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: Parkes, Rhae
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2018

    This brief describes strategies and opportunities for Public Housing Authorities and other owners and operators of assisted housing to finance supportive services. This brief is not exhaustive, but it compiles lessons and observations based on the author’s work in the industry. Given the significant challenges some families face, even while housed, no single strategy will work in isolation. A multilayered approach is needed to develop more sustainable platforms on which to deliver supportive services. (Author abstract) 

    This brief describes strategies and opportunities for Public Housing Authorities and other owners and operators of assisted housing to finance supportive services. This brief is not exhaustive, but it compiles lessons and observations based on the author’s work in the industry. Given the significant challenges some families face, even while housed, no single strategy will work in isolation. A multilayered approach is needed to develop more sustainable platforms on which to deliver supportive services. (Author abstract) 

  • Individual Author: McCay, Jonathan; Derr, Michelle; Person, Ann
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2018

    A road test is an iterative, rapid prototyping approach used to refine the design and implementation of a program strategy or intervention. This analytic piloting process involves multiple cycles of gathering formative feedback, adjusting the design, and strengthening the implementation of a strategy prior to scaling it up. By using this accessible approach to vetting programmatic changes, human services practitioners can clarify and strengthen the linkages between a program strategy and its anticipated outcomes and more precisely identify the necessary conditions for successful implementation. The road test is part of the Learn, Innovate, Improve (LI2) process for using and producing evidence in the course of program change. Pilot testing is a common practice in human services programs (such as workforce development and employment services, safety net programs, child welfare services, early childhood education programs, and healthy family programs, among others), yet programs can often do more to maximize learning from the experience of trying something new. In cases where a...

    A road test is an iterative, rapid prototyping approach used to refine the design and implementation of a program strategy or intervention. This analytic piloting process involves multiple cycles of gathering formative feedback, adjusting the design, and strengthening the implementation of a strategy prior to scaling it up. By using this accessible approach to vetting programmatic changes, human services practitioners can clarify and strengthen the linkages between a program strategy and its anticipated outcomes and more precisely identify the necessary conditions for successful implementation. The road test is part of the Learn, Innovate, Improve (LI2) process for using and producing evidence in the course of program change. Pilot testing is a common practice in human services programs (such as workforce development and employment services, safety net programs, child welfare services, early childhood education programs, and healthy family programs, among others), yet programs can often do more to maximize learning from the experience of trying something new. In cases where a strategy or intervention is rolled out without intentional and incremental refinement, the program change might ultimately be abandoned due to complications or perceived ineffectiveness, resulting in wasted energy and resources. (Author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Derr, Michelle; Person, Ann; McCay, Jonathan
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2018

    The Learn, Innovate, Improve (LI2) process is a systematic, evidence-informed approach to program improvement. LI2 involves a series of analytic and replicable activities, supported by collaboration between practitioners and applied researchers, to help human services programs design, implement, and iteratively test programmatic changes. As a continuous improvement process, LI2 is intended to build practitioners’ capacity for better using and producing high-quality evidence; ultimately, this process can be institutionalized within the program environment. Human services programs (such as workforce development and employment services, safety net programs, child welfare services, early childhood education programs, and healthy family programs, among others) often seek to improve their practices in order to better help their clients. For various reasons, however, undertaking a systematic and evidence-informed approach to program change may not always happen. The LI2 process was collaboratively designed as a flexible solution to help programs embed analytic methods into their change...

    The Learn, Innovate, Improve (LI2) process is a systematic, evidence-informed approach to program improvement. LI2 involves a series of analytic and replicable activities, supported by collaboration between practitioners and applied researchers, to help human services programs design, implement, and iteratively test programmatic changes. As a continuous improvement process, LI2 is intended to build practitioners’ capacity for better using and producing high-quality evidence; ultimately, this process can be institutionalized within the program environment. Human services programs (such as workforce development and employment services, safety net programs, child welfare services, early childhood education programs, and healthy family programs, among others) often seek to improve their practices in order to better help their clients. For various reasons, however, undertaking a systematic and evidence-informed approach to program change may not always happen. The LI2 process was collaboratively designed as a flexible solution to help programs embed analytic methods into their change and quality improvement efforts. (Author abstract) 

  • Individual Author: Ross, Christine; Sama-Miller, Emily; Roberts, Lily
    Reference Type: Stakeholder Resource
    Year: 2018

    The Exploration of Integrated Approaches to Supporting Child Development and Improving Family Economic Security project investigated the design and evaluability of approaches to alleviating poverty that address the needs of low-income parents and children. The project examined programs that deliberately combine services that are intended to support both child development and parental economic security. Recent advances in implementation science and other fields of research can provide key insights for new programs that may prove more effective than similar programs designed in the 1980s and 1990s. The project was funded by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and was conducted by Mathematica Policy Research and Northwestern University. (Author abstract) 

    The Exploration of Integrated Approaches to Supporting Child Development and Improving Family Economic Security project investigated the design and evaluability of approaches to alleviating poverty that address the needs of low-income parents and children. The project examined programs that deliberately combine services that are intended to support both child development and parental economic security. Recent advances in implementation science and other fields of research can provide key insights for new programs that may prove more effective than similar programs designed in the 1980s and 1990s. The project was funded by the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and was conducted by Mathematica Policy Research and Northwestern University. (Author abstract) 

  • Individual Author: Maxwell, Kelly
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2017

    Policymakers are increasingly interested in using administrative data to address pressing, policy-relevant questions. The federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for instance, issued a memo in 2014 that encouraged agencies to use and share administrative data and provided guidance related to using administrative data for statistical purposes (M-14-06). Building on this, the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services focused its 2015 Innovative Methods meeting on the promises and challenges of using administrative data in social policy research.

    This brief is based on a panel presentation at that meeting, Gaining Access and Maintaining Confidentiality. The purpose of this brief is to provide an overview of the multiple aspects of access to consider when using administrative data for social policy research. It includes discussion of access to data, importance of relationships, considering and valuing both confidentiality and access to data, and building...

    Policymakers are increasingly interested in using administrative data to address pressing, policy-relevant questions. The federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for instance, issued a memo in 2014 that encouraged agencies to use and share administrative data and provided guidance related to using administrative data for statistical purposes (M-14-06). Building on this, the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE) in the Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services focused its 2015 Innovative Methods meeting on the promises and challenges of using administrative data in social policy research.

    This brief is based on a panel presentation at that meeting, Gaining Access and Maintaining Confidentiality. The purpose of this brief is to provide an overview of the multiple aspects of access to consider when using administrative data for social policy research. It includes discussion of access to data, importance of relationships, considering and valuing both confidentiality and access to data, and building capacity for the use of administrative data. As an overview, it is intended to raise awareness of issues rather than extensively describe access issues or offer strategies for overcoming challenges in accessing data. Multiple other resources are available regarding the use of administrative data. One example is the Child Care and Early Education Research Connections Working with Administrative Data webpage, where administrative data resources are summarized and updated quarterly. (Author introduction)

Sort by

Topical Area(s)

Popular Searches

Source

Year

Year ranges from 1965 to 2018

Reference Type

Research Methodology

Geographic Focus

Target Populations