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 includes resources which may be available only via journal subscription. The SSRC may be able to provide users without subscription access to a particular journal with a single use copy of the full text.  Please email the SSRC with your request.

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: Burt, Martha R.
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2010

    This report addresses two questions: 1) What happens to homeless families who "graduate" from HUD-funded transitional housing (TH)? and 2) What factors affect housing, employment, and children's well-being after TH? Project sites included Cleveland/Cuyahoga County, Detroit, Houston/Harris County, San Diego City and County, and Seattle/King County. 195 families were interviewed as they left TH, with 179 (92 percent) completing 12 month follow-up interviews. Certain aspects of TH programs and the way that mothers used them affected mothers' education and employment immediately after TH and employment 12 months later. Having a housing voucher at TH exit was the strongest predictor of stable housing during the year following TH, but had no effect on employment outcomes. (author abstract)

    This report addresses two questions: 1) What happens to homeless families who "graduate" from HUD-funded transitional housing (TH)? and 2) What factors affect housing, employment, and children's well-being after TH? Project sites included Cleveland/Cuyahoga County, Detroit, Houston/Harris County, San Diego City and County, and Seattle/King County. 195 families were interviewed as they left TH, with 179 (92 percent) completing 12 month follow-up interviews. Certain aspects of TH programs and the way that mothers used them affected mothers' education and employment immediately after TH and employment 12 months later. Having a housing voucher at TH exit was the strongest predictor of stable housing during the year following TH, but had no effect on employment outcomes. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Polit, Denise F.; Nelson, Laura; Richburg-Hayes, Lashawn; Seith, David; Rich, Sarah
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2005

    The 1996 national welfare reform law imposed a five-year time limit on federally funded cash assistance, established stricter work requirements, and provided greater flexibility for states in designing and managing programs. This report — the last in a series from MDRC’s Project on Devolution and Urban Change — describes how welfare reform unfolded in Los Angeles County (particularly between 1998 and 2001) and compares welfare reform experiences and outcomes there with those in the other three Urban Change sites: Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), Miami- Dade County, and Philadelphia.

    After presenting a digest of the study’s findings, this summary report offers background on the Urban Change study in Los Angeles, depicts the county’s demographic and economic environment, describes the implementation of welfare reform, explains the effects of reform on welfare receipt and employment and on the lives of welfare recipients, describes what happened in Los Angeles neighborhoods during welfare reform, and concludes with policy implications drawn from conclusions from all four Urban...

    The 1996 national welfare reform law imposed a five-year time limit on federally funded cash assistance, established stricter work requirements, and provided greater flexibility for states in designing and managing programs. This report — the last in a series from MDRC’s Project on Devolution and Urban Change — describes how welfare reform unfolded in Los Angeles County (particularly between 1998 and 2001) and compares welfare reform experiences and outcomes there with those in the other three Urban Change sites: Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), Miami- Dade County, and Philadelphia.

    After presenting a digest of the study’s findings, this summary report offers background on the Urban Change study in Los Angeles, depicts the county’s demographic and economic environment, describes the implementation of welfare reform, explains the effects of reform on welfare receipt and employment and on the lives of welfare recipients, describes what happened in Los Angeles neighborhoods during welfare reform, and concludes with policy implications drawn from conclusions from all four Urban Change sites. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Richburg-Hayes, Lashawn; Freedman, Stephen
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2004

    This report analyzes the experiences of welfare “cyclers,” a group that has received relatively little attention in previous research on welfare dynamics. For this study, “cycling” is defined as receipt of welfare benefits during three or more discrete spells during a four-year observation period. The goals of this report are to understand the incidence of cycling and the types of families who cycle on and off the rolls, and, if possible, to shed light onto why they repeatedly return to assistance. The report also considers whether welfare cyclers appear to be more advantaged or more disadvantaged than other welfare recipients in the labor market. One view of cycling is that cyclers move on and off welfare, repeatedly, during transitional periods as they attempt to leave welfare. Eventually, cyclers may attain stable employment and leave assistance more permanently. An alternative view of cycling is that cyclers may work for pay only briefly and return to welfare for longer spells with little progress toward self-sufficiency.

    To explore these issues, we compare welfare,...

    This report analyzes the experiences of welfare “cyclers,” a group that has received relatively little attention in previous research on welfare dynamics. For this study, “cycling” is defined as receipt of welfare benefits during three or more discrete spells during a four-year observation period. The goals of this report are to understand the incidence of cycling and the types of families who cycle on and off the rolls, and, if possible, to shed light onto why they repeatedly return to assistance. The report also considers whether welfare cyclers appear to be more advantaged or more disadvantaged than other welfare recipients in the labor market. One view of cycling is that cyclers move on and off welfare, repeatedly, during transitional periods as they attempt to leave welfare. Eventually, cyclers may attain stable employment and leave assistance more permanently. An alternative view of cycling is that cyclers may work for pay only briefly and return to welfare for longer spells with little progress toward self-sufficiency.

    To explore these issues, we compare welfare, employment, and other outcomes for cyclers to those of two other groups within the welfare caseload: short-term recipients and long-term recipients. For this study, a short-term recipient is defined as someone who had one or two spells and a total of up to 24 months of welfare receipt during the four-year (48-month) observation period. Long-term recipients are defined as sample members with one or two spells and a total of 25 to 48 months of welfare receipt during the observation period.

    The report tracks the patterns of welfare receipt, employment, and other outcomes of 161,007 single-parent welfare recipients, aged 18 to 59, from five MDRC studies of welfare reform initiatives during the mid- to late 1990s. Three of these studies are experimental (random assignment) evaluations of welfare reform initiatives—Connecticut Jobs First, Florida Family Transition Program (FTP), and Vermont Work Restructuring Project (WRP). The other two are nonexperimental studies of the effects of welfare reform in large urban areas: Cleveland (Cuyahoga County) and Philadelphia Urban Change.

    The period of sample intake for this study took place during 1993 through 1997 and varied in duration from one year to five years across the five sites. For the three experimental evaluations, sample intake occurred when sample members were randomly assigned to a program or control group. (Only program group members are included in the sample for most analyses). For the two Urban Change sites, the years of sample intake were chosen to maximize data availability and to cover a similar time period as the evaluation sites. Sample intake in Cleveland and Philadelphia took place when sample members were first recorded as receiving a welfare payment during these years.

    As a result of the sample intake procedures for these studies, about 40 percent of the sample entered the study as new recipients, individuals who were just beginning their first observed spell of welfare receipt. The remaining 60 percent were ongoing recipients, individuals who entered the study in the middle of an observed spell of welfare receipt.

    For each sample member in the five sites, the observation period began with the month of sample intake and ended four years (48 months) later. For the first members to enter the sample, most or all of the observation period took place during the years before their state welfare agency implemented their Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) regulations in response to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). The rest of the sample experienced TANF’s services, time limits on eligibility to receive welfare benefits, and other requirements throughout all or most of the observation period. (author abstract)

Sort by

Topical Area(s)

Popular Searches

Source

Year

Year ranges from 2004 to 2010

Reference Type

Research Methodology

Geographic Focus

Target Populations