Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 1 - 10 of 35

Do SNAP work requirements work? (Harris, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of reinstated SNAP work requirements on employment and SNAP participation for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs). The study used a…
The long-term effects of California’s 2004 Paid Family Leave Act on women’s careers: Evidence from U.S. tax data (Bailey et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of California’s 2004 Paid Family Leave Act (PFLA) on take-up of paid leave, along with employment, wage earnings, and self-employment income for…
Essays in public economics (Elwell 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of federal and state Medicaid expansions on hours worked per week, annual earned income, and participation in other public safety net programs among…
National evaluation of welfare-to-work strategies: Implementation, participation patterns, costs, and two-year impacts of the Detroit welfare-to-work program (Farrell et al. 2000)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Michigan Opportunity and Skills Training (MOST)/Work First on public benefit receipt, employment, and earnings. The study was a randomized…
Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington state. (Upjohn Institute Technical Report No. 13-029). [Community and Technical College Job Prep Training]
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Community and Technical College (CTC) Job Preparatory Training on employment rates, average quarterly earnings, and benefit receipt of high school…
Return on investment analysis of a selected set of workforce system programs in Indiana. [WIA Dislocated Worker] (Hollenbeck 2009)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Dislocated Worker program on the employment rate, earnings, and benefit receipt of low-income adults who are…
Return on investment analysis of a selected set of workforce system programs in Indiana. [TAA] (Hollenbeck 2009)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Program on the employment, earnings, and benefit receipt of dislocated workers in Indiana. The author used a…
What strategies work for the hard-to-employ? Final results of the Hard-to-Employ demonstration and evaluation project and selected sites from the Employment Retention and Advancement project. [NYC PRIDE] (Butler et al 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Personal Roads to Individual Development and Employment (PRIDE) program on employment, earnings, and public assistance receipt. The study was a…
What strategies work for the hard-to-employ? Final results of the Hard-to-Employ demonstration and evaluation project and selected sites from the Employment Retention and Advancement project. [Minnesota Tier 2] (Butler et al 2012)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study examined the impact of the Minnesota Tier 2 program on employment, earnings, and receipt of public assistance for unemployed single parents. The study was a randomized controlled trial. The…
Framing and claiming: How information-framing affects expected social security claiming behavior (Brown et al. 2016)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of different ways of framing retirement information on the age at which individuals intended to claim Social Security benefits. The authors randomly…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.