Navigating Barriers to Economic Self-Sufficiency: The Mediating Role of Employment Hope and the Impact of Interventions

Backgrounds: Economic self-sufficiency (ESS) is a central objective of workforce development programs. Historically, welfare-to-work programs have primarily emphasized short-term economic outcomes, such as employment rates and increased income (Hall et al., 2010; Dworsky, 2005). However, less attention has been paid to psychological factors and structural and individual barriers that impact ESS (Danziger et al., 2000). Traditional workforce development have shown limitations in achieving economic well-being (Smedslund et al., 2006). Recently, programs based on traditional welfare-to-work models have integrated additional services including counseling, childcare, and case management to more comprehensively address structural and individual barriers faced by clients (Silva et al., 2011). Furthermore, additional interventions such as Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) programs have emerged as promising strategies to enhance effectiveness of workforce development programs (Dermody et al., 2022). Among those additional supports, the Transforming Impossible into Possible (TIP) program aims to foster psychological empowerment while addressing systemic and individual barriers through a structured, goal-oriented approach (Hong et al., 2020). However, there remains a gap in the literature regarding the impact of additional interventions on the ESS of workforce development participants in economically vulnerable populations. This study aims to examine whether employment hope (EH) mediates the relationship between employment barriers (EB) and ESS across additional programs: SEL, TIP, case management, and no additional program.

Methods: This quantitative study surveyed 631 low-income jobseekers participating in employment programs offered by community-based agencies in Chicago from 2011 to 2020. Respondents completed self-report surveys measuring Economic Self-Sufficiency (Gowdy & Pearlmutter, 1993), Perceived Employment Barriers (Hong et al., 2014a), and Employment Hope (Hong et al., 2014b). Data were analyzed through Structural Equation Modeling, comparing mediation effects of employment hope between employment barriers and ESS across different supplemental program types: TIP, SEL, case management, and no additional program.

Results: The analysis revealed significant differences among intervention types. Among participants in the TIP program group, a significant indirect effect was found (indirect effect β = -.098, 95% CI [-.231, -.015]) with a non-significant direct effect between EB and ESS (β = -.216, p = .258), indicating that EH fully mediates the relationship between EB and ESS (total effect β = -.259, 95% CI [-.451, -.011]; CFI = .950, TLI=.937). The relationship between EB and ESS showed no significant direct effects in the SEL (β = .025, p =.819), case management (β =-.097, p = .254), and no additional program (β =-.207, p = .296) groups, nor were indirect effects significant. These findings highlight the TIP program’s effectiveness in fostering ESS among job-training participants.

Conclusions and Implications: These results recommend that organizations providing employment programs adopt interventions that enhance hope while reducing barriers. These programmatic shifts go beyond skill-building to incorporate holistic and goal-oriented programs, such as TIP, which empower clients to navigate systemic obstacles. Additionally, welfare policies should incorporate psychological empowerment components alongside structural support, ensuring that interventions do not merely focus on job placement but also on long-term employment resilience. Social work practice should emphasize structural interventions and hope-building techniques to improve economic self-sufficiency outcomes.