Citation URL: http://www.urban.org/JohnTrutko

The Partnership for Fragile Families Demonstration projects, operating in 13 sites across the country, provided a range of services aimed at increasing the capacity of young, economically disadvantaged fathers in becoming financial and emotional resources to their children and sought to reduce poverty and welfare dependence. As part of a multi-component evaluation, this report examines how participants fared in two key areas: (1) employment rates and earnings levels and (2) the establishment of child support orders and the payment of child support.

The President's High Growth Job Training Initiative (HGTJI) is a major national effort to encourage the development of market-driven strategies to address critical workforce challenges as defined by business and industry. As part of the Urban Institute's evaluation of this program, this first report documents the lessons, experiences and sustainability of 20 of the earliest HGJTI grantees as told by the project administrators. The purpose of the report is to summarize the major implementation lessons emerging from the early grantees and document the extent to which projects continue after the end of the grant.

This report describes the design and implementation of the Partners for Fragile Families (PFF) demonstration projects. Operating in 13 sites across the country, PFF provided a range of services aimed at increasing the capacity of young, economically disadvantaged fathers in becoming financial and emotional resources to their children and sought to reduce poverty and welfare dependence. The report examines the programs structure and institutional partnerships; participant characteristics; recruitment and enrollment efforts; the nature of employment, peer support, parenting, and child support-related services provided through the initiatives; and implementation challenges and lessons.

The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998 (P.L. 105-220) recognized the relationship between adult education and workforce development and the need for accountability in all literacy, training, and employment programs. Enacted as Title II of WIA, the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) required substantial changes in the operations of state and local adult education programs, including allocation of funds, accountability and performance measurement, and the relationship between adult education and one-stop delivery systems. This report synthesizes information from a survey of all state directors of adult education and site visits to nine local programs in five states. Findings relate primarily to the first 18 months of AEFLA implementation.

The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998 (P.L. 105-220) recognized the relationship between adult education and workforce development and the need for accountability in all literacy, training, and employment programs. Enacted as Title II of WIA, the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) required substantial changes in the operations of state and local adult education programs, including allocation of funds, accountability and performance measurement, and the relationship between adult education and one-stop delivery systems. This report synthesizes information from a survey of all state directors of adult education and site visits to nine local programs in five states. Findings relate primarily to the first 18 months of AEFLA implementation.

This is one of several reports based on the national evaluation of the Welfare-to-Work grants program. Congress established the Welfare-to-Work (WtW) grants program as part of the Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997. The three billion dollar initiative was intended to support programs, especially in high-poverty communities, to assist the least employable, most disadvantaged welfare recipients make the transition from welfare to work. These funds were also available to help low-income noncustodial parents increase their earnings and better support their children. The purpose of this report is to document how grantees have adapted as they approach or reach the ends of their WtW grant periods and how other conditions in 2002 and 2003--particularly the slow economy and any state policies related to TANF or the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)--have affected their programs. The report discusses the legacy and lessons of WtW from the perspective of grantee agency administrators in the study sites.

The Social Security Administration (SSA) contracted with the Urban Institute and its subcontractor, Westat, and several individual consultants to develop an intervention, evaluation, and survey design for a demonstration project to assist Supplemental Security Income participants. The SSA proposed demonstration program would pay "Job Monitors" (JMs) to assist working SSI recipients with simple problems that may affect their employment. The program would be funded primarily through a Plan for Achieving Self Support (PASS), an SSA-approved written plan that specifies an employment goal and the expenditures necessary to achieve that goal.

This is one of several reports from the congressionally mandated national evaluation of the WtW grants program. The report presents findings from the process and implementation analysis component of the evaluation, and describes the service delivery operations of programs funded with WtW grants in eleven study sites. These findings are based on information collected through two rounds of site visits in 1999 and 2001, and management information system data maintained by the programs on participants and services. Topics covered include institutional arrangements, targeting and enrollment, service delivery models, and job placement.

Welfare reform became a major priority in New York City in the 1990s. Policies were work-centered throughout, but the focus and programs evolved over time. This report describes the work components of welfare as of late 2001, but does not analyze the quality of services provided or the effect on individuals or services. Various perspectives are incorporated, including HRA administrators, managers and staff, contractors, and community representatives.

In Fort Worth, Baltimore, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and San Diego, faith-based organizations (FBOs) received between $36,000 and $3.6 million in contracts from local workforce development agencies in 2000. Most churches contacted provided only informal employment services, although one to three large churches in each city sponsored more formal services, but without public funding. About half the non-profit FBOs contacted (e.g., homeless shelters, transitional housing facilities or social service agencies) received public funding and many of these provided some employment-related services. Federal funding to FBOs for employment services was mainly from the U.S. Departments of Labor and Housing and Urban Development.

Return to list of authors