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: Slack, Tim; Myers, Candice A.
    Reference Type: Journal Article
    Year: 2012

    This study examines the extent to which geographic variation in Food Stamp Program (FSP) participation is explained by place-based factors, with special attention to the case of the three poorest regions of the United States: Central Appalachia, the Texas Borderland, and the Lower Mississippi Delta. We use descriptive statistics and regression models to assess the prevalence and correlates of county-level FSP participation circa 2005. Our findings show that the economic distress that has long characterized Appalachia, the Borderland, and the Delta clearly translates into greater reliance on the FSP relative to other areas of the country. State-level effects and local-level variations in poverty, labor market conditions, population structure, human capital, and residential context explain much of this reality. Yet, even after taking all of these factors into account, these regional geographies remain home to particularly high FSP participation. Our findings underscore the importance of considering these regions as key cases of study in the stratification of American society and...

    This study examines the extent to which geographic variation in Food Stamp Program (FSP) participation is explained by place-based factors, with special attention to the case of the three poorest regions of the United States: Central Appalachia, the Texas Borderland, and the Lower Mississippi Delta. We use descriptive statistics and regression models to assess the prevalence and correlates of county-level FSP participation circa 2005. Our findings show that the economic distress that has long characterized Appalachia, the Borderland, and the Delta clearly translates into greater reliance on the FSP relative to other areas of the country. State-level effects and local-level variations in poverty, labor market conditions, population structure, human capital, and residential context explain much of this reality. Yet, even after taking all of these factors into account, these regional geographies remain home to particularly high FSP participation. Our findings underscore the importance of considering these regions as key cases of study in the stratification of American society and hold a variety of implications for public policy. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Hein, Maria L.
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2006

    The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) began funding Individual Development Account (IDA) programs for low-income refugees in October 1999. The objectives of ORR’s IDA program are: 1) "to promote the participation of refugees in the financial institutions of this country;" and 2) "to assist refugees in purchasing assets to promote their economic self-sufficiency."

    The Office of Refugee Resettlement’s IDA program, as described in the 1999 Program Announcement (Federal Register, June, 9, 1999), is designed to help participants to purchase assets, as a means of increasing their financial independence. Program participants receive financial literacy training and have the opportunity to open a matched savings account. IDA program participants must save toward one of the following savings goals:

    • Homeownership or renovation;
    • Microenterprise capitalization;
    • Post-secondary education;
    • Vocational training or recertification;
    • Automobile purchase (if needed to maintain or upgrade employment)
    • Computer purchase (for one’s...

    The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) began funding Individual Development Account (IDA) programs for low-income refugees in October 1999. The objectives of ORR’s IDA program are: 1) "to promote the participation of refugees in the financial institutions of this country;" and 2) "to assist refugees in purchasing assets to promote their economic self-sufficiency."

    The Office of Refugee Resettlement’s IDA program, as described in the 1999 Program Announcement (Federal Register, June, 9, 1999), is designed to help participants to purchase assets, as a means of increasing their financial independence. Program participants receive financial literacy training and have the opportunity to open a matched savings account. IDA program participants must save toward one of the following savings goals:

    • Homeownership or renovation;
    • Microenterprise capitalization;
    • Post-secondary education;
    • Vocational training or recertification;
    • Automobile purchase (if needed to maintain or upgrade employment)
    • Computer purchase (for one’s education or microenterprise).

    At the time that funds are withdrawn for a qualifying asset purchase, the withdrawals are matched. Some of ORR’s IDA program grantees offer a 1:1 match (i.e., in these programs, an individual participant can have a maximum of $4,000 of their savings matched, receiving a $4,000 match, for a total of $8,000 toward their asset purchase). The remainder offer a 2:1 match (i.e., in these programs, an individual participant can have a maximum of $2,000 of their savings matched, receiving a $4,000 match, for a total of $6,000 toward their asset purchase).

    In order to qualify for ORR’s IDA program, a refugee (see footnote 1) must:

    • Have earned income
    • Have a household earned income that does not exceed 200 percent of the federal poverty level (at the time of program enrollment)
    • Have assets that do not exceed $10,000 (at the time of enrollment), excluding the value of a primary residence.

    (author introduction)

  • Individual Author: Thompson, Terri; O'Brien, Carolyn T.; Van Ness, Asheley
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2001

    Welfare reform efforts and significant caseload declines have resulted in a commonly held belief that those remaining on welfare face multiple barriers to employment, or are in some way "hard-to-serve." Clients with complex barriers to employment, disabilities, or medical conditions, are often grouped under this broad heading. One of the most significant challenges facing states and localities related to serving the hard-to-serve population is identifying the specific conditions and disabilities clients have that may be a barrier to finding and maintaining employment.

    In 1999, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services contracted with the Urban Institute to conduct a Study of Screening and Assessment in TANF/Welfare-to-Work (WtW). The first phase of the study involved a review of the issues and challenges faced by TANF agencies and their partners in developing strategies and selecting instruments to identify substance abuse and mental health problems, learning disabilities, and domestic violence situations among TANF clients. The issues and challenges...

    Welfare reform efforts and significant caseload declines have resulted in a commonly held belief that those remaining on welfare face multiple barriers to employment, or are in some way "hard-to-serve." Clients with complex barriers to employment, disabilities, or medical conditions, are often grouped under this broad heading. One of the most significant challenges facing states and localities related to serving the hard-to-serve population is identifying the specific conditions and disabilities clients have that may be a barrier to finding and maintaining employment.

    In 1999, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services contracted with the Urban Institute to conduct a Study of Screening and Assessment in TANF/Welfare-to-Work (WtW). The first phase of the study involved a review of the issues and challenges faced by TANF agencies and their partners in developing strategies and selecting instruments to identify substance abuse and mental health problems, learning disabilities, and domestic violence situations among TANF clients. The issues and challenges identified through that review are presented in Ten Important Questions TANF Agencies and Their Partners Should Consider (hereafter referred to as Ten Important Questions). The second phase of the study involved case studies of a limited number of localities to further explore how TANF agencies and their partners responded to the issues and challenges identified during phase one. The findings from the case studies are presented in this report.

    Findings are based on discussions held between November 2000 and February 2001 with TANF agency staff and staff of key partner agencies in six localities: Montgomery County, KS, Owensboro, KY, Minneapolis, MN (the IRIS Program), Las Vegas, NV, Arlington, VA, and Kent, WA. Highlights of the insights offered by the case studies are provided below. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Short, Vanessa L.; Oza-Frank, Reena; Conrey, Elizabeth J.
    Reference Type: Journal Article
    Year: 2012

    To compare preconception health indicators (PCHIs) among non-pregnant women aged 18–44 years residing in Appalachian and non-Appalachian counties in 13 U.S. states. Data from the 1997–2005 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were used to estimate the prevalence of PCHIs among women in states with ≥1 Appalachian county. Counties were classified as Appalachian (n = 36,496 women) or non-Appalachian (n = 88,312 women) and Appalachian counties were categorized according to economic status. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models examined differences in PCHIs among women by (1) Appalachian residence, and (2) economic classification. Appalachian women were younger, lower income, and more often white and married compared to women in non-Appalachia. Appalachian women had significantly higher odds of reporting <high school education (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.19, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.10–1.29), fair/poor health (AOR 1.14, 95 % CI 1.06–1.22), no health insurance (AOR 1.12, 95 % CI 1.05–1.19), no annual checkup (AOR 1.12, 95 % CI 1.04–1.20), no recent Pap...

    To compare preconception health indicators (PCHIs) among non-pregnant women aged 18–44 years residing in Appalachian and non-Appalachian counties in 13 U.S. states. Data from the 1997–2005 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were used to estimate the prevalence of PCHIs among women in states with ≥1 Appalachian county. Counties were classified as Appalachian (n = 36,496 women) or non-Appalachian (n = 88,312 women) and Appalachian counties were categorized according to economic status. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models examined differences in PCHIs among women by (1) Appalachian residence, and (2) economic classification. Appalachian women were younger, lower income, and more often white and married compared to women in non-Appalachia. Appalachian women had significantly higher odds of reporting <high school education (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.19, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.10–1.29), fair/poor health (AOR 1.14, 95 % CI 1.06–1.22), no health insurance (AOR 1.12, 95 % CI 1.05–1.19), no annual checkup (AOR 1.12, 95 % CI 1.04–1.20), no recent Pap test (AOR 1.20, 95 % CI 1.08–1.33), smoking (AOR 1.08, 95 % CI 1.03–1.14), <5 daily fruits/vegetables (AOR 1.11, 95 % CI 1.02–1.21), and overweight/obesity (AOR 1.05, 95 % CI 1.01–1.09). Appalachian women in counties with weaker economies had significantly higher odds of reporting less education, no health insurance, <5 daily fruits/vegetables, overweight/obesity, and poor mental health compared to Appalachian women in counties with the strongest economies. For many PCHIs, Appalachian women did not fare as well as non-Appalachians. Interventions sensitive to Appalachian culture to improve preconception health may be warranted for this population. (Author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Briefel, Ronette; Melia, Micah; Harvey, Bonnie; Forrestal, Sarah; Chojnacki, Gregory ; Caronongan, Pia; Gothro, Andrew; Cabili, Charlotte; Kleinman, Rebecca; Gabor, Vivian; Redel, Nicholas; Gleason, Philip
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2018

    This study—authorized by the 2010 Child Nutrition Act—tests innovative strategies to end childhood hunger and food insecurity. The interim evaluation report describes (1) the demonstration projects, (2) planning and early implementation activities, and (3) findings from the baseline data collection for four projects located within Chickasaw Nation, Kentucky, Nevada, and Virginia. A fifth demonstration project was implemented in Navajo Nation but not evaluated due to changes in program design. The demonstrations occurred during 2015-2017 and operated for 12 to 24 months. (Author abstract) 

    This study—authorized by the 2010 Child Nutrition Act—tests innovative strategies to end childhood hunger and food insecurity. The interim evaluation report describes (1) the demonstration projects, (2) planning and early implementation activities, and (3) findings from the baseline data collection for four projects located within Chickasaw Nation, Kentucky, Nevada, and Virginia. A fifth demonstration project was implemented in Navajo Nation but not evaluated due to changes in program design. The demonstrations occurred during 2015-2017 and operated for 12 to 24 months. (Author abstract) 

Sort by

Topical Area(s)

Popular Searches

Source

Year

Year ranges from 2001 to 2018

Reference Type

Research Methodology

Geographic Focus

Target Populations