View the full project profile

Project Description

MFIP attempts to encourage work, alleviate poverty, and reduce welfare dependence through financial incentives and mandatory participation in employment-focused services for long-term welfare recipients, which expands on the pre-existing voluntary STRIDE employment program.

Child Outcomes Survey: Enhanced survey developed to obtain information about MFIP's impacts on children. Target measures include child care, education, health and safety, and social and emotional adjustment.

Project duration: Jan 1993 - Jun 2000

Sites studied include Hennepin County (Minneapolis), Minnesota
Anoka County, Minnesota
Dakota County, Minnesota
Mille Lacs County, Minnesota
Morrison County, Minnesota
Sherburne County, Minnesota
Todd County, Minnesota
Ramsey County (St. Paul), Minnesota

Sample Characteristics and Sites Studied

14,369 welfare applicants and clients (families).

Random sample of 7,208 experimental group (MFIP or MFIP/STRIDE) and 7,431 control group (AFDC/STRIDE or AFDC) members.

Note: A four group design for single-parents was used in Hennepin county; a three group design for single parents was used in Anoka and Dakota; a 2 group design was used for two-parent families in both urban and rural areas; and a 2 group design for non-public assistance Food Stamp families was used in rural areas only.

Recent Findings in Brief

08/01/05: Minnesota's Family Investment Program Evaluation: Turning Welfare into a Work Support: Six-Year Impacts on Parents & Children from the MFIP

Impact Findings

• For the full sample of single-parent families, MFIP increased employment, earnings, welfare receipt, and income up through Year 4 of the follow-up period, after which MFIP’s effects on economic outcomes dissipated. In two-parent families, through Year 4 of the follow-up period, MFIP reduced employment among second earners, usually women; however, the reduction in family earnings was offset by higher welfare benefits, resulting in no effects on family income.
• MFIP’s economic effects persisted up until Year 6 for several of the most disadvantaged groups of single parents, including those with little employment history, long-term welfare receipt, and no high school diploma or General Educational Development (GED) certificate and those with a combination of these characteristics.
• Among the full sample of single-parent families, MFIP had no overall effect on the elementary school achievement of very young children, but, in line with results for parents, positive effects did occur for several subgroups of young children for whom data are available — notably children of long-term recipients and of the most disadvantaged families. The program had no effect on elementary school achievement of young children in two-parent families.
• By Year 6, marriage rates were similar for MFIP and AFDC single-parent families overall, but the small positive effect MFIP had at the three year point did persist for some subgroups of single-parent families. For two-parent families, MFIP’s effects on divorce varied by the prior welfare history of the two-parent family, with small reductions occurring among recipient families and an opposite pattern occurring among newer applicants, leading to no overall effect.

Contact