Teenage Parent Demonstration (TPD) |
|
| Locations: | Camden, NJ; Newark, NJ; south side of Chicago, IL |
|---|---|
| Target Population: | All teenagers who were first-time parents and receiving welfare. In Illinois, teenagers who had no children, but were in the third trimester of pregnancy and receiving welfare were also targeted. |
| Sanctions/ Bonuses: | Generally $160 sanction per month, the amount normally allocated to cover the needs of the mother, for failure to participate in activities (education, training, or employment-related activities) |
| Services: | Case management; initial workshops on topics such as employment preparation, family planning, life skills, parenting, child support, and nutrition; child care assistance; transportation assistance. Average caseloads ranged from about 40 in the New Jersey sites to about 80 in Chicago. |
| Final Report: | Ellen Eliason Kisker, Anu Rangarajan, and Kimberly Boller. Moving Into Adulthood: Were the Impacts of Mandatory Programs for Welfare-Dependent Teenage Parents Sustained After the Programs Ended? Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 1998. |
Learning, Earning, and Parenting Program (LEAP)
|
|
| Locations: | Ohio (all counties). The evaluation focused on 12 counties. |
| Target Population: | All pregnant women and custodial parents under 20 years old who are receiving welfare and do not have a high school diploma or GED |
| Sanctions/ Bonuses: | $62 bonus for enrolling in school; $62 bonus for each month teen meets attendance requirements; $62 sanction for not attending initial assessment or failing to verify school enrollment; $62 sanction for each month teen exceeds allowable absences |
| Services: | Child care assistance; transportation assistance; at least minimal case management. Average caseloads ranged from under 20 for part-time case managers to 200. |
| Final Report: | Johannes M. Bos and Veronica Fellerath. LEAP: Final Report on Ohio's Welfare Initiative to Improve School Attendance Among Teenage Parents. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, August 1997. (Executive Summary) |
New Chance Demonstration |
|
| Locations: | 16 sites: California (3), Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, New York (2), Oregon (2), Pennsylvania (3) |
| Target Population: | Mothers 16 to 22 years old who were age 19 or younger when they first gave birth, were receiving welfare, did not have a high school diploma or GED, and were not pregnant when they entered the program |
| Sanctions/ Bonuses: | None; programs were voluntary |
| Services: | Case management; on-site ABE and GED preparation; other employment-related services; good-quality child care on site or nearby; family planning classes, counseling, and referrals; parenting classes. Caseloads, planned to be 25, often rose to 40 or higher. |
| Final Report: | Janet C. Quint, Johannes M. Bos, and Denise F. Polit. New Chance: Final Report on a Comprehensive Program for Young Mothers in Poverty and Their Children. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, September 1997. (Executive Summary) |
[ Return to Report ]