Youth in Transition

Changing caseload dynamics are creating many challenges for state and local welfare agencies, including the growing proportion of families with older teens who will soon begin to "age out" of public assistance. According to the U.S. Administration for Children and Families (ACF), in 1999, 16.5 percent of TANF children were over the age of 12 and five percent were 16 years of age or older. One decade ago, 12.8 percent of the caseload were over the age of 12 and 3.4 percent were at least 16 years old. It is likely that families with older children represent longer-term recipients with multiple barriers to employment and that the adolescents in these families are at increased risk of long-term dependency and negative outcomes (ACF 2000).

Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Reconciliation Act of 1996, states only may provide cash assistance to a family that includes a minor child or a pregnant woman. A minor child is an individual under the age of 18 or an 18-year-old who is in secondary school or in an equivalent vocational training program. States may adopt more restrictive definitions; they also may use their maintenance of effort (MOE) funds to expand eligibility to older children. Several states have used that flexibility to extend the age of majority to ages 19, 20, or 21 for full-time students (SPDP, 1999).

Once they reach the age of majority under the state's TANF policy, young TANF males, as well as young females without children, will not be eligible for cash assistance. However, it is highly probable that the needs of these youth will not end with the end of cash assistance. Unless youth-oriented programs and policies address their unique set of risk factors, they are more likely as adults to spend time in expensive remedial programs, commit more crimes and strain the criminal justice system, rely on public benefits and services ranging from welfare to housing subsidies, and pay fewer taxes as adults due to lower earnings. Furthermore, these newly-emancipated, but potentially impoverished, youth will create additional strains on systems to provide access to health care for the uninsured, food and nutrition programs for adults who are ineligible for food stamps, services for the homeless, etc.

While the needs of disadvantaged youth are not new to state and local policymakers, older teens in families receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) will present some special challenges as they move toward adulthood. This Issue Note discusses those challenges and describes policy and program options that can assist states and localities to prepare these youth for self-sufficiency.

What are the primary risk factors that may affect the ability of older teens in TANF families to move toward self-sufficiency? Older teens living in TANF families face a complex set of risk factors. Their sociodemographic disadvantages combined with the characteristic risk-taking behaviors of adolescence pose a threat to their immediate and future physical, psychological, and emotional health and to their long-term academic and economic well-being.

These teens often live in housing situations which are in unstable or distressed communities with high levels of crime and poor access to quality schools, job opportunities, training, and governmental services. In addition, it is estimated that only 19 percent of poor teenagers live in households with both of their married parents. Furthermore, there is a greater likelihood of domestic violence and child maltreatment in TANF families than in the general population. The potential consequences of these environmental characteristics include increased incidence of substance abuse, depression, physical and emotional problems, as well as gang involvement, dropping out of school, delinquent behavior, and later employment problems and low earnings (Brookings, 2000).

The economic situation of families receiving TANF, as well as TANF work requirements, can place particular strains on teen-age children, particularly older teens. Most of these teens have lived in or near poverty for much of their lives, increasing the likelihood that they will suffer long-term negative consequences (Brookings, 2000). In addition, adolescents may be particularly sensitive to the stigma associated with welfare receipt and, as their families remain on TANF, may experience low self-esteem and long-term emotional and academic problems. Finally, these teens often are unsupervised for long periods of time as their parent move into employment. They also may be responsible for the care of younger siblings during non-school hours. Family pressures and a lack of community supports that provide structured activity and guidance during large parts of the day may increase risk-taking behaviors and school-related problems among these teens.

What are the particular risk factors facing older children who are "child-only cases?" State and local policymakers may want to consider ways to address the particular risk factors facing older TANF youth who are child-only cases. Child-only cases comprised 29.1 percent of the national TANF caseload in 1999 and from 11 to 57 percent of state caseloads (ACF, 2000). Child-only cases are those in which TANF benefits are paid on behalf of a minor child, but the caregiver's needs and income are not included when determining the benefit level. Child-only cases may result when a child is placed with a relative in a kinship care situation or when the child's parent is no longer eligible for assistance due to a sanction, time limit, immigration status, etc.

Child-only cases who have been removed from the home and placed in kinship or other foster care arrangements may have experienced family violence, parental substance abuse, or other dysfunctional situations in the home. These youth may suffer from separation anxiety and emotional and academic problems that can lead to later school failure and employment problems. Youth receiving child-only benefits as a result of a sanction or imposition of a time limit are likely to live in a family characterized by at least one barrier to employment. Adults in these families are more likely to suffer from substance abuse, mental health problems, or other disabilities that can lead to financial problems. Again, the familial stress is likely to have a negative impact on the child's emotional and academic well-being. For more information, see Kaplan and Copeland, 2001.

What can the public and private sectors do to assist older TANF youth to avoid future dependency? Youth prevention programs have proliferated during the past decade. The programs target a wide variety of behaviors and problems and operate both within and outside of school settings to assist youth to overcome barriers to school achievement and to prepare them for a secondary degree, post-secondary education or employment training. The following discussion provides examples of promising program approaches that may promote self-sufficiency among older TANF youth. Also, see Kaplan, 1999, Welfare Information Network, 2000 or visit http://www.nydic.org.

Youth Development programs aim to prepare young people to meet the challenges of adolescence and adulthood through a variety of experiences and activities that increase social, moral, emotional, physical, and cognitive competency. These programs can be effective in preventing the full range of high-risk behaviors, such as delinquency, violence, and substance abuse, which can compromise the ability of older TANF teens to become self-sufficient adults. The programs integrate education, health, mental health, substance abuse, employment, and vocational services through community-based collaborations; family and peer support; mentoring; linkages with private businesses to foster work-based learning; and community service opportunities. Also, see MacLellan, 2000.

· State-based efforts. The Family and Youth Services Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is supporting state youth development programs through its State Youth Development Collaboration grants. Thirteen states are using these funds to develop or strengthen state strategies for youth on the basis of their identified needs and prior activities related to youth development. For more information, visit http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/fysb/State-YD-Collb.htm. For information about other state efforts, visit http://www.nydic.org/statepolicy.html.

· Community-based efforts. There are a wide variety of public and private sector community-based prevention programs that incorporate youth development principles. These programs often involve community-wide collaborations. See the Welfare Information Network, May 2000.

· School-based efforts. Schools have become the centerpiece of youth development activities through initiatives that expand school hours and community and family-oriented services. These efforts aim to provide a safe place for children before and after school; access to enrichment programs; and a wide range of support services for entire families. Community schools, the most common model, are established through school-community partnerships and operate out of public school buildings. The U.S. Department of Education has awarded grants to support the creation of community schools in over 3,600 schools in more than 900 communities, as part of its 21st Century Learning Center Program. There are a number of other privately and publicly-supported programs throughout the country. See Coalition for Community Schools, 2001.

School-based before and after-school care programs are another important component of youth development efforts. First, participation in school-age child care at younger grade levels has been found to improve social skills and to increase academic performance. These positive impacts can last into the older teen years and provide a foundation that helps prevent at-risk teens from adopting destructive behaviors. Second, the structure and supervision provided through after-school programs for high school-age teens can help reduce juvenile crime and other problem behaviors and encourage positive academic and employment outcomes (Sylvester, 2000). Effective programs operate during the school year and throughout the summer months and include extended periods of organized sports, cultural or other recreational activities; homework assistance; computer and technology training; mentoring services; community service opportunities; and apprenticeships and job training programs.

Teen pregnancy prevention is an important component of any state and local effort to promote self-sufficiency among older TANF teens transitioning off of cash assistance. PRWORA requires both the federal government and states to outline how they intend to establish goals and work to reduce the non-marital and teen pregnancy rate. As a result, an increasing number of states have adopted new policies and programs directed towards teen pregnancy prevention, particularly in the public schools. In addition, many states are working with community-based organizations and media outlets to develop coalitions that target teen pregnancy prevention and they are increasing their efforts to change the behavior of teen males. State teen pregnancy prevention policies are summarized in Wertheimer, et al. 2000. For program examples, see Eisen, et al, 2000 or visit http://www.welfareinfo.org/prevention.htm.

Family violence services and interventions should be a part of any effort to provide positive environmental, emotional and familial supports for older TANF teens. Interagency and intersectoral collaborative policies and programs are needed to overcome the complex, often intergenerational, effects of family violence and to reduce its incidence. Because families in violent situations are more likely to remain in the welfare system longer, TANF agencies are in a unique position to provide intervention and prevention services. It is essential that TANF agencies readily inform clients of the kinds of support services that are available to victims of domestic violence, as most women are not likely to readily admit abuse. Agencies will need to collaborate with law enforcement, the courts, child welfare and other human services agencies, health agencies, community-based providers, employers, and schools to provide a range of supportive services to the entire family, as well as employment-related training, literacy and job placement services. See MacLellan and Brown, 2000 or visit http://www.welfareinfo.org/domestic.htm#Programs.

School Completion/Dropout Prevention. Youth who have not completed high school are more likely to be poor, unemployed and to be in need of welfare assistance as adults (Dynarski, 1998). While PRWORA does not require minor teens in TANF families to attend school, at least 34 states have chosen to do so. However, regardless of these state education requirements, many young childless adults will not have completed their high school education when they age out of TANF, decreasing their opportunities for long-term self-sufficiency.

While there are a number of public and private sector program models being used to encourage high school completion among at-risk teens, there is no single approach that is universally effective. However, there are certain key program elements that policymakers will want to incorporate into any efforts to reduce dropout rates and to improve academic performance. These program components include interagency collaboration; support services, such as counseling and mentoring; leadership development; conflict resolution; family involvement; and other youth development approaches.

Many of these components are incorporated into alternative high school programs that have been a focus of state efforts to meet the needs of students who may be at-risk of dropping out. Increasing attention also is being paid to ways to create alternative options at the middle school level in order to prevent school failure during the early teen years and to improve future outcomes as the youth move to high school. Alternative programs typically have smaller class sizes, more personalized settings and approaches, more focused teaching and learning, and specialized attention to individual students' social support needs. The most common models of alternative schools include: 1) Schools Within a School -- for students who need a separate location and different staff for learning within the traditional school; 2) Schools Without Walls -- for students requiring educational and training programs delivered from various locations within the community; 3) Alternative Learning Centers -- for students who need a special curriculum and a separate location from the traditional school; 4) Magnet Schools -- which focus on selected curriculum areas with specialized teachers and with attendance by choice; and 5) Second-Chance Schools -- for students who are at risk of being expelled or incarcerated. For more information, see National Dropout Prevention Center, 1999.

General Education Development certificate (GED) programs can assist students who have dropped out of school, or are behind grade level. These programs prepare individuals for examinations covering mathematics, reading, social studies, science, and writing and are offered through local high schools, community colleges, community-based organizations, adult literacy programs, and programs serving TANF clients. The GED tests are jointly administered by the GED Testing Service of the American Council on Education, each participating state and territory, and official GED Testing Centers. For more information, visit http://www.acenet.edu/calec/ged/home.html.

What programs are available to help prepare older TANF youth to enter the workforce? Effective youth employment programs for both in-school and out-of-school youth integrate vocational and job training skills with life skills and employment-related values (e.g. punctuality, interpersonal skills, etc.). In addition, these programs offer opportunities for career exploration, community service, mentoring, and internships through strong collaborations between government, local business, community-based youth-serving organizations, social services, and the schools.

· School-to-Work (STW), which integrates school-based and work-based learning to better prepare young people for the workplace and other post-secondary options. All 50 states received STW implementation funds and most continue to support the program with state funds. Support for STW continues to grow as studies show that school-to-work experiences improve academic performance, as well as employment options. Visit www.stw.ed.gov/.

· Career academies, which provide school-based career-oriented coursework and experiences as well as a supportive environment for teachers. Partnerships with local employers serve as a source for mentors and internships for participating students. Career academies have been implemented in more than 1,500 schools across the country and, increasingly, are serving a broad cross-section of students. The academies have been found to be particularly useful in improving academic performance among students considered at-risk for failure and effective in preparing high school students for post-secondary education (Kemple, 2000).

· Vocational-technical education programs, which prepare individuals for employment in current or emerging occupations that do not require a bachelor's or advanced degree. These programs combine classroom instruction, hands-on-laboratory work and on-the-job training with career counseling, and remedial classes. Under the federal Carl D. Perkins Act, basic grants are awarded to each state's education agency, with the state generating the bulk of the funds. During the past decade, the federal government has placed increasing emphasis on Tech Prep education, a planned sequence of study in a technical field beginning as early as the ninth grade and extending through two years of post-secondary occupational education or an apprenticeship. There are Tech Prep programs in every state. For more information, visit http://www.ed.gov/offices/OVAE/perkins.html.

· YouthBuild, a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development program, which supports programs that provide intensive academic instruction to youth ages 16 to 24, leading to the GED or high school diploma, combined with on-the-job training in housing construction. Critical program components include community service, counseling and youth development services. Since FY 1993, more than 550 YouthBuild planning and implementation grants have been awarded. For more information, visit http://www.hud.gov/progdesc/youthb.cfm.

· U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) youth employment programs include: 1) Job Corps, which provides education, vocational training, work experience, and counseling through a residential learning experience to 65,000 young adults ages 16-25, each year; 2) Youth Offender Grants, which supports 14 pilot projects that incorporate job training and education into programs to help young people ages 14-21 who are, or have been, under criminal justice supervision, involved in gangs or are out of school in communities with high poverty and unemployment; and 3) Apprenticeships, which combine on-the-job training and related classroom instruction for individuals who are at least 16 years of age and meet sponsoring employers' qualifications.

In addition, under the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), DOL is authorized to provide Youth Opportunity grants to empowerment zones, enterprise communities, and other high-poverty areas to increase the long-term employment opportunities of out-of-school youth ages 14-21. The funds are to be used to provide a wide range of services, as well as for the establishment of community centers to serve as a centralized location for program referrals and skills development training. The WIA also consolidated federal summer and year-round youth employment programs into formula grants to states and local areas. These grants support comprehensive workforce development services for low-income youth, ages 14-21 who have at least one of six specific barriers to employment. At least 30 percent of these funds must help out-of-school youth. For more information, visit http://www.doleta.gov/youth_services/

Private sector workforce development approaches. There are many models of private sector workforce preparation programs for youth. The Boys and Girls Clubs of America, the YMCA of America, the National 4-H Council, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Alliance of Business, the Salvation Army, and Goodwill Industries are among the many private entities with youth employment initiatives. Visit http://www.welfareinfo.org/edandtraining.htm#organizations. Foundation support is available for states that want to develop their own approaches to youth workforce development outside of federal funding constraints. Visit http://www.naco.org/programs/social/work/grants.cfm.

What can be done to assist older TANF teens to pursue post-secondary education? States may want to consider ways to increase access to the wide range of existing college preparatory, career guidance and financial aid programs in order to encourage and enable older TANF teens to pursue a postsecondary degree. The federal TRIO program consists of six initiatives designed to motivate and support students from disadvantaged backgrounds to seek educational opportunities. Over 1,200 colleges, universities, community colleges, and agencies throughout the country now offer TRIO Programs. Funds are distributed to institutions through competitive grants. Another federal program, GEAR-UP, promotes and supports community-based and state efforts to encourage more young people to have high expectations, stay in school, achieve academically and take college preparatory courses. For more information, visit http://www.ed.gov/offices/OPE/programs/helping.html. In addition, there are a number of federal financial aid programs that target low-income and disadvantaged youth, including Pell Grants and others. For more information see Friedman, 2000 or visit http://www.teri.org/hearbkg.htm.

How can TANF funds be used to support services and programs for older TANF teens? To be eligible for TANF funding, it must be "reasonably calculated" to serve one of four TANF purposes, as defined under U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) guidelines: "1) to provide assistance to needy families; 2) to end dependence of needy parents by promoting job preparation, work and marriage; 3) to prevent and reduce out-of-wedlock pregnancies; 4) to encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families" (ACF, 1999). Programs for older TANF teens that are likely to meet these criteria include teen pregnancy prevention, youth development, dropout prevention, and workforce preparation services, as well as other programs aimed at improving motivation and self-esteem. Under the DHHS guidelines, the use of TANF funds for these programs would not trigger time limit and other TANF work participation and data collection requirements. For more information, see Cohen and Greenberg, 2000.

As described earlier, states also may fund services for at-risk youth under the WIA, which made more than $1 billion available each year for workforce preparation, education and other support services for youth ages 14-21. Federal Welfare-to-Work funds also may be used to provide employment-related services to hard-to-serve, out-of-school TANF teens. For more information, visit http://wtw.doleta.gov.

How can new case management approaches be used to better serve older TANF teens? Front-line welfare workers can play an important role in assisting older teens in TANF families to access services and programs that support future self-sufficiency. Agencies may want to develop a team of workers with specialization in youth issues and provide case managers with specific training in the assessment of high-risk youth, the identification of the range of needed youth development and career advancement services, and monitoring of the youth and his/her family. An understanding of adolescent development and good communication skills are needed to enable workers to establish a rapport and level of trust with older TANF teens. The establishment of a personal responsibility plan, as required for TANF adults, also can increase the level of trust between the youth and the agency and can improve a teen's motivation and self-esteem. In addition, agencies will want to identify, and develop, interagency collaborations with youth-serving organizations for successful linkages and referrals. Finally, agencies should consider ways to lessen administrative burdens for these case managers through simplification of policies and procedures, and the use of information technologies to automate certain tasks. For more information, see Relave, 2001.

Preliminary findings from The Next Generation project, which is looking at the effects of various policies on low-income children, indicate that some welfare reforms may have a negative effect on school achievement and social behaviors among adolescents. The study authors suggest that one reason for these findings, the first to find a potential connection between specific reform approaches and adolescent outcomes, may be the limited availability of community-based programs that supervise teens when their parents go to work (Morris, et al., 2001).

Researchers looking at the effects of poverty on teens have documented the link between low socioeconomic status, overcrowding or large family size, low maternal education, limited employment skills by the head of household, and welfare status and problem behavior, poor school performance, and mental health problems among youth. Those youth who experience several of these sociodemographic risk factors simultaneously are more likely to develop serious problems (Moore, 2000). A recent study of teens in California found that poverty, low levels of education and employment, and high levels of unemployment appear to have a large impact on birthrates among teenagers. This study supports the body of research establishing a link between socioeconomic status and teen pregnancy rates (Kirby, et al). In addition, the National Center for Education Statistics (2001) found that low-income young adults are five times as likely as their peers to drop out of school.

There is a wealth of evaluation literature on effective programs that target high-risk youth. For an overview of key findings regarding effective program characteristics and the cost-benefits of youth programs, see Kaplan, 1999. Evaluations of dropout prevention programs have yielded mixed findings, highlighting the difficulties of finding a simple solution to school failure. The studies indicate that individual interventions, combined with alternative educational settings beginning at the middle school level, hold the most potential of success (Dynarski, 1998). A literature review of research on the value of the GED in the labor market indicates that a GED may offer short-term economic gains, but recipients earn significantly lower earnings over the long-term. Researchers also found that more than 60 percent of GED recipients pursue some form of additional education or training and that GED recipients are more likely to get a better job than high school dropouts who do not return to school (Brown, 2000). In addition, there are numerous evaluations of school to work, career academies and other approaches to youth workforce development. For more information, see Kemple, 2000 or visit http://www.stw.ed.gov and http://www.nyesc.org/pepnet/.

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), DHHS is supporting field-initiated policy research on the impacts of welfare-related policy changes. ASPE is particularly interested in studies that look at the impacts on adolescents and the use of state TANF funds for youth development programs for high-risk youth. Contact 202/401-6640 or see http://aspe/hhs.gov/fr0301.htm.

The National Institute on the Education of At-Risk Students of the U.S. Department of Education supports research and development activities designed to improve the education of students at-risk of educational failure because of poverty or other socioeconomic disadvantages. The Institute funds a range of field-initiated research, as well as the university-based Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed at Risk and the Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence. Contact 202/219-2239 or visit http://www.ed.gov/offices/OERI/At-Risk/.

The following programs are illustrative of the range of possible state and local approaches to assist older TANF teens move towards self-sufficiency. For additional examples, see American Youth Policy Forum, 1999 or visit http://www.nyec.org/pepnet/index.html.

California -- Wise Guys is a comprehensive 8-12 week workshop for 10-19 year-old males designed for the prevention of adolescent pregnancy and dating violence. The program promotes the concept of responsibility, especially in the area of sexuality, and also teaches young men the importance of life skills, such as setting goals, decision-making, communication, and resisting peer pressure. Contact Jane Park at 800/846-3475, ext. 236 or pasha@socio.com.

Massachusetts -- Diploma Plus operates in ten sites throughout the state and provides over 700 at-risk or formerly out-of-school youth with the opportunity to transition successfully to postsecondary education and careers. During phase one of the two-part program, students participate in alternative education programs to master core academic competencies and life skills. During phase two, students participate in project-based learning, attend community college, and complete work-based learning internships, all as part of earning a high school diploma. Contact Joy Casteel at 617/727-8158, ext. 2295 or visit http://www.commcorp.org/CYDE/DP/default.htm.

New York -- The After-School Corporation (TASC) is a non-profit organization dedicated to enhancing the quality and availability of after-school programs for students in kindergarten through 12th grade in New York. TASC funds community-based organizations and other not-for-profit groups to operate after-school programs in public schools. Programming combines educational enrichment, technological skills development, homework help, and participation in sports, the arts, and community service, with parental involvement and a low parent/student ratio. For older students, programs also include peer counseling, internships, violence prevention, college preparation and job training. Contact Shauna Grop at 212/547-6945 or visit http://www.tascorp.org.

Texas -- The Family Place, in Dallas, has provided services to victims of family violence since 1978. Services include a 24-hour hotline for survivors and a separate hotline for abusers; emergency shelter and supportive living transitional housing; a hospital emergency room intervention program; a teen dating violence program; outreach services; a batterers' intervention and prevention program; resources for incest; court advocacy program; and bilingual services. The Childhood Early Intervention Program for Children and Youth addresses problems of children who witness domestic violence, such as the emotional trauma, cognitive distortions, and limited information processing skills. Contact The Family Place at 214/559-2170 or visit http://www.familyplace.org.

Wisconsin -- The state 's Community Youth Grants, which provide services to at-risk, disadvantaged youth, are funded solely with TANF monies. The program aims to prevent dependency, improve social, academic and employment skills, and to prevent pregnancy. Allowable uses of the grants include case management, substance abuse prevention, after-school programs, life skills training, and career counseling. Contact Alice Wilkins at 608/267-3708.

Project GRAD (Graduation Really Achieves Dreams) -- Implemented in several school districts across the country, Project GRAD is a collaborative effort between schools and the community to address the educational needs of inner-city children and youth. Program interventions, beginning in the primary grades and continuing through high school, combine proven curriculum components with ongoing teacher training, community and parental involvement, and continuous program support, evaluation and innovation. Project GRAD emphasizes reading and math skills, builds self-discipline, provides resources to support at-risk children and their families, and offers scholarship support for college. Contact Robert Rivera at 713-654-7083 or visit http://www.projectgrad.org/site_files/aboutus.html.

Youth Internship/Apprenticeship Program -- This program of the National 4-H Council was initiated with the assistance of American Honda Motor Co., Inc. to allow students to link school learning with work experience at auto and motorcycle dealerships. Community-based programs, developed by teams of community partners, including dealerships, extension agents, and school representatives, provide immediate practical application of skills learned in the classroom. Students are provided with both coaches and mentors who guide their work-based learning while linking it to the high school curriculum. Contact Mary Dunphy by fax at 301/961-2894 or mdunphy@fourhcouncil.edu or visit http://www.fourhcouncil.edu/YCC/WFP-Updates/W_YIAP.HTM.

· National Governors' Association, Thomas MacLellan, 202/624-5427 or Tmaclellan@nga.org.

· National Youth Employment Coalition, David Brown, 202/659-1064 or http://www.nyec.org.

· Office of Youth Services/Office of Youth Opportunities, U.S. Department of Labor, 202/693-3030 or youth@doleta.gov.

· Urban Institute, Marvin Eisen, Richard Wertheimer, Elaine Sorenson, 202/833-7200.

Administration for Children and Families (ACF). Characteristics and Financial Circumstances of TANF Recipients, Fiscal Year 1999. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), August 27, 2000. Available at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/opre/characteristics/fy99/analysis.htm.

ACF. Helping Families Achieve Self-Sufficiency: A Guide on Funding Services to Children and Families through the TANF Program. Washington, D.C.: DHHS, 1999. Available at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ofa/funds2.htm.

Brown, Bettina. Is the GED a Valuable Credential? Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career and Vocational Education, 2000. Available at http://www.ericacve.org.

Brown, David E. Advancing Youth Development under the Workforce Investment Act. Washington, D.C.: National Youth Employment Coalition, 1998. Available at http://www.nec.org/yd&wia.htm.

Coalition for Community Schools. Community Schools. Partnerships for Excellence. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Educational Leadership, February 2001. Available at http://www.communityschools.org/partnerships.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.

Dynarski, Mark and Philip Gleason. How Can We Help? What We Have Learned From Evaluations of Federal Dropout-Prevention Programs. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, June 30, 1998. Available at http://www.dropoutprevention.org/2levelpages/downloads/dod_Syn.pdf.

Eisen, Marvin, et al. Teen Risk-Taking: Promising Prevention Programs and Approaches. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, October 3, 2000. Available at http://www.urban.org/pdfs/TeenRiskTaking_2.pdf.

Kaplan, April. Youth At-Risk of Welfare Dependency. Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, February 1999. Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/youthissue.htm.

Kaplan, April and Ivory Copeland. Addressing the Well-Being of Children in Child-Only Cases. Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, April 2001. Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/childonlycasesissuenote.htm.

Kemple, James J. and Jason C. Snipes. Career Academies. Impacts on Students' Engagement and Performance in High School. Princeton, N.J.: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., February 2000. Available at http://www.mdrc.org/Reports2000/CareerAcademies/CA-ExSum-2-4-00.htm.

Kirby, Douglas, et al. "Manifestations of Poverty and Birthrates Among Young Teenagers in California Zip Code Areas." Family Planning Perspectives. Washington, D.C.: Alan Guttmacher Institute, March/April 2001. Available at http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/journals/3306301.html.

MacLellan, Thomas and Rebecca Brown. Building Bridges Across Systems: State Innovations to Address and Prevent Family Violence. Washington, D.C.: National Governors' Association, October 17, 2000. Available at http://www.nga.org/center/divisions/1,1188,C_ISSUE_BRIEF^D_314,00.html.

Morris, Pamela A., et al. How Welfare and Work Policies Affect Children: A Synthesis of Research. Princeton, N.J.: Manpower Development Research Corporation, January 2001. Available at http://www.mdrc.org/NextGeneration/Default.html.

National Center for Education Statistics. Dropout Rates in the United States: 1999. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2001. Available at http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/dropout/.

National Youth Development Information Center. Barriers to Core Resources for Positive Youth Development. Washington, D.C.: The National Assembly, 2000. Available at http://www.nydic.org/barriers.html.

National Youth Development Information Center. Definitions of Youth Development. Washington, D.C.: The National Assembly, March 1998. Available at http://www.nydic.org/devedef.html.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Safe From the Start. Taking Action on Children Exposed to Violence. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, November 2000. Available at http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/ojjdp/182789.pdf.

Relave, Nanette. Using Case Management to Change the Front Lines of Welfare Service Delivery. Washington, D.C.: Welfare Information Network, February 2001. Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/casemanagementissuenote.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.

Sorenson, Elaine et al. Redirecting Welfare Policy Toward Building Strong Families. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, March 2000. Available at http://www.urban.org/family/sf_3.html.

State Policy Documentation Project. Categorical Eligibility: Definition of Child/Temporary Absence. Washington, D.C.: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, July 1999. Available at http://www.spdp.org/tanf/categorical/child.pdf.

Sylvester, Kathleen and Kathy Reich. After-School Programs Issues & Ideas. Washington, D.C.: Social Policy Action Network, November 2000. Available at http://www.futureofchildren.org/asp.pdf.

U.S. Department of Education. School-to-Work Web Site. Washington, D.C. Visit http://www.stw.ed.gov.

Welfare Information Network. Prevention Programs for Youth: Reducing the Risk of Dependency and Poverty. Washington, D.C., May 2000. Available at http://www.welfareinfo.org/mooremay.htm.

Wertheimer, Richard, et al. State Policy Initiatives for Reducing Teen and Adult Nonmarital Childbearing: Family Planning to Family Caps. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, November 2000. Available at http://newfederalism.urbanorg/html/anf_a43.html.

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, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

Network Consortium 7^th Annual Welfare-to-Work to Self-Sufficiency National Conference, August 18-21, 2001 in Reno, Nevada.

The Welfare-to-Work to Self-Sufficiency National Conference is a forum to identify issues, share promising practices, and explore solutions that move individual from welfare-to-work to self-sufficiency. The conference is organized around the following focus areas: post-employment services, model programs, practices, and customer/participant issues, service integration, TANF reauthorization, basic essentials, personal & professional renewal, leadership & technology.

For additional information, see http://www.network-consortium.org/