Latest Reports from the Center on Labor, Human Services & Population

Research shows that work programs for noncustodial parents can increase employment and child support payments. Yet very few state TANF programs provide these work activities even though the estimated cost of implementing a requirement is zero. Congress needs to reaffirm its intent to impose a work requirement on noncustodial parents through the child support program and clearly state that child support funds may be used to fund the work programs. 

Based on our review and synthesis of the individual development account (IDA) literature, findings in this report include that IDA accounts (in the short-term, five years after program entry) help low-income families become homeowners, start or expand a business, or pursue secondary education. Studies to date have found no relationship between IDA program participation and net worth. The report reviews empirical evidence on the effect of IDA program participation and project design features on outcomes and highlights remaining gaps in the literature.

More than a quarter of U.S. families are in the bottom 40 percent of both the net worth and the income distributions. For these families, neither assets nor income offers much protection against financial shocks. This fact sheet describes the characteristics of these families. Low-asset low-income families tend to be younger, single, less educated, in poorer health, and minority.

Growth in the number of children in immigrant families during the 2000s offset the decline in children with native-born parents. Between 2000 and 2009, the minority share of U.S. children under age 18 increased from 38 to 44 percent, driven by growth in the number of Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian children and a decline in non-Hispanic white children. While the increase in minority children included children with foreign-and native-born parents, children of immigrants accounted for most of the growth. This brief highlights important trends in the changing demographics of the U.S. child population nationally and across states.

The majority (84 percent) of the 17 million children of immigrants in the United States live in the 100 largest metropolitan areas. Children of immigrants drove the growth in the child population under age 18 nationally and in the largest metros: if it was not for them, the child population in the top 100 metros overall and in many metros would have declined in the last decade. Driven by immigration and population momentum, the child minority share across the top 100 metros reached 51 percent in 2009 and many of the largest metros became "majority minority" metros.

In a month, Congress's Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, known informally as the Super Committee, will issue its recommendation on how to deflate the deficit by at least $1.5 trillion over the next ten years. In a year, Americans will go to the polls to select many federal, state, and local leaders. And in between these events, state capitals will tangle anew over shrinking revenues, burgeoning constituent needs, and balanced-budget dictates.

Where, in all of this, are America's 74 million children? What challenges and opportunities are posed by budget battles when we think about the dramatic changes in children's lives in recent decades -- almost 22 percent living in poverty, the trend toward "majority minority" among children, the regional shifts from northern states losing children to southern states gaining them? What will it take to come to national and state budget decisions that invest at the level needed for the youngest generation to succeed, especially in light of states' senior role in funding children's programs and services?

The Immigrant Access to Health and Human Services study maps and describes the policy context that can affect immigrant access to health and human services and the well-being of immigrants and their children. This paper summarizes federal provisions and key aspects of state-level variation related to immigrants' eligibility for TANF, SNAP, Medicaid, and CHIP based on a review of literature and the latest information. It provides a building block for the fieldwork and in-depth assessment of the policy context around immigrant access to health and human services.

Over the last two decades, the United States has witnessed its biggest wave of immigration since the late 19th century. Today’s immigrants have settled in many more communities across the country, including some that received few immigrants in the past. The diversity of these destination communities means that recent immigrants’ experiences and effects vary widely.

Join us as a distinguished panel discusses the implications of immigration’s mix and magnitude. How are metropolitan communities affected by and adapting to the influx of immigrants -- and the children of immigrants? What new challenges and opportunities confront local, state, and federal policy?

The Congress, the President, and various commissions have begun discussing real Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid reform. This paper suggests that as these discussions move forward, it would be helpful to examine lifetime contributions and benefits for Medicare and Social Security to understand the programs’ internal fiscal situations and their broader role in overall budget policy and, most importantly, as a way toward a more unified and coherent approach to entitlement reform for seniors. This approach also provides a useful window on how equitably lifetime benefits and taxes are distributed and on the fiscal stability of the overall system.

Is poverty incompatible with asset accumulation? We examine whether the poor can and do save and whether they are able to build up assets over time. Data are presented from household surveys, as well as from programs targeted at helping families accumulate assets. Presenting and evaluating the state of knowledge provides a new lens on whether the current income-based safety net could better serve poor families by having an asset building component. Conventional thinking is that families that are income poor cannot save. This chapter shows that this thinking is inaccurate; poverty does not have to be incompatible with asset accumulation.