Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008)

Do they know welfare as we knew it has ended?: Welfare participants' knowledge about time limits

Purpose:

Although time limits were generally expected to reduce welfare use at the enactment of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), subsequent research in the past decade has shown that time limits may have little or just modest impact on welfare use (Grogger, Karoly, & Klerman, 2002). Because time limits are mostly dependent on welfare participants' understanding (Blank, 2002), how much welfare participants actually know of time limits is critical. Surprisingly, however, relatively little effort has been made to assess the welfare participants' knowledge about time limits. Anderson (2002) presents that welfare participants tend to have basic knowledge but they lack the detailed information about work incentives. Anderson also emphasizes the role of caseworkers in knowledge transmission. Based on this finding, this study identifies the major factors affecting welfare participants' basic and detailed knowledge about time limits.

Methods:

Data come from the Survey of Wisconsin Works Families (SWWF), three-wave panel survey of the participants of Wisconsin's welfare reform program, Wisconsin Works (W-2). 2,063 W-2 participants are selected who responded both of first two waves of SWWF (1999 and 2000). Basic and detailed knowledge of time limits are measured by two questions in each wave. The first question asks whether W-2 participants are aware of time limits (basic). The second question asks the specific number of months they can receive W-2 benefits, which is 60 months (detailed). Control variables include respondent's age, race/ethnicity, education, county of residence, number of different time-limited W-2 placements, AFDC history, age of youngest child, number of children in household, employment status prior to W-2, and English speaker. Panel data analysis with random effects is employed, because the dependent variable is dichotomous.

Results:

While the majority of W-2 participants are aware of time limits (64% in Wave 1 and 72% in Wave 2), knowledge of the 60-month rule is low (30% in Wave 1 and 26% in Wave 2). Analysis of awareness shows that, the passage of time, months of participation in the time-limited placements, and African American are associated with more awareness of time limits, while previously employed (full or part time) W-2 participants who started W-2 in non-cash placement are less aware of time limits. Analysis of knowledge of the 60-month rules shows different pattern. The passage of time is no longer significant, and the number of different time-limited placements (implying more contacts between staff and participants) becomes positive and significant. Also, non-English speaker is less likely to know the 60-month rule.

Implications:

This study shows that different factors are associated with different types of knowledge. While W-2 participants become aware of time limits as time goes by, the detailed rule of the 60-month limit seems to be more difficult to understand. Results suggest that the communication between W-2 staff and participants are important for participants to have knowledge about time limits. These results also suggest the importance of initiatives designed to increase participants' knowledge.