Skip to main content
Back to Top

 

SSRC Library

The SSRC Library allows visitors to access materials related to self-sufficiency programs, practice and research. Visitors can view common search terms, conduct a keyword search or create a custom search using any combination of the filters at the left side of this page. To conduct a keyword search, type a term or combination of terms into the search box below, select whether you want to search the exact phrase or the words in any order, and click on the blue button to the right of the search box to view relevant results.

Writing a paper? Working on a literature review? Citing research in a funding proposal? Use the SSRC Citation Assistance Tool to compile citations.

  • Conduct a search and filter parameters as desired.
  • "Check" the box next to the resources for which you would like a citation.
  • Select "Download Selected Citation" at the top of the Library Search Page.
  • Select your export style:
    • Text File.
    • RIS Format.
    • APA format.
  • Select submit and download your citations.

The SSRC Library collection is constantly growing and new research is added regularly. We welcome our users to submit a library item to help us grow our collection in response to your needs.


  • Individual Author: Hulsey, Lara; Leftin, Joshua; Gordon, Anne; Wulsin, Claire Smither; Redel, Nicholas; Schirm, Allen; Beyler, Nicholas; Heviside, Shella; Estes, Brian; Trippe, Carole
    Year: 2016

    The Direct Certification with Medicaid (DC-M) demonstration added Medicaid to the list of programs used to directly certify students for free school meals. The evaluation compared districts randomly assigned to either conduct DC-M or use normal certification procedures to examine whether DC-M leads to changes in the percentage of students certified, the number of meals served, Federal reimbursements, and certification costs incurred by districts. It also assessed State-level administrative costs and identified the challenges that states and districts faced when implementing DC-M. This report presents findings from the second year of the demonstration, school year 2013-2014.

    The impact findings for this study are internally valid estimates of the impact of DC-M for the participating evaluation districts in the participating states. However, this study was not intended to be nationally representative; study states and districts differ in important ways from states and districts nationally. Therefore, the findings cannot be generalized more broadly and interpreted as the...

    The Direct Certification with Medicaid (DC-M) demonstration added Medicaid to the list of programs used to directly certify students for free school meals. The evaluation compared districts randomly assigned to either conduct DC-M or use normal certification procedures to examine whether DC-M leads to changes in the percentage of students certified, the number of meals served, Federal reimbursements, and certification costs incurred by districts. It also assessed State-level administrative costs and identified the challenges that states and districts faced when implementing DC-M. This report presents findings from the second year of the demonstration, school year 2013-2014.

    The impact findings for this study are internally valid estimates of the impact of DC-M for the participating evaluation districts in the participating states. However, this study was not intended to be nationally representative; study states and districts differ in important ways from states and districts nationally. Therefore, the findings cannot be generalized more broadly and interpreted as the effects that would be anticipated from an expansion of DC-M to a broader (or otherwise different) set of states and districts.

    •  

    Key Findings:

    • In some demonstration states, DC-M positively affected certification outcomes and the percentage of meals served for free, but not the overall participation rate. In other words, for some states in the study sample, DC-M successfully reduced reliance on school meal applications and increased the proportion of students receiving free meals, although it did not affect the number of meals served overall. These increases resulted in additional Federal reimbursements in some states. However, there was no impact on district costs for certifying students. State DC-M administrative costs varied widely, but the per-student costs were low even in the highest cost states, and a large majority of the costs were start-up costs rather than ongoing costs. (author abstract)

     

  • Individual Author: Collins, Ann; Briefel, Ronette
    Year: 2013

    This Congressional report summarizes the implementation and evaluation of two approaches tested in the summers of 2011 through 2013. Summer EBT for Children (SEBTC) uses existing electronic benefits transfer systems to provide household benefits for children.  The Enhanced Summer Food Service Program (eSFSP) tests several changes to the traditional program, including incentives to extend operating periods, incentives to add enrichment activities, meal delivery for children in rural areas, and weekend and holiday backpacks. (author abstract)

    This Congressional report summarizes the implementation and evaluation of two approaches tested in the summers of 2011 through 2013. Summer EBT for Children (SEBTC) uses existing electronic benefits transfer systems to provide household benefits for children.  The Enhanced Summer Food Service Program (eSFSP) tests several changes to the traditional program, including incentives to extend operating periods, incentives to add enrichment activities, meal delivery for children in rural areas, and weekend and holiday backpacks. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Fraker, Thomas M.; Levy, Dan M.; Olsen, Robert B.; Stapulonis, Rita A.
    Year: 2004

    The $3 billion Welfare-to-Work (WtW) grants program established by Congress as part of the Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997 provided funds to over 700 state and local grantees. Congress appropriated funds for FY1998 and FY1999, and grantees were allowed five years to spend their funds.1 The intent of the grants program, administered at the national level by the U.S. Department of Labor, was to supplement the welfare reform funds included in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grants to states, which were authorized under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA).2 WtW funds were to support programs—especially those in high-poverty communities—to assist the least employable, most disadvantaged welfare recipients and noncustodial parents make the transition from welfare to work. (author abstract)

    The $3 billion Welfare-to-Work (WtW) grants program established by Congress as part of the Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997 provided funds to over 700 state and local grantees. Congress appropriated funds for FY1998 and FY1999, and grantees were allowed five years to spend their funds.1 The intent of the grants program, administered at the national level by the U.S. Department of Labor, was to supplement the welfare reform funds included in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grants to states, which were authorized under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA).2 WtW funds were to support programs—especially those in high-poverty communities—to assist the least employable, most disadvantaged welfare recipients and noncustodial parents make the transition from welfare to work. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Fagnoni, Cynthia M.
    Year: 2000

    The General Accounting Office (GAO) examined worksite-based activities currently in place to help recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) develop the skills required for successful transition to unsubsidized employment. Data were collected from the following sources: (1) data reported by states to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS); (2) interviews of selected state TANF administrators and experts on TANF work programs; and (3) review of nine state- and local-level worksite activities nationwide. All the worksite activities visited assigned TANF recipients to public or private sector employers in areas such as building maintenance, clerical work, unskilled health care, and food service. Although data on worksite-specific outcomes were not available from all sites and although the available data could not be compared across sites, program administrators, participants, and others suggested that worksite activities can help participants with no prior work experience develop a resume and simultaneously provide community services. However, some...

    The General Accounting Office (GAO) examined worksite-based activities currently in place to help recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) develop the skills required for successful transition to unsubsidized employment. Data were collected from the following sources: (1) data reported by states to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS); (2) interviews of selected state TANF administrators and experts on TANF work programs; and (3) review of nine state- and local-level worksite activities nationwide. All the worksite activities visited assigned TANF recipients to public or private sector employers in areas such as building maintenance, clerical work, unskilled health care, and food service. Although data on worksite-specific outcomes were not available from all sites and although the available data could not be compared across sites, program administrators, participants, and others suggested that worksite activities can help participants with no prior work experience develop a resume and simultaneously provide community services. However, some critics argued that some worksite activities do not provide the skills or experience needed for successful transition to unsubsidized employment. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO)
    Year: 1999

    For at least 30 years, states’ welfare and workforce development systems have been collaborating at some level to provide employment and training services to welfare clients, but their efforts often focused more on skills training than on getting a job. Over time, federal welfare reform initiatives have given states greater flexibility to design and administer their welfare programs to serve their unique program needs, including greater flexibility in collaborating with workforce development systems. At the same time, the workforce development system has established a new service delivery mechanism, called the one-stop career center, which states have been implementing to deliver employment and training services to all clients. (author abstract)

    For at least 30 years, states’ welfare and workforce development systems have been collaborating at some level to provide employment and training services to welfare clients, but their efforts often focused more on skills training than on getting a job. Over time, federal welfare reform initiatives have given states greater flexibility to design and administer their welfare programs to serve their unique program needs, including greater flexibility in collaborating with workforce development systems. At the same time, the workforce development system has established a new service delivery mechanism, called the one-stop career center, which states have been implementing to deliver employment and training services to all clients. (author abstract)

Sort by

Topical Area(s)

Source

Year

Year ranges from 1999 to 2016

Reference Type

Research Methodology

Geographic Focus

Target Populations