Work Training Plan Cutting Welfare Costs, Study Finds

In findings expected to have far-reaching implications for the nation’s embattled welfare system, new research released today shows that California’s work training program succeeded in reducing government spending by getting significant numbers of welfare recipients into jobs.

The research on California’s GAIN program, commissioned by the state Department of Social Services, provides the first major evidence that mandatory welfare-to-work programs with strong emphasis on basic education can produce substantial results.

“I think the results were more dramatic than all of us suspected they would be,” said Rusell Gould, state secretary of Health and Welfare.

The study, coming at a time when welfare-to-work programs are being criticized as too slow in producing results, is expected to provide new impetus for JOBS (Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training), a national program initiated by Congress that imposes obligations on recipients but at the same time offers services designed to move them into jobs.

It also adds credence to the philosophy embodied in the 1988 Family Support Act that the acceptance of government aid must carry an obligation to seek work and get off the public dole as soon as possible.

Established in 1985, California’s GAIN (Greater Avenues for Independence) program was an important forerunner for the federal JOBS program. It differed from the so-called workfare programs of the past, which simply attempted to place recipients in jobs by providing a broad array of services with heavy emphasis on education and training.

As now designed, the California program is mandatory for nearly all adult welfare recipients except single mothers with very young children. However, in some counties that have not been able to fully fund the program, it has by necessity been limited to certain groups, such as long-term recipients.

The report found that in the first year of participating in GAIN single parents--mostly mothers--earned on the average 17% more than members of a control group not in the program, and received 5% less in welfare payments.

Although the authors of the report insisted it is too early to draw conclusions about the long-term success of GAIN, the fact that one county--Riverside--showed notably better results than any other is expected to have some influence on the course of the program in California.

The Riverside program placed heavy emphasis on continuous job hunting and made more frequent use of sanctions, penalizing families who showed poor attendance in the program by reducing their welfare grant.

“We wanted to produce the greatest good for the greatest number,” said Lawrence Townsend Jr., director of the Riverside County Department of Public Social Services. “We wanted to sell clients on the idea that you will not start at the top of a corporation and you may not get off welfare immediately but you’ll have some pride in paying your own way.”

Conducted by the nonprofit Manpower Demonstration Research Corp., the study focused on the GAIN programs in six widely different California counties--Los Angeles, San Diego, Tulare, Butte, Alameda and Riverside--and included 33,000 welfare recipients.

With 17% of the nation’s welfare recipients, California has the largest and most comprehensive welfare work training program of any state. At any one time it has about 175,000 recipients enrolled in GAIN.

“GAIN and other state jobs programs were not designed as quick fixes so the fact that in the first year you’re already seeing notable welfare savings and earnings gains is definitely encouraging in terms of the potential payoff of this approach,” said Judith M. Gueron, the research company’s president.

Although the findings varied from county to county, and differed markedly in some categories, the study even showed encouraging results with some hard-core groups, such as so-called welfare dependents or long-term recipients, who in the past have not been much affected by work training programs.

Likewise, the program exhibited success with two-parent families on welfare, who also have not often been affected by jobs programs. Overall, the study reported that two-parent families in the GAIN program averaged 15% more in earnings than the control group not on the program. The increased earnings produced a 6% reduction in welfare spending for the GAIN group.

Among the counties, Riverside had a better showing in nearly all categories. In the single-parent family group, for example, it reported a 65% difference in earnings between those participating in GAIN and a similar group not enrolled in the program. The higher earnings for the GAIN group allowed the state to reduce welfare spending for those families by 12%.

Los Angeles had surprisingly mixed results with the program. Its its single-parent GAIN group had 1% less in earnings than the control group not in the program. But among two-parent families, the GAIN group showed earnings that were 21% higher than the group not on the program.

“We’ve struggled ourselves with how to interpret the Los Angeles results,” said James Riccio, a senior research associate and lead author of the report. “But it may in fact be that they’re serving a tougher population.”

Faced with funding shortages, GAIN programs in Los Angeles and Alameda counties served only long-term recipients, the group most in need of intensive education and training. Among the counties, Los Angeles’ GAIN group had the highest percentage of its recipients--81% for single-parent families and 92% for two-parent families--considered in need of basic education. It also had the smallest proportion of single parents--17%--with recent work history.

Riccio said that with large numbers of GAIN recipients enrolled in basic education it will take longer for Los Angeles and any other county with a heavy education component to show strong positive results from the GAIN program.

Even so, the study was not even officially released before Democrats and Republicans began arguing over the results. Gould said the Riverside findings supported Gov. Pete Wilson’s proposal to move the program toward greater emphasis on job hunting and away from its generally heavy concentration on education and training.

“The study reinforces the Administration’s proposal to get the GAIN program focused on employment opportunities,” said Gould. “We think there are opportunities to get people back into the job market and that’s the approach that we ought to be using.” With more focus on job seeking, Gould said, the program, which is now not fully funded, could serve more people.

But Assemblywoman Delaine Eastin (D-Union City), chairwoman of the former legislative GAIN oversight committee, said such strong first-year results indicate that second- and third-year results will be even better. At that point, she said those now enrolled in the education program will begin moving into the job force.

“I think these results support the argument that we should not make substantial changes to the GAIN program until the longer-term results are in,” she said.

She said the initial success of the program also supports the Democratic argument that state funding for GAIN should be increased so it can reach more recipients.