The Evaluation of the Tribal Welfare-to-Work Grants Program: Initial Implementation Findings. Study Methods and Sites

01/29/2005

The study focuses on a small but diverse set of tribal WtW grantees. Ten grantees were selected from the 92 tribal grantees that were awarded WtW grants by DOL in FY 1999 with the aim of ensuring variation in five attributes (see Table 1.2):

  1. Region of the country defined as East (east of the Mississippi River), Southwest (Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah), Plains (Kansas, Montana, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming), Pacific (California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington), and Alaska
  2. Size of the TANF population defined, for the purposes of this study, as large (more than 1,000), medium (between 100 and 999), and small (fewer than 100)
  3. Whether the tribal grantee operates a PL 102-477 program
  4. Whether the tribal grantee operates its own TANF program
  5. Whether the grantee is an individual tribe or a tribal consortium
Table 1.2
Diversity of Study Sample on Key Attributes

Grantee

State(s) Region Size of TANF Population 102-477 Program Tribal TANF Consortium

1. California Indian Manpower Consortium, Inc. (CIMC)

CA Pacific Medium No No Yes

2. Eastern Band of Cherokee (EBCI)

NC East Medium No No No

3. Kickapoo Tribe of Kansas

KS Plains Small No No No

4. The Klamath Tribes

OR Pacific Small No Yes No

5. Navajo Nation

AZ, NM,UT Southwest Large No Yes No

6. Nez Perce Tribe

ID Pacific Medium Yes Yes No

7. Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians

MN Plains Medium No No No

8. Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc. (TCC)

AK AK Large No Yes Yes

9. Three Affiliated Tribes (TAT)

ND Plains Medium Yes No No

10. White Earth Reservation Tribal Council

MN Plains Medium Yes No No