Skip to main content
Back to Top

 

Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Publisher ID: 
SSRC-DID-0001994

Analysis plan for the PACE intermediate (three-year) follow-up study

Individual Author: 
Judkins, David
Fein, David
Buron, Larry

The Pathways for Advancing Careers and Education (PACE) evaluation is a study of nine promising programs that use a “career pathways” framework for increasing education, employment, and self-sufficiency among low-income individuals and families. Funded by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, PACE will include three points of participant follow-up—at 18 months, three years, and six years after random assignment.

Welfare Rules Databook: State TANF policies as of July 2017

Individual Author: 
Heffernan, Christine
Goehring, Benjamin
Hecker, Ian
Giannarelli, Linda
Minton, Sarah

The purpose of this publication—the Welfare Rules Database’s annual Databook—is to provide researchers and policymakers with easy access to detailed information on how states provide cash assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program. The dozens of tables in this book collectively describe how states determine eligibility for TANF benefits, how they compute program benefits for eligible families, and the work requirements and time limits that they impose.

ACF’s career pathways evaluation findings: What have we learned and future directions for the field

Individual Author: 
Fucello, Mark
Fein, David
Peck, Laura
Irwin, Molly

This video from the 2018 Research and Evaluation Conference on Self-Sufficiency (RECS) presented ACF's evaluation of career pathways programs. The presenters discussed two RCTs, the first being PACE, a study which evaluated 9 different career pathways programs, and HPOG, which aimed to provide TANF recipients with access to careers in healthcare and increase the health care labor force.

Evaluating a teen pregnancy prevention program in rural Kentucky

Individual Author: 
Goesling, Brian
Lee, Joanne
Wood, Robert G.
Zief, Susan

Although rural counties have the highest teen birth rates in the United States, teen pregnancy prevention practitioners have developed few programs for youth in rural areas.To identify effective pregnancy prevention approaches for rural youth, the Administration for Children and Families within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services funded Mathematica Policy Research to evaluate an adapted version of the Reducing the Risk teen pregnancy prevention curriculum in rural Kentucky.

Measuring self-regulation skills in evaluations of employment programs for low-income populations: Challenges and recommendations

Individual Author: 
Kautz, Tim
Moore, Quinn

This report discusses issues related to measuring self-regulation skills in evaluations of employment programs for low-income populations.1 First, it presents an overview of self-regulation skills and their importance for employment programs. Second, it introduces approaches to measuring self-regulation skills. Third, it discusses challenges when measuring self-regulation skills in evaluations of employment programs for low-income populations. Fourth, it provides criteria and recommendations for selecting measures. (Edited author overview)

Remaking the safety net

Individual Author: 
Carter, Clarence H.
Fishman, Mike
Dungey, Cynthia
Brooks, Cory Pastor
Fayson, Tina

This video from the 2018 Research and Evaluation Conference on Self-Sufficiency (RECS) described a bold vision for the future safety net, how to evaluate programs, genuinely improve outcomes through holistic case management, support collaborations between service organizations and government. Clarence H.

Lessons from a federal initiative to build capacity to end youth homelessness

Individual Author: 
Klein Vogel, Lisa
Bradley, M. C.

This brief discusses the capacity strategy associated with "The Framework to End Youth Homelessness: A Resource Text for Dialogue and Action," (USICH, 2013) (herafter referred to as the “Framework”) and how the strategy was implemented by YARH Phase I grantees (Figure 1). This framework expanded on the 2010 strategic plan, “Opening Doors,” which was geared toward preventing homelessness among multiple populations (USICH, 2010). The 2013 framework targets the specific challenges and needs of homeless adolescents as they transition to adulthood.

Reducing homelessness among youth with child welfare involvement: An analysis of phase I planning processes in a multi-phase grant

Individual Author: 
Stagner, Matthew
Vogel, Lisa Klein
Knas, Emily
Fung, Nickie
Worthington, Julie
Bradley, M. C.
D'Angelo, Angela
Gothro, Andrew
Powers, Courtney

Youth and young adults with child welfare involvement face significant challenges in their transition to adulthood—challenges that increase their risk of becoming homeless. Evidence on “what works” for youth in foster care or young adults formerly in foster care is limited (Courtney et al. 2007).

Sustaining efforts to reduce youth homelessness without additional federal funding

Individual Author: 
Vogel, Lisa Klein
Fung, Nickie
Bradley, M. C.

This brief discusses how 7 of the 12 Phase I grantees who were not awarded Phase II grants are working to sustain efforts in their community to prevent homelessness based on the planning accomplished during Phase I. Sustainability efforts were discussed in individual phone calls with the Phase I project director and/or project manager in November and December 2015, as most Phase I grantees were preparing to submit their final Phase I grant report. (Author summary)

 

Causal validity considerations for including high quality non-experimental evidence in systematic reviews

Individual Author: 
Deke, John

Federally funded systematic reviews of research evidence play a central role in efforts to base policy decisions on evidence. These evidence reviews seek to assist decision makers by rating the quality of and summarizing the findings from research evidence. Historically, evidence reviews have reserved the highest ratings of quality for studies that employ experimental designs, namely randomized control trials (RCTs).