This report describes the early implementation of the Ramsey County, Minnesota, Lifelong Learning Initiative (LLI). The LLI uses a goal-oriented approach to help recipients of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, known as the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), set their own employment-focused goals and break them into smaller, manageable, and achievable tasks.
Subsidized employment and transitional jobs programs seek to increase employment and earnings among individuals who have not been able to find employment on their own. First-hand accounts of participants’ experiences in these programs can inform efforts to improve long-term employment outcomes for various “hard-to-employ” populations.
Importance Trauma is a leading cause of death and disability for patients of all ages, many of whom are also among the most likely to be uninsured. Passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was intended to improve access to care through improvements in insurance. However, despite nationally reported changes in the payer mix of patients, the extent of the law’s impact on insurance coverage among trauma patients is unknown, as is its success in improving trauma outcomes and promoting increased access to rehabilitation.
The Children’s Bureau funded a multi-phase grant program referred to as Youth At-Risk of Homelessness (YARH) to build the evidence base on what works to prevent homelessness among youth and young adults who have been involved in the child welfare system. To date, there is very little evidence on how to meet the needs of this population.
To systematically document key characteristics and features of American Job Centers (AJCs), Mathematica and its partners—Social Policy Research Associates, The George Washington University, and Capital Research Corporation—conducted the Institutional Analysis of AJCs for the U.S. Department of Labor. This paper discusses key features and experiences of 12 AJCs that are located in rural areas. The research focuses on AJCs as the unit of service delivery, which is a narrower focus than prior studies of the rural workforce system as a whole.
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.
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).
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)
Since 2005, Congress has funded Responsible Fatherhood (RF) grants to support programs for fathers that promote responsible parenting, economic stability, and healthy marriage. Although many fathers voluntarily enroll in these programs, service providers often struggle with program attendance and completion (Zaveri et al. 2015). RF programs cannot achieve their intended outcomes if fathers participate minimally or not at all. Factors related to fathers’ circumstances and the programs that serve them may explain what leads some fathers to participate more than others.
Research indicates that most families using emergency shelters stay briefly—one to four or five months—and rarely return (Culhane et al. 2007). However, some families remain homeless for long periods of time or experience repeated episodes of homelessness. These families may have characteristics and service needs that differ from those of families who leave shelter quickly and permanently. Communities and homelessness practitioners might benefit from identifying those families’ characteristics and experiences to improve targeting of services.