Program Tries Sweetening Welfare With Added Cash for Job Trainees

Kathy Thorpe wants a job. She wants a place to live in a neighborhood where she and her two toddlers will feel safe. And she wants to get off welfare.

“Ever since I’ve had these kids, I’ve had this fear--that I’d always be financially dependent,” said Thorpe, 28. “These kids are depending on me, and I don’t want to let them down.”

After a failed marriage and being out of work with no help caring for her 2 1/2-year-old daughter and year-old son, she has a chance to fulfill those goals now, thanks to experimental job-training that rewards personal effort with cash bonuses.

“I would love to get into computers,” Thorpe said. “I’d like to try to be a word processor.”

Officials here in Montgomery County, frustrated by a low rate of participation in vocational programs, in July started a three-year pilot program offering up to $1,000 each to welfare recipients who will go to school and get jobs.

“It’s no longer good enough to just give people a (welfare) check,” said Robert S. Caulk, director of the Department of Social Services for the county, which borders the District of Columbia. “We’ve got to do more to provide them with the wherewithal to get off of welfare, to break that cycle of dependence.”

The program, designed for those on Aid to Families with Dependent Children for at least three years and for low-income, teen-age parents, is the first in the nation to offer cash incentives, Caulk said.

Participants who fulfill a goal, such as consistent attendance of a training class or completing a high school equivalency course, receive payments ranging from $25 to $200, up to a maximum of $1,000 per person a year. (The U.S. Agriculture and Health and Human Services departments agreed to waive deduction of the incentive payments from welfare and food stamp payments.)

The program will cost nearly $1 million in federal, state and county funds, Caulk said. The annual savings in welfare benefits would be about $5,000 for each family of three that becomes self-supporting, he said.

Social workers set up the goals and payments, taking into consideration each person’s abilities and motivation level.

“We’re trying to empower case managers to have the flexibility to say, ‘For this client, just showing up five days in a row is an accomplishment,’ ” Caulk said. “That person would be rewarded at the end of five days. Somebody else may have a totally different kind of package. They may have to score well in word processing or assembly or retail training. Others may get one payment to complete the class.”

About 600 people will participate in the experimental program, with half receiving cash incentives and the other half acting as a control group.

“The federal government suggested we keep payments quiet” so the control group wouldn’t know others were getting paid to complete the tasks they did without pay, Caulk said. “But that is impossible, because they’re all in the same classes, and we want them to discuss their progress and encourage each other.”

Montgomery County has tried other projects. Three years ago, it gave welfare recipients vouchers worth up to $250 each to pay for food, utilities or other expenses in exchange for their participation in job-training programs. The dropout rate was more than 50%.

The federal government’s approach to the problem is to require certain welfare recipients to take job-training classes to keep their public-assistance checks coming.

Caulk said that even the threat of losing payments they now receive has not motivated some welfare recipients.

Last year, Congress passed the Family Support Act. It requires the states to set up large-scale educational, job-training and work programs to teach welfare recipients to be self-sufficient.

Maryland was the first state to comply in all counties, said J. C. Shay of the state Department of Human Resources. He added that Maryland officials are optimistic about Montgomery County’s idea.

“We’re anxious to see how the cash incentives will impact on the welfare recipients’ participation, motivation and continuation in the program,” he said.

Federal officials are taking a wait-and-see attitude.

“We’re not in favor of the program or against it, but if it is successful, we’d like to see it tried in other areas,” said Peter Germanis of the federal Low-Income Opportunity Board, a panel of officials from several federal agencies working to improve the welfare system. “And if it were to succeed in several areas, it could be used for reforming the national welfare system.”

Already, the program has surpassed Caulk’s expectations.

“Our goal was to have 40 people in the first (job-training) class. So far, 61 people have enrolled,” he said. “Going on past experience, we could lose half in the next month.”

If this program works, however, the cash payments will encourage trainees to stay, he said.

“This has never been tried before, so if we find that the payments make no difference, even that is worth knowing,” Caulk said. “Then we can sit down and think of something else to try.”