Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Rowe, G., Mabli, J., Hartnack, J., & Monzella, K. (2022). Expanding opportunities & reducing barriers to work: Final summary report. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SNAP-ET-FinalReport.pdf [Mississippi SNAP E&T pilot; Comparison between ECCS and Control]
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Employment and Training (E&T) pilots on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt. This profile focuses on the contrast between the Enhanced Community College Services (ECCS) group for the Mississippi SNAP E&T pilot, known as Ethics, Discipline, Goals, Employment (EDGE) and the control group. The authors investigated similar research questions for another contrast between the Basic Community College Services (BCCS) group and the control group, the profile of which can be found here. The authors also investigated similar research questions for SNAP E&T pilots in other states, the profiles of which can be found here:
- The study was a randomized controlled trial at the Mississippi site that assigned individuals to one of three groups: a treatment group that was offered Enhanced Community College Services (ECCS), a treatment group that was offered Basic Community College Services (BCCS), or a control group. The authors conducted statistical analyses of participant surveys and administrative data to compare the outcomes of the treatment and control group members.
- The study found that the ECCS group had higher earnings and SNAP benefit amounts receipt than the control group participants.
- The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to EDGE, and not to other factors.
Intervention Examined
Ethics, Discipline, Goals, Employment (EDGE)
Features of the Intervention
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a Food and Nutrition Service initiative for individuals and families with low incomes. SNAP participants receive monthly benefits to access food. Some participants also receive work supports through SNAP Employment and Training (E&T) programs, such as assessment, support services, job search assistance, occupational skills training, and basic education. To expand the knowledge base on effective approaches for helping SNAP participants gain skills and find employment, Congress funded ten state SNAP agencies in 2015, including Mississippi, to implement SNAP E&T pilots that tested innovative strategies for connecting participants with jobs that boost their incomes and reduce their reliance on public assistance benefits.
Mississippi's SNAP E&T pilot, Ethics, Discipline, Goals, Employment (EDGE), provided basic skills training, case management, job readiness training, occupational skills training, subsidized employment, and support services. The program was designed to serve able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs): adults ages 18 to 49 who are not disabled and have no dependents.
Mississippi tested two distinct implementations of the EDGE program. Under the Enhanced Community College Services (ECCS) model, EDGE participants received a four-week career readiness course, were offered more intensive case management, and were able to access additional support services. Under the Basic Community College Services (BCCS) model, EDGE participants did not participate in the career readiness course, received less intensive case management, and had access to fewer support services.
Features of the Study
The study was a randomized controlled trial at the Mississippi site that assigned 3,051 individuals to one of three groups: a control group and two treatment groups, the Enhanced Community College Services (ECCS) group and the Basic Community College Services (BCCS) group. The majority of study participants were Black, non-Hispanic, a little over half were male, and the average age was 32. Almost a third of study participants did not have a high school diploma or equivalent education. Nearly all participants had worked at some point, but just 5 percent were employed at the point of random assignment. Most participants had participated in SNAP in the year before enrolling.
The Enhanced Community College Services (ECCS) treatment group members were eligible to receive the enhanced set of E&T services developed under the pilot, which included basic skills training, case management, job readiness training, occupational skills training, subsidized employment, support services, and a specialized four-week career readiness course. The control group members were eligible for existing SNAP E&T services and programs as well as any other services available in the community.
The authors used administrative service use data, unemployment insurance (UI) wage records, SNAP administrative data, and follow-up survey data. Follow-up surveys were conducted at 12 months and 36 months after random assignment. The authors used statistical models to compare the outcomes of treatment and control group members. The authors’ regression models controlled for participants’ baseline characteristics, and incorporated weights to ensure the results represented all participants in the pilot program.
Findings
Employment
- Based on administrative data, the study did not detect statistically significant differences in employment rates between ECCS participants and control group participants.
Earnings
- Based on administrative data, the study found that ECCS participants had higher earnings than control group participants in Year 2, Year 3, and Year 2 and Year 3 combined. These differences in earnings were statistically significant. The study found no statistically significant differences in earnings in Year 1.
Public benefits receipt
- Based on administrative data, the study did not detect statistically significant differences in SNAP participation rates between ECCS and control group participants.
- Based on administrative data, the study found that ECCS participants had higher SNAP benefits than control group participants in Year 1 and Year 2—and higher SNAP benefits as a percentage of maximum benefit amounts than control group participants in Year 1. However, the study found no significant differences in Year 3 or Years 2 and 3 combined.
- Based on administrative data, the study did not detect statistically significant differences in SNAP exit rates between ECCS and control group participants.
- Based on administrative data, the study did not detect statistically significant differences in duration of SNAP participation between ECCS and control group participants.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
This profile summarizes study findings for outcomes measured using administrative data. Because they were measured using administrative data, these outcomes had low attrition and the analyses of these outcomes received a high causal evidence rating. The study authors also conducted analyses of outcomes measured using survey data. Outcomes measured using survey data had high attrition but analyses of these outcomes received a moderate causal evidence rating since the authors ensured that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention.
The study authors estimated multiple, related impacts on outcomes related to employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt. Performing multiple statistical tests on related outcomes makes it more likely that some impacts will be found statistically significant purely by chance and not because they reflect program effectiveness. However, to address multiple comparisons bias, the authors selected two primary confirmatory outcomes before analyzing the data: (1) earnings (based on both the UI wage records and survey data) and (2) SNAP participation in the two years after random assignment.
The study authors report p-values of less than 0.10 as statistically significant. When assessing the statistical significance of study findings, CLEAR reviews use a p-value threshold of less than 0.05. Thus, only results that demonstrated a p-value of less than 0.05 are considered statistically significant in this profile.
Due to reporting and data collection timelines, the authors did not have a full three years of UI wage data for all participants. However, the authors conducted sensitivity analyses to assess the exclusion of individuals without complete data and found their findings robust to this restriction.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Ethics, Discipline, Goals, Employment (EDGE), and not to other factors.