Work Programmes for Welfare Recipients

Abstract

Background: Welfare-to-work programmes have replaced passive welfare recipiency as a means of fighting poverty in many developed countries during the latest decades. There is a belief that placing welfare recipients into subsidised jobs and/or strengthening their skills and knowledge will help them acquire steady jobs. There has, however, been no systematic review of the effects of such programmes on employment, earnings and welfare payments searching systematically for studies from all parts of the world. Objectives: To estimate the effects of work programmes, including elements such as job search assistance, job search training, subsidised employment, job clubs, vocational training, etc. on welfare recipients. employment and economic self-sufficiency. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised trials, or cluster randomised trials of welfare-to-work programmes. Data collection and analysis: Studies were evaluated independently by two reviewers according to a data extraction form. The GRADE system was used for quality assessment. Outcomes on employment, earnings, welfare payments, and proportion on welfare were included in meta-analyses. Main results: Randomised controlled impact evaluations of welfare-to-work programmes came almost exclusively from the United States. A total of 46 programmes with more than 412.000 participants were included in this review. Overall, 60.9 percent of intervention participants were employed at the follow-ups. But 57.9 percent of control participants were also employed. For all four outcomes, there was significant heterogeneity which could not be sufficiently explained by moderator analysis. The GRADE quality assessment showed that for all four outcomes, the quality of evidence was very low. Authors' conclusions: Welfare-to-work programmes in the USA have shown small, but consistent effects in moving welfare recipients into work, increasing earnings, and lowering welfare payments. The results are not clear for reducing the proportion of recipients receiving welfare. Little is known about the impacts of welfare-to-work programmes outside of the USA.

Activation and ‘coercion’ among Swedish social assistance claimants with different work barriers and socio‐demographic characteristics: What is the logic?

“…A review of 48 activation programmes in the USA (Welfare‐to‐Work programmes in US terminology) reveals small positive effects on earnings and employment. Moreover, it shows that job activation tends to have a greater effect than resource activation (Smedslund et al., 2006). However, other studies indicate that there is a time lapse with respect to certain effects of resourse activation (Greenberg, Ashworth, Cebulla & Walker, 2004; Hotz, Imbens & Klerman, 2006).…”

“…A Swedish study (Dahlberg, Johansson & Mörk, 2008) that examined the effects of the local introduction of stricter activation requirements for SA claimants found a small positive group‐level effect on employment. On the other hand, both in the USA and Europe, voluntary programmes, that is, programmes in which sanctions are not used, tend to have more favourable results than mandatory programmes (Malmberg‐Heimonen, 2005; Smedslund et al., 2006).…”

Cognitive test to forecast unsafe driving in older drivers: Meta-analysis

“…The supplemental analysis, then, was conducted by using trim-and-fill method (Smedslund et al, 2006). Consequently, synthesized effect size involving trimmed studies showed a little change in comparison with the existing effect size as TMT-B "0.56", TMT-A "0.50"and UFOV-subtest 2 "0.49".…”

Active Labour Market Programme Participation for Unemployment Insurance Recipients

“…Individuals who are entitled to unemployment insurance benefits or who have pensions of any kind were, however, excluded in Smedslund et al (2006).…”