| The federal law that overhauled the nation's
welfare system in 1996 aimed to break the cycle of poverty
through its effects not only on welfare recipients but also
on their children. While it was feared that some of the policy
changes might harm young children, it was generally believed
that older children would benefit from new community norms
and the presence of working parents as role models. But analyses
from several MDRC studies released in recent years suggest
that the new policies did not bring benefits to adolescents.
With reauthorization of the 1996 law now under debate, the
Next Generation project — an innovative collaboration
among MDRC and other leading research institutions —
has produced this research synthesis, the first comprehensive
and systematic look at how welfare and work policies targeted
at low-income parents have influenced their adolescent children.
Using meta-analytic techniques, the work integrates survey
data collected from parents in eight MDRC studies of 16 different
welfare and employment programs, focusing on children aged
12 to 18 when the surveys were conducted; it also draws on
ethnographic case studies to flesh out the quantitative findings.
In each study, some parents were randomly
assigned to a program that included some combination of three
key policies — mandatory employment activities, earnings
supplements, and time limits on welfare receipt — while
others were randomly assigned to a control group that was
neither eligible for the program's services nor subject to
its requirements. Random assignment ensures that any differences
that emerged between the two groups — or their children
- are attributable to the program. Although the studies examined
programs that began operating before 1996, the three policies
examined here have been adopted, in various combinations,
in many states' programs since welfare reform was passed.
Thus, this is the best body of evidence to date concerning
how low-income adolescents fare as a result of policies aimed
at increasing their parents' employment.
Key Findings
- When asked about their adolescent children, parents
in the programs under study reported worse school performance, a higher
rate of grade repetition, and more use of special educational services
than did control group parents. On average, the programs did not, however,
affect the proportion of adolescents who dropped out of, were suspended
from, or completed school. There were likewise no overall differences
between the program and control groups in the proportion of adolescents
who had children. Girls and boys fared similarly on all the outcomes
examined.
- No single one of the three policies under study
could explain the programs' effects on adolescents. For instance, negative
effects were observed both for the programs that required parents to
work or to participate in work activities in order to receive welfare
benefits and for the programs in which parents' work participation was
purely voluntary.
- Adolescents with younger siblings experienced the
most troubling effects. As well as showing larger unfavorable effects
on school performance and receipt of special educational services than
did the full sample, program group adolescents with younger siblings
were more likely than their control group counterparts to be suspended
or expelled from and to drop out of school - perhaps because they were
also more likely to provide care for their siblings. Program group adolescents
without younger siblings, in contrast, were more likely than their control
group counterparts to participate in out-of-school activities and experienced
few effects on school outcomes.
Together, the findings point to the challenges
faced by low-income single parents who work - most of whom
hold inflexible, unpredictable low-wage jobs - as well as
the unmet child care needs associated with their employment.
Possible strategies for mitigating the negative effects of
welfare reform on adolescent children include reducing the
need for them to assume adult responsibilities at home, ensuring
that they have access to high-quality supervised activities
outside school, and finding ways to resolve the conflicts
that their low-income parents face in juggling parenthood
and inflexible employment.
|
