Web Site.
Washington, D.C.: National Employment Law Project. Visit http://www.nelp.org/ui.htm.
Palladino,
Scott. Using State Tax Policy to Assist Low-Income Families.
Washington, D.C.: National Governors' Association, October 5, 2000.
Available at http://www.nga.org/Pubs/IssueBriefs/2000/Sum001005StateTax.asp.
Roberts,
Paula. Beyond Welfare: The Case for Child Support Assurance.
Washington, D.C.: Center for Law and Social Policy, 1999.
Available at http://www.clasp.org/pubs/childassurance/CSAPaper.htm.
Sachs,
Heidi. Domestic Violence as a Barrier to Women's Economic Self-Sufficiency.
Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, December 1999.
Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/domesticviolence.htm.
Scott,
Ellen K., et al. Welfare Reform and the Work-Family Tradeoff.
Evanston, Ill.: Joint Center for Poverty Research, 2000. Available at http://www.jcpr.org/newsletters/vol4_no4/artcles.html.
Sorenson,
Elaine, et al. Child Support Offers Some Protection Against Poverty.
Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, March 2000.
Available at http://newfederalism.urban.org/html/series_b/b10/b10.html.
Vroman,
Wayne. Effects of Welfare Reform on Unemployment Insurance.
Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, May 1998.
Available at http://newfederalism.urban.org/html/anf22.html.
Welfare
Information Network. Applicant
Diversion and Welfare Reform. Washington,
D.C.: Welfare Information Network, October 1999.
Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/pamresourceoct.htm.
Welfare
Information Network. Coordinating
Transportation Services for Low-Income Workers. Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, October 2000.
Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/transportationresourceoct.htm..
The
Welfare Information Network is supported by grants form the Annie E. Casey
Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard
Foundation, the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the
Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, ad the U.S. Department of Labor.
- Welfare Information Network ~ Barry
L. Van Lare, Executive Director
|
