Effects of Earnings‐Supplement Policies on Adult Economic and Middle‐Childhood Outcomes Differ for the “Hardest to Employ”

Abstract

Data from the Minnesota Family Investment Program and the New Hope demonstration were used to determine whether experimental effects of antipoverty policies differ by parents' risk for nonemployment. Using propensity score analysis, increases in employment and income were largest in the harder-to-employ halves of both samples. However, only children in the moderately hard-to-employ quartiles (50th to 75th percentile) consistently showed improvements in school and behavior outcomes. The very-hardest-to-employ 25% experienced decreases in school engagement, and increases in aggressive behaviors, despite substantial increases in parental employment and income. In this group, increases in maternal depression, reductions in regular family routines, and smaller increases in job stability and center-based child care occurred. These factors may have counteracted the potential benefits of increased income on children.

Do the Effects of Head Start Vary by Parental Preacademic Stimulation?

“…Children with low levels of preacademic stimulation may lack sufficient support at home, while children with high levels of parental preacademic stimulation may not need the additional help offered by Head Start. Support for the “Goldilocks” hypothesis has been found in other studies of child outcomes in low-income populations, particularly when investigating the match between welfare-to-work policies and worker needs (e.g., Huston et al, 2003; Yoshikawa, Magnuson, Bos, & Hsueh, 2003). In these studies, antipoverty employment programs differentially benefitted children of mothers who were moderately hard-to-employ rather than children of mothers who were the most or least likely to be employed.…”

Placing Community Psychology in the Context of the Social, Health and Educational Sciences: Directions for Interdisciplinary Research and Action

“…Such in-depth learning about methodological diversity within other disciplines is bound to enrich community psychology. Similarly, as econometric approaches that are familiar to psychologists expand beyond benefit-cost analysis to a fuller array of experimental and non-experimental methods used in that field (e.g., NICHD Early Child Care Research Network & Duncan, 2003;Yoshikawa, Magnuson, Bos, & Hsueh, 2003), community psychology stands to gain in its quantitative approaches to intervention and policy.…”

Racial/Ethnic Differences in Effects of Welfare Policies on Early School Readiness and Later Achievement

“…However, these programs’ effects on other family outcomes and on child school achievement were generally small and inconsistent (McGroder, Zaslow, Moore, & LeMenestrel, 2000). Recent findings from other types of experimentally-evaluated welfare and anti-poverty programs have highlighted variation in program impacts for families with differing circumstances (Alderson, Gennetian, Dowsett, Imes, & Huston, 2008; Gassman-Pines, Godfrey, & Yoshikawa, 2009; Morris, Bloom, Kemple, & Hendra, 2003; Yoshikawa, Magnuson, Bos, & Hsueh, 2003). Thus, overall program effects may be masking important subgroup differences across subsets of families.…”