Section of Individual Rights &
Responsibilities
Wisconsin study examines reform impact |
| Charlotte Snow is a writer in
Chicago. |
While it's too early to draw definitive conclusions about the impact of welfare reform, Human Rights has obtained the preliminary findings of a study conducted by the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin-Madison on how the state's benefits recipients are faring under the new laws. As one of the first states to implement welfare reform, Wisconsin has served as a bellwether for many others. Last fall, Institute researchers Mark Courtney and Irving Piliavin initiated a one-year research project to study the experiences of selected low-income families in Dane County, Wis., whose intital contacts with the state's welfare program took place shortly after its implementation in October 1997. The researchers chose to study about 150 families eligible to transfer to the program, called W-2, from an AFDC waiver demonstration program operating in Wisconsin since 1994, and another 150 families not currently enrolled in the AFDC program who have sought information on W-2. The preliminary findings summarize information gathered in initial interviews with 110 heads of families drawn from the population of potential transfers. Here are the Institute's preliminary findings: • 84.5 percent of respondents are currently unmarried and slightly more than half have never been married. • While ethnic and racial minorities comprise only 7 percent of all Dane County residents, they comprised almost 70 percent of the sample. • Nearly one-third of respondents had neither a high school diploma nor its equivalent. None had completed either an associates or bachelors degree and fewer than one in 10 had any type of technical or vocational training. • A majority of respondents were receiving Food Stamps and Medicaid and more than half were also participating in the Supplemental Program for Women, Infants, and Children. • A minority of respondents were disabled or had a disabled family member. • More than half of the sample is currently employed, with a median length of employment of less than two and a half months and median monthly earnings of $1,031, which is less than the 1997 poverty line for a family with three members and well below the povery line for a family of four. • While almost one-third of those not currently working reported that they are actively seeking employment, a significant minority of those not currently working are not seeking employment. About two-thirds of the respondents who are neither employed nor looking for work say they are enrolled or planning to enroll in W-2, suggesting that they are misinformed about W-2's stringent work requirements or believe they have a disability that will exempt them from the work requirements. • Slightly more than one-third of those who are neither employed nor looking for work are not planning to enroll in W-2, suggesting they have some other source of reliable income, such as another government program, a partner, or a family member. • Most respondents are planning to continue their children's medical assistance coverage. For the small minority who are not continuing their coverage, it may be that the children have insurance coverage through noncustodial parents or by respondents' current or former employers or respondents. Or they may have mistakenly assumed that either they have to participate in W-2 for their children to recieve assistance or that their children are no longer eligible for assistance once they become employed. • Those respondents who are neither employed nor seeking employment appear to be the most difficult W-2 participants to serve. This group has been receiving cash assistance longer than other respondents. They may not be seeking work not only because they want to stay home with their children, as their children are older those of other respondents. They have, on average, less education than others, suggesting their employment prospects may be poor. • 40 percent of respondents rely solely on informal child-care arrangements. Almost one out of five respondents reported that they have a child who cares for him-or herself. While most of these children may be old enough to care for themselves, at least for short periods of time, further analyses revealed that respondents with children as young as eight and nine years old have been relying on self-care. |