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: Holahan, John ; Simpson, Michael
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2021

    As of July 2021, 12 states have not expanded Medicaid as permitted by the Affordable Care Act,  contributing to 5.8 million people with incomes below the federal poverty level being without coverage. One approach to help cover people in this “Medicaid gap” would be to have the federal government make Marketplace coverage available to those between current Medicaid eligibility levels and  the federal poverty level. An alternative would be to employ a public option plan in the Marketplace to for the same population. The public option would be a government sponsored plan paying Medicare rates to providers. In this paper we show that a public option that typically pays Medicare rates would considerably reduce the cost of increasing coverage in the Medicaid gap. Using a public option instead of marketplace benchmark premiums would reduce federal premium tax credits for people in the Medicaid gap by about 28 percent. Federal spending for the Medicaid gap population would range from $16.6 to $18.1 billion in 2022 with marketplace benchmarks compared to $11.4 to 1$2.3 billion with the...

    As of July 2021, 12 states have not expanded Medicaid as permitted by the Affordable Care Act,  contributing to 5.8 million people with incomes below the federal poverty level being without coverage. One approach to help cover people in this “Medicaid gap” would be to have the federal government make Marketplace coverage available to those between current Medicaid eligibility levels and  the federal poverty level. An alternative would be to employ a public option plan in the Marketplace to for the same population. The public option would be a government sponsored plan paying Medicare rates to providers. In this paper we show that a public option that typically pays Medicare rates would considerably reduce the cost of increasing coverage in the Medicaid gap. Using a public option instead of marketplace benchmark premiums would reduce federal premium tax credits for people in the Medicaid gap by about 28 percent. Federal spending for the Medicaid gap population would range from $16.6 to $18.1 billion in 2022 with marketplace benchmarks compared to $11.4 to 1$2.3 billion with the public option, depending on the subsidy schedule. Ten year estimates of federal spending range from $199 billion to $217 billion with marketplace benchmarks compared to $136 billion to $148 billion with the public option. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Bateman, Nicole ; Ross, Martha
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2021

    The recession associated with the COVID-19 pandemic announced itself in spring 2020 with head-spinning job losses: 22 million lost jobs within two months, a shock that is hard to overstate.

    But aside from a brief winter setback due to surging COVID-19 cases, the U.S. economy has, fortunately, gained jobs each month since this initial hemorrhage. Earlier this month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) announced the economy added an expectations-beating 850,000 jobs in June, and wages also rose. This is unreservedly good news, but the economy is still down 7 million jobs, long-term unemployment is up, and many workers and families continue to struggle. (author abstract)

    The recession associated with the COVID-19 pandemic announced itself in spring 2020 with head-spinning job losses: 22 million lost jobs within two months, a shock that is hard to overstate.

    But aside from a brief winter setback due to surging COVID-19 cases, the U.S. economy has, fortunately, gained jobs each month since this initial hemorrhage. Earlier this month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) announced the economy added an expectations-beating 850,000 jobs in June, and wages also rose. This is unreservedly good news, but the economy is still down 7 million jobs, long-term unemployment is up, and many workers and families continue to struggle. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Wheaton, Laura ; Giannarelli, Linda ; Dehry, Ilham
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2021

    In an earlier brief, we estimated that the American Rescue Plan Act, enacted in March 2021, would reduce the 2021 annual poverty rate to 8.7 percent (Wheaton et al. 2021). We now project a 2021 poverty rate of 7.7 percent for 2021. The revised projection accounts for improvements in the economy, incorporates updated state-level information on pandemic-related policies, and improves the method for weighting the data to reflect 2021. Both the earlier poverty projections and these updated projections use the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which allows a more comprehensive assessment of families’ economic well-being than the official poverty measure. The projections, developed using the Urban Institute’s Analysis of Transfers, Taxes, and Income Security model, take into account expected levels of employment and income in 2021, safety-net benefits, taxes and tax credits, state “back to work” bonuses, and federal and state stimulus checks. Key findings include the following:

    • Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure, the annual poverty rate projection for 2021 of 7.7 percent is...

    In an earlier brief, we estimated that the American Rescue Plan Act, enacted in March 2021, would reduce the 2021 annual poverty rate to 8.7 percent (Wheaton et al. 2021). We now project a 2021 poverty rate of 7.7 percent for 2021. The revised projection accounts for improvements in the economy, incorporates updated state-level information on pandemic-related policies, and improves the method for weighting the data to reflect 2021. Both the earlier poverty projections and these updated projections use the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which allows a more comprehensive assessment of families’ economic well-being than the official poverty measure. The projections, developed using the Urban Institute’s Analysis of Transfers, Taxes, and Income Security model, take into account expected levels of employment and income in 2021, safety-net benefits, taxes and tax credits, state “back to work” bonuses, and federal and state stimulus checks. Key findings include the following:

    • Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure, the annual poverty rate projection for 2021 of 7.7 percent is well below the rate of 13.9 percent that we estimate for 2018.
    • The projected poverty rate for children is 5.6 percent, for adults ages 18 to 64 it is 8.1 percent, and for people age 65 and older it is 9.2 percent.
    • The 2021 poverty rate is projected to be higher for Black, non-Hispanic people (9.2 percent), for Hispanic people (11.8 percent), and for non-Hispanic Asian American and Pacific Islanders (10.8 percent) than for white, non-Hispanic people (5.8 percent).
    • The federal stimulus checks have a larger antipoverty impact than any of the other programs; if all other programs were in place but the stimulus checks had not been paid, we project 12.4 million more people would be in poverty in 2021. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program alone keeps 7.9 million people out of poverty in 2021, and unemployment insurance benefits lower the number in poverty by 6.7 million (assuming all other programs are in place).
    • The combined benefits have the largest impact on children, reducing their projected 2021 poverty rate 81 percent relative to what it would be without any benefits (from 30.1 percent to 5.6 percent).
    • The benefits have the largest impact on Black non-Hispanic people (reducing their 2021 projected poverty rate 74 percent) and the smallest impact on non-Hispanic Asian American and Pacific Islanders (reducing their 2021 projected poverty rate 54 percent).

    (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Ivers, Louise C.; Walton, David A.
    Reference Type: Journal Article
    Year: 2020

    As the world struggles with the rapidly evolving pandemic of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), evidence and experience suggest that low-income and marginalized communities in our global society will bear the biggest impact. Weknow this because, with our colleagues in Boston, Haiti, Uganda, and Sierra Leone, we have worked in under-resourced, overstretched, and overwhelmed health systems for our whole careers. We know we will see the devastating impact of this pandemic on those who are already marginalized; COVID-19 will amplify existing inequities, and we must act swiftly to leave no one behind. (Author introduction)

    As the world struggles with the rapidly evolving pandemic of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), evidence and experience suggest that low-income and marginalized communities in our global society will bear the biggest impact. Weknow this because, with our colleagues in Boston, Haiti, Uganda, and Sierra Leone, we have worked in under-resourced, overstretched, and overwhelmed health systems for our whole careers. We know we will see the devastating impact of this pandemic on those who are already marginalized; COVID-19 will amplify existing inequities, and we must act swiftly to leave no one behind. (Author introduction)

  • Individual Author: Elliott, Diana; Quakenbush, Caleb
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2019

    Washington, DC, is a city of contrasts with respect to residents’ financial security. While some residents are among the country’s most financially secure, others find it hard to make ends meet. High housing costs, unequal opportunity, and economically segregated neighborhoods make it challenging for some residents to feel financially secure and to weather unexpected expenses and emergencies.

    The city has extensive resources to support residents, ranging from policies that protect consumers to city-led programs that assist those in need to deep nonprofit capacity that helps residents improve their financial standing. But even in a city with strong supports for financial health, more can be done. To learn where gaps and opportunities exist in DC’s financial landscape, we spoke with residents about their financial challenges, how they address financial crises, the financial services they like and use most, and what financial service needs are not being met. From this knowledge, better programs can be designed to help residents shore up their financial standing.

    This...

    Washington, DC, is a city of contrasts with respect to residents’ financial security. While some residents are among the country’s most financially secure, others find it hard to make ends meet. High housing costs, unequal opportunity, and economically segregated neighborhoods make it challenging for some residents to feel financially secure and to weather unexpected expenses and emergencies.

    The city has extensive resources to support residents, ranging from policies that protect consumers to city-led programs that assist those in need to deep nonprofit capacity that helps residents improve their financial standing. But even in a city with strong supports for financial health, more can be done. To learn where gaps and opportunities exist in DC’s financial landscape, we spoke with residents about their financial challenges, how they address financial crises, the financial services they like and use most, and what financial service needs are not being met. From this knowledge, better programs can be designed to help residents shore up their financial standing.

    This brief describes the financial landscape for DC residents and the products and services that would help them most. Additionally, this brief is responsive to the city’s concurrent and ongoing policy and program conversations. For one, the DC government is investigating whether a financial empowerment center—where residents can receive financial counseling—may be needed and for whom. For another, nonprofit and government stakeholders have been discussing small-dollar loan gaps, where residents seek emergency funds, and how best to address such needs. This brief is grounded in these conversations and related questions, explored through six focus groups conducted in October and December 2018 with residents accessing financial programs through various DC nonprofit service providers. We conducted additional stakeholder interviews among leaders working within the DC government and at area nonprofits who work with people with notable financial needs of potential interest for financial empowerment center programming. These people include returning citizens, immigrants, those transitioning off Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and those transitioning out of homelessness.

    The findings reveal the financial service needs that programs are not meeting and potential avenues to better help DC residents move toward greater security.

    Key findings include the following:

    • Distrust in financial institutions is prevalent. Most residents in the focus groups were banked. But there was considerable distrust of large financial institutions because of negative experiences with banks and loans. Some residents reported switching banks or credit unions after bad experiences and reported pulling money out of their accounts.
    • Residents struggle to build up savings. Most respondents reported that saving money for emergencies and long-term financial goals was difficult for such reasons as student loan payments, transportation expenses, financial disruptions, unpredictable employment, and consumer debt. Housing costs were frequently cited as the biggest expense and concern.
    • Credit access and understanding is limited. Despite an interest in improving their credit scores, respondents did not necessarily have the correct information or know the best way to achieve this goal. In addition, not all residents have access to revolving credit, and its access is limited in less affluent areas.
    • Small-dollar loans could help. Residents expressed a need for emergency cash assistance. There are few safe and affordable small-dollar loan products in DC, and none provide immediate assistance, so expanding access could help. But residents are concerned about borrowing money and being locked into an inflexible payment cycle and schedule.

    Many residents could be served well by a financial empowerment center. This includes returning citizens, people transitioning off government assistance and housing programs, and immigrants. Financial counseling and coaching, loan products, and programs that target debt management and housing expenses could offer benefits. (Author abstract)

     

Sort by

Topical Area(s)

Popular Searches

Source

Year

Year ranges from 1999 to 2021

Reference Type

Research Methodology

Geographic Focus

Target Populations