The Office of Human Services Policy (HSP) conducts policy research, analysis, evaluation, and coordination on various issues across the Department, including but not limited to, poverty and measurement, vulnerable populations, early childhood education and child welfare, family strengthening, economic support for families, and youth development. HSP serves as a liaison with other agencies on broad economic matters and is the Department’s lead on poverty research and analysis.
Division of Children and Youth Policy
The Division of Children and Youth Policy focuses on policies related to the well-being of children and youth. Projects range from quick-turnaround policy analyses to large-scale experimental studies, and major policy initiatives. Key areas include early childhood, early care and education, home visiting, youth development and risky behaviors, parenting and family support, child welfare and foster care, linkages with physical and mental health, methods for evaluating what works, and strategies for improving research and data in these areas.
Division of Economic Support for Families
The Division of Economic Support for Families focuses on policies affecting various low-income populations. This includes policy development around major initiatives such as homelessness and reentry. It also includes conducting and coordinating analysis, research, and evaluation on the safety net, economic support and opportunity, welfare-to-work issues, strengthening families and responsible fatherhood, child support enforcement, and domestic violence. Other key priorities include place-based initiatives, immigration and refugees, human trafficking, benefits access, and various human services programs.
Division of Data and Technical Analysis
The Division of Data and Technical Analysis focuses on policies and programs concerning low-income and otherwise disadvantaged populations. The Division provides data analytic capacity for policy development through data collection activities, secondary data analysis, modeling, and cost analyses. The Division focuses on cross-cutting human services policy issues such as income, poverty, cash and non-cash supports for low-income families, employment, fertility, and child welfare. The Division also issues annual updates to the poverty guidelines and reports to Congress on indicators of welfare dependence.
View Reports By Topic Area:
+Early Childhood and Child Welfare
+Economic Support and Employment
+Place-Based Initiatives and Community/Faith-Based Partnerships
+Social Services Delivery and Implementation
+Poverty and Measurement
ABOUT THIS ISSUE BRIEF This ASPE issue brief on federal child care assistance eligibility and receipt shows that approximately 17 percent of federally-eligible children received subsidized care through CCDF or related government funding streams in an average month in fiscal year 2011. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation Office of Human Services Policy US Department of Health and Human Services Washington, DC 20201
This report provides an examination of the length of time that low-income families receive government-funded child care subsidies that pay for part or all of the cost of their care arrangements. The figures presented are based on ASPE's analysis of a restricted-use version of child care subsidy administrative data from 35 states. In general, the data presented in this report show that families utilize child care subsidy programs for relatively short time periods i n most states, usually less than a year, but frequently return to the subsidy programs after they exit. They are more likely to enter, leave, or return to the subsidy programs d u ri ng particular times of the year and these usage patterns often coincide with the school year calendar.
Information on the Supplemental Poverty Measure - A Summary of 2013 Current Population Survey Data (October 2014)
The Census Bureau published poverty estimates for 2013 using the recently developed Research Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM). The SPM adds greater refinement and thus differs from the official measure in both the measurement of needs1 and the resources2 available to meet those needs. This brief summarizes key findings from the 2013 SPM release.
The Strong Cities, Strong Communities Initiative (SC2) is a new interagency approach to partnering with cities for economic growth launched by the White House Domestic Policy Council in 2011. The SC2 initiative represents a new model of collaboration between federal and local government to improve how the federal government invests in and offers technical assistance to support locally driven economic development and job creation goals. The initiative focuses on changing how federal and local government systems interact, promoting enhanced collaboration and communication among federal agencies, tailoring solutions to local conditions, and increasing the capacity of local leaders and institutions for economic development. At the start of the pilot, federal agencies assigned employees to interagency teams of experts called SC2 teams. Each SC2 team consisted of a team lead and federal employees assigned to work for the city full-time, part-time, or in an advisory capacity. A small number of SC2 team members were deployed to the pilot cities where they worked at or in close proximity to city hall; other SC2 team members were based out of their agency’s headquarters in the Washington, DC area or out of regional or field offices. The Department of Health and Human Services contracted with Abt Associates and Mt. Auburn Associates to evaluate the first 18 months of the SC2 pilot. The evaluation focuses on how the pilot was implemented and the factors associated with its success. The evaluation addresses three research questions: 1. How are the activities of the SC2 teams being implemented? 2. How have federal participants experienced SC2? 3. What has been learned that can be used to enhance future program implementation
Indicators of Welfare Dependence, Annual Report to Congress The Welfare Indicators Act of 1994 directed the Secretary of Health and Human Services to study the most useful statistics for tracking and predicting dependence on three means-tested cash and nutritional assistance programs: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Food Stamps, and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Since then, ASPE has been producing these reports:
Updated Findings from the HHS Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review: January 2011 Through April 2013
HHS updates the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review: Four New Programs Identified August 2014
ASPE RESEARCH BRIEF Children in Nonparental Care: Findings from the 2011-2012 National Survey of Children's Health March 2014 By: Laura Radel and Matthew Bramlett Abstract
By: Pamela Winston Abstract
ASPE RESEARCH BRIEF By: Alana Landey, Yuliya Rzad Abstract This research brief presents findings from an intramural study of six selected states’ approaches to funding energy assistance for low-income residents from federal, state and private sources.
Integrating Health and Human Services Programs and Reaching Eligible Individuals Under the Affordable Care Act
ASPE PROJECT Integrating Health and Human Services Programs and Reaching Eligible Individuals under the Affordable Care Act This project page is available on the Internet at:
This research brief examines child poverty in 2010 using both the official poverty measure that the Census Bureau has been using since the 1960’s and the more recent Research Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM). It examines three groups of children – the “core” poor who live in families who are poor regardless of which measure is used, the “lifted out” children who are classified as poor under the official measure but are no longer poor under the supplemental poverty measure, and children who are not poor under the official measure but who are “thrown in” to poverty under the new SPM measure. The brief identifies the core characteristics of each group of poor children and demonstrates what each measure independently contributes to our understanding of child poverty.
ASPE ISSUE BRIEF By: ASPE Human Services Policy Staff Abstract
This brief, one in a series on disconnected low-income men, provides a geographic and demographic snapshot of these men. Low-income men are defined as those age 18 to 44 who live in families with incomes below twice the federal poverty level (FPL)1 and do not have four-year college degrees. Other briefs in the series examine low-income men’s education, employment, health, and their heightened risk of incarceration and disenfranchisement.
This brief, part of a series on disconnected low-income men, examines their health insurance coverage and health status using data from the American Community Survey (ACS) and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) with some additional information provided by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Low-income men are defined as those age 18 to 44 who live in families with incomes below twice the federal poverty level (FPL)1 and do not have four- year college degrees. Other briefs in the series examine low-income men’s demographic profiles, education, employment, and heightened risk of incarceration and disenfranchisement. We selected the most recent variables available at the state level that captured broad measures of health coverage and access, and general health.We focus primarily on men’s connections to health care providers and systems, as opposed to disparities in specific health conditions. We present the national picture and highlight differences across states.
Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, Sexually Transmitted Infections, and Associated Sexual Risk Behaviors: A Systematic Review
ASPE REPORT Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, Sexually Transmitted Infections, and Associated Sexual Risk Behaviors: A Systematic Review April 2013 By: Brian Goesling, Silvie Colman, Christopher Trenholm (Mathematica Policy Research) Mary Terzian, Kristin Moore (Child Trends) This report is available on the Internet at:
Best Intentions are Not Enough: Techniques for Using Research and Data to Develop New Evidence-Informed Prevention Programs
RESEARCH BRIEF Best Intentions are Not Enough: Techniques for Using Research and Data to Develop New Evidence-Informed Prevention Programs April 2013 By: Dennis D. Embry, Mark Lipsey, Kristin Anderson Moore, & Diana F. McCallum Abstract
ASPE RESEARCH BRIEF Abstract
RESEARCH BRIEF By: Karen Blase and Dean Fixsen Abstract
This research brief discusses some of the fundamentals of quality program implementation that have been identified through research and practice and that may be useful for practitioners and researchers alike. The brief defines quality program implementation, and highlights the importance of a high quality implementation, identifies 23 factors that affect implementation, discusses 14 steps in achieving quality implementation (10 of which need to occur before a program starts), and notes that responsibility for quality implementation is shared by key stakeholders. The factors that can affect implementation quality range from societal, community, program, practitioners, and organizational influences, as well as the implementation process itself. The brief explains how implementation should focus on core components, allowing adaptation of other aspects to suit the population and setting. This is one of four research briefs prepared under the auspices of an ASPE contract entitled Emphasizing Evidence-Based Programs for Children and Youth: An Examination of Policy Issues and Practice Dilemmas Across Federal Initiatives.
Final Brief By: Lesley Freiman, Laura Harris, Amanda Mireles, Susan Popkin Abstract
In the Running for Successful Outcomes: Exploring the evidence for Thresholds of School Readiness Technical Report
ASPE Report By: Tamara G. Halle, Elizabeth C. Hair, Margaret Buchinal, Rachel Anderson, and Martha Zaslow Prepared for: Laura Radel Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Abstract