SERVING NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS:

A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY OF

WELFARE-TO-WORK PROGRAMS

Karin Martinson, The Urban Institute

John Trutko, The Urban Institute

Debra Strong, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

December 2000

The Urban Institute

2100 M Street N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20037

This report was funded by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, under contract No. 100-98-0009 with Mathematica Policy

Research, Inc., and its subcontractors, the Urban Institute and Support Services International, as part of the

Evaluation of the Welfare-to-Work Grants Program. Views expressed are those of the authors and do not

represent official positions of the Department of Health and Human Services, Mathematica Policy

Research, Inc., the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its sponsors.
ii
iii

CONTENTS

Chapter Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................vii

I INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1

A. Issues Facing Low-Income Noncustodial Parents................................................... 3

B. Overview of the Welfare-to-Work Grants Program................................................ 6

C. Research Methods ................................................................................................... 9

D. Structure of the Report .......................................................................................... 12

II PROGRAM DESIGN AND CHARACTERISTICS............................................................. 15

A. Sponsoring Agencies and Partnerships with Other Organizations........................ 15

B. Project Service Area .............................................................................................. 23

C. Funding Sources .................................................................................................... 23

D. Participation Levels and Target Groups Served.................................................... 25

E. Program Goals....................................................................................................... 27

III GETTING NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS TO PARTICIPATE......................................... 31

A. Recruitment and Outreach Strategies .................................................................... 31

B. Incentives to Participate ........................................................................................ 41

IV PROGRAM SERVICES...................................................................................................... 45

A. Intake and Assessment .......................................................................................... 45

B. Case Management ................................................................................................. 47

C. Employment and Postemployment Services ......................................................... 49

D. Parenting and Relationship Services ..................................................................... 56
iv

E. Other Types of Services ........................................................................................ 62

V CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................... 65

REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................. 71

APPENDIX A:PROFILES OF THE NCP STUDY PROGRAMS

DeKalb County Fatherhood Connection, Decatur, GA......................................................... 75

Full Employment Council’s Concerned Parent Program, Kansas City, MO........................ 79

Houston Works, Houston, TX............................................................................................... 82

Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization (IRFFR),

Milwaukee, WI............................................................................................................... 86

Los Angeles County Private Industry Council Noncustodial Parent-to-Work

(NCPtW) Program, Los Angeles, CA ........................................................................... 90

LAVeterans in Progress Fathers Welfare-to-Work Program, Los Angeles, CA .................. 94

Milwaukee County Private Industry Council, Milwaukee, WI............................................. 98

Minneapolis FATHER Project, Minneapolis, MN.............................................................. 102

Nevada Business Services, Las Vegas, NV ........................................................................ 106

Wisconsin Department of Corrections NOW Program, Milwaukee, WI............................ 111

Yakima SHARE Program, Yakima, WA............................................................................ 115

APPENDIX B: SUMMARY OF WtW AMENDMENTS.......................................................... 119
v

EXHIBITS

Exhibit Page

I-1 PROGRAMS INCLUDED IN WtW NONCUSTODIAL PARENT

STUDY.................................................................................................................. 11

II-1 KEY BACKGROUND FEATURES OF NONCUSTODIAL

PARENT PROGRAMS ........................................................................................ 16

 II-2 ROLE OF THE CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN

NCP PROGRAMS................................................................................................ 21

III-1 RECRUITMENT METHODS AND INCENTIVES TO

PARTICIPATION IN NCP PROGRAMS............................................................ 32

IV-1 EMPLOYMENT AND POSTEMPLOYMENT SERVICES

IN NCP PROGRAMS........................................................................................... 50

IV-2 PARENTING AND OTHER SERVICES IN NCP PROGRAMS ....................... 57
vi
ABSTRACT

The Welfare-to-Work (WtW) Grants Program presents an important opportunity for

states and localities to provide employment services to noncustodial parents.

This study examines the strategies that 11 purposively selected WtW grantees used to

design and operate programs serving this population. It also summarizes lessons that can

be learned from these efforts—lessons that are applicable to the larger community of

workforce development and social services agencies which would like to be more proactive in serving low-income noncustodial parents. Specifically, the report examines

program design and characteristics, recruitment and outreach strategies, incentives for

participation, and program services (including employment, post-employment, and

parenting services).
vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Welfare-to-Work (WtW) Grants Program, authorized by the Balanced Budget Act of

1997, provides federal funding to states and local organizations to help welfare recipients and

other low-income parents move into employment, stay employed, and improve their economic

situation. Low-income noncustodial parents (NCPs) (mainly fathers) of welfare children are

among the main target groups for WtW services, along with custodial parents who are receiving

cash assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program and

moving from welfare to work. This focus reflects policymakers’ growing interest in strategies to

increase the employment and earnings of noncustodial fathers and thereby improve their ability

to provide financial support for their children and play an active role in their lives.

WtW grants represent a new source of funding for local work-focused services to NCPs.

This report describes 11 local programs funded by WtW grants, in terms of the types of

organizations operating the programs, the range of services offered, and the interagency

WTW PROGRAMS FOR NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS

INCLUDED IN THIS REVIEW

• DeKalb Fatherhood Connection, Atlanta, Georgia

• Full Employment Council’s Concerned Parent Program (CPP), Kansas City,

Missouri

• Houston Works, Houston, Texas

• Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization (IRFFR),

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

• LA County Noncustodial Parent-to-Work Program, Los Angeles, California

• LA Veterans in Progress Program, Los Angeles, California

• Milwaukee County Private Industry Council WtW Competitive Grant Program,

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

• Minneapolis FATHER Program, Minneapolis, Minnesota

• Nevada Business Services, Las Vegas, Nevada

• Wisconsin Department of Corrections NOW Program, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

• Yakima SHARE Program, Yakima, Washington
viii

collaborations in effect. No single strategy or set of services predominates. Rather, local grant

recipients have discretion in developing and implementing program models, within the

parameters of the WtW regulations. Thus, the experiences of these programs illustrate a variety

of strategies and approaches that are being implemented around the nation and highlight key

issues that must be addressed to serve this population group.

DESIGNING EMPLOYMENT-FOCUSED PROGRAMS FOR NCPs

The main goals of these WtW-funded programs are employment and job retention. The

priority for these programs is to help the NCP find and keep a job. However, each program also

consciously recognizes the goal of increasing child support payments. Other goals, such as

improving parenting skills or upgrading job skills, are generally considered secondary, although

in at least one program (the Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization),

family connections and improved parenting are the top objectives.

The availability of WtW grant funds spurred an interest in, or added further impetus for,

serving NCPs. In some of the sites visited, the grants encouraged the initiation and development

of programs for fathers; in other sites, the grants represented a new source of funds to expand or

enhance preexisting programs focusing on fatherhood and child support.

A variety of organizations are implementing programs for NCPs. Six of the programs

reviewed are operated by workforce development agencies; the other five are administered by

other types of agencies, including nonprofit community-based organizations and a corrections

department. This suggests that various types of organizations can implement and operate

programs for this group.

These WtW programs bring together a wide range of partners to meet the varied needs of

low-income NCPs. The program partners include workforce development agencies,

community-based organizations, child support enforcement agencies, the courts, and TANF

agencies. Collaboration has occurred in designing and funding, as well as in operating, the

program—in particular, especially in recruiting and referring eligible fathers, and in providing

special services, such as legal assistance or treatment for mental health or substance abuse.

Coordination is promoted when partnering agencies agree on the goals of the program and when

WtW funds are available to encourage more formal collaboration.

Many of these WtW programs involve child support enforcement agencies. The role of the

child support enforcement agency varies among the programs and includes providing direct

referrals from the agency or court, providing flexible child support payment options for program

participants, and designating staff to work with participants on child support issues. Making a

commitment to the service-focused NCP program, however, requires a paradigm shift for the

staff of the child support agency, since their primary mission is to collect child support.

Funding sources greatly influence the program designs and the collaborative partnerships.

All these programs are funded totally or partly by WtW grants, particularly competitive grants.

However, some of the programs are funded by other sources as well, such as the Fragile Family
ix

project, which targets young fathers. Programs must operate within the constraints of overall

budgets and special financial and eligibility requirements of the various funding sources.

These programs are each serving a relatively small number of participants, but provide

intensive client-focused services for special target groups. Most of the programs had served

between 100 and 200 participants by mid-2000. Within the WtW eligibility criteria, some of the

programs target specific types of NCPs, for example, homeless veterans, incarcerated parents

about to be released, parolees and probationers, or fathers under the age of 25.

GETTING NCPs TO PARTICIPATE

Recruitment is a critical program design feature and a challenge for programs serving lowincome NCPs. For most of these programs, recruitment is one of the most difficult

implementation challenges. The population is difficult to identify and hard to reach. When

contacted, many NCPs are uninterested, or averse to participating, usually because they distrust

programs that might be affiliated with child support enforcement agencies or the corrections

system.

Programs use a combination of outreach and recruitment strategies and do not rely only on

receiving participant referrals. Most of the programs establish formal and clear procedures to

receive direct referrals from other agencies (e.g., child support enforcement programs, courts,

and correctional facilities). In addition, many use mass mailings, public service announcements,

neighborhood canvassing with literature and brochures, and presentations at community events

and organizations. To build their base of participants, most programs work very hard to establish

and maintain trust within the low-income community.

Programs generally adopt a “carrot-and-stick” approach. These programs primarily rely on

voluntary participation by some or all of their NCPs. Nevertheless, some of the programs have

strong mandatory features that bring parents into the program in the first place. Courts can

require a person to participate in a program, for example, as a condition of parole or as part of a

child support enforcement action. Even the programs that are highly mandatory, though, provide

individualized employment and job retention services along with supportive services and case

management.

• Positive incentives. The services available through the programs are the most common

incentive for participating--primarily the employment services, but also transportation

assistance, vouchers for work-related expenses, and other support services. Some

programs are able to help get child support payment orders modified or to arrange for

relief from payment arrearages. Programs that provide these options find them useful for

encouraging both recruitment and ongoing participation.

• Requirements and sanctions. In mandatory programs, sanctions usually take the form of

a threat of incarceration or child support collection activity and are most likely to be

imposed through the courts, child support enforcement agencies, or correctional systems.
x

FULL RANGE OF SERVICES IN COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAMS

All these programs conduct some type of employability assessment. Employment

information (job history, skills, and vocational interests) is collected, along with some personal

and family information. Staff may also assess health, reading and math ability, interpersonal

skills, and self-esteem, either through case interviews or by administering a formal test or other

instrument. In all of the programs, participants are required to sign personal responsibility

contracts outlining their obligations in the program (specifically to participate in employment

services, establish paternity, and pay child support).

Programs use two basic approaches for providing case management: a single case manager

or a team of specialists. Staff feel that NCPs need “comprehensive” and “intensive” case

management services; therefore, program staff often have small caseloads or share case

management responsibilities among multiple staff or even with other agencies.

Employment preparation and postemployment services are the core program activities.

Most of these programs focus on moving NCPs into jobs quickly and provide support services

necessary to maintain employment.

• Job search and job readiness assistance are the primary employment services in

these programs. Job search assistance is primarily provided through individualized,

one-on-one meetings with program staff, but a few programs with somewhat more

participants hold group job readiness workshops. Job search services are provided

primarily under contract by community-based organizations with experience serving

disadvantaged people (although not necessarily NCPs), although some programs

provide services themselves. Contracting allows programs to draw on the expertise of

different organizations and to serve NCPs with special needs (e.g., substance abuse

problems and homelessness). Under both arrangements, NCPs can be referred to

existing job search services provided at the Employment Service or One-Stop Career

Centers.

• Some programs offer pre-employment education, vocational training, or on-the-job

training, but participation in these services by NCPs is low. NCPs are interested in

finding unsubsidized employment quickly (in part because of their need to pay child

support) and are much less interested in job training or school.

• All these programs consider postemployment job retention services a key program

element. To promote job retention, these programs continue to provide assistance to

the NCPs once they find a job, usually by contacting the person at least monthly.

There is less focus on career advancement and upgrading skills.

Parenting and relationship services are not a priority in all programs, but most provide

access to some type of assistance. A few of the programs place a strong emphasis on parenting,

improving access and visitation, and improving relationships with the other child’s parents. In

these programs, the services are fully integrated into the program model—primarily through
xi

regularly scheduled peer support sessions and individual counseling sessions. Parenting and

relationship issues are not as central in other projects, although most address them as they arise

through individual counseling sessions or referrals to parenting workshops and mediation

services. A few incorporate parenting issues and instruction into other workshops that dealt

more broadly with work readiness. Because NCPs generally do not have a good understanding

of the child support enforcement system, some programs also systematically worked with

participants on child support issues—often with designated staff from the child support

enforcement agency.

Given the extent of employment barriers faced by low-income NCPs, most of these

programs make specialized services available to participants through referrals to other

organizations with expertise in the appropriate area. Most programs offer referrals for

substance abuse problems, mental health issues, housing assistance, and anger management.

CONCLUSION

• A variety of public and private organizations can establish and operate programs

for low-income NCPs. Programs for NCPs can be provided through a variety of

different structural models, bringing together widely varying local partnerships and

services. Because each locality operates within a different service environment and

economy and serves a different clientele, no single model is necessarily preferable,

nor is there a presumptive agency that should be the lead administrative entity.

• Programs can benefit from collaboration and coordination among agencies. This

is a population with many problems—personal, legal, and employment-related. No

single agency is likely to have the expertise and experience to address the wide

combination of issues and problems. The availability of WtW funds helped to

provide an impetus for bringing local agencies together for a common purpose:

improve employment outcomes so that NCPs can better fulfill their responsibilities to

pay child support and take a more active role in the lives of their children.

• Recruitment is a critical challenge and a major component of programs serving

NCPs. For many NCPs, this can be a first step in improving their employment and

earnings potential, but programs must gain their trust. While the expanded eligibility

criteria in the 1999 WtW amendments significantly broadened the pool of eligible

participants and eased recruitment difficulties, these efforts continue to require

constant attention, effort, and resources. Programs that are most successful in

recruiting participants use multiple outreach and recruitment approaches, with

particular attention to developing referral arrangements with other agencies serving

large number of NCPs.

• A combination of positive inducements and pressures may prove more successful

than either a completely voluntary program or a harshly punitive program.

Involving both the child support agency and the courts—which can provide both

“carrots and sticks” for participation—appears to be important for addressing both

recruitment and program retention. Most programs used a mix of both positive (child
xii

support payment options, comprehensive program services) and negative incentives

(threat of incarceration) to encourage participation. Once NCPs are participating,

though, individualized employment and support services provided by professional

staff with small caseloads are important.

• Helping NCPs understand and negotiate the child support enforcement system may

be an important program service. Based on discussions with program staff, many

low-income NCPs lack accurate information about the child support system,

including how payments reach the children and how special payment plans can be

arranged. While the programs in this study did not consistently emphasize this issue,

some designated staff to assist participants on these issues—reportedly in a less

adversarial way than traditional child support agency staff.

• Programs that provide employment-related services to low-income NCPs should

ensure that a range of services is available to address the varied problems of these

people and their families. NCPs are interested primarily in obtaining a job quickly.

However, other employment and support services can improve their long-run

economic status, earnings, and child support payment. Ongoing case management,

counseling, and job placement assistance can improve job retention and ensure an

effective transition to a new job. Job training and education activities could

complement regular employment and improve skills. Some NCPs also may need a

range of other support services in order to sustain regular employment and fulfill their

parenting responsibilities. These services include mental health or substance abuse

treatment, child care or transportation assistance, legal services, and housing

assistance.
1

I. INTRODUCTION

The role of noncustodial parents (NCPs) in the lives of low-income families has received

increased attention from policymakers and program administrators in recent years. Increasing

the level of child support that NCPs pay to children in low-income households is viewed as an

important element in the range of policies designed to reduce the extent and depth of poverty and

welfare dependency among children. However, research shows that about one-quarter of all

NCPs do not pay child support because they are poor themselves and cannot afford to support

their children without further impoverishing themselves or their families.1

 This has led to

increased efforts to boost the employment and earnings of these parents by encouraging them to

participate in employment and training programs, and thereby increase their ability to provide

financial support for their children and play more active roles in their lives.

The Welfare-to-Work (WtW) Grants Program, authorized under the Balanced Budget Act of

1997, is a primary vehicle for states and localities to provide employment, training, and other

support services to NCPs, as well as hard-to-serve welfare recipients. WtW, with $3 billion in

federal funds, was enacted to complement the major welfare reform provisions authorized in

1996 under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA),

particularly the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant. The WtW grants

complement TANF in that these funds are specifically designated for work-related activities and

not for cash welfare payments. In addition, WtW funds target specific groups: the least

employable welfare recipients and low-income noncustodial parents, including those with

 

1

Mincy, R., and E. Sorensen. “Deadbeats and Turnips in Child Support Reform.” Journal

of Policy Analysis and Management, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 44–51, 1998.
2

children on or eligible for welfare or other types of public assistance.2

 While services to NCPs

were included in the initial legislation, changes made in 1999 to the WtW eligibility criteria

increased the emphasis on NCPs as a key population to be served under this program.

From initial passage of the WtW legislation, enthusiasm about the possibility of serving

NCPs was very high, with many states indicating that some or all of their state WtW dollars

would be targeted at NCPs and a number of the organizations applying for and receiving grants

indicating that NCPs would be part of their target populations. But based on anecdotal reports

and the low numbers of NCPs actually served,3 implementation of such programs seemed more

difficult than first envisioned. These implementation difficulties appeared consistent with

reports of slow start-up by non-WtW programs serving NCPs, such as the Office of Child

Support Enforcement Responsible Fatherhood Demonstration projects.4

This study examines the strategies that 11 purposively selected WtW grantees used to design

their programs and recruit participants, including some of the mid-course corrections needed to

improve services and client intake. It also summarizes lessons that can be learned from these

efforts—lessons that are applicable to the larger community of workforce development and

social services agencies which would like to be more pro-active in serving low-income

noncustodial parents. This study was undertaken to provide field-based information to WtW

state and community-based grantees and other programs interested in serving low-income NCPs

 

2

 See Section B for more information on the WtW target groups.

3

Perez-Johnson, I., and A. Hershey. Early Implementation of the Welfare-to-Work Grants

Program: Report to Congress. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., 1999.

4

Pearson, J., N. Thoennes, D. Price, and J. Venohr. Office of Child Support Enforcement

Responsible Fatherhood Programs: Early Implementation Lessons. Denver, CO: Center for

Policy Research and Policy Studies, Inc., 2000.
3

on how some WtW grantees had successfully managed to design and implement a program

addressing the employment and other service needs of NCPs.

For this study, “success” is measured solely by programs’ reported ability to recruit

participants and deliver services. It is important that the reader recognize that this study is not an

evaluation of WtW grantees’ effectiveness in service delivery, employment placements, payment

of child support, or improved father-child relationships. Information in the report is based on

visits to the sites—no outcome information was gathered during this study and no analysis was

conducted on program effectiveness. However, the findings from this study are important

because there can be no improvement in outcomes for NCPs and their families unless programs

can recruit participants and provide services.

A. ISSUES FACING LOW-INCOME NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS

While it is important to recognize the diversity of this population, low-income noncustodial

parents are disproportionately poorly educated minorities with limited job opportunities. Studies

have shown that, while many low-income NCPs have some work experience, many work

intermittently and for low wages.5

 Lack of stable and well-paying employment among lowincome NCPs is due to several factors, including lack of education and job skills, the decline in

blue-collar jobs historically available to noncollege-educated men, discrimination, and a lack of

 

5

Martinson, K. Serving Noncustodial Parents Through Welfare-to-Work Grants: Labor

Market Characteristics, Employment Barriers, and Service Strategies. Washington, DC: The

Urban Institute, 1998; and Sorenson, E. Low-Income Noncustodial Fathers: Who Are They and

What Are States Doing to Assist Them in Their Effort to Pay Child Support? Washington, DC:

The Urban Institute, January 1997.
4

social networks among this population.6

 In addition, many low-income NCPs have criminal

records and substantial legal problems that prevent them from securing employment.7

Lack of stable employment clearly limits the ability of NCPs to pay child support. One

study estimates that 60 percent of NCPs who do not pay child support are limited by income,

education, high rates of institutionalization, or intermittent employment history.8 These NCPs

have become known within the child support community as “dead broke” rather than “dead

beat.”

The child support system itself also establishes some disincentives for noncustodial parents

to find work and make child support payments.9 When a child receives TANF, under federal

law, the custodial parent on welfare must assign her rights to child support to the state. This

means that most formal child support payments reimburse state and federal welfare costs, rather

than go to the family (unless child support payments exceed the size of the welfare grant).10 In

 

6

Martinson, 1998.

7

Doolittle, F., et al. Building Opportunities, Enforcing Obligations: Lessons for Child

Support Reform from the Parents’ Fair Share Pilot Phase. New York, NY: Manpower

Demonstration Research Corporation, 1998.

8

Office of the Inspector General. The Establishment of Child Support Orders for LowIncome Noncustodial Parents. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services, 2000.

9

Reichert, Dana. Broke But Not Deadbeat: Reconnecting Low-Income Fathers and

Children. Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1999.

10Prior to the passage of PRWORA, all states were required to pass-through the first $50 per

month of child support. Under PRWORA, states can choose whether to pass-through child

support to the family or to retain the funds. Currently, less than half the states have a child

support pass-through. See State Policy Re: Pass-Through and Disregard of Current Month's

Child Support Collected for Families Receiving TANF-Funded Cash Assistance at

http://www.clasp.org/pubs/childenforce/child_support_enforcement.htm.
5

addition, orders are generally not modified quickly when the noncustodial parent becomes

unemployed, which makes it difficult for NCPs to meet payment obligations and results in rapid

accumulation of child support debt (or arrearages).

Several studies have documented that low-income men living apart from their children are

often outside the social service and workforce development systems in the United States.11

Much of the social safety net has been structured around custodial parents and children, such as

welfare assistance, including TANF (formerly the Aid to Families with Dependent Children

program [AFDC]) and Medicaid. Adult-based sources of support for education and training,

such as Pell Grants and the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) program,12 serve low-income

men and women, but often have not been able to enroll the hard-to-serve noncustodial fathers

attached to poor custodial mothers. And even if served by these programs, there was no explicit

connection made between the education and employment services being delivered and lowincome men’s responsibilities as fathers.13

 

11Edin, K., L. Lein, and T. Nelson. Low Income, Non-Residential Fathers: Off-Balance in a

Competitive Economy, An Initial Analysis. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services, 1998, available at http://fatherhood.hhs.gov; and Johnson, E., A. Levine, and

F. Doolittle. Fathers’ Fair Share. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation, 1999.

12The Workforce Investment Act (WIA), enacted in 1998, replaced the JTPA program.

13An early exception was the Parents’ Fair Share (PFS) demonstration program operated in

seven sites around the country, which focused on increasing noncustodial parents’ employment

rates, earnings, and level of support provided to their children. This program—which was

rigorously evaluated using a random assignment design in seven sites—provided employment

services and enhanced child support enforcement to noncustodial parents with children receiving

cash assistance. Noncustodial parents identified as being behind in their child support payments

due to unemployment were ordered by the courts to participate in the program. The evaluation

of this program showed mixed results. Across all sites, a referral to the PFS program increased

the percentage of noncustodial parents who paid child support. There was also an increase in the

average amount of child support paid in two sites. The program was moderately successful at

increasing earnings among more disadvantaged fathers and had little effect on the earnings of

more-employable fathers. See Martinez, J., and C. Miller. Working and Earning: The Impact of
6

 Beginning with the passage of PRWORA, which increased the flexibility states have in

spending federal and state welfare funds14 and provided funding through the Office of Child

Support Enforcement to increase parenting opportunities for NCPs through access and visitation

grants to states, there has been increased interest in providing services to low-income NCPs.

This interest in helping low-income fathers meet their responsibilities and the recognition of the

need for additional services targeted to this population led to the inclusion of noncustodial

fathers as a target group under WtW in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and the expansion of

the eligibility criteria in the WtW amendments of 1999 (see discussion below).

B. OVERVIEW OF THE WELFARE-TO-WORK GRANTS PROGRAM

Under the WtW program, the federal government distributed $3 billion in fiscal years 1998

and 1999 to help move hard-to-employ welfare recipients and noncustodial parents into jobs.

Three-quarters of the funds were allocated to states based on a formula; one-quarter was

distributed competitively based on applications submitted to the Department of Labor. Both

formula and competitive grants target the same populations and can be used for the same types of

activities. Some WtW funds may still be available to provide services to NCPs. As of July 2000

about $700 million in federal WtW funds have been expended, leaving an unexpended balance

of approximately $2 billion. Grantees, under both the state formula and competitive programs

 

(continued)

Parents’ Fair Share on Low-Income Fathers’ Employment, New York, NY: Manpower

Demonstration Research Corporation, 2000; and Doolittle, F. et al. The Kansas City Concerned

Parent Program and the Los Angeles County Non-Custodial Parent-to-Work programs included

in this report are based on the PFS model.

14A Guide to Funding Services for Children and Families Through the Temporary

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services, 1999. Available at http://fatherhood.hhs.gov.
7

have at least until February 2001 and potentially through September 2002, depending on the date

of original award, to use their funds.

WtW Eligibility Requirements for NCPs. The WtW legislation originally specified that

both the formula and competitive grants must be used to fund services for the hardest-to-employ

welfare recipients and noncustodial parents, although recent amendments have substantially

broadened targeting requirements (especially for NCPs). (See Appendix B for a summary of the

WtW amendments.) As originally enacted, the law required that at least 70 percent of the funds

be used for:

1. Long-term TANF recipients or recipients who are within one year of reaching the

TANF time limit and who also have two of three legislatively specified barriers to

employment: no high school diploma or GED and low reading or math skills,

substance abuse problems, or “poor work history”15

2. Noncustodial parents who have two of the same three legislatively specified barriers

to employment and have a child with a custodial parent or (in the case of a child-only

case) a child who is a long-term TANF recipient or is within one year of reaching the

TANF time limit

3. A person with two of the three barriers to employment (described above) but no

longer receiving TANF, as a result of federal or state-imposed time limits

Under the original law, up to 30 percent of the funds could be used for TANF recipients or

NCPs who have “characteristics associated with long-term welfare dependency,” such as teenage

parents, persons with poor work history, or high school dropouts. WtW funds could be used to

serve the targeted groups of custodial parents on TANF, NCPs, or both the custodial and

noncustodial parents together.

 

15The WtW regulations define “poor work history” as having worked no more than 13

consecutive weeks full-time in unsubsidized employment in the prior 12 months.
8

As the WtW grants program was implemented, evidence accumulated quickly that the

eligibility criteria were slowing enrollment and limiting participation.16 These concerns led to

enactment in 1999 of amendments to the WtW eligibility criteria, which made it easier for both

TANF recipients and NCPs to qualify for services.17 The amendments left intact the requirement

that 70 percent of WtW funds be spent on a defined category of participants, but allowed NCPs

to qualify if they met the following three conditions: (1) they are unemployed or underemployed,

or are having difficulty making child support payments; (2) their minor children are receiving or

eligible for TANF, or received TANF in the past year, or are receiving or are eligible for

assistance under the Food Stamp, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid, or the State

Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP); and (3) they enter into a personal responsibility

contract under which they commit to cooperating in establishing paternity, paying child support,

and participating in services to improve their prospects for employment and paying child

support.18

WtW-Allowable Activities. WtW funds can be used for a range of activities designed to

move eligible custodial parents and NCPs into employment, with an emphasis on jobs that have

the potential for increasing future earnings. The funds can be used broadly for employmentrelated activities, including job readiness training/workshops; job placement assistance; on-the-

 

16Perez-Johnson, I., et al. Further Progress, Persistent Constraints: Findings from a Second

Survey of the Welfare-to-Work Grants Program. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research,

Inc., 2000.

17The amendments to the WtW law went into effect in January 2000 for those receiving a

WtW competitive grant and in July 2000 for formula grantees.

18The amendments removed the requirement that long-term TANF recipients exhibit

additional barriers to employment. TANF recipients are eligible under the amended criteria if

they have received assistance for at least 30 months, are within 12 months of reaching a time

limit, or have exhausted their TANF benefits as a result of time limits.
9

job training; community service or work experience; job retention services and other

postemployment services; and a range of support services. Grantees are allowed substantial

flexibility in designing WtW strategies geared to the needs of each participant and local labor

market conditions.

The amendments also allow WtW funds to be used for pre-employment vocational

education and job training for up to six months (under the original law, WtW funds could not be

utilized for stand-alone job training or education). These funds can also be used for training or

education once a person has begun work, either as a postemployment service in conjunction with

work or as a work-based activity. Finally, WtW funds can be used for community service or

work experience jobs, which include subsidized employment in the public, nonprofit, and forprofit sectors, as well as traditional on-the-job training.

Data Access and Confidentiality. The original law contained no provisions on data access,

and program operators encountered difficulties in obtaining the data they needed to determine

eligibility of NCPs. This led to amendments that give state child support enforcement agencies

the authority to share information with Private Industry Councils (PICs, or local workforce

investment boards) for the purposes of identifying and contacting NCPs about participation in

the WtW program. The amendments also require that procedures be established for safeguarding

privacy.19

C. RESEARCH METHODS

This study is designed to provide a current “snapshot” of programs serving noncustodial

parents under the WtW program. Programs from eight states (including some in the same city)

 

19See Action Transmittal #00-08 at www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse/cseats_c.htm for more

information on this provision.
10

were purposively selected to illustrate a range of potential models and approaches to providing

services for NCPs. Exhibit I-1 lists the programs selected for this study.20 Though most WtW

programs serving NCPs are new and typically serve small numbers of NCPs, in selecting sites

we sought programs that were fully operational and that served 100 or more NCPs.21 In the

types of projects selected, we sought variation according to the following dimensions: (1)

geographic location (regions of the country, urban/rural), (2) subpopulations of NCPs served, (3)

sponsoring agencies and types of collaborating partners, and (4) program models/approaches.

The programs included in this study operated under both the original provisions and the

amendments, although some programs were just beginning to implement the changes at the time

of our site visit.

Information for the study was collected primarily through one- and two-day site visits

conducted between May and July 2000.22 We talked with managers and line staff from the key

partners in the program, including (as appropriate) the lead organization, the workforce

development organization, employment service providers, the child support enforcement agency,

and the courts. The discussions covered such topics as program goals/objectives,

implementation process and challenges, outreach and recruitment, intake and assessment,

 

20Section II of this report provides some details on the basic characteristics of the selected

programs.

21The two exceptions were the LA Veterans Program and the Nevada Business Services.

These were smaller programs that provided interesting program designs and served very

disadvantaged populations.

22Because Yakima, WA, is included in the larger WtW evaluation, information from this site

was collected through phone interviews and from site visits conducted as part of a separate WtW

study.
11

Exhibit I-1: Programs Included in WtW Noncustodial Parent Study

Program/Location Program Description

Dekalb Fatherhood

Connection

Decatur, GA

Community-based organization is lead agency, responsible for

employment and other support services. Participants are

referred from child support agency and recruited from

community.

Full Employment Council’s

Concerned Parent Program

(CCP)

Kansas City, MO

Workforce board provides employment and other support services.

Participants are referred from child support agency and recruited

from community.

Houston Works

Houston, TX

Individuals facing threat of incarceration due to unpaid child support

can opt to participate in the program and are referred by the courts.

Services are contracted out and provided by several organizations

and agencies.

Institute for Responsible

Fatherhood and Family

Revitalization (IRFFR)

Milwaukee, WI

One of seven programs in a national nonprofit organization. Strong

emphasis on one-on-one and peer group counseling sessions. The

primary goal is to connect noncustodial parents (NCPs) with their

children and improve parenting skills.

LA County Noncustodial

Parent-to-Work Program

Los Angeles, CA

Provides employment services to NCPs who are in child support

arrears and unemployed. Operated by the workforce board with the

District Attorney’s Office providing referrals.

LA Veterans in Progress

Los Angeles, CA

Targets NCPs who are both homeless and veterans. Residential

program with most employment and support services provided on

site.

Milwaukee Private Industry

Council (PIC) Program

Milwaukee, WI

Collaborative of five specialized community-based organizations

(e.g., substance abuse, mental health, legal issues) under contract

with PIC to provide employment and other services to NCPs.

Minneapolis FATHER

Project

Minneapolis, MN

Lead agency is nonprofit community-based organization. Strong

emphasis on parenting. Employment services are contracted out to

other organizations, and individuals are recruited from community.

Nevada Business Services

Las Vegas, NV

Workforce board has contracts with two nonprofit agencies to

provide employment and other services to NCPs. One provider

targets male NCPs while the other serves incarcerated female NCPs

who will be released in the near future.

Wisconsin Department of

Corrections NOW Program

Milwaukee, WI

Targets NCPs on probation and parole, with most employment and

support services provided through the five W-2 agencies in

Milwaukee.

Yakima SHARE Program

Yakima, WA

Individuals facing threat of incarceration due to unpaid child support

can choose to participate in the program and are referred by the

Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. Employment services are provided

by a number of community-based organizations.
12

employment services, linkages with the child support agency, postemployment services,

parenting skills instruction, and case management practices.

Two important limitations of this study should be noted. First, our observations are based

on site visits in just eight communities. While some broader conclusions are warranted based on

similar findings across several sites, the study results are not nationally representative. Second,

this is a descriptive study that focuses on implementation experiences of selected sites. It is

intended to provide information on program design and development and recruitment strategies.

It is not possible from the information gathered during the site visits to draw conclusions about

the effectiveness of particular programs or approaches in increasing employment, earnings, and

child support payments or improving relationships with family members.

D. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

The sections that follow present key study findings from visits conducted to each program.

Section II provides an overview of the basic design and structure of initiatives, including types of

sponsoring agencies and partners, funding sources, project goals/objectives, participation levels,

types of target populations served, and an overview of key implementation issues. The roles of

the workforce development agencies and the child support enforcement agencies are highlighted

in this section. Section III examines recruitment and basic incentives for participation—what

turned out to be critical elements in getting noncustodial parents into program services. Section

IV assesses the wide variety of services available to participants at the NCP programs visited,

including intake and assessment, case management, employment and postemployment services,

parenting services, and other support services. Section V provides conclusions and implications

of the study, including “lessons learned” from the project sites about assisting NCPs in securing

employment, paying child support, and being a better parent. Short summaries of each program
13

visited are attached in Appendix A and a summary of the WtW amendments is provided in

Attachment B.
14
15

II. PROGRAM DESIGN AND CHARACTERISTICS

The sites included in this study demonstrated that a variety of local agencies can work

together to sponsor programs that assist noncustodial parents in enhancing their employability

and their prospects for paying child support and being a better parent. The sections that follow

provide an overview of the types of agencies that sponsor initiatives and of their partners,

funding sources, project goals/objectives, participation levels, and types of populations served.

Exhibit II-1 provides a cross-site comparison of key dimensions discussed in this chapter.

A. SPONSORING AGENCIES AND PARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHER

ORGANIZATIONS

Different Types of Local Agencies Took the Lead in Sponsoring NCP Projects. Six of the 11

projects visited had as their lead agency a local workforce development organization. Because all

projects received WtW funds and focused on employment, it is not surprising that local workforce

development agencies took the lead in a number of sites. Projects led by local workforce development

boards that also administered Workforce Investment Act (WIA) programs were located in Houston

(Houston Works), Los Angeles (the Los Angeles County PIC), Las Vegas (Nevada Business Services),

Yakima (the Tri-County Workforce Development Council), Milwaukee (the PIC of Milwaukee County),

and Kansas City (the Full Employment Council).

In the five other sites, all of which also have some level of involvement of local workforce

development organizations, other types of local organizations played the lead role. For example,

in Milwaukee (where we visited a total of three NCP programs), one initiative (Project NOW)

was sponsored by the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC), a second by the Institute for

Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization (IRFFR), a nonprofit
16

Exhibit II-1: Key Background Features of Noncustodial Parent Programs

Fatherhood

nection

tur, GA

Full Employment

Council CCP

Kansas City, MO

Houston Works

Houston, TX

IRFFR Program

Milwaukee, WI

LA County NCP to

Work Program

Los Angeles, CA

LA Veterans in

Progress

Los Angeles, CA

conomic

ty Authority

ty-based

on [CBO])

Full EmploymentCouncil (FEC)(private industrycouncil [PIC])

Houston Works (HW)(PIC)

Institute for Responsible Fatherhood andFamily Revitalization(IRFFR) (CBO)

LA County PrivateIndustry Council,Department ofCommunity andSenior Services (CSS)(PIC)

LA Veterans inProgress (CBO)

b County

upport

ement (CSE)

a Department

or

- Missouri’s Parent

Fair Share (PFS)Program

- State Department

of Social Services(Division of Children and Familiesand Division ofChild SupportEnforcement)

- Office of the

Attorney General(operating nine unitsin Houston area)

- Harris County IV-D

court system

- Seven subcontracted

CBOs

- Wisconsin Works

(W-2) agencies andother localeducation andtraining providers

- Four additional

PICs in the LA area

- Department of

Public SocialServices

- District Attorney’s

Office

- Employment

Development Dept.

- The Training

Institute

- Veterans

Administration

- District Attorney’s

Office

- Employment

Development Dept.

- Workforce

Investment Actprogram

ounty

cludes

f Atlanta)

Kansas City andsurrounding area (fivecounties)

Harris County (withfocus on Houstonmetropolitan area)

City of Milwaukee(with focus on theinner city)

Los Angeles County Los Angeles

metropolitan area

o-Work

mpetitive

WtW competitivegrant

WtW competitive andformula grants

WtW competitivegrant

WtW competitive andformula grant

VeteransAdministration; WtWcompetitive grant;Ford Foundation grant

ugh 7/00) 267 (through of 7/00) 192 (through 7/00) 300 (served in 1999) 418 (through 6/00) 27 (through 5/00)

dial parents

eeting WtW

NCPs meeting WtWeligibility and referredfrom state PFSprogram (state is notpart of PFSevaluation)

NCPs meeting WtWeligibility, particularlyNCPs referred throughIV-D system

NCPs meeting WtWeligibility criteria;program also servescustodial parents ofenrolled NCPs

NCPs meeting WtWcriteria

Homeless, veteranNCPs recentlyreleased from drugtreatment (who meetWtW criteria)
17

aukee PIC Program

Milwaukee, WI

Minneapolis FATHER

Project

Minneapolis, MN

Nevada Business Services

Las Vegas, NV

WI Dept. of Corrections

NOW

Milwaukee, WI

Yakima Share Program

Yakima, WA

f Milwaukee Way-to-Grow (WTG)

(CBO)

Nevada Business Services(NBS) (PIC)

Wisconsin Department ofCorrections (DOC) (stateagency)

Tri-County WorkforceDevelopment Council(PIC)

e subcontracted

ncies: Human

vices Triangle,

sconsin Correctional

vices, United

grant Opportunity

vices, New Concepts,

 Curtis and

ociates

e W-2 agencies

te child support

orcement agency

- Neighborhood

Employment Council(coalition of eightsubcontracted CBOs)

- State and Hennepin

County Child SupportEnforcement Office

- Minneapolis

Employment & TrainingProgram (MinneapolisWorkforce Board)

- Two subcontracted local

CBOs: Nevada Partnersand Services Project2000

- Nevada State Welfare

Division

- WI Department of

Workforce Development

- Private Industry Council

of Milwaukee

- Five W-2 Agencies

- DHS Division of Child

Support

- Prosecuting Attorney’s

Office

- Three community-based

organizations

aukee County Minneapolis Clark, Lincoln, Nye, and

Esmeralda counties, withfocus on Las Vegas

Milwaukee County Yakima, Kittitas, and

Klickitat counties (all arerural counties)

competitive grant WtW competitive grant;

Ford Foundation grant

WtW formula grants Governor’s WtW 15

percent discretionary funds;DOC grant

WtW formula andcompetitive grants

hrough 6/00) 100 (thru 5/00) 70 (through 6/00) 130 (through 6/00) 185 (through 9/00)

 meeting WtW

lity; subcontractors

lize in serving

pulation (e.g.,

ders, substance

rs, mentally ill)

NCPs who meet WtWcriteria; more recentlyfocusing on young NCPs

NCPs meeting WtWeligibility; Services Project2000 targets female NCPsoffenders at correctionalfacility

NCPs on probation orparole and soon-to-bereleased inmates inminimum security prisonsmeeting WtW criteria

NCPs meeting WtWeligibility, particularlyNCPs referred through IVD system
18

organization headquartered in Washington, DC.23 Nonprofit organizations have the lead in three

other localities:

• Way-to-Grow, a community-based organization that provides social services to lowincome mothers and children, sponsored the initiative in Minneapolis

• LA Vets, which specializes in services for homeless veterans, led the effort at one

NCP project in Los Angeles

• The Dekalb Economic Opportunity Authority (EOA), a nonprofit community action

agency in Atlanta, led the Fatherhood Connection program.

One lesson that emerges from this study is that, while workforce development organizations

are perhaps a natural sponsor for NCP programs (especially with WtW formula funding being

distributed through local workforce development boards), a variety of other public and nonprofit

organizations can take the lead in serving NCPs. Each locality is different—there is no single

model for development of initiatives for NCPs, and no particular agency that must lead such

initiatives.

Programs Brought Together a Wide Range of Partners to Meet the Varied Needs of

Low-Income NCPs. As shown in Exhibit II-1, the NCP projects we visited brought together a

wide range of local partners. Nearly all projects involved partnerships with five or more

organizations, and in several sites partnerships extended to ten or more organizations.

Collaboration was a critical component in all the sites visited, because no single organization

could bring to bear all the services required to meet the varied needs of low-income NCPs. In

some instances, partners were brought to initiatives to strengthen and expand recruitment efforts,

particularly in cases where lead organizations experienced difficulties with identifying and

 

23Using WtW competitive grant funds, IRFFR has mounted responsible-fatherhood

programs to serve low-income, noncustodial fathers in several other locations (Cleveland, OH;

Nashville, TN; San Diego, CA; Washington, DC; and Yonkers, NY).
19

enrolling NCPs. Partners were also brought in to provide needed documentation for eligibility

(for example, TANF agencies to assist with determining eligibility of NCPs under WtW rules).

Other partners were brought into initiatives because of the direct client services they were able to

provide, such as workforce development organizations (for job placement, skills upgrading, and

retention assistance); courts and child support agencies (for information about child support

arrearages and paternity establishment, as well as to modify payments and visitation); and a wide

range of social service agencies (for transportation assistance, housing assistance, vocational

rehabilitation, substance abuse and mental health treatment, and a range of other support

services). Box II-A provides examples of the different types of partnerships in the programs we

visited.

Among the Most Important Partnerships Were Those Between the Workforce

Development and Child Support Enforcement Agencies. Given the focus on serving NCPs

and making them employable, two of the most common partners were local workforce

development agencies and child support enforcement entities. As shown on Exhibit II-2, seven

of the projects featured partnerships with child support enforcement agencies—where the agency

played some role in the program.

The role of the child support enforcement agency in the programs for NCPs varied among

the sites. An important role in several of the programs was to provide direct referrals to the NCP

program—either from the agency or from the court. As discussed in more detail in Section III,

the programs in Houston (see Box II-A) and Yakima obtain referrals from the courts, while

referrals were made by the child support enforcement agency in Dekalb, Kansas City, and the

Los Angeles County NCP-to-Work programs.
20

Box II-A

Examples of Partnerships in NCP Programs

• Minneapolis FATHER Project. The lead agency in this initiative is Way-to-Grow (WTG), a nonprofit

organization operating programs for mothers and children. Among the key linked agencies under the Welfareto-Work (WtW) program are the workforce development agency serving Minneapolis (the Minneapolis

Employment and Training Program), the Neighborhood Employment Council (a coalition of eight nonprofit

organizations providing employment services), and the local and state child support enforcement offices. This

initiative, and the partners involved, grew out of an earlier and ongoing initiative led by WTG under Ford

Foundation’s Partners for Fragile Families (PFF) Initiative. WtW funding came along after the partners

involved in PFF had already come together and developed the design for PFF. These partners viewed WtW as

an opportunity to expand the resources available for serving NCPs in Minneapolis and to build on efforts

underway as part of the PFF initiative. The relationship between WTG and the state child support

enforcement agency was sufficiently strong enough that the state applied for and received a federal waiver

from the Office of Child Support Enforcement at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which

provided federal funding support for the PFF demonstration.

• Houston Works. Although Houston Works, a workforce development agency, is the lead organization in

terms of providing funding and overseeing this NCP project, the child support enforcement system helped to

shape this initiative and plays a critical role in providing a steady stream of NCPs in need of employment

services. The Office of the Attorney General (OAG) for the State of Texas, which operates nine Child

Support Enforcement Units in the Houston area, played a key role in the development of this project. In the

years leading up to the initiative, the OAG had been looking for ways to improve systems for collection of

child support (including prevention of arrearages, alternatives to jail, and more father-friendly approaches),

but lacked resources needed to implement new strategies. The Harris County court system also played an

instrumental role in the development of the project. Three local judges agreed to court-ordered participation

in the Houston Works project as an alternative to jail on child support orders. They also arranged for an NCP

case manager (from Houston Works or one of its subcontractors) to be present at the courts each day the court

is in session. In terms of providing direct services for NCPs referred through the courts, Houston Works

subcontracts with seven local human services agencies to provide assessment, case management, employment

and training services, post-placement services, support services, and referral to a range of other support

services: Educational Learning and Enrichment Center (ELEC), SEARCH Homeless Project, DSU Training

Institute, Houston Community College, Employment and Training Centers (ETC), Goodwill Industries, and

Refugee Services Alliance (RSA).

• Wisconsin NOW Program. The Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC), Division of Community

Correction has taken the lead role in project design, startup, and ongoing administration of NOW, which targets

NCPs on probation or parole. DOC identifies participants and has assigned ten probation and parole agents to

case manage NOW participants throughout their involvement in the program. The Wisconsin Department of

Workforce Development, which has overall responsibility for administration of employment, training, and

welfare programs in the state (including welfare reform and the JTPA program), assisted with the design of the

initiative and determines WtW eligibility for potential NOW participants. DOC contracts with five Wisconsin

Works (W-2) agencies to provide case management, employment, training, parenting, and other support

services for NOW participants. The five W-2 agencies are Employment Solutions of Milwaukee (affiliated

with Goodwill Industries); United Migrant Opportunity Services; Opportunities Industrialization Center of

Greater Milwaukee; YW Works; and Maximus.
21

Exhibit II-2: Role of Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Agency in NCP Programs

Program/Location

CSE Agency

is Partner

Referral from

CSE Agency

or Courts

Flexible CSE

Policies for

Participants

Designated

CSE Staff

for Program

Dekalb Fatherhood

Connection

Decatur, GA

 Yes Yes No Yes

Full Employment Council’s

Concerned Parent Program

(CCP)

Kansas City, MO

Yes Yes Yes Yes

Houston Works

Houston, TX

Yes Yes No Yes

Institute for Responsible

Fatherhood and Family

Revitalization (IRFFR)

Milwaukee, WI

No No No No

LA County Noncustodial

Parent-to-Work Program

Los Angeles, CA

Yes Yes Yes Yes

LA Veterans in Progress

Los Angeles, CA Yes No Yes Yes

Milwaukee PIC Program

Milwaukee, WI Yes No No No

Minneapolis FATHER

Project

Minneapolis, MN

Yes No Yes Yes

Nevada Business Services

Las Vegas, NV

No No No No

Wisconsin Department of

Corrections NOW Program

Milwaukee, WI

No No No No

Yakima SHARE Program

Yakima, WA

Yes Yes Yes Yes
22

Another role played by the child support enforcement agency was to provide additional

incentives for participation. This role is discussed more extensively in Section III. Some

programs—including those in Kansas City, Minneapolis, and Yakima—offered flexible child

support payment options for program participants including establishment of reduced payment

agreements and reestablished default orders.

In several of the programs, the child support enforcement agency designated specific staff to

work with the NCP program. The role of these staff varied, although as discussed in Section IV

an important role for some of them was to assist the NCP in understanding the child support

system and ensuring that child support payments were made—but reportedly in a less adversarial

way than the traditional child support enforcement agency staff. For example, in Dekalb, a

liaison from the child support agency assisted the program’s case managers in resolving any

issues that may have prevented the NCP from finding or keeping a job and on ensuring that child

support payments were made. In Minneapolis, designated case workers at the child support

enforcement agency worked with participants on arranging child support modifications and (if

necessary) establishing paternity and orders.

Staff in some child support enforcement program partners said that their agency’s

participation in the NCP program required or represented a paradigm shift in agency culture and

values. Several child support enforcement staff we interviewed indicated that the concept of

assisting NCPs delinquent in child support was not only new for them, but also ran counter to

their traditional mission and procedures. These officials noted that child support enforcement

agencies are usually judged by the amount of child support they collect and the size of annual

increases. As one interviewee stated, “Our goal is compliance, not casework.”

In some cases, motivation for trying a new “helping” approach was purely pragmatic: it was

based on the realization that some NCPs simply could not pay child support, and that tactics
23

traditionally used to deal with them, such as incarceration and suspension of driver’s licenses,

failed to address their lack of income and often worsened prospects for employment and payment

of child support. Hence, at least as a first step, it made sense for child support enforcement

agencies to refer unemployed or underemployed NCPs to a program that could improve chances

for job placement, upgrading of wages, and job retention.

B. PROJECT SERVICE AREA

Programs Mostly Served NCPs within Urban Areas. All the programs we visited served

NCPs in urban areas. Three of the 11 programs served multi-county areas in and around an

urban area that included surrounding suburban areas and adjoining rural areas. The Nevada

Business Services program served a four-county area (coinciding with the agency’s workforce

development area) that was spread across the southern half of the state, although most

participants came from Las Vegas. The other two programs with multi-county service areas

were Yakima (which served a primarily rural three-county area that included Yakima) and

Kansas City (which served a five-county area that included Kansas City). Generally, the study

programs served a single county (six sites) or focused on a particular city (the Minneapolis site)

or an inner-city area within an urban area (the Milwaukee IRFFR site).

C. FUNDING SOURCES

Funding Sources Significantly Affected Program Design and Partnerships. All the

programs included in this study were funded either wholly or partly through the WtW grants

program. Funding sources were important, because each program had to work within the

constraints of overall funding, and each funding source had related program requirements. For

example, WtW funding brought fairly specific targeting requirements with respect to eligibility

and imposed restrictions on the types of allowable services (see Section I for details). The
24

narrowness of the 70 percent targeting requirement under WtW initially constrained the pool of

noncustodial parents who could qualify under the program, which reportedly hampered the

recruitment efforts of many programs (see discussion below).

Most Sites Relied upon WtW Competitive Grant Funds. Nine of the 11 programs visited

used WtW competitive grants to fund their projects (see Exhibit II-1). Four of the programs used

WtW formula funds, and three programs (Houston Works, the Los Angeles County Noncustodial

Parent-to-Work Program, and the Yakima SHARE Program) used both competitive and formula

grant funds. One program, the Wisconsin DOC’s NOW Program, used WtW 15 Percent

Discretionary funding for the NCP initiative.

Sites Sometimes Blended WtW Funds with Other Funding. When programs focused on

a particular population, they were sometimes able to leverage funding from other sources that

also had an interest in serving that population. For example, the LA Vets Program and the

Milwaukee DOC received additional funding from the Veterans Administration and the

Wisconsin DOC, respectively. The Minneapolis Fatherhood Project, a site in a national

demonstration project (under the Partners for Fragile Families initiative) sponsored by the Ford

Foundation and the Department of Health and Human Services, was able to supplement its

foundation resources with both a WtW competitive grant and federal child support matching

funds.

One lesson that emerges from our visits is that WtW funds provided the seed money to bring

partners together to design and implement NCP initiatives. The grant funds also helped leverage

funds from other sources (e.g., foundations and federal, state, and local agencies). In addition,

through collaboration with other agencies, NCP projects accessed additional services for NCPs at

little or no cost, which helped to extend grant funds and expand the numbers of NCPs that could

be served.
25

D. PARTICIPATION LEVELS AND TARGET GROUPS SERVED

Study Programs Served Relatively Small Numbers of Participants. Overall, the

programs included in the study operated on a small scale.24 From the time they first began

receiving WtW funds (generally only in 1999) through the time of our site visits (in summer

2000), most programs had served between 100 and 200 participants. The Milwaukee PIC (460

noncustodial parents served through June 2000) and the Los Angeles County PIC (418 through

June 2000) had served the largest number of NCPs; next in size were the IRFFR program in

Wisconsin (estimated at about 300 served in 1999) and the Kansas City Concerned Parent

Program (CPP, 267 participants). The smallest of the programs was LA Vets, which had

enrolled and served 27 NCPs. As noted above, the smallest programs such as LA Vets focused

on serving a specific, disadvantaged population of NCPs.

The scale of some of the programs was affected by a number of factors, particularly

difficulties recruiting NCPs (discussed in detail in Section III), as well as constraints in the level

of funding. However, the program size also reflects that many NCPs received services for an

indefinite period of time. Under WtW rules, programs can continue to serve individuals

indefinitely (as long as the program has funding). This enabled programs to continue to provide

NCPs with postemployment services, help with finding a new job or upgrading to a higherpaying job, and assistance with support services. As discussed in Section IV, most sites had not

established specific rules for when an individual was terminated from the program.

 

24The sites provided somewhat varying estimates of participation levels over different time

periods, so it was difficult to compare participation levels across sites. Some provided estimates

of the number of NCPs served from program inception to the time of our visit while others

provided current levels of participation.
26

Because of Their Locations, Study Programs Served High Concentrations of InnerCity African Americans. Given their primary funding source, all the programs in this study

targeted noncustodial fathers who met the WtW eligibility criteria, primarily low-income men

with children receiving welfare or other means-tested benefits. The programs did not target

particular racial or ethnic groups, but because they often operated in urban and inner-city areas,

their caseloads included high proportions of minority clients: African Americans (in ten sites)

and Hispanics (in two sites).

Several Programs Targeted Special Groups of NCPs, Including Offenders, ExOffenders, Veterans, and Homeless People. Within the WtW eligibility requirements,

programs sometimes targeted a specific subgroup of noncustodial parents. For example, the LA

Vets program targeted a particularly hard-to-serve population: NCPs who were both veterans

and homeless. The programs in Milwaukee (Project NOW) and Nevada (Services Project 2000)

focused on ex-offenders on parole and probation and those who were incarcerated (but soon to

be released). After initially focusing broadly on NCPs who met the WtW eligibility criteria, the

Minneapolis program, because of its participation in a Ford Foundation project, shifted to a focus

on younger fathers (under age 25) who did not have paternity established (but who still met the

WtW criteria).

NCPs Faced Many of the Same Barriers to Employment as Custodial Parents, but Had

Fewer External Supports. Many NCPs had limited education and skill levels and lacked stable

work experience. In this way, the employment barriers that NCPs faced were similar to those

faced by custodial parents receiving cash assistance—a group that some program operators

generally had more experience in serving. However, in several ways, NCPs presented challenges

different from those that arise in serving TANF custodial parents. Because of pressures to pay

child support and make ends meet, many NCPs came to programs strongly motivated to find jobs
27

quickly and hold onto them. In fact, several program operators noted that if programs could not

rapidly find jobs for participants, NCPs were likely to lose interest in participating in other

services and drop out of programs. Staff also reported that while NCPs were somewhat more

likely than TANF recipients to have some level of work experience and occupational skills, they

often faced one or more serious barriers to employment. For example, program staff reported

that NCPs were more likely than custodial parents receiving TANF to be ex-offenders and/or to

have substance abuse problems. Both these factors often limited job opportunities, particularly

chances to obtain higher-paid employment.

Noncustodial parents also lacked eligibility for programs such as TANF and Medicaid,

which provided ongoing support for many low-income custodial parents. Program operators also

reported that NCPs often had a limited understanding of the child support enforcement system,

which tended to compound their difficulties with the system and contribute to rapid

accumulation of child support arrearages. Use of enforcement tools within the child support

system could result in additional barriers to employment. For example, the loss of a driver’s

license because of nonpayment of support could complicate the effort to secure and keep

employment.

E. PROGRAM GOALS

All Study Programs Had a Strong Emphasis on Employment and Job Retention.

Because WtW (with its emphasis on “work first” approaches) funded all the programs included

in this study, job placement and retention were primary goals (see box for several illustrations of

program goals and objectives).
28

Program operators indicated that noncustodial parents also had a strong preference for

program services that would help them find a well-paying job quickly. This was because many

NCPs came to programs unemployed, underemployed, or, even if fully employed, living from

check to check. If they were unemployed, they often did not qualify for unemployment benefits

or had exhausted existing benefits. Typically, NCPs had little if any savings and had often

accumulated some, often substantial, child support arrearages. They also had little in the way of

support systems or others (e.g., a working spouse or family member) they could count on during

extended periods of unemployment or time spent acquiring new skills in training programs.

Periods of unemployment or underemployment generally caused them to fall further behind with

Box II-B

Illustration of Types of Program Goals in NCP Programs

• Dekalb Fatherhood Project. The primary goal of the Dekalb Fatherhood Project is

to find jobs for the noncustodial parents (NCPs). Staff at all levels consistently

explained that the thrust of their program is “work first.” Employment, either full- or

part-time, is the emphasis in order to increase child support payments. Once the NCP

is working, staff also focus on promoting other “self-enhancement” activities, such as

education and training (done concurrently with work), and on addressing a range of

other issues, including substance abuse, mental health problems, and parenting issues.

• Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization. The central

emphasis of the IRFFR project is on reconnecting NCPs with their children and

improving parenting skills. At the core of the project is a belief that attitude change

leads to other positive consequences, such as greater involvement with children,

payment of child support, paternity establishment, and long-term employment. An

important goal of the program is to resolve relationship issues and disputes between

the noncustodial and custodial parents, so that the NCP can become actively involved

financially and emotionally with the children.

• LA Veterans in Progress. With support from the Veteran’s Administration, this

program was established in 1993 to meet a serious service gap for homeless veterans in

the Los Angeles area. Homeless veterans who successfully completed substance abuse

or alcohol programs had nowhere to live and no one to provide continued support for

them to reenter the world of work. The goals of the original program were to help

homeless veterans become self-sufficient and, when capable, participate fully in the

labor market and achieve residential stability and continued sobriety. With additional

support from the WtW grants program, the program seeks to assist homeless veteran

fathers already being served in the VIP program obtain employment, improve their

relationship and parenting skills with their children, stop the cycle of fatherlessness,

and improve their payment of child support.
29

child support payments in a battle to keep up with housing, food, and transportation expenses. In

addition, NCPs often faced strong pressures from courts or child support enforcement agencies to

find and keep jobs so they could make child support payments. Hence, participants (like

program funders) had a strong preference for services that would help them land a job quickly

(e.g., short-term job readiness workshops and one-on-one placement assistance).

While program staff clearly viewed job placement as their primary mission, most also

placed a strong emphasis on job retention. A common problem NCPs faced—often one that

leads to enrollment in the NCP program in the first place—is job loss and inability to maintain

stable employment over an extended period. As discussed in greater detail in Section IV of this

report, programs sought to enhance chances of long-term employment by providing participants

with postemployment services: ongoing case management, troubleshooting of problems as they

arose in the workplace and at home, assistance with transportation, referral to education and

training for upgrading basic and job-related skills, and guidance toward a range of other

supportive services.

Payment of Child Support Was Also an Important Goal of Most Programs. In addition

to helping NCPs secure employment, most programs also had the goal of increasing the child

support payments made by the NCP. Because stable employment was necessary for the

consistent payment of child support, this goal generally complemented the employment focus of

the programs. The goal of increasing child support payments was particularly strong in

programs that were closely linked with the child support enforcement system, such as the

Houston Works and the Yakima SHARE projects.

Some Programs Had Goals of Improving Parenting. A few programs blended goals of

improving employability with those of building parenting skills and reconnecting NCPs with

their children. For example, programs in Minneapolis (the Minneapolis FATHER Project) and
30

Wisconsin (the IRFFR program) viewed increasing the involvement of NCPs in the lives of their

children and building parenting skills as project goals on an equal footing with improving

employment outcomes. While most other programs sought a general improvement in family and

parenting situations, these two sites assigned these objectives particular priority. As discussed

later in the report, staff in some other sites indicated a desire to add parenting or responsiblefatherhood programs in the near future.
31

III. GETTING NONCUSTODIAL PARENTS TO PARTICIPATE

Recruitment, enrollment, and retention are critical if programs are to serve noncustodial

parents. The programs involved in this study all found these to be their most challenging tasks.

This section discusses two key elements for eliciting participation among noncustodial parents:

(1) recruitment strategies to identify and enroll potential program participants, and (2) incentives

(both positive and negative) that programs used. Exhibit III-1 provides an overview of key

features of the recruitment approaches and incentives used by individual sites.

A. RECRUITMENT AND OUTREACH STRATEGIES

Recruitment Proved to Be a Critical Program Component at All Sites, With Many of the Sites

Struggling to Recruit NCPs. A key aspect of all the programs visited involved the extent to which they

developed recruitment strategies to identify and inform potentially interested and eligible noncustodial

parents about available services. For most sites, the recruitment of NCPs proved to be difficult.

Programs had to work hard to build up their base of participants, even though most programs were

relatively small, serving fewer than 200 NCPs. Programs used a variety of outreach methods, particularly

linking with other agencies to obtain referrals.

Effective outreach and recruitment strategies are vital features of NCP programs. If

programs are unable to identify and enroll eligible NCPs, even the most comprehensive and

effective service delivery systems cannot succeed. If recruitment activities are not carefully

tailored to the target group and well executed by project staff, they can be inefficient and costly.

Nearly all programs included in this study struggled with recruitment right from the start, and

had to change and fine-tune their recruitment methods and program “messages.” None of the

programs indicated that they were “swamped” by NCPs or that they could not adequately
32

Exhibit III-1: Recruitment Methods and Incentives to Participation in NCP Programs

Fatherhood

nection

tur, GA

Full Employment

Council (FEC) CCP

Kansas City, MO

Houston Works

Houston, TX

IRFFR Program

Milwaukee, WI

LA County NCP to

Work Program

Los Angeles, CA

LA Veterans in

Progress

Los Angeles, CA

eferrals from

upport

ment (CSE)

ment in

nity through

m staff (teams

managers are

in a local

nity and

n

rhood

ing)

ations at

and other

ms, word of

nication

st

ible for

ing

ment

ls

- Main source of

referrals is fromParents Fair Share(PFS, co-located insome FEC sites)

- Applicants from other

FEC programs

- Referrals from “street

recruiters”

- Distribution of

materials andpresentations to otheragencies

- Direct referrals

through CSE unitsand IV-D courts

- “Reverse referrals”

through seven subcontracted agencies

- Other outreach

methods includeposters, brochures,targeted mailings,radio public serviceannouncements, wordof mouth

- Outreach Specialist

recruits noncustodialparents (NCPs) incommunity (e.g.,stores, recreationcenters)

- Staff presentations at

schools, churches, etc.

- Some referrals

through W-2 andother agencies

- Word of mouth

- Department of Public

Social Services(DPSS) and DistrictAttorney’s Officeprovides lists of thosepotentially eligible forprogram

- Mailings and cold

phone calls are madeto those on list

- Posters advertising in

other program in othercounty offices

- Maintains contacts

with over 90 countyagencies to identifypotential participants(including DPSS,prisons, andrehabilitation groups)

 and

Mandatory and voluntary Mandatory and voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary

eferred from

n be issued

pt citations

ested for not

ating

m services are

nt incentive

- NCPs referred from

PFS for delinquentchild support (CS)face legal process ifthey do not participate

- Temporary reduction

of CS payment andpostponement licensesuspensions forprogram participants

- $300 and $1,500

vouchers are providedat job retention points

- NCPs referred from

CSE who do notparticipate may faceincarceration

- Program services are

important incentive

- Main incentive for

participation isprogram services

- Program services are

important incentive

- Accumulation of

arrearages can bestopped

- Program services are

important incentive

- Order and arrearage

payments can bemodified
33

aukee PIC Program

Milwaukee, WI

Minneapolis FATHER

Project

Minneapolis, MN

Nevada Business Services

Las Vegas, NV

WI Dept. Of Corrections

NOW

Milwaukee, WI

Yakima Share Program

Yakima, WA

t referrals from

y courts, the

ren’s First Initiative,

agencies, and

onsin Dept. Of

ctions (DOC)

subcontracting

ies conduct own

ach, including

ding community

s, distributing

ures about the

am, and media

tising.

- Outreach methods include

posters, brochures, radioand television advertising,staff presentations at localprograms andorganizations, familypicnic, mass mailing toCSE clients, and word ofmouth

- Referrals from employment

service providers

- Recruitment has relied

primarily upon “reversereferrals” from 2subcontract agencies

- Outreach methods include

brochures, word of mouth,staff presentations

- Services Project 2000

recruits offenders withinprison

- Main source of referrals is

from DOC probation andparole agents (main sourceof referrals)

- Small number of “reverse

referrals” through W-2agencies

- Memos and presentations

to DOC probation andparole agents to make themaware of the program

- Direct referrals from CSE

units and ProsecutingAttorney’s Office.

- Established a short-term

position to identify eligibleNCPs at the CSE office

ory and voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory

iduals referred from

s can face continuing

action for

articipation

am services are

rtant incentive

- Program services are

important incentive

- Child support payment

options for participantsincluding delay of CSorders for 90 days,modification of orders,stopping interest onarrearages, lifting penalties,free paternityestablishment, waivingbirthing expenses

- Main incentive for

participation is programservices

- Participation is voluntary,

but once enrolledparticipation in NOWactivities becomesmandatory (thoughrevocation of probation orparole unlikely basedsolely on non-compliancewith NOW project)

- Program services are

important incentive

- NCPs who do not

participate may faceincarceration

- Child support payment

options include: paymentagreements for less thancurrent amount(temporarily),reestablishing defaultorders, and possiblywaiving arrears

- Program services are

important incentive
34

Box III-A

Problems Experienced with Recruitment in NCP Programs

• Kansas City Concerned Parent Program. Like other grantees, the Full

Employment Council (FEC) experienced some early difficulties with recruitment

and enrollment, in part because of the narrowness of the initial Welfare-to-Work

(WtW) eligibility requirements and also in part because of reluctance of NCPs to

participate or difficulties in obtaining needed eligibility information. For example,

some NCPs could not provide Social Security numbers or sometimes even the last

name of the custodial parent needed to determine the welfare status of the children.

Sometimes custodial parents lived out of the area or even out of state. Broadening

of the eligibility requirements has helped expand the pool of eligibles, and FEC

now has access to information that does not require Social Security information.

The project also found that special events were of limited value, which staff

attributed at least in part to NCPs’ wariness of “smoke-outs” or “sting” operations

(events conducted by other agencies to attract NCPs and then make arrests for child

support arrearages). Their link with Missouri’s Parents’ Fair Share program has

proven to be a vital source of referrals, and over time FEC has been flexible enough

to test and improve recruiting strategies. For example, the program is now using

two young fathers as “street recruiters” to go out into the communities and

neighborhoods to provide information to men and women who may need and

qualify for program services.

• Wisconsin Department of Corrections NOW Program. This program relied at

first on probation or parole officers to refer men from their caseloads, but

enrollment was slow. Officers already had heavy workloads and lacked strong

incentives to comb their caseloads for suitable referrals, since cases transferred

from their caseloads to NOW officers would be replaced. Another factor was that

many NCPs were not eligible for WtW services under the original eligibility

criteria, often because the mothers of their children were no longer receiving TANF

or were not long-term recipients. Some NCPs were reluctant to participate or failed

to enter the program because they had already committed new offenses or feared

that failing in NOW would result in revocation of parole or probation.

serve those who were eligible. In fact, staff in most sites said they were constantly involved in

recruitment and were looking for additional NCPs to serve.

Programs Faced Challenges in Recruiting NCPs and Interesting Them in Program

Services. Staff gave a variety of reasons and factors that accounted for their difficulties with

recruitment of NCPs (see Box III-A for several specific illustrations of the problems encountered

by sites in this study).
35

First, unlike TANF recipients, NCPs have not traditionally been the focus of programs in the

past, so many NCPs were simply not aware that programs existed for them. Many NCPs

identified as potential candidates had never before been enrolled in social service or employment

programs. Many potential recruits were difficult to reach and, when contacted, were either

uninterested or even averse to participation. Site staff reported that some NCPs were distrustful

of programs or agencies (particularly if programs were attached to child support agencies, the

courts, or correctional systems). For example, some NCPs (especially those with large child

support arrearages) were concerned that their involvement in programs might lead to

garnishment of wages, loss of driver’s licenses, or even imprisonment. Some NCPs feared that

recruitment events might even be “sting” operations set up by local law enforcement agencies.

In several sites, staff also reported that some NCPs were reluctant to open letters sent by welfare

or child support agencies. Several administrators underscored the importance of building a track

record and trust within the local community, because NCPs were not accustomed to accessing

services and were often wary of programs linked or potentially linked to the welfare or child

support enforcement system.

Second, because NCPs have not typically participated in other human services programs, it

was often difficult for the program to find and link with other agencies that might be able to refer

large numbers of individuals. Even those programs that were able to identify other agencies that

served large numbers of NCPs (e.g., the IV-D court system, child support agencies, local

initiatives aimed at youth, and the correctional system), found that some of these other agencies

were not eager to partner or that the NCPs were not very interested in participating in another

program.

Third, staff in most study programs reported that NCPs were interested primarily in securing

a steady, well-paying job. In most locations the programs operated, economic conditions had
36

been relatively good in recent years (with low unemployment and even labor shortages in some

occupations). Depending upon an individual’s job-specific skills and employer demand for a

particular occupation, NCPs could secure relatively well-paying jobs quickly without outside

assistance. Hence, favorable economic conditions ironically translated into less demand among

NCPs for program services even though they might help improve their earnings in the long run.

Fourth, some NCPs had little or no desire to reconnect with the custodial parent or

dependent children and so were not interested in pursuing services. Similarly, some custodial

parents who might have information that could help recruit NCPs were uncooperative either

because they did not want to be reconnected with the NCP or because they wanted to protect the

NCP from being identified by child support enforcement agencies.

Fifth, at least initially (before Congress passed legislation simplifying the WtW eligibility

criteria for NCPs), programs found it difficult to find NCPs that met the eligibility criteria

(particularly the 70 percent criterion) or to obtain the necessary verification data. Fearing they

might be audited in the future and have to pay back funds used for NCPs who did not meet the

initial WtW eligibility criteria, programs were cautious in making sure they could document

WtW eligibility before enrolling NCPs.

Finally, in addition to these constraints, some agencies either did not initially recognize the

difficulties they might encounter in recruiting NCPs or failed to develop plans for conducting

recruitment. Others did not allocate sufficient resources or staff, and some lacked experience

conducting aggressive outreach efforts, particularly with regard to NCPs.

Program Design and Resources Affected Recruitment. The ways in which projects

structured their outreach and recruitment depended upon a number of factors. Whether sites

targeted specific NCP subpopulations (e.g., offenders, ex-offenders, or NCPs with arrearages) or

sought to recruit all eligible NCPs often affected both the type and the scope of recruitment
37

efforts. For example, programs such as those in Wisconsin (ex-offenders), Houston (NCPs

involved with the IV-D system), and Nevada (soon-to-be-released female inmates) sought to

establish referral arrangements with the courts and the correctional system. Other sites that more

broadly targeted NCPs were more likely to conduct outreach activities in local neighborhoods

and to use media advertisements and public service announcements (PSAs). Two programs,

Kansas City and Dekalb, received referrals from state child support programs and also conducted

their own outreach and recruitment activities.

Resources available and allocated to outreach efforts played a role in determining the

structure and methods used. For example, some types of outreach were more expensive (e.g.,

media advertisement and sending staff into the local neighborhoods to conduct outreach) than

others (e.g., making presentations to local agencies, relying on referrals from other agencies, and

distribution of flyers/brochures). The extent to which programs were already established within

their communities had some effect on the intensity of outreach needed and methods employed.

Those agencies or programs that were the “new guys on the block” reportedly needed to work

harder at recruitment. Finally, the willingness of other agencies to partner and success with

regard to referring eligible NCPs affected the need for sites to conduct additional outreach.

Those sites that could obtain a steady flow of referrals from other agencies had to conduct less

outreach on their own.

Though Recruitment Strategies Emphasized Referrals from Other Agencies, Sites

Employed a Variety of Other Strategies. Similar recruitment methods were used in most of

the study programs, especially receiving referrals from other agencies and distributing flyers and

program brochures. Exhibit III-1 provides a cross-site comparison of strategies employed

including:
38

• Direct Referrals from Other Agencies. This was a particularly important method for

many programs. Both mandatory and voluntary programs looked to those agencies

that served large numbers of NCPs—primarily the IV-D courts and correctional

systems, but also substance abuse programs and homeless shelters—and sought to set

up referral arrangements that would result in a direct flow of NCPs from these

agencies. Setting up such arrangements often proved more difficult than expected.

The referral arrangements between agencies had to be carefully monitored and

refined over time to ensure that administrators and line staff in other agencies actually

referred NCPs and that the referred NCPs actually showed up. Several examples of

innovative agency referral methods are highlighted in Box III-B. Links to child

support enforcement agencies and courts (for example, as in Houston Works site), as

well as the correctional system (as in the Wisconsin DOC’s Project NOW), which

could provide access to large pools of potential recruits for NCP programs. If wellstructured, partnerships with the child support enforcement and correctional systems

can provide NCP projects with a steady source of referrals.

• Distribution of Brochures/Flyers and Presentations at Other Local Human

Services Agencies to Increase Public Awareness. Programs sought to reach NCPs

either by making staff at other agencies knowledgeable about program offerings or by

placing program literature where NCPs would see it. One important strategy that

sites employed was to visit other agencies that served NCPs and to brief staff

(individually or as a group) about available program services, eligibility, and how to

refer NCPs to the program. Often program literature and brochures were left with

other agency staff to be handed out to NCPs or displayed in other places that NCPs

and their custodial parents were likely to frequent, such as: other social service

programs, grocery stores, churches, local schools and training institutions,

recreational facilities and playgrounds, public housing facilities, probation and parole

agencies, and in IV-D courts. Some program staff made presentations at orientation

sessions attended by NCPs or custodial parents (e.g., orientations held at prerelease

centers for offenders, orientations for individuals served by one-stop career centers,

orientations for TANF recipients, and workshops held by local fatherhood initiatives).

In some sites, staff attended and/or set up booths at local job fairs and other

community events, where they could distribute program literature and talk one-onone with potential program recruits.

• Use of PSAs on Radio and Television, and Paid Advertisements in Local Media.

Some programs sought out opportunities for free PSAs on local radio and television

stations. Local site administrators and staff also gave interviews to local television,

radio, and newspaper reporters, which provided an opportunity to inform a wider

audience of NCPs and custodial parents about available services. Some sites also

paid for advertisements on local radio stations and in local newspapers.
39

• Use of Mass Mailings Targeting NCPs and Custodial Parents. Some agencies (e.g.,

the Way-to-Grow project in Minneapolis and the Nevada Business Services in Las

Vegas) mailed out letters about the program to carefully targeted groups of NCPs or

custodial parents. However, several administrators noted that significant numbers of

NCPs were reluctant to respond to mass mailing by public agencies (especially those

closely linked to child support enforcement or welfare programs), which limited the

success of mailings.

• Reliance on Word of Mouth. Programs also relied on word of mouth, particularly

through former participants and community leaders. Because programs often targeted

a specific community, this reportedly was one of the most effective ways of

distributing information about the program and encouraging program participation.

Hearing from a local church leader, friend, or relative that a program provided useful

services (e.g., the program helped someone find a job or obtain improved visitation)

was considered the most certain way to interest people.

• Neighborhood Recruiting. Several sites sent individual staff and case management

teams into neighborhoods (the Dekalb Fatherhood Project and IRFFR) where

potential recruits congregated, to distribute information about program services and

conduct one-on-one recruitment. One program, the Concerned Parent Program (in

Kansas City), sent two noncustodial fathers into neighborhoods as “street recruiters”

to make informal contacts with potential recruits. These programs reported that the

ability to interact one-on-one with fathers in their own neighborhoods and explain

program services in some detail helped to begin to build trust and interest in

participation.

Overall, program administrators and staff emphasized the importance of not underestimating

the difficulties of attracting NCPs to programs. They noted that even if programs appeared to

offer the range of services NCPs needed, staff must not assume that NCPs will be easy to find or

that they will participate (even if pursued vigorously). Even programs in which recruits were

threatened with incarceration if they failed to participate found it difficult to engage and keep

NCPs in their programs. Difficulties sites experienced with recruitment stemmed from the

problems discussed at the beginning of this section, particularly those related to getting the word

out about program services to NCPs (who are not accustomed to being served by such initiatives)

and building sufficient interest and trust in NCPs so they are willing to take the initial steps

needed to access available services.
40

Box III-B

Illustrations of Recruitment Methods in NCP Programs

• Minneapolis FATHER Project. This project used a multifaceted approach. First, they

disseminated materials (primarily flyers and posters) to different agencies, including job

banks, prenatal clinics, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) offices,

Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) offices, child support offices, family court,

probation officers, and other community-based organizations. Second, Way-to-Grow

(WTG) staff conducted presentations about the program for staff at numerous agencies,

including TANF, corrections, and the courts. They also used newspaper and radio ads in

publications and stations used by the target population. (The radio ads were particularly

effective.) WTG also sponsored a community barbecue for families. While this

barbecue resulted in the enrollment of just four dads, project staff thought it was very

useful for getting the word out about the program. The child support enforcement office

also did mass mailings to noncustodial parents (NCPs). Finally, now that the program is

better known within the community, they find that word of mouth has become an

increasingly important way in which NCPs learn about the program.

• Houston Works. Most recruitment for this project comes either under court order by

IV-D Court Masters (judges) or through direct referral by Office of the Attorney General

(OAG) staff from one of the nine Child Support Enforcement Units in Houston.

Unemployed or underemployed NCPs that come before the IV-D judges for nonpayment

of child support are court-ordered to report to Houston Works for orientation,

assessment, and participation in employment services offered by the agency. The judges

may use the program as an alternative to a jail sentence and require (as part of a

compliance hearing) that NCPs report back to the court within 30 or 90 days on their

participation in the program. If the NCP fails to report to Houston Works or fails to

follow through on services available through the project, the IV-D judge will take this

into consideration in the compliance hearing. The courtroom includes posters promoting

the program, and the bailiff hands out brochures to NCPs about the program services and

how to access them. In addition, the court has made available office space for the

project so that Houston Works (or one of its subcontractors) can have a staff person

available whenever the court is in session (Monday–Thursday from 9 AM to 2 PM). The

judges indicate to NCPs that they must meet with the on-site staff person immediately

upon completion of the hearing so they can be scheduled for orientation at Houston

Works. Staff from the nine Child Support Enforcement Units also make referrals to the

project, often as a result of negotiations over an initial child support order or failure to

pay child support.

• Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization. IRFFR Outreach

Specialists recruit young fathers where they frequently gather in the community,

including local stores, recreational centers, basketball courts, and playgrounds. The

program office is located within the inner-city community it serves, and outreach

specialists live within that same community. Additionally, fathers are recruited through

staff presentations at schools, churches, and other gatherings of NCPs. IRFFR also

provides information about the program to staff at other agencies and programs serving

the community (including W-2 agencies and the Department of Corrections) and accepts

referrals from these agencies. A significant proportion of NCPs are self-referrals,

hearing about the program through word of mouth from friends, relatives, coworkers,

and others in the community.
41

B. INCENTIVES TO PARTICIPATE

Most Study Programs Relied upon Voluntary Participation by Some or All

Noncustodial Parents. Programs varied in terms of whether participation was mandatory or

voluntary, as well as in the types of incentives offered to participate. As shown in the cross-site

comparison earlier in Exhibit III-1, among the 11 programs visited, six had voluntary program

participation, four featured a combination of voluntary or mandatory participation (generally

depending upon the source of the referral), and one only involved mandatory participation.

In our discussions, site administrators and staff indicated that encouraging participation and

reducing attrition from programs were among the most challenging issues they face. A “carrotand-stick” approach appeared to offer the greatest potential for getting NCPs into programs and

keeping them engaged. Mandatory programs included the threat of some type of sanctioning if

the individual did not participate in services or if he dropped out before completing the project.

Sanctions, which usually took the form of incarceration or strict child support collections, were

most likely to be imposed through the courts, child support enforcement agencies, or correctional

systems. Program services and flexibility on child support payments for program participants

(offered by a few sites) were the primary positive incentives used by the study sites to encourage

participation. It is important to note that even mandatory programs also offered some positive

inducements.

The one study site that featured mandatory participation for all NCPs was the Yakima

SHARE Program, which was a collaborative effort of several agencies (including the local

workforce development board, the local child support enforcement office, and the prosecuting

attorney). With a primary goal of ensuring that NCPs became employed and paid their child

support, this program relied for recruitment entirely upon the child support agency and the

prosecuting attorney’s office. These agencies referred NCPs who were unable to find work on
42

their own to the SHARE program, under threat of incarceration if the person did not participate.

Most NCPs choose to participate, and few were jailed. Administrators believed that the leverage

of the court’s involvement and the realistic threat of jail served as an important motivator to

NCPs. However, this program also had what it viewed as important “carrots.” For example, the

child support agency, working with the courts, could provide a number of breaks on child

support: (1) establishment of payment agreements for less than the current amount for a

temporary period, (2) reestablishment of payment agreements for default orders that were

originally incorrect (default orders or orders completed when the noncustodial parent was not

present), and (3) the possibility of waiving arrearages.

Five sites we visited featured mandatory participation for some participants and voluntary

participation for others, usually on the basis of the referral source of the NCP. The Houston

Works and the Wisconsin DOC are two examples of projects that included both elements. In the

case of the Houston Works site, the major source of referrals was the IV-D system. NCPs were

ordered by IV-D judges to attend the program or face jail time. A compliance hearing was

typically held 90 days after the court order was issued to determine if conditions were met.

Failure to cooperate with Houston Works and to pay child support would likely result in jail time

(for up to six months) for the NCP. However, subcontracted agencies to Houston Works under

the initiative were also encouraged to conduct recruitment efforts on their own, and NCPs

coming to the program through these subcontracted agencies did so voluntarily. In the case of

the Wisconsin DOC program, NCPs on probation or parole were given the choice of enrolling in

Project NOW. However, once the NCP decided to enroll, attendance in program activities

became mandatory. Noncompliance could be a reason for revocation of probation or parole,

though usually revocation would result for failure to participate in Project NOW along with some

other infraction of the terms of probation or parole.
43

Finally, about half the sites featured voluntary enrollment on the part of all program

participants. Several of these programs were operated by workforce development agencies (e.g.,

the Los Angeles PIC, Nevada Business Services, and the PIC of Milwaukee County) and tended

to have outreach and recruitment activities that were either apart from the child support

enforcement system or included substantial numbers of referrals that did not come through it.

An example of a voluntary approach to participation was IRFFR (in Milwaukee). IRFFR, which

embraces the view that a father has the inner capacity to solve his own problems, recruited NCPs

who had a strong desire to make changes in their lives and reconnect with their children.
44
45

IV. PROGRAM SERVICES

At the core of the programs for noncustodial parents are the services to assist participants in

moving to employment and improving their relationships with their families. These programs

use a range of approaches to help participants achieve these goals. This section describes how

these programs performed intake and assessment, managed NCP cases, provided employmentrelated services, assisted with parenting and relationship matters, and delivered other types of

support or ancillary services.

A. INTAKE AND ASSESSMENT

The first step to enrolling a noncustodial parent in a program was to have eligibility

determined, based on the WtW criteria. In some cases, a referral agency made this determination

(particularly if the child support enforcement agency was responsible for the referral); in others,

the lead agency determined eligibility (often in coordination with other agencies with necessary

information on the NCP). If the NCP was determined to be eligible, an assessment was

completed.

If a person was not eligible for the WtW program, most agencies made referrals to another

program in the community or referred the person to a one-stop career center. Some staff stressed

the importance of providing some kind of service to every NCP who came in the door, both

because they were often very needy and because developing trust and support in the community

was important to gain additional referrals, recruits, or walk-ins.

Assessments Generally Were Conducted through One-on-One Interviews. In all of the

study programs, employment goals and prior work history were the focus of the assessment

interview. A range of other issues, such as family circumstances, parenting education,
46

transportation and housing, health and behavioral problems, and pending legal actions, were also

discussed in greater or lesser detail depending on the goals of the program. Some programs

administered the Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) to gauge the reading and math skills of

some or all applicants. Other formal assessment tools were used less often. One program

(Services Project 2000, a subcontractor to Nevada Business Services in the Las Vegas site) used

a formal screening instrument to assess drug and alcohol abuse, and a second program (LA Vets)

required drug tests because all participants were former drug or alcohol abusers who had agreed

to remain drug free during the program. The result of the assessment was generally an

employment plan (in some sites referred to as an individual service strategy) outlining the steps

the participant would take to find a job.

Study Programs Required Participants to Sign a Personal Responsibility Contract. In

all the programs, participants were required to have personal responsibility contracts. Personal

responsibility contracts outline the conditions and requirements of the program. By signing the

contract, the participant agrees to accept these requirements. These contracts were required by

the WtW amendments, although several of the programs we visited used contracts even before

the amendments were in place. As specified in the WtW amendments, the contracts generally

required NCPs to participate in employment services, establish paternity, and pay child support.

The personal responsibility contracts were generally completed as part of the upfront

assessment, after the participant received a general orientation to the program, the participant’s

employment and family background were discussed, and an employment plan had been agreed

to. Overall, program staff experienced little difficulty in implementing the personal

responsibility contracts. In some instances, participants were nervous about signing these

contracts, but in general, program staff found that participants were willing to agree to the

requirements—even in sites serving a voluntary population. In many cases, the contract was part
47

of a package of other forms the participant was required to sign, such waivers giving permission

for agencies to provide information needed for eligibility or to share information with each other.

B. CASE MANAGEMENT

Program staff, often referred to as case managers, use various strategies to monitor, direct,

counsel, or assist participants in their efforts to obtain employment and address other issues. A

case manager is generally responsible for ongoing contact with the participant, including

conducting the assessment, providing employment and job referrals, coordinating supportive

services, and documenting employment or related activities. In some programs, the case

manager may be more of a coordinator than a counselor and may manage only certain activities

or limited aspects of a client’s case.

Programs Used Two Basic Approaches for Providing Case Management Services.

Several of the programs included in the study—IRFFR, Nevada Business Services, and Yakima

SHARE—provided all case management services through a single staff person. In these

programs, one staff person was responsible for intake and assessment, the provision of job search

services, and all follow-up and monitoring activities. This approach offered the advantage of

having all the service needs of the noncustodial parent addressed through a single point of

contact.

Other programs used a team approach with multiple staff—usually two but sometimes

more—each of whom had responsibility and expertise in different areas. In some programs, such

as those in Minneapolis and Houston, case management was provided by a team from multiple

agencies, while the Dekalb and Kansas City programs assigned multiple staff from the same

agency. As an example, responsibilities were sometimes divided between a staff member who

focused on employment and another who focused on personal or family issues. While it required
48

greater coordination, participants using this team approach were enthusiastic about it, because it

brought staff members with different areas of expertise into the case. This enabled each team

member to focus on a limited range of issues, but without neglecting other needs. Box IV-A

provides examples of programs that used each of these approaches.

Program Staff Reported that NCPs Required Intensive Case Management Services.

Program staff usually characterized the case management services provided to NCPs as

“intensive” or “comprehensive,” and staff devoted substantial time. Program administrators tried

to minimize caseloads for staff and often split case management responsibilities among multiple

staff or agencies, both before and after employment. In some programs, case managers were

accessible to participants 24 hours a day through phones or pagers.

Box IV-A

NCP Case Management Approaches

Single Case Manager. The Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization

(IRFFR) in Milwaukee places strong emphasis on intensive case management and staff role

modeling. Staff are required to model a “risk-free lifestyle” (no drugs or alcohol) as a

condition of employment. IRFFR seeks to hire married couples to serve as Managing

Partners (program administrators) and Outreach Specialists. Each participant is assigned to

an Outreach Specialist, who lives in the neighborhood and is available to participants by

telephone or in person 24 hours a day. Outreach Specialists provide counseling through

frequent home visits and also connect participants to services and employment opportunities.

Team Case Management. In the DeKalb Fatherhood Connection program, noncustodial

parents work closely with two different staff members. A Job Coach is responsible for all

employment-related issues, such as job readiness, job search and placement, and job

retention. A Family Advocate is responsible for managing all other aspects of the case

including intake and assessment, parenting and family issues, and participation in education

and training activities. One Job Coach and one Family Advocate form a “team” (there are

five teams in all) and communicate frequently about their shared cases. Each team is located

in a different neighborhood and works with all program participants in that community.
49

C. EMPLOYMENT AND POSTEMPLOYMENT SERVICES

At the heart of the assistance each program offered were the services that enhanced the

employability of NCPs. All programs helped noncustodial parents find jobs, and for the most

part this was the focus of their programs. Exhibit IV-1 shows an overview of key features of the

employment services that individual sites provided.

Programs Focused on Moving People into Jobs Quickly through Individualized Job

Search and Job Readiness Services. Job search, in which NCPs looked for employment

directly, and job readiness activities, which provided training in job preparation and soft skills,

were the principal services in all the programs we studied. These services were provided

primarily through individualized, one-on-one meetings with program staff and focused on

finding immediate employment. The services included developing job readiness skills

(interviewing techniques, resume development, communication skills), job counseling, planning

and overseeing the job search process, providing of job leads, and helping with the job

applications.

Because NCPs faced multiple barriers to employment, staff consistently reported working

intensively with them during the job search period and meeting or speaking with them frequently

until they found a job. Services were individualized, and only one program established work

search requirements for the NCP. In the Los Angeles NCP-to-Work program, 30 hours per week

of independent job search was required.

In about half of the study sites, community-based organizations that had experience serving

disadvantaged individuals (though not necessarily NCPs) provided job readiness, job search, and

job placement activities. Many of the sites used multiple providers. In the other half of the sites,

the lead agency provided these services directly. Some programs used contracts with different

service providers to provide job search services to NCPs with special needs. For example,
50

Exhibit IV-1: Employment and Postemployment Services in NCP Programs

atherhood

ection

ur, GA

Full Employment

Council CCP

Kansas City, MO

Houston Works

Houston, TX

IRFFR Program

Milwaukee, WI

LA County NCP-toWork Program

Los Angeles, CA

LA Veterans in

Progress

Los Angeles, CA

cted job

th

e from

staff

ness classes

by Dekalb

c

nity

y and Dept.

ent

 used on as

asis

staff

inkages

loyers

- Self-directed job

search withassistance from FECstaff, including somestaff working withemployers to identifyopenings

- Specific services

vary bysubcontractor, butcontractors typicallyprovide one-on-onejob search assistanceand access toreadiness workshops

- Basic skills/GED

instruction and shortterm trainingavailable

- Individualized

employmentservices, includingjob search and jobreadiness

- Weekly peer group

sessions that coversome employmentrelated topics

- Staff maintain close

linkages with severallarge local employers

- On-site instruction

on basic computersoftware; referrals toeducation/training

- Peer Support Group

that addresses selfesteem, employment,and parenting issuesis initial activity

- 24 hours of

structured jobreadiness activities

- For those

unemployed afterthese activities, 30hours of independentjob search is required

- Job search and job

readiness activities,including access tojob developers

- Classroom training,

basic skills training,and work experienceavailable

- Training programs

include culinary arts,construction, andcustomized trainingprograms withToyota and Marriott

tion follow

monthly

minimum)

s on

dial parents

n education

ng once

- Job retention followup on a monthly

basis (at minimum)

- After three months

on the job, $300voucher for workrelated expenses;after 18 months, a$1,500 voucher

- Job retention

addressed throughcontinuing casemanagement

- Job retention

addressed throughcontinuing casemanagement

- Job retention

addressed throughcontinuing casemanagement

- Job retention

services, with focuson obtainingadditional training

tation

e in the

us tokens or

sses

e with

ated

- Assistance with

transportationincluding bus passes,car repairs, carinsurance, speciallicenses, and van andtaxi service

- Assistance with

work-related expenses

- Transportation

assistance includesbus passes/tokens,gas allowance, andhelp with car repairs

- Assistance with

work-relatedexpenses

- Assistance with

transportation andwork expenses

- Vouchers for workrelated expenses,

transportation, andhousing which maybe used for up to sixmonths afteremployment

- On-site housing is

provided; transitionalhousing provided tothose who leaveprogram

- Assistance with

transportation andwork expenses
51

ukee PIC Program

ilwaukee, WI

Minneapolis FATHER

Project

Minneapolis, MN

Nevada Business

Services

Las Vegas, NV

WI Dept. of Corrections

NOW

Milwaukee, WI

Yakima SHARE

Program

Yakima, WA

ces provided

gh subcontracting

ies. Each has

ility to design its

ervices but strong

asis on job search

ob readiness

ties, and job

ion

- Employment services

vary by provider, butstrong emphasis on jobsearch and job readiness

- Education, training, and

on-the-job trainingoptions are available

- Nevada Partners: Jobready NCPs enroll in

four-hour job readinessworkshop; NCPs not yetjob ready enroll in twoweek job readinessworkshops

- Services Project 2000:

eight-week workshopfor offenders nearingrelease

- Both projects emphasize

individualized jobsearch after workshopsare completed

- Specific approaches and

services vary by W-2agency, but generallyinclude job readinessworkshops and jobsearch assistance, with asmall number ofreferrals for short-termjob training

- Individualized job

search and jobreadiness provided

- NCPs sometimes

referred to same jobsearch classes as otherWelfare-to-Work andWorkforce InvestmentAct participants

- Some OJT and work

experience slots are used

tention addressed

gh continuing case

gement

ontractors make

upgrading

able after a

ipant secures a job

- Job retention addressed

through continuing casemanagement

- Job retention addressed

through continuing casemanagement

- Varies by provider but

job retention generallyaddressed throughcontinuing casemanagement

- Job retention addressed

through continuing casemanagement

ontracting agencies

a range of support

es directly or

gh referrals,

ding transportation

ance and work

d assistance

- Assistance with

transportation, shortterm emergencies (rent,utilities), and workrelated expenses

- Transportation

assistance includes buspasses/tokens, gasallowance, help with carrepairs

- Assistance with workrelated expenses

- Contracting agencies

offer wide range ofsupport services directlyor through referrals,including transportationassistance and workrelated expenses

- Transportation

assistance and workrelated expensesprovided
52

Houston Works contracted with providers who specialized in serving homeless families, disabled

people, and refugees. Yakima SHARE could make referrals to providers who specialized in

providing employment services to youth or people with substance abuse problems.

 Participation in group job readiness workshops prior to entering a direct job search was

emphasized in some sites, including the programs in Nevada and Los Angeles County:

• In the Nevada Business Services program, for those who were job ready, the

contractor provided a four-hour job readiness class. Those who were not job ready

were enrolled in a two-week job readiness program that included sessions on goal

setting, building self-esteem, managing conflict, and effective job search strategies.

Another contractor for this program also provided structured job readiness services

for soon-to-be-released female NCP offenders (see Box IV-B).

• The Los Angeles County NCP-to-Work program developed a Job Club exclusively

for NCPs, which lasted 24 hours (spread over several days) and focused on

developing job skills, preparing resumes, building communication skills, and learning

interview techniques.

In other programs, group job readiness services were used less systematically, although

NCPs were sometimes referred to existing workshops operated by community-based

organizations or one-stop career centers on an as-needed basis.
53

Developing and Maintaining Relationships with Employers Was Viewed as Critical.

Most programs had staff that worked to develop linkages with employers, usually as part of the

individualized job search services that were provided. Staff focused on developing an in-depth

understanding of the local labor market and contacting employers to identify specific job

openings appropriate for their clientele. Some staff found that they increased employer interest

by “selling” the program, that is, by directly explaining the mission of the program, which

reportedly helped overcome negative views of some employers. Staff also emphasized to

employers the availability of screening services, tax credits, and no-cost retention services (see

below) to attract employers.

Education and Training Programs Were Not Used Extensively. Program staff reported

that even when education and training services were made available, NCPs were reluctant to use

them. This lack of interest in education and training to upgrade skills was usually the result of

the NCPs’ interest in seeking paid employment as quickly as possible. In many cases, NCPs had

a pressing need to pay child support and support their families.

Box IV-B

Employment Services for Female NCP Offenders

Nevada Business Services contracts with Services Project 2000 to provide a unique set of

employment-related services for soon-to-be-released female noncustodial parents.

Participants attend an eight-week, 32-session workshop that follows a formal curriculum

focused on life skills, self-esteem, anger management, effective communication, and

motivation. There are also sessions on family success, relationships, and parenting, as well as

securing and keeping a job. At the conclusion, participants are given a “diploma of life” at a

special ceremony. The workshop is followed by weekly peer group sessions until the woman

is released from prison. As release time approaches for each participant, program staff

identify job leads and a range of other support services to ease the transition from prison into

the community. Once a woman is employed, assistance is available 24 hours a day, seven

days a week to troubleshoot problems and arrange for services.
54

While NCPs did not use education and training services at high rates, several of the

programs did make these services available. Some made referrals to existing programs in the

community, while others had directly funded or had developed education and training programs

for their participants. Some examples include:

• IRFFR assigned a staff member to provide basic training on the most frequently used

computer software applications. Volunteers also provided on-site literacy instruction.

• Houston Works had subcontractors who offered short-term training for the following

occupations: computer operator, truck driver, certified mechanic, certified nursing

assistant, corrections officer, bank teller, customer service representative, and retail

clerk, among others.

• The LA Vets program developed agreements with Toyota and Marriott to provide

customized training (with the person receiving a wage during the training period),

with a guarantee of employment upon completion of the program.

There was also little use of subsidized employment services such as on-the-job training and

work experience. Because the economy was strong and because NCPs preferred unsubsidized

employment, program operators preferred to place people directly into unsubsidized jobs. One

exception was the Yakima SHARE program, which provided on-the-job training and work

experience to NCPs as well as other WtW participants. In part, this was due to the community’s

history of providing subsidized-employment opportunities in a range of different programs.

Postemployment Services Were a Key Program Element. All the programs included in

this study continued to provide assistance to NCPs after they started working. As shown on

Exhibit IV-1, most of the programs focused on providing follow-up to improve job retention,

although one program provided financial incentives as well (see Box IV-C). This follow-up

assistance usually consisted of: (1) contacting NCPs on a monthly or biweekly basis to ensure

that they were still working, and (2) troubleshooting to guard against job loss. Several of the

programs also contacted employers directly for their perspective on the person’s job
55

performance. Staff also reported that employers considered the availability of follow-up services

an important element in their decision to hire an NCP. Programs generally worked with NCPs

for an indefinite period of time after they found a job—and did not have a specific point when

services would end.

Support services were also an important postemployment service. Most programs continued

to help with transportation and work-related expenses once the participant found a job. For

example, the Kansas City CPP spent a large portion of its WtW grant on providing transportation

resources to people who had returned to work. Monthly bus passes were available to help

employed individuals get to and from work, and one-time payments were made to help with

automobile repair, insurance, and fees for special driver’s licenses if they were required for a job

(e.g., a commercial driver’s license). The Full Employment Council (FEC) also received a grant

that provides "door to job" transportation for the CPP program—to help participants who live in

rural areas with no bus service or who need off-hours transportation for second- and third-shift

jobs. These funds can pay for taxi rides, vans, or other transportation alternatives to assist the

participant in maintaining employment.

Issues related to career advancement, such as combining work and school or moving to a

better job, generally did not receive high priority. While several of the programs recognized this

as important, it was handled primarily on a case-by-case basis, with staff helping participants

pursue these options when they could. One exception was the Dekalb Fatherhood Connection,

which made a systematic effort (and reported some success) in enrolling program participants in

some type of education or training once they were working.
56

D. PARENTING AND RELATIONSHIP SERVICES

Most programs visited as part of this study focused on enhancing employment outcomes

and improving timely payment of child support, but some addressed parenting and relationship

issues as well, including developing parenting skills, improving access and visitation to the

noncustodial parent’s children, building relationships with the child’s other parent (including

mediation services), and assisting with child support issues. Exhibit IV-2 provides an overview

of key features of these parenting and relationship services in the individual sites.

Parenting and Relationship Services Were Not a Priority in All Programs, but Most

Programs Provided Access to Some Type of Assistance. The scope and intensity of services

provided to improve parenting skills and help NCPs cope with relationship issues varied across

the sites. Both the IRFFR and the Minneapolis FATHER Project placed a strong emphasis on

parenting, improving access and visitation, and improving relationships with the child’s other

parent. These parenting services were fully integrated and strongly emphasized, primarily

through regularly scheduled peer support sessions and individual counseling sessions. The

Minneapolis program also provided on-site legal services on custody issues (see Box IV-D). In

addition, while the Wisconsin DOC’s Project NOW itself did not have a strong parenting

Box IV-C

Financial Incentives to Promote Job Retention

To motivate noncustodial parents and other Welfare-to-Work (WtW) participants to find

and retain employment and pay child support, the Kansas City Concerned Parent

Program uses WtW funds to create financial incentives: vouchers that allow participants

to purchase a variety of employment-related goods and services. A participant who holds

a job for three months receives a $300 voucher and, after nine months, a $1,500 voucher.
57

Exhibit IV-2: Parenting and Other Services in NCP Programs

atherhood

ection

ur, GA

Full Employment

Council CCP

Kansas City, MO

Houston Works

Houston, TX

IRFFR Program

Milwaukee, WI

LA County NCP-toWork Program

Los Angeles, CA

LA Veterans in

Progress

Los Angeles, CA

 made to

anizations

ting services

support

nd to a new

e program

on access/

 issues

vide informal

nd guidance

ting issues

rom CSE

assistance

d support and

ment services

- Referrals made to

other organizationsfor parenting andmediation services

- Staff provide informal

support and guidanceon parenting issues

- On-site Parents’ Fair

Share staff to provideassistance on childsupport and otherissues

- Referrals made to

other organizationsfor parenting, peersupport groups, andmediation services

- Planning to contract

with two agencies toprovide parentingworkshops

- Emphasis of project is

on reconnectingnoncustodial parents(NCPs) with theirchildren andimproving parentingskills

- One-on-one

counseling andweekly peer supportgroups are primaryinterventions

- Parenting services

provided informallythrough peer supportgroup meetings

- Mediation provided

upon request of NCP(primarily to deal withchild support, notcustody issues)

- Designated CSE staff

to provide assistanceon child supportissues

- Parenting is covered

informally as part ofevening workshopsand peer supportsessions

- Representative from

District Attorneyavailable to assist onchild support issues

 to other

ions (after

ent) for

e abuse,

nagement,

al health

- Referrals to other

organizations (afteremployment) forsubstance abuse andmental health issues 

- Range of support

services offereddirectly or throughreferrals, includinghousing, child care,substance abusetreatment, and mentalhealth treatment

- Referrals to other

organizations forassistance withtransportation,housing, substanceabuse and otherservices

- Domestic violence

program that refers both abusers andabused to outsideagencies forcounseling

- Referrals to other

organizations forsubstance abusetreatment (includingthose identified byemployers)

- Vouchers for workrelated expenses,

transportation, and housing which may beused for up to sixmonths afteremployment

- On-site housing is

provided; transitionalhousing provided tothose who leaveprogram

- Seven on-site staff to

provide counselingand other services ona range of issues
58

waukee PIC Program

Milwaukee, WI

Minneapolis FATHER

Project

Minneapolis, MN

Nevada Business

Services

Las Vegas, NV

WI Dept. of Corrections

NOW

Milwaukee, WI

Yakima SHARE

Program

Yakima, WA

aff provide informal

pport and guidance on

renting issues

bcontractors

couraged to develop

renting component

bcontract with Legal

tion of Wisconsin

akes a wide array of

gal services available

- Biweekly peer support

groups that addressparenting issues

- Staff provide informal

support and guidance onparenting issues

- Monthly family events- On-site legal assistance

for custody issues

- Referrals for mediation

services

- Designated CSE case

workers to assist onchild support issues

- Services Project 2000

includes workshopmodules focused onfamily and parentingissues

- Both contractors can

refer participants forlegal or mediationservices

- Varies by provider.

Employment Solutionsoffers formal 26-sessionresponsible-parentingcurriculum; UnitedMigrant OpportunityServices offers 10-session “Survival Skillsfor Men,” whichincludes parentingcurriculum; other W-2agencies designingfatherhood/ parentingcurriculum

- Staff provide informal

support and guidance onparenting and childsupport issues

- Recently started

developing peer supportsessions

- Regular meetings with

staff from the DistrictAttorney’s office onchild support and otherissues

bcontracting agencies

fer a range of support

rvices directly or

ough referrals,

cluding legal

sistance, substance

use treatment, and

using assistance

bcontracting agencies

fer specialized

rvices (e.g., one

ency specializes in

oviding services for

CPs with mental

alth and substance

use problems)

- Referrals for substance

abuse, mental health,and anger managementissues

- Referrals for housing,

child care, substanceabuse, and mental healthtreatment.

- Subcontracting agencies

offer wide range ofsupport services directlyor through referrals,including housingassistance, substanceabuse treatment andmental health issues

- Range of services

provided throughreferrals, includingmental health, domesticviolence, and angermanagement services

- Individuals with

substance abuseproblems referred toprovider who specializesin serving thispopulation
59

focus, one of the five contractors providing services under this model offered a comprehensive

26-week parenting curriculum (see Box IV-D).

In other sites we visited, parenting issues were not as central to the programs. A few

programs and agencies, such as LA Vets and Services Project 2000 (a subcontractor to Nevada

Business Partners in Las Vegas [see Box IV-B above]), incorporated parenting issues and

instruction into other workshops that dealt more broadly with basic skills and work readiness. In

all programs, case managers addressed issues relating to parenting, custody, or relationships with

the child’s parent as they arose and provided individual counseling as needed. In addition, all

sites made referrals to parenting workshops and mediation services sponsored by other agencies.

However, program staff reported that they rarely made such referrals.

A few programs had not focused on parenting issues initially, but had subsequently began to

develop options in this area. The Houston Works project was planning to add two new

subcontractors that would concentrate on providing parental skills workshops and counseling for

NCPs in need of intensive help. While an important part of the original program design, the

Yakima SHARE program initially focused on implementing the other components of the

program (e.g., employment-related services) and just recently started to offer peer support

sessions featuring an increased emphasis on parenting issues.
60

Box IV-D

Examples of Parenting and Relationship Services

• Wisconsin Department of Corrections NOW Program. Two of the five agencies

providing direct services under this initiative have implemented parenting/fatherhood

program components; the other W-2 agencies are in various stages of planning or

implementation. Employment Solutions (affiliated with Goodwill Industries of Southeastern

Wisconsin) offers a comprehensive, 26-session parenting/fatherhood workshop for NOW

participants. Sessions cover values, manhood, understanding the child support system,

understanding children’s needs, coping as a single father, male/female relationships, men’s

health, and substance abuse issues. A second agency, United Migrant Opportunity Services,

also offers a ten-session workshop, entitled “Survival Skills for Men.” The small-group

workshop sessions (three hours each, held twice a week) cover budgeting, parenting, health,

grooming/dressing, and a range of other topics.

• Minneapolis FATHER Project. The Minneapolis FATHER Project conducts biweekly peer

support groups using a formal curriculum and also sponsors monthly family events for

noncustodial parents (NCPs). This program also has a part-time staff person responsible for

assisting NCPs with resolving visitation and custody issues. This staff person operates a law

clinic, where 14 volunteer attorneys are available to provide advice on custody matters. In

addition, this project made mediation services available through referral to the county’s

family services agency.

• Institute for Fatherhood and Family Revitalization. The emphasis of the Milwaukee

IRFFR project is on reconnecting NCPs with their children and improving parenting skills.

The main intervention is direct, one-on-one counseling with each participant. At the core of

the project is a belief that attitude change leads to other positive consequences, such as

greater involvement with children, payment of child support, paternity establishment, and

long-term employment. NCPs also attend weekly peer support groups, in which they can

discuss parenting, relationships, work, and a range of other topics. Once the NCP is

engaged, the program seeks to bring in the custodial parent for individual counseling and

peer support groups. An important goal of the program is to resolve relationship disputes

between the noncustodial and custodial parents, so that the NCP can become actively

involved financially and emotionally with the children. IRFFR refers participants to other

agencies for paternity establishment, as well as mediation and legal assistance related to child

support and visitation.
61

While there is a requirement in the WtW amendments for consultations with domestic

violence providers, at the time of our site visits, these had not yet occurred in most programs.

One site—LA County—operated a program funded by TANF for both abusers and victims of

domestic violence. Program staff were trained on the issues, including the indicators of domestic

violence, and referred participants to suitable agencies for counseling and treatment. The

Yakima SHARE program made referrals to community-based organizations (usually the YWCA)

for domestic violence services.

Some Programs Assisted Individuals on Child Support Issues. Program staff

consistently reported that low-income NCPs did not have a good understanding of the child

support enforcement system and were wary of connecting with the system. To address this issue,

several programs systematically worked with the NCPs to both help them better understand the

child support system and ensure that he made child support payments once he found a job—but

reportedly in a less adversarial way than traditional child support enforcement agency staff.

Various staff performed this function, and in some sites designated staff from the child support

enforcement agency took on this role. Programs placing some emphasis on this issue included

those with a strong partnership with the child support agency (e.g., Houston and Yakima) as well

as others:

• Staff in the Dekalb program strongly emphasized the requirements of the child support

system in its program orientation. In addition, a liaison from the child support agency

assisted the program’s case managers in resolving any issues that may have prevented

the NCP from finding or keeping a job and in ensuring that child support payments were

made.

• In Minneapolis, a supervisor and two line staff at the child support enforcement agency

worked with all NCPs in the FATHER Project. Once a NCP was enrolled in the

program, these staff worked with the participant (if necessary) to establish paternity and

establish an order. They also worked with participants—both before and once they

begin working—on arranging the different adjustments to child support payments that

this program offers (e.g., delaying and modifying orders, stopping interest on

arrearages).
62

• In the LA Vets program, participants met with a representative from the District

Attorney’s office as soon as they found a job to discuss payment issues for child support

orders and arrearages.

While some programs directly addressed helping NCPs understand the child support system,

other programs did not. Those where there was no systematic method for addressing child

support issues typically had case managers address child support issues on an as-needed basis.

E. OTHER TYPES OF SERVICES

Employment services were the focus of this set of programs for noncustodial parents, but

because participants face significant barriers to employment, program operators recognized that

it was important to offer a wider array of supportive services.

Specialized Services Were Made Available Primarily through Referrals to Other

Organizations. As shown on Exhibit IV-2, most of the programs in this study made specialized

services available to participants through referrals to other organizations with expertise in the

appropriate area. For example, individuals with substance abuse or mental health problems were

referred to providers who offered appropriate treatment or counseling programs. Most

programs—including such programs as Dekalb Fatherhood Connection, Houston Works, and

Nevada Business Partners—were also prepared to make referrals to other local providers for

housing assistance, anger management, or peer support groups on an as-needed basis. A few

programs also made referrals for child care assistance, which NCPs needed on occasion.

As discussed in a previous section, a few of the programs (e.g., Houston Works and Yakima

SHARE) subcontracted with providers that specialized in employment and other services to

people with particular barriers, such as substance abuse problems. Usually, however, these

programs did not have contractual arrangements with other agencies for such services. Rather,

programs established the necessary, often informal linkages with appropriate organizations so
63

that referrals could be made on a timely basis.

Referral Rates to These Other Types of Services Were Generally Low. While a wider

range of services was available, most programs reported that few referrals were actually made to

them. Staff reported that it was often difficult for NCPs to admit to or seek help for some of the

problems they were experiencing. So that substance abuse problems could be identified and

resolved, staff in the LA County program were notified by employers when on-the-job drug tests

were positive. NCPs were then required to go through an assessment that could lead to re-entry

into the program or referral to a treatment program.

Of the programs in our study, the LA Vets program offered the widest range of services

(beyond those for employment). It was a residential program in which participants lived on site

in dormitory-style suites. If participants found a job, they paid the lesser of $50 or one-third of

their earnings per week for housing. In addition, participants who left the program were eligible

for transitional housing at the same site. Counseling was also provided on site, and participants’

medical expenses were covered through their veterans’ benefits (although most medical services

were provided off site).
64
65

V. CONCLUSIONS

The 11 programs serving noncustodial parents under the WtW grants program reviewed in

the previous sections represent different approaches to serving this low-income population. The

experiences of these programs provide a number of insights into how to structure and implement

programs for NCPs. Although the sample of sites visited is small and the results not nationally

representative, a few observations and conclusions might be useful to others interested in similar

programs.

A Vvariety of Public and Private Organizations Can Establish and Operate Programs

for Low-Income NCPs. Programs for NCPs are provided through a variety of different

structural models and bring together widely varying local partnerships and services. Because

each locality operates within a different service environment and economy and serves a different

clientele, no single model is necessarily preferable, nor is there a presumptive agency that should

be the lead administrative entity. Half the projects examined were administered by workforce

development agencies, one was run by a corrections department, and the rest were operated by

community-based organizations.

Programs Can Benefit from Collaboration and Coordination among Agencies.

Regardless of the administering agency, most projects in this review were collaborative efforts

that involved a number of partners, including the workforce development agency, the child

support enforcement agency, courts, and community-based organizations. The benefits of

interagency collaboration are understandable, since the target population tends to have many

problems—personal, legal, and employment-related. No single agency is likely to have the

expertise and experience to address the full range of issues and problems adequately. Based on

conversations with staff, there seem to be strong reasons to believe that programs for NCPs can
66

benefit from collaboration and interagency coordination.

The availability of WtW funds in the study sites helped promote collaboration to some

extent. The presence of the funds provided an impetus for bringing local agencies together

around a common purpose—improving employment outcomes so that NCPs can better fulfill

their responsibilities to pay child support and take a more active role in the lives of their children.

Although it may often be time-consuming and complicated to bring together a number of

partners, it is important from several standpoints:

• Partnerships facilitate recruitment, which can be a serious stumbling block to getting

programs up and running

• Collaboration can substantially expand the range of services that can be provided for

a target group with widely varying needs and few external supports

• Linkages can help to leverage and expand significantly the local resources available

to meet the needs of NCPs

Recruitment Is a Critical Challenge and a Major Component of Programs that Serve

NCPs. For many low-income NCPs, this type of program could be a first step toward improving

their employment and earnings potential. However, programs must first gain the trust of the

people they are trying to help. The most significant challenges for programs that target NCPs are

recruiting and fully engaging NCPs. All programs visited faced some difficulties on this front, at

least initially, although most were able to boost their enrollments over time. Several lessons

emerge from the implementation experiences of programs reviewed in this report.

• Programs that were most successful in recruiting participants used multiple

approaches. Partnering with different agencies to provide a steady source of referrals,

particularly from the child support enforcement agency or the courts, is an important

strategy that increases program enrollment. However, many of the programs used a

variety of other strategies to identify potential program participants. These included the

distribution of brochures and flyers, presentations at other agencies, use of PSAs and paid

advertisements in the local media, mass mailings, neighborhood recruiting, and word-ofmouth.

• Programs should not underestimate the problems associated with recruiting NCPs.

Most of the programs visited assumed that participants would come primarily
67

through referrals from other agencies. With few exceptions, the programs realized that

referrals alone were not adequate. Adding outreach activities late can be expensive and

can divert staff and resources available for direct service delivery. Systematically

considering outreach and recruitment strategies before startup could help minimize

program disruption later. Once in place, recruitment efforts must be monitored carefully

(particularly in the early stages of programs), and changes will be needed to improve

outreach and recruitment methods for the eligible and interested NCP population.

• A combination of positive inducements and pressures may prove more successful than

either a completely voluntary program or a harshly punitive program. Involving the

child support agency and the courts, which can provide both “carrots and sticks” for

participation, appears to be important for simultaneously addressing recruitment and

program retention issues. Most programs used a mix of both positive (child support

payment options, comprehensive program services) and negative incentives (threat of

incarceration) to encourage participation. Once NCPs are participating, though,

individualized employment and support services by professional staff with small

caseloads are essential.

Low-Income NCPs Are Most Interested in Rapid Employment. Program operators

reported that, while NCPs faced some of the same challenges to employment as custodial parents

(basic skills deficiencies, lack of job-specific skills, and difficulties with job retention), they had

some special needs that programs should address. Perhaps most importantly, NCPs typically

come to programs under strong pressure (often by courts and child support agencies) to find

work quickly because of unpaid and mounting child support payments and other financial

pressures. Therefore, this population has a strong and abiding interest in securing a job (or

upgrading employment).

Programs that fail to respond quickly to this overriding need will likely experience high

levels of attrition. Program staff reported that NCPs generally lack the external supports (e.g.,

other working family members and access to cash assistance programs) to engage in lengthy job

readiness workshops, education and training programs to upgrade skills, or work experience

programs. Programs serving this population need to look first to meeting immediate job

placement and support services needs, then to considering ways to engage NCPs in programs

over a longer period of time (once employed) to upgrade job skills and parenting skills.
68

Helping NCPs Understand and Negotiate the Child Support Enforcement System May

Be an Important Program Service. Based on discussions with program staff, it appears that

more low-income NCPs might be interested in improving their employment situation if they

understood the child support system better and believed that their efforts would benefit their

children. Many low-income NCPs lack accurate information about the child support system,

including how payments reach the children and how special payment plans can be arranged. If

they understood better how the system works, and if they felt they could trust the programs, they

might be more willing to participate seriously and develop long-term child support payment

plans. While the programs in this study did not consistently emphasize this issue, some

programs have designated specific staff—often from the child support enforcement agency—to

assist participants with these issues.

Because of NCPs’ interest in employment, program services need to be focused on both preand postemployment activities. However, other types of services may be critical to the NCPs

long-term employment prospects. NCPs are interested primarily in obtaining a job quickly, but

other employment and support services can help improve their long-run economic status,

earnings, and child support payment. Ongoing case management, counseling, and job placement

assistance can improve job retention and ensure an effective transition to a new job. Job-training

and education activities could complement regular employment to help improve skills. Some

NCPs also need a range of other support services to sustain regular employment and fulfill their

parenting responsibilities, including mental health or substance abuse treatment, child care or

transportation assistance, legal services, housing assistance, and services that address the

problems of domestic violence. At a minimum, either through the sponsoring agency or by

coordinating with other local service providers, the following are among the core program

components:
69

• Well-targeted and coordinated outreach and recruitment

• Assessment and employability development planning, culminating in the

development of a written individual employment or service plan that identifies

participant goals and activities

• Ongoing case management and individual counseling

• Assistance with child support issues

• Job search, job development, and job placement services, including job search

workshops, job clubs, help in identifying job leads, and direct job placement

assistance

• Job training services, including (1) remedial education and basic skills/literacy

instruction, (2) occupational skills training, (3) on-the-job training, and (4) other types

of work experience, such as internships/fellowships

• Postplacement follow-up and support services (e.g., additional job placement

services, training after placement, support groups, and mentoring)

• A range of other support services that are provided either directly by the project or

through referral arrangements with other human services providers, including

parenting education; alcohol and other substance abuse assessment and counseling,

with referral as appropriate to outpatient and/or inpatient treatment; child care

assistance; transportation assistance; referral for mental health assessment,

counseling, and treatment; and referral for housing services

The experiences of programs visited underscored the importance of providing a comprehensive

range of services to address the varied problems NCPs faced in securing employment and

becoming more actively involved in the lives of their children.
70
71

REFERENCES

A Guide to Funding Services for Children and Families Through the Temporary Assistance for

Needy Families (TANF) Program. 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services.

Doolittle, F., V. Knox, C. Miller, and S. Rowser. 1998. Building Opportunities, Enforcing

Obligations: Lessons for Child Support Reform from the Parents’ Fair Share Pilot Phase. New

York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

Edin, K., L. Lein, and T. Nelson. 1998. Low Income, Non-Residential Fathers: Off-Balance in

a Competitive Economy, An Initial Analysis. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services, available at http://fatherhood.hhs.gov.

Johnson, E., A. Levine, and F. Doolittle. 1999. Fathers’ Fair Share. New York, NY: Russell

Sage Foundation.

Martinez, J. and C. Miller. 2000. Working and Earning: The Impact of Parents’ Fair Share on

Low-Income Fathers’ Employment, (New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research

Corporation), 2000.

Martinson, K. 1998. Serving Noncustodial Parents Through Welfare-to-Work Grants: Labor

Market Characteristics, Employment Barriers, and Service Strategies. Washington, DC: The

Urban Institute.

Mincy, R., and E. Sorensen. 1998. “Deadbeats and Turnips in Child Support Reform.” Journal

of Policy Analysis and Management, vol. 17, no.1, pp. 44-51.

Office of the Inspector General. 2000. The Establishment of Child Support Orders for LowIncome Noncustodial Parents. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services.

Pearson, J., N. Thoennes. D. Price, and J. Venohr. 2000. Office of Child Support Enforcement

Responsible Fatherhood Programs: Early Implementation Lessons. Denver, CO: Center for

Policy Research and Policy Studies, Inc.

Perez-Johnson, I, and A. Hershey. 1999. Early Implementation of the Welfare-to-Work Grants

Program: Report to Congress. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

Perez-Johnson, I, A. Hershey, and J. Bellotti. 2000. Further Progress, Persistent Constraints:

Findings from a Second Survey of the Welfare-to-Work Grants Program. Princeton, NJ:

Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

Reichert, Dana. 1999. Broke But Not Deadbeat: Reconnecting Low-Income Fathers and

Children. Washington, DC: National Conference of State Legislatures.

Sorenson, E. 1997. Low-Income Noncustodial Fathers: Who Are They and What Are States

Doing to Assist Them in Their Effort to Pay Child Support? Washington, DC: The Urban

Institute.
72
APPENDIX A

PROFILES OF THE NCP STUDY PROGRAMS
74
75

Dekalb County Fatherhood Connection

Decatur, GA

Overview and Local Context

The Fatherhood Connection is operated by a community action agency that directly provides

employment and case management services to noncustodial parents (NCPs). This program uses

a variety of recruitment methods--potential program participants are referred from the child

support enforcement agency and recruited directly from the community. Immediate employment

is the primary goal of this program. Once the noncustodial parent is working, however, staff also

focus on promoting education and training (done concurrently with work) and on addressing a

range of other issues, including substance abuse or parenting issues. The Fatherhood Connection

operates in Dekalb County—a large urban/suburban county that includes part of Atlanta,

Georgia—and serves a primarily African American population.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

The Dekalb Economic Opportunity Authority—a nonprofit, community-based organization with

extensive experience providing Head Start and employment services--provides both the

employment and case management services in this program. The Dekalb County Child Support

Enforcement Office plays an important role in providing referrals to the program, and the

Georgia Department of Labor, the Sheriff’s Department, and the Dekalb County Department of

Family and Children Services have also been involved in recruitment efforts. Program staff are

housed at existing community programs, including local Family Resource Centers and a housing

authority.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

The Fatherhood Connection program is funded by a Welfare-to-Work (WtW) competitive grant.

The program began operating in April 1999. As of July 2000, there were 160 fathers enrolled in

the program.

Target Group

The program serves NCPs who meet the WtW eligibility criteria.

Incentives for Participation

Individuals who do not participate in program services or do not start making their child support

payments when they find employment can be issued contempt citations and arrested. On the

positive side, in addition to program services, the child support enforcement office provides

some limited assistance on child support issues for program participants. On a case-by-case

basis, the program will reinstate revoked licenses for participants if necessary. For those

recruited directly by the Fatherhood Connection program, the child support office will delay the

collection of child support or license suspensions for 30 days after program enrollment.
76

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

The Fatherhood Connection program identifies potential program participants in two ways.

First, individuals are recruited directly from the community. To assist in this effort, the program

created a communication specialist position to develop and prepare recruitment materials,

including a newsletter, flyers, and posters. The location case management teams in specific

communities also help in recruitment. These staff are able to develop an in-depth understanding

of services, events, and activities in their neighborhood and to identify potential recruitment

opportunities. Other outreach strategies include: (1) a widely distributed quarterly newsletter

about the program, (2) a mass mailing to all Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

mothers informing them about the program, (3) presentations to incarcerated fathers participating

in a pre-release life skills program, and (4) recruiting from lists of NCPs identified by the

Employment Service at the Georgia Department of Labor.

Second, the Fatherhood Connection receives a significant number of referrals from the child

support enforcement agency. Noncustodial parents who have not paid child support in over 30

days are required to participate in one of two programs (or they will be sent to a court hearing).

“Job-ready” NCPs are referred to a state employment program for NCPs called the Georgia

Fatherhood Program. Those that are considered “hard-to-serve” (primarily those without a high

school diploma) are required to participate in services at the Fatherhood Connection.

Intake and Assessment

The County Child Support Enforcement Office determines WtW eligibility for those individuals

it refers to the Fatherhood Connection. Staff at the Fatherhood Connection, with assistance from

child support staff, determine WtW eligibility for those recruited directly into the program.

The assessment process is intensive and covers a range of issues, including employment and

education history, employment goals, family history, and potential employment barriers.

Assessment includes the completion of a five-page assessment form identifying employment

history and barriers, development of a three-step action plan, and the completion of a personal

responsibility contract that requires the participant to establish paternity (if they have not),

participate in Fatherhood Connection activities, seek employment, and develop a manageable

child support plan. The Test of Adult Basic Education (TABE) is administered to those who

have not graduated from high school or gotten a GED.
77

Case Management

Each NCP in the program works with two staff members at the Fatherhood Connection. Job

Coaches are responsible for all job-related assistance, including job readiness services, job

placement, job retention, and working with employers. Family Advocates focus on intake and

assessment and addressing other nonemployment-related issues, including substance abuse,

mental health, housing, parenting, and referrals to education and training programs. There are

five sets of “teams”—each of which consists of a Job Coach and a Family Advocate. Each team

serves a different neighborhood in the county.

The child support enforcement agency hired a consultant who is also actively involved in

working with Fatherhood Connection participants. This individual, in collaboration with the

Fatherhood Connection case management teams, provides assistance on a range of employment,

personal, and family issues for individuals who are referred from the child support enforcement

agency.

Employment and Postemployment Services

Before beginning job search activities, participants attend a three-hour motivational, selfempowerment class that focuses on explaining program services and child support

responsibilities. Following the self-empowerment class, individuals are referred directly to their

Job Coach, who assists them in initiating a job search (sometimes through accessing services at

the Employment Service or the Dekalb Economic Opportunity Authority) and provides referrals

for employment leads.

Once individuals find a job, Job Coaches continue to remain in close contact with the individual.

They usually contact the client every other week—and are required to contact them once a month

to verify employment. Once they are working, in order to promote their career advancement, the

Family Advocate is responsible for working with individuals to identify and enroll them in

appropriate education and training programs. The program also provides transportation

assistance in the form of transit passes or tokens.

Parenting and Relationship Services

The program makes referrals to peer support, parenting, and other relationship-oriented services

on an as-needed basis. Overall, few participants have been using these services. A few referrals

have been made to a new statewide program called “Families First,” which focuses on resolving

access and visitation issues.

Other Services

On an “as-needed” basis, the Fatherhood Connection makes referrals for substance abuse and

mental health issues.
78

Contact Information

Dr. Frederick Zaks

The Fatherhood Connection

3576 Covington Highway

Decatur, GA

(404) 297-0068
79

Full Employment Council’s Concerned Parent Program

Kansas City, MO

Overview and Local Context

The Full Employment Council (FEC) is a private, nonprofit organization created in 1986 by the

merger of four local employment programs (a program for ex-offenders, a youth program, a

reverse-commute urban employment program, and a nonprofit organization that operated Job

Training and Partnership Act programs). As the administrator for two Service Delivery Areas

(SDAs) and a provider of employment services for FUTURES (Missouri’s Temporary

Assistance for Needy Families program), it has a long history in workforce development and a

good working relationship with the state’s Department of Social Services (DSS) (which includes

child support enforcement). Implementation of the Welfare-to-Work (WtW) program for

noncustodial parents (NCPs) challenged the agency to adapt its usual approach to recruiting

program participants, its operational procedures and linkages with DSS at the state and local

level, and its successful employment program (characterized by the innovative use of voucher

payments to provide substantial job retention incentives to participants) for a population of

clients they had not served before.

Some participants in the FEC’s Concerned Parents Program (CPP) are also part of the state’s

Parents’ Fair Share (PFS) program, which also provides assistance to NCPs in finding

employment and paying child support. The program has developed creative approaches to

recruit additional clients—such as the use of two “street recruiters who go where the FEC can’t

go.” The program has several case managers for each participant and emphasizes quick job

placement accompanied by self-enhancement after employment. Kansas City is an

urban/suburban area, and the program serves a mix of African Americans, Hispanics, and

Caucasians.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

The FEC, PFS, and DSS—particularly the Division of Children and Families and the Division of

Child Support Enforcement (for eligibility and [initially] recruitment and referrals)—are the key

partners in this initiative.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

A competitive WtW grant funds the NCP program. As of July 2000, a total of 267 participants

had entered the program.

Target Group

The program serves NCPs who meet the WtW eligibility criteria. No specific demographic

group has been targeted, although the NCP caseload reflects the low-income population in the

area.
80

Incentives for Participation

CPP is a voluntary program. To encourage participation, for those referred through PFS, child

support collection can be delayed (though this adds to arrearages) or sanctions postponed (such

as the suspension of professional, hunting and fishing, and drivers’ licenses) while NCPs are

participating in CPP or other education, training, and placement programs.

The employment services and financial incentives for job retention are also important incentives

to encourage participation. CPP provides a job retention incentive in the form of vouchers for

work-related expenses. They are available at three months (a value of $300) and nine months (a

value of $1,500) for participants continuously on the same job. At the time of our visit, only one

NCP had received the nine-month benchmark voucher.

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

NCPs who are unemployed, underemployed (unable to make their full child support payments at

their current wage), or have arrearages are referred to the PFS program by the Division of Child

Support Enforcement. PFS then refers WtW-eligible individuals to the CPP program. Slightly

less than half of the CPP participants are referred by the PFS program. PFS staff are colocated at

the CPP program.

In addition to referrals through PFS, the FEC staff members also check applicants and

participants in other FEC programs for WtW eligibility and make referrals to CPP when

appropriate. In addition, they have just implemented a program using two street recruiters: NCPs

themselves who had been clients in FEC programs and who are known in the community

because they are local musicians. They “go where the FEC cannot go” to initiate contact and

conversations with young men and women who may be eligible for the CPP and to extend

friendly invitations to enroll in the program.

Intake and Assessment

For individuals referred through PFS, the PFS case manager is responsible for determining WtW

eligibility and has usually conducted an initial assessment. Whether referred by PFS or from any

other source, all individuals must complete an application for the CPP program, and CPP staff

complete a one-on-one assessment covering employment and basic personal/family issues.

Participants also sign a personal responsibility contract.

Case Management

The CPP uses a team of case managers. A Career Counselor (CC) at CPP addresses overall

needs with attention to personal and family issues. Each participant also meets with an

Employment Counselor (EC) who helps with job search, does job development, and works on

retention after placement. FEC has now added a third position—a Job Matcher who provides

three immediate job referrals to each participant after orientation. Participants use postcards to

stay in touch, and they are asked to keep journals to discuss with their CC on a monthly basis.

The CC or EC contact them regularly to check on employment and to encourage them to
81

undertake self-enhancement activities such as education and training. Those referred to CPP by

PFS also continue to work with their PFS case manager on a range of issues—which vary

depending on the needs of NCP—including referrals to employment, education and training

activities, parenting issues, and child support issues.

Employment and Postemployment Services

Services include job preparation, resume preparation, provision of job leads, job development,

and retention follow-up, including logistical support such as help with transportation (which has

represented a large expenditure for the CPP). Job preparation for the NCPs are conducted in

three half-day sessions by an experienced educator and coach called a Job Success Instructor.

All WtW clients are eligible for the retention incentives described earlier. CPP sometimes refers

NCPs to education and training programs, and the program sometimes pays for training. CPP

participants can also engage in work experience and on-the-job training, but there is not much

interest in these programs among the NCPs.

Parenting and Relationship Services

NCPs can be referred by their PFS case manager or a CC to a mediation service on visitation

issues, unless there is a court order banning visitation. There is one fatherhood program in the

area, but only a few referrals have been made to it. Though FEC has focused on employment,

some CPP and FEC staff members are exploring ways to incorporate additional services such as

parenting, peer groups, and anger management.

Other Services

All NCPs have access to GED, adult basic education, and Workforce Investment Act training

programs. They can also get referrals for substance abuse treatment. In addition, PFS provides

additional funding for some services (the PFS program already does a fairly broad assessment,

and the scope of its assessments is now expanding).

Contact Information

Clyde McQueen

President/CEO

Full Employment Council, Inc.

1720 Paseo

Kansas City MO 64108

(816) 471-2330
82

Houston Works

Houston, TX

Overview and Local Context

Prior to the development of the Houston Works (HW) project for noncustodial parents (NCPs),

the local Office of the Attorney General (OAG) was looking for ways to improve systems for the

collection of child support, to include an emphasis on prevention of arrearages, alternatives to

jail, and more father-friendly approaches. When leaders of HW invited an assistant attorney

general to visit one of their seven one-stop centers in Houston and to discuss applying for a WtW

grant to serve NCPs, he recognized an opportunity to establish the kind of program he and a

coalition of organizations had been trying to fund for several years.

Initial recruitment was slow. After the program began operating, however, the OAG and HW

approached the IV-D court serving Houston and offered the judges (who hear 90 to 100 child

support cases per day, four days a week) an alternative remedy to the threat of incarceration for

those who could not meet their child support obligation due to unemployment: help finding and

retaining jobs. They agreed to give the program a try, and today the program has forged a strong

link between HW, the OAG, and the courts that the assistant attorney general has been asked to

replicate elsewhere in the state.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

HW, created in 1984 as staff to the Private Industry Council serving the City of Houston,

operates one-stop career centers and a range of workforce development programs serving

disadvantaged residents of Harris County (with a focus on the city of Houston). The OAG for

the state of Texas, which operates nine Child Support Enforcement Units in the Houston area,

also played a central role in the design and implementation of the partnership. In addition, the

Harris County IV-D court system has played an instrumental role in the development of the

project and in providing a steady source of referrals.

HW subcontracts with seven local human service agencies to provide assessment, case

management, employment and training services, postplacement services, support services, and

referral to a range of other services: Educational Learning and Enrichment Center; SEARCH

Homeless Project; DSU Training Institute; Houston Community College; Employment and

Training Centers; Goodwill Industries; and Refugee Services Alliance.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

The NCP program is funded by a Welfare-to-Work (WtW) competitive grant. Between the start

of the grant (June 1998) and July 2000, HW had enrolled a total of 192 NCPs. The overall goal

is to serve 510 NCPs through the end of the grant (June 2001).
83

Target Group

Program participation is limited to individuals meeting the WtW eligibility criteria, though HW

is able to serve individuals referred by the courts and child support enforcement units who do not

meet WtW eligibility criteria through its one-stop career centers (which provide a range of

employment services for the general public). Hence, in effect, HW can provide services and

meet the needs of any NCP referred—though more intensive services (e.g., training, referral to

subcontractors, and a range of support services) are available for those eligible under WtW.

Incentives for Participation

Those not coming through the courts or child support enforcement units voluntarily participate in

the program. The primary incentives are the employment and retention services that HW and its

subcontractors provide.

The IV-D judges can court order participation in the HW program as one of the conditions with

which the NCP must comply. (The individual essentially has three alternatives: payment of the

delinquent child support, jail, or reporting to HW). A compliance hearing is typically held 90

days later to check to see if these conditions are met—failure to cooperate with HW and not

paying child support could be sufficient reason for jailing (for up to six months).

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

Eighteen months into the WtW grant, the outlook for success appeared bleak, with only 47 NCPs

enrolled. Legislative changes in the WtW eligibility criteria and a link with the IV-D courts

(facilitated by provision of an on-site desk at the court where program representatives could

make immediate contact with NCPs referred to the program) substantially eased recruiting

problems. In addition, HW developed effective literature and promotional materials that have

been distributed throughout the community and is now also receiving reverse referrals from its

seven employment services vendors. In addition, HW screens its other one-stop clients for WtW

eligibility.

HW reports back to the court on whether court-ordered referrals fail to show up for the program.

HW does not disclose employment or wage information to the court, however. HW makes it

clear that it has no responsibility for collecting child support and wants to avoid that perception

on the part of its clients.

Intake and Assessment

Procedures for enrollment in the program vary, depending on how the individual is recruited.

For court-order referrals, a representative of the program is available whenever the court is in

session at an office adjacent to the courtroom. This representative tries to immediately engage

any individuals who have been court-ordered to HW; these individuals complete a brief

information form (so HW can confirm eligibility) and are invited to the next scheduled NCP

orientation session. HW is able to check eligibility directly by using the state’s integrated
84

database system, which it can access because it is a provider for the Workforce Investment Act

and CHOICES (Texas’s TANF work program).

When individuals are “reverse-referred” by HW vendors, vendors provide identification

information that enables HW to check WtW eligibility. If individuals referred by vendors are

WtW eligible, the subcontractor referring the NCP is given the go-ahead to enroll the individual

in the program and begin providing services. (Those not WtW eligible may still receive services

from these agencies; depending on their situation and the availability of other funds, however,

the services may be more limited.)

HW participants sign personal responsibility contracts or verbally agree to them. Individual

employment plans are developed by HW case managers or vendor case managers (with HW

sign-off).

Case Management

When the program began, HW had trouble finding community-based organizations and

nonprofits who would agree to provide services for NCPs, because many agencies did not have

experience working with them and felt they were an unknown group. Therefore, HW decided to

provide employment services itself, through its one-stops, for half of the planned caseload of

510.

HW employs two NCP case managers and is about to hire a third. When clients are referred to

employment subcontractors, the HW case manager serves in a secondary capacity, primarily

tracking progress of the NCP through the program and signing off on the service plan and

changes to it. Each subcontracted agency assigns a case manager to work with an enrolled NCP.

HW and the two subcontractors we visited emphasized the case manager working one-on-one

with the individual, particularly in job placement, provision of support service or arranging for

referral for support services, and troubleshooting problems as they arise.

Employment and Postemployment Services

Before they would agree to refer NCPs to the program, the courts wanted to make sure that those

they referred could be served whether they were WtW eligible or not. Therefore, HW made a

commitment to link every referral to employment services. HW could make this commitment

because of the resources available in its one-stops.

HW and the two subcontractors we visited emphasize work-first approaches; these include job

readiness workshops, job placement assistance, intensive case management, and support services

tailored to individual needs. Postemployment services have primarily involved one-on-one case

management, including contacts with employers and troubleshooting of problems as they arise.

Short-term training (less than six months) and basic skills instruction (particularly toward

obtaining a GED) is made available either directly by WtW subcontracting agencies or through

referral arrangements. Relatively few NCPs have been interested in pursuing training, however.
85

Parenting and Relationship Services

The HW program focuses on improving the economic viability of NCPs; other services and goals

were seen as incidental. However, all the program partners have become more interested in

incorporating resources and services to address other needs such as parenting skills. HW is

trying to help a local parenting program qualify as a vendor to HW so it can refer NCPs to the

program.

Other Services

HW and its vendors can and do provide referrals for substance abuse treatment or other services,

as well as transportation assistance and even child care.

Contact Information

Rick Von Frank

WtW Coordinator

Houston Works

600 Jefferson, Suite 300

Houston, TX 77002

(713) 654-1919 (x1167)
86

Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization (IRFFR)

Milwaukee, WI

Overview and Local Context

The Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization (IRFFR), headquartered in

Washington, DC, received a Welfare-to-Work (WtW) competitive grant to establish grassroots

responsible fatherhood programs to serve low-income, noncustodial fathers in several locations:

Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Cleveland, Ohio; Nashville, Tennessee; San Diego, California;

Washington, DC; and Yonkers, New York. The program provides intensive one-on-one and peer

group counseling, as well as a range of other services, to help noncustodial parents (NCPs) to

become involved in the lives of their children and provide financial support and security in a

loving, compassionate way. IRFFR places strong emphasis on intensive case management and

staff role modeling. Outreach Specialists and Managing Partners—who live in the neighborhood

and are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week to participants—provide counseling through

frequent home visits and also connect participants to needed services and employment

opportunities. This site visit summary focuses on the structure of the program as it has been

initiated in Milwaukee.

The Milwaukee IRFFR project serves a primarily African American clientele from low-income

neighborhoods within the city. While the job market is relatively strong in the Milwaukee area

and unemployment at among its lowest levels in many years, pockets of unemployment and

underemployment persist within the inner city.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

IRFFR, a nonprofit organization established in 1982, is the lead agency for project design,

startup, and ongoing administration of this initiative. The program in Milwaukee and other cities

replicates an earlier (and still ongoing) initiative mounted by IRFFR in Cleveland. In the

Milwaukee site, IRFFR provides most services directly and does not have other key

subcontracted partners. However, the organization coordinates with other human service

agencies (including W-2 agencies), education and training providers, and employers for

recruitment and referral for services or employment opportunities.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

IRFFR received a WtW competitive grant to design and implement the project in Milwaukee and

several other locations. The Milwaukee site enrolled and served an estimated 300 individuals in

the program and placed 176 in jobs in 1999.
87

Target Group

The IRFFR project’s target population is primarily low-income and disadvantaged male NCPs,

most of whom live within about 15 minutes’ drive time of the program office. Once the male

NCP is actively engaged in the program, IRFFR seeks to involve (if possible) the custodial

parent in the program.

Incentives for Participation

Participation in the program is voluntary. The IRFFR philosophy embraces the view that a father

has the inner capacity to solve his own problems and the role of the program staff is to assist him

through a process of self-discovery. The main incentives to participation are one-on-one

counseling, group sessions, and referral to job openings and support services.

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

IRFFR Outreach Specialists recruit young fathers where they frequently gather in the

community, including local stores, recreational centers, basketball courts, and playgrounds. The

program office is located within the inner-city community it serves, and Outreach Specialists live

within that same community. Fathers are also recruited through staff presentations at schools,

churches, and other gatherings of NCPs. IRFFR also provides information about the program to

staff at other agencies and programs serving the community (including W-2 agencies and the

Department of Corrections) and accepts referrals from these agencies. A significant proportion

of NCPs are self-referrals, who hear about the program through friends, relatives, coworkers, and

others in the community.

Intake and Assessment

The IRFFR program is open entry/open exit, with the length of participation typically lasting at

least six to eight months (and often longer). The NCP (once enrolled, referred to as a “protégé”)

decides on his own whether he wants to participate. The core service provided to all participants

is a series of in-home, one-on-one counseling sessions. The initial home visits (generally

conducted twice a week during the first month) focus on assessment and developing a plan

outlining goals the individual would like to achieve. Outreach Specialists use an inductive

counseling technique (referred to as “creative questioning”), which enables the father to take an

active role in the development of personal goals and in identifying his own resources (for

example, personal, family, community) to achieve them. Because there is a strong belief that

participants must want to make changes in their lives and that these changes must come from

within participants, fathers are encouraged to be self-reliant and not depend on program staff to

provide answers to questions.

Case Management

IRFFR places strong emphasis on intensive case management and staff role modeling. As a

condition of employment, staff members are required to model a “risk-free lifestyle” (no drugs or

alcohol). IRFFR tries to hire married couples to serve as Managing Partners (program
88

administrators) and Outreach Specialists. It is believed that program participants will emulate

the married couple’s behavior once they see a successful marriage modeled. Outreach

Specialists provide counseling through frequent home visits and also connect participants to

needed services and employment opportunities.

Employment and Postemployment Services

IRFFR provides a range of individualized employment services aimed at assisting participants to

secure or upgrade employment, including help with resume preparation, job search planning, and

job leads. The project maintains close links with several area employers (including UPS) for job

placement. IRFFR has a staff member who provides basic instruction on the most frequently

used computer software applications. IRFFR also has volunteers who come to the office to

provide basic literacy instruction. After participants become employed, IRFFR continues to

provide case management services and troubleshooting to guard against job loss and slipping

back into destructive lifestyles.

In addition to intensive in-home counseling, IRFFR offers peer group sessions in the evening

once a week. Separate sessions are held each week for males and females. Each session, which

involves a facilitator and small group discussions among participants, focuses on a particular

topic area, such as building self-esteem, fathering skills, health and nutrition, employment, and

male/female relationship building.

Parenting and Relationship Services

The central emphasis of the IRFFR project is on reconnecting NCPs with their children and

improving parenting skills. The main intervention is direct, one-on-one counseling by program

staff with each participant. At the core of the project is a belief that attitude change leads to

other positive consequences, such as greater involvement with children, payment of child

support, paternity establishment, and long-term employment. After the NCP is engaged, the

program seeks to bring in the custodial parent for individual counseling and peer support groups

(separate peer support groups are held for mothers). An important goal of the program is to

resolve relationship issues and disputes between the noncustodial and custodial parents, so that

the NCP can become actively involved financially and emotionally with the children. IRFFR

refers participants to other agencies for paternity establishment, as well as for mediation and

legal assistance related to child support and visitation issues.

Other Services

IRFFR arranges for participants to receive needed support services primarily through other

human service agencies in Milwaukee. The organization maintains linkages so that it can refer

NCPs for housing assistance, transportation assistance, nonmedical substance abuse treatment,

and other services.
89

Contact Information

The Institute for Responsible Fatherhood

 and Family Revitalization

Milwaukee Office

2451 N. 44th Street

Milwaukee, WI 53208

(414) 873-5068
90

Los Angeles County Private Industry Council

Noncustodial Parent-to-Work (NCPtW) Program

Los Angeles, CA

Overview and Local Context

The Noncustodial Parent-to-Work (NCPtW) Program started operating in September 1998. This

NCP program grew out of Los Angeles County’s Parents’ Fair Share (PFS) demonstration. The

program provides both pre- and postemployment services to NCPs who are have child support

arrearages and who are unemployed or underemployed (working less than 25 hours per week).

The program is to serve 1,000 participants over the course of the grant. The program seeks to

improve the lives of children by improving parents’ means of caring for them financially and by

enabling NCPs to take a more active role in their children’s lives.

The program serves a primarily minority clientele (approximately 55 percent Hispanic, 35

percent African American, and 10 percent other) from low-income neighborhoods throughout

Los Angeles County. Although the economy has been strong and the unemployment rate low,

job placement and retention has been difficult due to fear of incarceration for arrearages prior to

joining program and drug/alcohol use by a high number of participants.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

The lead agency is the LA County Private Industry Council (PIC), Department of Community

and Senior Services (CSS). Key partners include four additional PICs in the Los Angeles area:

City of Los Angeles; Long Beach; South Bay; and Carson-Lomita-Torrance. Other partners

include the Department of Public Social Services (DPSS), which provides lists to CSS of

General Relief participants who may be eligible for NCPtW services; the Los Angeles County

District Attorney’s Office (the IV-D agency), which provides lists of NCPs to CSS from which

CSS can recruit potential participants; the State of California Employment Development

Department (EDD), and The Training Institute (TTI). EDD and TTI have contracts to provide

services to program clients.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

The LA County PIC, CSS, received a two-and-one-half-year competitive grant in August 1998 to

build on the existing Noncustodial Parent Demonstration (NCP Demo) Program in LA County

and continue activities started under the PFS demonstration. Funding includes competitive and

formula grants. The program is to serve 1,000 noncustodial parents over the course of the

grant—750 through the five partner PICs and 250 through the five community-based

organizations that have contracted with the South Bay PIC. As of June 2000, the program has

served 418 NCPs.
91

Target Group

Eligible program participants are NCPs of children whose custodial parent is receiving

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and has received assistance for 30 months or

longer or is within 12 months of reaching the time limit on receipt of assistance. There are

approximately 300,000 to 350,000 NCPs in the Los Angeles area available as potential program

participants. The show-up rate among those referred has dropped from 90 to 95 percent at the

beginning of the program to approximately 80 percent. Approximately 2 out of 12 new

participants drop out during the pre-job search stage. There are no financial disincentives or

punishments for dropping out of the program.

Incentives for Participation

Participation is voluntary. In addition to the employment and parenting services provided,

participants can work with the IV-D staff to stop their arrearages from mounting while they are

in the program.

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

DPSS and the LA County District Attorney’s (DA’s) Office play central roles in the referral and

eligibility verification process. The LA County DA’s office provides lists of NCPs to CSS, from

which CSS can recruit potential participants. DPSS verifies that potential program participants

are indeed eligible for the program. DPSS also provides lists to CSS of General Relief

participants who may be eligible for NCPtW services. Recruitment is done through public flyers

and mailings, job fairs and local program sites, and some word of mouth.

Intake and Assessment

Each recruited NCP whom DPSS verifies meets the WtW eligibility criteria first goes through an

NCPtW orientation lasting about two hours. At the orientation session, recruits complete

standard reading and math tests, as well as a short survey about their perceptions of themselves

and their relationships with their children. Recruits also complete a Baseline Information Form.

Each NCP is then assigned a CSS caseworker and spends the first week in a Peer Support Group

and completing additional intake, testing, and assessment forms.

Case Management

Clients have “case analysts” or “case coordinators.” The case analyst or coordinator conducts an

initial orientation for all potential clients. This is followed by an assessment by TTI, a private

firm contracted to provide employment and case management. EDD provides job development

and placement services under a contract with the program. Clients then go through pre-job

search activities, which include group counseling with other NCPs and basic skills training

(when needed). Clients also sign a Personal Responsibility Contract after determining their goals

and needs. This is sometimes referred to as an Individual Service Strategy Plan.
92

Meetings called “case staffings” occur when clients miss peer support groups, miss scheduled

program services, or are having difficulty with the program overall. The case staffing group

includes the case analyst/coordinator, the peer group facilitator, the job developer, job club

coach, and the EDD staff member who has worked with the client.

Employment and Postemployment Services

Employment services begin the first week with a Peer Support Group component, which has

sessions three times a week lasting two to three hours. This component is designed to enhance

self-image, help identify long- and short-term life and employment goals, and encourage

responsible parenting. NCPs then attend a job club lasting seven to nine sessions. The job club

is intended to develop job search skills, teach participants how to prepare resumes, improve

communication and other soft skills, and increase skills in applying for and interviewing for

positions. Participants have access to computers and telephones for resume writing, internet job

search, and faxing during this time. For those unemployed at the end of the job club, 30 hours of

independent job search per week must be verified.

Postemployment services include clothing, transportation, housing, and, possibly, other services,

which may be used for up to six months past initial job placement. On-the-job training has not

been used.

Parenting and Relationship Services

These services are provided primarily through the peer counseling meetings, which are open to

all clients, including those who have been placed in a job. Mediation with custodial parents is

provided when the NCP requests it. The program does not emphasize custody assistance.

A coparenting program brings the fathers together to learn about nonconfrontational means of

communication with the mothers. There is some incentive for the fathers to attend and

participate in this program, as it provides a forum for them to share their experiences with and

learn from others in similar positions. An attempt has been made to bring the mothers into the

program with one another, separately, and with the fathers. The mothers have much less

incentive to participate in this program, however, and they generally do not.

Other Services

There is a domestic violence program, which receives separate funding from TANF and welfare

funds specifically for those clients tied to welfare. The program also serves NCPtW and NCP

Demo clients. Staff are trained to identify indicators of domestic violence, recognize both

abusers and the abused, and refer them to outside agencies for counseling and treatment.

A drug/substance abuse treatment assistance program refers clients to treatment programs and

monitors the clients while in the NCPtW program. Program staff are notified by employers

when a client tests positive on a drug test on the job. The clients must go through an assessment

that can lead to reentry into the program or referral to a drug assistance agency. Clients often do

not return to the program.
93

Contact Information

Geraldo J. Rodriguez

Program Manager

Employment and Training/Special Programs

County of Los Angeles Community & Senior Services

3175 W. Sixth Street, 3rd Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90020

(213) 738-3084

Charles E. Adams

Project Manager

L.A. County Noncustodial Parent-to-Work Program

County of Los Angeles Community & Senior Services

Centro Maravilla Area Office

4718 Cesar E. Chavez Ave.

Los Angeles, CA 90022

(323) 260-3861
94

LA Veterans in Progress Fathers Welfare-to-Work Program

Los Angeles, CA

Overview and Local Context

LA Veterans in Progress (VIP) was established in 1993 to meet a serious service gap for

homeless veterans in the Los Angeles area. Homeless veterans who successfully completed

substance abuse or alcohol programs had nowhere to live and no one to provide continued

support for them to reenter the world of work. A public-private partnership was formed, with a

private for-profit firm owning the facility and a nonprofit organization formed to provide

services to the veterans. The goals of the original VIP program are to help homeless veterans

become self-sufficient and, when capable, participate fully in the labor market and achieve

residential stability and continued sobriety. A component was added in April 2000 for homeless

veteran fathers who required fatherhood services, as well as the labor market and social support

services provided to the homeless vets already being served under the VIP program. In addition

to the goals of the extant program, the fathers program is to provide participants with selfsufficiency and employment, improve their relationship and parenting skills with their children,

stop the cycle of fatherlessness, and improve their payment of child support.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

LA Vets is the lead partner in the program and is responsible for operation of the program. The

Veterans Administration (VA) is the largest source of support and provides about 50 percent of

the funding; the VA has seven staff on-site. The LA County District Attorney’s Office, the IV-D

agency, works with the program to provide assistance on child support matters. The state

employment security agency, the Employment Development Department, is a service provider

and has staff stationed at the program to help participants find employment. The local

Workforce Investment Act (WIA) program (formerly JTPA) serves as a funder and grant

administrator. AmeriCorps provides a large number of volunteers.

Funding Sources and Enrollment

The fathers program receives funding from several sources. The VA is the largest source of

support and provides about 50 percent of the funding. The second-largest source of support is

from the LA County’s Welfare-to-Work (WtW) competitive grant, which provides about 20

percent of the program’s funding. (This is the same grant that provides support for the LA

County noncustodial parent WtW program, but a portion of the money is transferred to the South

Bay Private Industry Council which, in turn, provides the funds to LA Vets.) The third major

source of funding is from the Ford Foundation’s Partners for Fragile Families grant, which

provides about 15 percent of the noncustodial father WtW program support. The remaining

funds come from smaller grants and user fees. Participants who work are required to pay the

lesser of one-third of their earnings or $50 per week for the program. The program started April

1, 2000; as of June 2000, it had 27 participants enrolled. The desired enrollment for the program

is 32 participants on board and a total of about 100 served per year.
95

Target Group

The target group for the program is homeless, substance-abusing veteran noncustodial fathers

recently released from substance abuse treatment. To be eligible for the program, the

participants must have 90 days of sobriety. The program does not serve sex offenders or

veterans with less than an honorable discharge from the military. The program serves veterans

from the entire Los Angeles County area.

Incentives for Participation

The program is voluntary. The major incentive for participants to remain in the program is that

they are homeless and jobless, and the program offers housing, three meals a day, social services,

and a good prospect of obtaining a job (85 percent for the overall VIP program, with no figures

available for WtW yet). Although the program is flexible on length of participation, three

violations assure termination: lack of rent payment for working participants, failing a drug test,

and violence or verbal abuse.

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

The program is constantly conducting outreach activities for the WtW program and the broader

VIP program. Over 90 county agencies are contacted on a regular basis, encouraging them to

send eligible vets to the program. Major sources of referrals are detox centers, the welfare

agency (Department of Public Social Services), prisons, and the Haven (a Salvation Army

rehabilitation program). About 25 percent of those referred are believed to come in for eligibility

screening. The program makes extensive use of AmeriCorps volunteers for outreach; the

volunteers contact the more than 90 source agencies on a regular basis to obtain referrals.

Intake and Assessment

Upon application to the program, the potential participant is screened for eligibility. Participants

must be veterans with an honorable discharge. Virtually all applicants are homeless and

recovering substance abusers. During the initial interview, a job history is taken, and applicants

are asked why they want to enroll and why they want a job. If accepted, they are tested for drugs

and alcohol. Applicants with potential mental health problems may be asked to obtain clearance

from a VA mental health official to enroll, and those who need medicine must take their

medicine if they wish to remain in the program.

Before starting formal activities, participants engage in community service for 40 hours to show

that they are motivated and that they are willing to work for the help and benefits they receive.

During Phase 1 of the program, they receive a comprehensive assessment on their literacy level,

interests, anger management, self-esteem, and other areas that might affect their needs and

activities. They are also asked about their child support status at this time. Participants are asked

to sign a personal responsibility contract developed by the program.
96

Case Management

Case managers include certified alcohol and drug counselors, as well as AmeriCorps volunteers,

who generally have fewer credentials. Participants are tracked through the daily morning group

meetings, where their job seeking activities are monitored, and through weekly activity forms

that they fill out. The program director meets with participants who are not making satisfactory

progress to provide counseling and issue warnings if needed.

Participants are managed by the director of fathers programs and other case managers. The VA

has staff on-site to provide counseling and access to VA services to those in need. The primary

means for tracking participants’ progress are the daily meetings and the weekly self-progress

forms. The program is considering using a computerized management information system to

track participants through their stay.

Employment and Postemployment Services

The program includes both job search and training activities. The Career Center includes

program staff, as well as an outstationed state EDD person from the Disabled Veterans Outreach

Program. At the daily morning motivational and information sharing meeting, participants

indicate employers they have contacted and plan to contact—participants are required to make at

least five employer contacts daily. The Career Center includes job developers who identify

suitable openings for the participants. Classroom training and basic skills training are provided

when appropriate, and work experience is provided to some participants through the VA.

Current training programs include customized training programs with Toyota and Marriott, and

participants are also enrolled in culinary arts and construction programs. While enrolled in

training, participants usually receive minimum wage stipends.

Once participants obtain employment, the program works with them on pursuing education and

training to maintain or upgrade their job. The program also encourages participants to plan for

the longer term through counseling and meetings.

Key partners in providing employment and training activities are EDD, the local JTPA/WIA onestop, employers involved in customized training (Toyota and Marriott), and the Inglewood Adult

School (which provides basic skills training).

Parenting and Relationship Services

The fathers program started recently, so the parenting program is still evolving. The program

offers a series of workshops and group sessions, primarily in the evenings after job search and

training have been completed, to deal with life skills and relationship issues such as anger

management. Currently, parenting education is covered in an informal course; the staff is

concerned that the course will not meet court requirements for fathers ordered to take a course.

Topics covered include relationships with the custodial parent and the child, appropriate methods

of disciplining the child, and dealing with the child support system. Fathers are assisted

individually with child support issues, such as dealing with restraining orders and improving

access and visitation arrangements. The program does not offer formal mediation services.
97

Other Services

What sets this program apart from other WtW programs is that it is a residential program.

Participants live on-site in dormitory-style suites. If employed, they pay the lesser of $50 per

week or one-third of their earnings for housing. In addition, participants who terminate are

eligible for transitional housing at the same site. The VA has people on-site who provide

counseling and other VA services. Participants have medical services covered through the VA,

but most of these services are provided off-site at VA facilities.

Contact Information

Steve Peck

Director

733 South Hindry

Inglewood CA, 90301

(310) 348-7600 x3106
98

Milwaukee County Private Industry Council

Milwaukee, WI

Overview and Local Context

The Private Industry Council (PIC) of Milwaukee County received a Welfare-to-Work (WtW)

competitive grant to design and implement a collaborative project to target and serve

noncustodial parents (NCPs). The program seeks to enhance employability, job retention, and

capacity to pay child support. The original design for the initiative was based on the health

maintenance organization model. The design called for service providers to receive a capitated

amount to support and place participants in employment. The program refers NCPs to five

community-based organizations for job placement, retention, training, and a wide range of

support services.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

The PIC of Milwaukee has taken the lead role in project design, start-up, and ongoing

administration. The PIC has contracted with five local social service agencies to provide direct

client services: Human Services Triangle, Wisconsin Correctional Services, United Migrant

Opportunity Services (UMOS), New Concepts Self Development Center, and Curtis and

Associates. In addition, the PIC has contracted with five Wisconsin Works (W-2) agencies to

conduct WtW eligibility determination and entry of client data into the state’s automated data

system: Employment Solutions of Milwaukee (affiliated with Goodwill Industries); UMOS;

Opportunities Industrialization Center of Greater Milwaukee; YW Works; and Maximus.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

The PIC of Milwaukee received a WtW competitive grant to design and implement the program.

Under the competitive grant, which initiated contracts with service providers in January 1999, a

total of 261 NCPs had been enrolled and served through October 1999. The goal of the program

is to serve a total of 500 NCPs (through December 2000).

Target Group

The target group for the project is NCPs meeting the WtW eligibility criteria. However, each of

the subcontractors targets services to specific NCP subpopulations: UMOS targets Latino NCPs;

the Wisconsin Correctional Services targets NCPs with criminal justice histories; New Concepts

primarily targets African American NCPs with family and mental health issues; and the Human

Services Triangle targets NCPs with mental illness or substance abuse issues.

Incentives for Participation

The main incentives for participation are the wide range of employment, training, education, and

support services available to each participant. Participation in the program is generally
99

voluntary, though some NCPs are referred to the program through courts (and the Children First

initiative), in which case participation is usually mandatory.

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

Referrals to the program come from a variety of sources, including the Family Courts, the

Children First initiative, W-2 agencies, and the Wisconsin Department of Corrections. A

Childrens First/WtW Coordinator at the W-2 offices identifies NCPs that could potentially

benefit from the various employment, training, and support services available through the

initiative and makes referrals to subcontractors. In addition, the five subcontracting agencies

conduct some of their own outreach and recruitment activities, including placing advertisements

in local media and conducting recruitment at community gatherings. The state’s child support

enforcement office made lists of NCPs available to the five subcontracting agencies to facilitate

their recruitment activities. One subcontractor (UMOS) indicated that it had hired a full-time

outreach staff person to identify and recruit NCPs and was also advertising the availability of its

services for NCPs on television and radio and in newspapers.

Intake and Assessment

The five W-2 agencies serving Milwaukee conduct eligibility determination under the project.

Each of these agencies has a small contract to determine eligibility of NCPs for the

subcontracting agencies (except for UMOS, which is a W-2 agency) and to enter data on NCPs

enrolled under the competitive WtW grant into the state’s CARES system. Once the NCP is

determined eligible, the subcontracting agency is responsible for conducting an initial assessment

and assigning a case manager to each NCP. Though assessment procedures vary across

subcontracting agencies, in general, an agency case manager conducts a one-on-one interview

with the participant aimed at developing an individual service plan, including collecting

information on participant/family background characteristics, vocational interests and

preferences, health status (including substance abuse issues), work history and skills, intellectual

capabilities/aptitudes, reading/math skill levels, interpersonal/communication skills, and other

factors affecting employability and parenting skills. Based on this assessment, the case manager

is responsible for developing an individual service plan summarizing personal and vocational

goals, identifying employability issues/barriers to success, and recommending specific services

to achieve employment and parenting goals.

Case Management

Each subcontractor is responsible for assigning NCPs to a case manager responsible for

coordinating individualized services to achieve a set of planned outcomes (generally centering on

employment, job retention, and payment of child support). The case manager is responsible for

planning and arranging services and closely tracking participant involvement in the program.
100

Employment and Postemployment Services

The services provided through the subcontracting agencies have a clear work-first focus—

emphasizing job placement, job retention, and wage enhancement—particularly at the time the

individual enters the program. The initial goal is full-time or part-time work at any wage. The

program also emphasizes NCPs working so that they can meet their child support obligations.

Each subcontracted agency has considerable flexibility to develop its own program strategies,

and each of the five agencies has its own special focus. The five subcontracting agencies are

permitted to subcontract services to other community-based organizations.

The target population is primarily interested in services that facilitate job placement. Hence,

there is a strong emphasis on providing job readiness and placement assistance (including job

readiness workshops, help with resume preparation and interview skills, and help with job leads).

For example, one of the five subcontracted agencies—Curtis and Associates—receives a

benchmark payment of $4,800 for each NCP it serves but is placed at risk for job placement and

retention. If the agency is able to quickly place the individual into employment and retain them

in employment after 30 days, the agency makes money. If the agency is unable to find

employment for the individual, however, it must place the participant in a community service job

and pay the participant minimum wage (until the participant is placed in an unsubsidized job).

After participants are placed in jobs and paying child support, the service providers are to focus

program services on occupational skills training. Each vendor is required to offer one or more

employer-linked occupational skills training program for NCPs (for example, through the

Milwaukee Area Technical College). With job retention and upgrading posing major challenges

for many NCPs, the five subcontracting agencies provide an array of postemployment services,

including frequent employer and client contacts, provision of support services, and assistance

with upgrading basic and job-specific skills to enhance employability.

Parenting and Relationship Services

The main focus of the initiative is on employment, though subcontracting agencies are

encouraged to provide services that will help improve parenting. To improve parenting skills,

case managers are expected to provide informal support, guidance, and direction to NCPs

regarding parenting concerns and challenges. In addition, under the competitive grant, the PIC

has contracted with Legal Action of Wisconsin so that WtW-contracted agencies can make

referrals of NCPs for services. Some of the legal issues that Legal Action of Wisconsin can

provide assistance on are driver’s license revocations, evictions and housing matters, child

support, custody issues, visitation, family violence, restitution, probation violations, correction of

criminal records, and consumer debt problems.

Other Services

The five subcontracting agencies provide (directly or through referral arrangements with other

agencies) a range of support services to assist participants in obtaining and keeping jobs and

paying child support. These services include transportation assistance (for example, car repairs

and transportation vouchers), referral for nonmedical substance abuse counseling/treatment,
101

provision of work-related clothes and equipment, and referral to a wide array of legal services

(related to child support and visitation issues).

Contact Information

Delores Parr

PIC of Milwaukee County

101 W. Pleasant St., Suite 200

Milwaukee, WI 53212

(414) 225-2360
102

Minneapolis FATHER Project

Minneapolis, MN

Overview and Local Context

The Minneapolis FATHER Project was developed through a strong collaboration between the

city’s Private Industry Council (PIC), child support agency, and several community-based

organizations. This program, operating in a locality that has developed an array of fatherhood

programs, was initially developed and funded under the Ford Foundation’s Partners for Fragile

Families (PFF) initiative. The FATHER Project subsequently applied for and received a WtW

competitive grant to enhance the employment services provided through the program. The

FATHER Project is committed to providing a holistic set of program services focusing on

parenting, fatherhood, and family issues, as well as on employment. With ongoing

communication and assistance from local child support staff, it also provides assistance with

child support issues and payment options for participants and views this as a critical component

of the program. The FATHER Project is a voluntary program, and participants are recruited

through a range of community outreach efforts. It serves a primarily African American clientele

from low-income neighborhoods in Hennepin County (which includes the city of Minneapolis).

Lead Agency and Key Partners

Way-to-Grow (WTG), a nonprofit community-based organization, is the lead agency for the

Minneapolis FATHER Project. WTG also assists single mothers with child development and

parenting for pre-schoolage children, housing, and medical issues; it was selected as the lead

agency because the services for NCPs were seen as complementary to those provided to

custodial mothers. The Welfare-to-Work (WtW) grantee—the Minneapolis Employment and

Training Program (METP, the Minneapolis Workforce Board)—provides employment services

for the program through contracts with eight community-based organizations. The Hennepin

County Collection Services Division (HCCSD) conducts eligibility determinations and offers a

wide range of child support modifications for program participants.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

The FATHER Project is funded by a WtW competitive grant, a grant from the Ford Foundation,

and federal child support dollars (provided as a match to Ford Foundation funds as part an

approved waiver program). The program began operating in January 1999; as of May 2000, the

program had enrolled approximately 100 individuals.
103

Target Group

The program initially served NCPs who met the WtW eligibility criteria and who also had a child

support order in place in Hennepin County. More recently, since it has received funds from the

Ford Foundation, it is recruiting the target group for this program—young fathers (ages 16 to 25)

with no child support orders (but who also meet the WtW eligibility criteria).

Incentives for Participation

Participation in the FATHER Project is voluntary. The program offers a wide range of

assistance on child support issues, as well as comprehensive set of services to encourage

program participation. Child support incentives offered include delays in setting child support

orders for 90 days after a participant finds a job, modifying child support orders to reflect

fluctuating income, gradually increasing orders to enable the NCP to become accustomed to

paying child support, establishing paternity at no cost, waiving the payment of birthing expenses,

stopping interest on arrearage payments, and lifting penalties for nonpayment (such as license

suspensions, passport denials, and student grant holds).

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

The FATHER Project recruits potential program participants directly from the community and

uses a number of strategies to identify potential participants. Recruitment was initially difficult,

and significant staff time and resources were dedicated to this effort. Flyers, posters, and other

materials on the program are distributed to a range of agencies, including job banks, prenatal

clinics, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) agencies, the Women, Infants, and

Children (WIC) program, the child support office, family courts, the corrections department, and

community-based organizations. Staff also make presentations at a number of these programs,

and WTG sponsored a large community picnic to promote the program. Ads are placed in local

newspapers and on radio stations frequently used by the target group. Finally, the program

initially used “reverse referrals” by providing financial incentives to employment service

contractors for recruiting eligible NCPs. Gradually, the program has built a reputation for

helping fathers, and the participating agencies feel that word-of-mouth is spreading in the

communities they are targeting.

Intake and Assessment

NCPs who learn about the program through recruitment efforts call WTG. An initial phone

screen is conducted to determine if the NCP appears to be eligible. An eligible NCP is scheduled

for a meeting to complete an eligibility form. This is faxed to HCCSD to verify eligibility

(TANF and status of child support payments).

Those who are eligible for the program meet with a WTG case manager for an assessment.

Assessment is done through a one-on-one meeting with the case manager. The assessment

process is intensive and covers a range of issues, including employment and education history,

employment goals, family history, and potential employment barriers.
104

The individual is referred to an employment counselor at one of the contracted employment

service providers (the provider is generally selected based on participant convenience). In the

initial meeting with the employment counselor, the individual signs a personal responsibility

contract that details the NCPs responsibilities in the program. These include participating in

WTG parenting services by attending all scheduled activities, cooperating with Hennepin County

child support and collections, maintaining employment (if applicable), monthly contact with job

counselors, and job search activities.

Case Management

The FATHER Project provides intensive case management services, with staff at two

organizations providing assistance to each program participant. First, employment counselors at

the employment service providers are responsible for all job-related assistance, including job

readiness services, job placement, job retention, referrals to education and training, and working

with employers. Second, case managers at WTG are responsible for intake and assessment and

assistance with a range of other issues that may affect an individual’s ability to participate or

become employed and pay child support, including parenting and family problems or other

personal issues, such as substance abuse. WTG case managers and program participants also

work with HCCSD staff to make child support payment options available to participants.

Employment and Postemployment Services

Employment services for NCPs are provided by eight community-based organizations under

performance-based contracts with METP. Specific services vary by provider, but there is a

strong focus on immediate employment. Services provided include job placement, job readiness,

job search assistance (job leads and resume writing), and job development. Education, training,

and on-the-job training programs are available, but few NCPs use these options because most

have an interest in finding jobs quickly. Staff at both the employment service provider and WTG

maintain close contact with an individual after they begin working to address retention issues.

Some employment service providers worked closely with employers to identify appropriate jobs

for their participants and to resolve issues that arise once the NCP starts working.

Parenting and Relationship Services

The FATHER Project has a strong emphasis on parenting services. Peer support/parenting

groups are provided by WTG twice a week using a curriculum developed for the PFF

demonstration. WTG case managers also address parenting issues in their contacts with NCPs

and hold a monthly father-child or family event each month for those who want to participate.

Referrals are made for mediation services if necessary, although few NCPs have used these

services.

WTG employs a part-time staff person to assist NCPs on legal issues concerning visitation and

custody. This includes the operation of a law clinic where 14 volunteer attorneys provide

general advice on these issues—including how to represent yourself without the assistance of an

attorney.
105

Other Services

Referrals are made to outside organizations for a range of services, including anger management,

substance abuse, and mentoring, on an as-needed basis. Few NCPs have used these services.

WtW funds are also available to meet short-term emergencies or needs.

Contact Information

Deb Bahr-Helgen

Welfare-to-Work Program

Minneapolis Employment and Training Program

250 South 4th Street, Room 510

Minneapolis, MN 55415-1372

(612) 673-3938
106

Nevada Business Services

Las Vegas, NV

Overview and Program Context

This program focuses on enhancing employment outcomes, self-sufficiency, and payment of

child support for noncustodial parents (NCPs) located in a four-county area of the southern half

of Nevada (with most participants located in Las Vegas). Although the two main contractors—

Nevada Partners, Inc. and Services Project 2000—have considerable flexibility in how they

structure their programs, the main focus is on getting participants into a job, having them retain

employment, and, if possible, enhancing possibilities for increased earnings. Parenting skills are

not a focus of this initiative, though one of the two service providers includes several workshop

sessions (as part of its job readiness course) devoted to parental responsibilities.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

There are several key partners in this project. The main organization providing funding and

overseeing the effort is Nevada Business Services (NBS), which is the workforce investment

board serving a four-county area of southern Nevada. NBS, a nonprofit agency located in Las

Vegas, has contracted with two nonprofit organizations to provide services under the Welfare-toWork (WtW) program for noncustodial parents (NCPs): Nevada Partners, Inc., and Services

Project 2000 (formerly known as Camino Al Futuro). A third organization—Clark County

Social Services—was also contracted under the WtW-NCP project, but after one year withdrew

as a provider because of low referral activity. NSB receives WtW formula funds from the state

and is primarily responsible for selecting contractors; broadly defining the scope of work and

contractor goals for enrollment, job placement, and retention; overseeing contractor

performance; and providing technical assistance. The other partner in the project is the Nevada

State Welfare Division (NSWD) of the state’s Department of Human Resources. NSWD is

primarily responsible for referral of NCPs to the program and for WtW eligibility certification of

individuals “reverse referred” by the two WtW contractors.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment Levels

This project is funded using WtW formula funds. NBS (as the workforce development agency)

has received two allocations of WtW funds from the state: (1) a PY 1998–1999 allocation of

$2.47 million, and (2) a PY 2000–2002 allocation of $2.3 million. As of the end of June 2000,

only the first allocation had been contracted; no funds under the second allocation had been

contracted out to services providers. As of June 30, 2000, a total of 104 NCPs had been referred

for services to the WtW contractors; a total of 70 of these NCP had received services beyond

initial assessment. The overall goal is to provide services for a total of 113 NCPs over the twoand-a-half-year period of the grant.
107

Target Group

The overall target group for the program is NCPs meeting the WtW eligibility criteria. Nevada

Partners serves nearly all male NCPs (over 90 percent are male), mostly African American males

in their 30s and 40s. About half of these NCPs are ex-offenders; many are substantially in

arrears on their child support payments (in excess of $50,000).

Project Services 2000 further limits participation to female NCP offenders soon to be released

(within the six months) from the South Nevada Women’s Correctional Facility (a minimum and

maximum security prison, with 560 female inmates), two-thirds of whom are African American

and most of whom are in their 20s. Project Services 2000 limits intensive services to this prison

facility, though provides job placement assistance to a small number of WtW-eligible NCPs

referred directly by NBS. Project Services 2000 is also considering expanding its program to a

men’s facility (the Indian Springs Correctional Facility) but plans to do so under the second

funding allocation.

Incentives for Participation

The program is voluntary, and program administrators try to emphasize that the program will

help the NCP in several important ways—enhance long-term employability, build job-seeking

skills, enhance basic and job specific skills, help the individual to avoid jail, provide assistance

with modifying child support payments, and provide help with increasing visitation.

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

The recruitment approach for the program has shifted over time to rely primarily upon “reverse

referrals”—NCPs who are first identified by contractors and later certified by NBS (and the

NSWD) as WtW-eligible. In addition, small numbers of individuals are still being referred

through NSWD to the program. The main way that the contracting agencies have obtained

referrals is by identifying NCPs on their own and then checking with NBS as to whether the

individuals identified are WtW eligible. Nevada Partners receives some referrals of WtWeligible NCPs directly from NBS. However, most referrals come through reverse referrals,

whereby the agency identifies potentially eligible NCPs. Nevada Partners conducts an

orientation session at its own facility three times a week for the general public and individuals

referred by other agencies.

The Services Project 2000 directly recruits offenders during the two weeks prior to running its

eight-week Vital Skills workshop. Prison personnel place brochures about the program

throughout the prison facility, notifying prisoners of the startup of a new session.

Intake and Assessment

Both of the contractors provide a brief, up-front assessment and intensive, ongoing case

management services. Once WtW-eligibility is certified though NBS, Nevada Partners

schedules the NCP for a one-on-one interview. During this interview, information is collected

from the individual that is used to develop an individual service strategy (ISS). No formal tests
108

(for example, the Test of Adult Basic Education, interest inventories, or drug/alcohol tests) are

conducted as part of the assessment. The ISS is submitted to NBS at the end of the assessment,

and, at this point, the NCP is considered enrolled in the program.

Services Project 2000 conducts assessment activities as part of its initial activities in the eightweek Vital Skills Project Workshop. On the first day of the workshop, a general orientation is

provided, followed by assessment and completion of ISS. The assessment involves a one-on-one

interview with one of the two workshop facilitators. The project receives considerable

background information on each participant from the prison. The ISS is completed during this

one-on-one interview, which generates additional background information. In addition, the

participant completes a questionnaire that probes drug/alcohol abuse issues. The ISS is

submitted to NBS at the end of the assessment, and, at this point, the NCP is considered enrolled

in the program.

Case Management

Both contractors emphasize case management services tailored to individual needs of the

participant. Both programs assign a case manager to each enrolled NCP, who monitors progress

and troubleshoots problems, helps with job upgrading and retention, and arranges for support

services. Services Project 2000 features intensive case management—its case managers are

available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, once the individual is released from prison. Both

programs indicated that they accompanied participants to child support enforcement hearings.

Employment and Postemployment Services

Employment and postemployment services for NCPs are provided by the two contracted

agencies. Both providers emphasize work first approaches, which include a job readiness

workshop, job placement assistance, intensive case management, and support services tailored to

individual needs.

Nevada Partners divides participating NCPs into two basic groups after assessment—those who

are immediately job ready (a relatively small proportion of NCPs) and those who are not job

ready. Those who are job ready attend a four-hour job readiness workshop and then are

immediately engaged in job search activities (with considerable help from an agency case

manager in identifying job openings). The job readiness workshop primarily focuses on

effective job search strategies, development of a resume, and interview skills. An agency case

manager regularly meets with the individual to gauge progress, troubleshoot problems, arrange

for support services, and provide encouragement and job leads. The agency helps to match each

client’s skills with potential employer openings.

Those NCPs who are not immediately job ready (the majority of participants) are enrolled in

two-week job readiness workshop operated by Nevada Partners, called Career Quest. NCPs

enrolled in the project are mixed in with other disadvantaged individuals (both male and female,

including Temporary Assistance for Needy Families [TANF] and non-TANF recipients) to form

a workshop group of between 10 and 15 individuals. The employability skills workshop, led by

a Nevada Partners instructor each morning, includes sessions on goal setting, building self-
109

esteem, managing conflict, effective job search strategies, resume preparation, interviewing, and

employers’ expectations. At the conclusion of this workshop, participants work closely with a

case manager and engage in intensive job search activities (see above discussion for those who

are job ready).

Nevada Partners maintains close relationships with local employers, particularly those within the

hotel/gaming industry. For example, individuals interested in entering careers at local hotels and

in restaurants can be referred to the Culinary Union Training Center. This training center,

formed by the Las Vegas hotels and the Culinary Union, offers classes for people who want to

work in a hotel but do not have the required job skills or work experience.

Project Services 2000’s NCP program’s main intervention is an eight-week, 32-session Vital

Skills Project Workshop. This workshop follows a curriculum designed by the Life Skills

Foundation, Inc., located in Tampa, Florida. Each participant receives a workbook (over 200

pages long) divided into a series of 15 lessons. Workshop sessions, which are facilitated by two

Project Services 2000 instructors, focus on life skills, self-esteem, anger management, effective

communication, and motivation. There are also sessions on family success and relationships, as

well as on getting and keeping a job. Sessions require active involvement of participants and a

willingness to change. At the end of the eight-week session, participants are given a “diploma of

life” at a special ceremony.

This workshop is followed up by weekly peer group sessions until the individual is released from

prison. As the release time approaches, Project Services 2000 program staff provide assistance

with identifying job leads and intensive case management. Project staff have extensive contacts

with local employers. (These include employers in the hotel and gaming industry; however,

most ex-offenders face constraints on the types of jobs that they may take within the gaming

industry, especially if the individual must handle money.) After an individual is employed, the

assigned case manager is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week to troubleshoot problems

and arrange for services.

Parenting and Relationship Services

As part of the Life Skills Workshops run by Services Project 2000, 3 of the 15 modules in the

curriculum focus on family: “Family Success,” “Family Relationships,” and “Inter-Family

Understanding and Communication.” Both projects can refer individuals for legal or mediation

services. On occasion, case managers will accompany individuals to child support court

hearings to provide testimony of the level of participation of individuals in programs.

Other Services

Both service providers under the project provide an extensive array of support services, either

directly or through referral arrangements. These services include transportation assistance,

including bus passes, and help with car repairs; clothing, including payment at discount stores

and secondhand stores for work clothing; referral for substance abuse counseling and treatment;

and referral to mediation and legal services for child support and visitation.
110

Contact Information

Richard Blue, Executive Director

Nevada Business Services

920 West Owens

Las Vegas, NV 89106

(702) 638-8750
111

Wisconsin Department of Corrections NOW Program

Milwaukee, WI

Overview and Local Context

The Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC) received a three-year grant from the

Governor’s Welfare-to-Work (WtW) 15 Percent Discretionary funds to design and implement

the Non-Traditional Opportunities for Work (NOW) Program in Milwaukee County. The NOW

program—which targets noncustodial parents (NCPs) on probation or parole—is closely

connected with the Wisconsin Works (W-2) system, with most employment, training, and

support services under the program being provided through five W-2 agencies (at their 13 job

centers in Milwaukee County). The program seeks to enhance employability, job retention, and

capacity to pay child support, as well as to reconnect noncustodial fathers coming out of prison

with their children.

Like many prison systems across the country, Milwaukee’s prisons are crowded. As a result,

probation and parole agents have large caseloads, which leaves little time available to each

assigned case. The NOW Project offers additional services to complement those available

through the correctional system, with a special focus on employment, job retention, and support

services. Because of a relatively tight labor market, current conditions for finding a job for exoffenders are as good as they have been in a long time—yet ex-offenders face significant hurdles

and biases when seeking and trying to hold jobs.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

The Wisconsin DOC’s Division of Community Correction has taken the lead role in project

design, start-up, and ongoing administration of NOW. DOC has assigned ten probation and

parole agents (NOW agents) to case manage NOW participants throughout their involvement in

the program. The Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD), which has overall

responsibility for administration of employment, training, and welfare programs in the state

(including welfare reform and the JTPA program), assisted with the design of the initiative and

determines WtW eligibility for potential NOW participants. DOC contracts with five Wisconsin

Works (W-2) agencies to provide case management, employment, training, parenting, and other

support services for NOW participants. The five W-2 agencies are Employment Solutions of

Milwaukee (affiliated with Goodwill Industries); United Migrant Opportunity Services (UMOS);

Opportunities Industrialization Center of Greater Milwaukee; YW Works; and Maximus.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

The Wisconsin DOC received a three-year grant from the Governor’s WtW 15 Percent

Discretionary funds to design and implement the NOW Program in Milwaukee County. The

Governor’s discretionary funds are being matched by DOC. The program began enrolling its

first participants in April 1999; through June 2000, the program had enrolled and served a total

of 130 NCPs.
112

Target Group

NOW targets NCPs on probation or parole or who are soon-to-be-released inmates of minimum

security correctional facilities. While initially the program planned to serve only noncustodial

fathers, enrollment in the program was recently extended to noncustodial mothers on probation

or parole (though few have been served to date). NOW targets only those NCPs who are still

subject to DOC field supervision and will be subject to supervision long enough to allow them to

complete the NOW program while still under supervision. NOW excludes NCPs if participation

in the program poses a threat to the custodial parent or other family members (for example,

domestic violence offenders are excluded unless the custodial parent is aware of and agrees to

the NCP’s participation in the program).

Incentives for Participation

The main incentives for participation are the wide range of employment, training, education, and

support services that are made available to each participant. NOW participation is voluntary,

though once enrolled in the program participation in NOW activities becomes mandatory (a

condition of probation or parole). Despite being “mandatory,” it is unlikely that a NOW

participant would have his or her probation or parole revoked solely on the basis of

noncompliance with the NOW program (it would take some other violation of the conditions of

parole or probation, such as a new offense for re-imprisonment).

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

The NOW program recruits most NCPs through direct referrals by regular DOC probation and

parole agents. DOC probation and parole agents (estimated at about 350 agents in Milwaukee

County) are asked to identify from their caseloads individuals who potentially meet the WtW

eligibility criteria and would likely benefit from participating in the program. When recruitment

lagged during the early stages of the program, DOC introduced several new strategies to spur

recruitment. These include: (1) introducing NOW at orientation sessions for new

probationers/parolees, (2) reviewing the caseloads of each agent and identifying individuals who

are NCPs and WtW-eligible based on data provided by DWD, (3) placing additional posters

about the program in the DOC facilities, (4) encouraging W-2 agencies to recruit ex-offenders

and qualify them for NOW participation (“reverse referrals”), and (5) increasing awareness of

parole and probation agents about services available through NOW.

Intake and Assessment

Once potential NOW participants are identified, probation and parole agents complete and

forward a referral form to the NOW project coordinator. The NOW project coordinator compiles

a list of referred NCPs and sends the list to DWD for WtW eligibility determination. While

WtW eligibility is being checked by DWD, the recruit is scheduled for and takes the Test of

Adult Basic Education. NCPs determined to be WtW-eligible are re-assigned to the caseload of

one of 10 probation and parole agents who are specially assigned by DOC to serve as NOW

probation and parole agents (also referred to as NOW case managers).
113

Once eligibility for WtW is determined, the NOW probation and parole agent refers WtWeligible NCPs to one of the five W-2 agencies (based on a geographic match of the participant

with a W-2 agency). W-2 agency staff conducts an initial intake interview and enrolls the

individual with the agency. The individual becomes officially enrolled in the NOW program

when the W-2 agency enters case information into the state’s CARES data system. Though

assessment procedures vary across W-2 agencies, in general, a W-2 case manager conducts a

one-on-one interview with the participant aimed at developing an individual service plan. The

interview includes collecting information on participant/family background characteristics,

vocational interests and preferences, health status (including substance abuse issues), work

history and skills, intellectual capabilities/aptitudes, reading/math skill levels,

interpersonal/communication skills, and other factors affecting employability and parenting

skills. Based on this assessment, the W-2 case manager is responsible for developing an

individual service plan summarizing personal and vocational goals, identifying employability

issues/barriers to success, and recommending specific services to achieve employment and

parenting goals.

Case Management

Each NOW participant has two case managers—a DOC/NOW parole and probation agent and a

W-2 agency case manager. The DOC/NOW parole and probation agent retains final decisionmaking authority on services provided and sanctioning of the participant (revocation of probation

or parole status, as well as other sanctions). W-2 agencies assign each incoming participant to a

W-2 case manager or counselor, who is responsible for planning and arranging services and

closely tracking participant involvement in the NOW program. The DOC/NOW probation and

parole agent and the W-2 case manager negotiate and reach agreement on the service plan and

subsequent changes in the plan. The W-2 and DOC/NOW case managers typically talk at least

weekly about the progress of each NOW participant and work together to ensure that NOW

participants receive the services needed to make a successful transition back to their

communities.

Employment and Postemployment Services

The services provided through the W-2 agencies have a clear work first focus—emphasizing job

placement, job retention, and wage enhancement—particularly at the time the individual enters

the program. Services closely parallel those being provided for Temporary Assistance for Needy

Families recipients under other welfare reform programs administered by the W-2 agencies.

Each W-2 agency has considerable flexibility to develop its own program strategies, so there is

some variation across agencies in the types of employment and postemployment services

provided to NOW participants. The target population, most of whom have recently been

released from prison, is primarily interested in services that facilitate job placement. Hence,

there is a strong emphasis among all W-2 agencies on providing job readiness and placement

assistance (including job readiness workshops, help with resume preparation and interview skills,

and help with job leads). Although in less demand by the target population, W-2 agencies also

make available (as appropriate) short-term, career-focused job skills training (for example,

through the Wisconsin Technical College Systems and the University of Wisconsin-Extension

Program). W-2 agencies also provide basic computer skills training and referral to basic
114

education and remediation programs (for example, area literacy councils, Even Start Family

Literacy Programs). W-2 agencies have links with the employer community for subsidized jobs

and on-the-job training opportunities. W-2 agencies can also refer participants back to DOC for

work experience opportunities under DOC’s Community Corrections Employment Program or

the Wisconsin Conservation Corps program. With job retention and upgrading posing major

challenges for many ex-offenders, W-2 agencies provide an array of postemployment services,

including frequent employer and client contacts (especially to troubleshoot problems before they

lead to job loss), provision of ongoing support services (such as help with car repair and bus

tickets), and assistance with upgrading basic and job-specific skills to enhance employability

(e.g., basic education, English as a Second Language, and occupational skills training).

Parenting and Relationship Services

Two of the five W-2 agencies have implemented parenting/fatherhood program components, and

the other W-2 agencies are planning or implementing these components. Employment Solutions

offers a comprehensive, 26-session parenting/fatherhood workshop for NOW participants (using

a formal curriculum entitled Fatherhood Development: A Curriculum for Young Fathers).

Workshop sessions cover topics such as values, manhood, understanding the child support

system, understanding children’s needs, coping as a single father, male/female relationships,

men’s health, and substance abuse issues. UMOS also offers a ten-session workshop, entitled

“Survival Skills for Men.” The small-group workshop sessions (three hours each, held twice a

week) cover topics such as budgeting, parenting, health, grooming/dressing, and a range of other

topics.

Other Services

W-2 agencies provide (directly or through referral arrangements with other agencies) a range of

support services to assist participants in obtaining and keeping jobs and making the transition

from incarceration. These services include transportation assistance (for example, car repairs

and transportation vouchers), referral for nonmedical substance abuse counseling/treatment,

provision of work-related clothes and equipment, and referral to legal services (related to child

support and visitation issues). The specific services provided depend upon participant needs.

Contact Information

Ms. Margaret Browder

Field Supervisor and Coordinator

State of Wisconsin Department of Corrections

Division of Community Corrections

1819 E. Kenilworth Place

Milwaukee, WI 53202-1119

(414) 227-4399
115

Yakima SHARE Project

Yakima, WA

Overview and Local Context

The Support Has A Rewarding Effect (SHARE) project was developed through a strong

collaboration between the local workforce council, the child support agency, the Prosecuting

Attorney’s (PA’s) office, and several community-based organizations. Developed as a direct

result of the Welfare-to-Work (WtW) grants program, the SHARE program is one component in

Yakima’s larger WtW program. The SHARE program features a strong role for both the child

support agency and the PA’s office. Referrals to SHARE are initiated by the child support

office, which identifies individuals who are behind in child support payments. Eligible cases are

referred by the child support agency to the PA’s office to initiate contempt proceedings—

individuals who are unemployed can choose to participate in SHARE instead of facing

incarceration. The goal of SHARE is for the noncustodial parent (NCP) to begin, resume and/or

increase child support payments, encourage parental responsibility, and strengthen families.

Lead Agency and Key Partners

The WtW grantee—the Tri-County Workforce Development Council—played a lead role in

establishing the collaboration and overseeing program development and implementation. The

Division of Child Support at the Department of Social and Health Services is responsible for

identifying potential program participants and referring them to the PA’s office. Because of its

experience in working with disadvantaged adults and a WtW service provider, People for People

(PFP), a nonprofit community-based organization was selected as the primary provider of the

employment services. PFP contracts with the workforce council to provide employment services

to all types of WtW participants (including NCPs) in five locations.

SHARE is funded primarily through WtW formula funds. SHARE has now expanded it's

partnership to include other funding sources to support the NCPs. Through WtW competitive

grants awarded to Youthbuild USA and the Washington State Labor Council, services to NCPs

are provided by programs operated by the Yakima Valley Opportunities Industrialization Center

(OIC) and the Center for Administering Rehabilitation and Employment Services (IAM

CARES), a nonprofit organization, respectively. Finally, state WtW match dollars are used to

provide services to the NCPs through the AmeriCorps program. OIC and the AmeriCorps

program specialize in serving young NCPs, and IAM CARES focuses on those with substance

abuse problems.

Funding Source(s) and Enrollment

As described above, the SHARE program is funded by both WtW formula dollars, WtW

competitive grants and state match funds. The program began operating in late August 1998; as

of September 2000, the program had enrolled approximately 185 participants (100 at PFP, 50 at

IAMCARES, 25 at OIC, and 10 at AmeriCorps).
116

Target Group

The program serves NCPs who meet the WtW eligibility criteria, are behind in their child

support payments or are having difficulty making payments, and reside in Yakima or Kittitas

counties covered by the WtW grant. The NCPs must also meet the criteria for a contempt

hearing: having a support order, failure to comply with the order, and a history of nonpayment.

Incentives for Participation

SHARE is a mandatory program. Eligible NCPs who cannot find work and cannot pay child

support must participate in program services, or they will be referred for incarceration. In

addition to program services, the program has important child support payment options to

encourage participation: (1) payment agreements for less than the current amount for a

temporary period, (2) reestablishing inaccurate default orders, and (3) the possibility of waiving

arrears owed to the state. When the NCP begins working, the PA’s office is notified and they

may modify existing orders to ensure payment requirements are reasonable and may modify

payments required to address arrearages.

Outreach and Recruitment Strategies

This program relies exclusively on the child support agency for referrals to the SHARE program;

for the most part, it was able to supply a steady source of referrals. The program added a

temporary staff person funded by WtW dollars to work directly at the child support office on

identifying eligible NCPs; this strategy improved the number of referrals made to the PA’s

office.

When the NCP appears at court, the NCP is informed that if he cannot pay child support, he must

participate in the SHARE program—which will assist him in obtaining employment—or be held

in contempt of court and jailed. The PA’s office has worked closely with the judges to inform

them about the SHARE program; in some cases, participation in the SHARE program is written

into the court order.

Intake and Assessment

WtW eligibility is determined by the child support office and verified when the individual arrives

at one of the service providers. Those who are eligible for the program meet with a case

manager for an assessment. Assessment is done through a one-on-one meeting with the case

manager. The assessment process is intensive and covers a range of issues, including

employment and education history, employment goals, family history, and potential employment

barriers. At this meeting, the individual signs a personal responsibility contract that details the

NCP’s responsibilities in the program.
117

Case Management

Case managers at PFP are responsible for intake and assessment and assist with a range of other

issues that may affect an individual’s ability to participate or become employed and pay child

support, including family problems or other personal issues. They also are responsible for all

planning and arranging for all job-related assistance, including job readiness services, job

placement, job retention, referrals to education and training, and working with employers. The

PA’s office also remains involved in the monitoring of cases and conducts review hearings to

check participant progress every 30 to 45 days.

Employment and Postemployment Services

Employment services are individualized to meet participants needs. Job search services are the

primary employment activity in the SHARE program. Many SHARE participants participate in

job search workshops and activities offered that are also attended by WtW and Workforce

Investment Act clients. NCPs also participate in on-the-job training and work experience

activities, although to a lesser extent than job search. Programs in Yakima have a history of

providing subsidized employment options, and thus have experience in providing these types of

services. These subsidized employment activities are also available to other WtW participants.

Parenting and Relationship Services

Case managers generally address parenting and relationship issues through informal counseling

and assistance. More recently, PFP has taken the lead and started offering peer support sessions,

which they developed on their own using a mix of different curricula. The plan is for the support

sessions to be offered to all the NCPs in the near future.

Other Services

Referrals are made to outside organizations on an “as-needed” basis for a range of services,

including anger management, mediation, and assistance on domestic violence. As noted above,

individuals with substance abuse problems are referred to IAM CARES, an organization with

experience serving this population. WtW funds are also available to meet transportation and

short-term emergencies or needs.

Contact Information

Kathy Thomas

Tri-Valley Workforce Development Council

120 South 3rd Street, Suite 200-A

Yakima, WA 98901

(509) 574-1950

E-mail: kathyt@co.yakima.wa.us
118
119

APPENDIX B

SUMMARY OF WtW AMENDMENTS
120
121

The 1999 Welfare-to-Work Amendments

Title VIII of H.R. 3424,enacted as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2000,

contains the "Welfare to Work and Child Support Amendments of 1999" (1999 Amendments)

These amendments make several significant changes to the Welfare-to-Work (WtW) grant

programs administered by the Department of Labor. These changes, summarized below in

question-and-answer format, are generally similar to those proposed by the Administration to

allow WtW grantees to more effectively serve both long-term welfare recipients and

noncustodial parents of low-income children, and to streamline WtW reporting requirements.

How is eligibility changed under the 1999 WtW Amendments?

Required Beneficiaries/General Eligibility

"The 70% Eligibility Criteria"

Old Requirement: As originally enacted, at least 70 percent of WtW grant funds had to be

expended to provide services to long-term Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

recipients who met two of three specified barriers to employment and to noncustodial parents

who met the barriers and whose children are long-term TANF recipients.

How do the 1999 WtW Amendments Change General Eligibility? The 1999 amendments

remove the requirement that long-term TANF recipients must meet additional barriers to

employment in order to be eligible for WtW. Therefore, TANF recipients are eligible for WtW if

they have received assistance for at least 30 months (whether consecutive or not), if they are

within 12 months of reaching their TANF time limit, or if they have exhausted their receipt of

TANF due to time limits.

In addition, under the 1999 amendments, noncustodial parents are eligible if: (1) they are

unemployed, underemployed, or having difficulty paying child support obligations; (2) their

minor children are eligible for, or receiving TANF benefits (with a priority for parents with

children who are long-term recipients), received TANF benefits during the preceding year, or are

eligible for, or receiving assistance under the Food Stamps program, the Supplemental Security

Income program, Medicaid, or the Children's Health Insurance Program: AND (3) they enter into

a personal responsibility contract under which they commit to cooperating in establishing

paternity and paying child support, and participating in services to increase their employment

and earnings, and to support their children. The 1999 amendments also require grantees to

consult with domestic violence organizations in developing these projects to serve noncustodial

parents.

Other Eligibles - "The 30% Eligibility Requirement"

Old Requirement: As originally enacted, WtW grantees could also spend up to 30 percent of

grant funds on TANF recipients and noncustodial parents who have characteristics associated

with long-term dependency.
122

How do the 1999 WtW Amendments Change Eligibility under the 30% provision? In

general, the 30% eligibility criteria are retained, except for noncustodials. In addition, the 1999

amendments add several categories of eligibility under the 30% provision, including 1) TANF

recipients who have significant barriers to self-sufficiency under criteria established by the PIC,

2) youth aged 18 to 25 who have "aged out" of foster care, and 3) custodial parents with incomes

below the poverty line.

Noncustodial parents are no longer included under the 30 percent provision, but may be served

under the general eligibility provisions described above.

What changes were made to WtW allowable activities?

The 1999 Amendments add vocational education and job training as a separate allowable activity

under WtW. Such training may be provided to a WtW participant for up to 6 months.

In addition, grantees that are not PICs or workforce investment boards may provide readiness,

placement and post-employment services directly to WtW participants. As originally enacted,

WtW grantees could generally only provide such services through contracts or vouchers.

How will reporting changes affect current grantees?

The 1999 WtW Amendments eliminate the participant and financial reporting requirements as

originally enacted and authorize the Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Secretary of

Health and Human Services as well as States, organizations representing States, and localities, to

establish requirements for the collection and maintenance of financial and participant

information and the reporting of such information. The Department expects to publish WtW

participant and financial reporting requirements early in 2000. WtW grantees will continue to

operate under the current reporting requirements until reporting changes are published and

become effective.

How do the 1999 WtW Amendments effect grantees' access to information about potential

WtW participants?

Under the 1999 Amendments, State agencies responsible for enforcing child support orders

(State IV-D agencies) have the authority to share information on noncustodial parents for the

purpose of identifying and contacting them regarding participation in the WtW program. This

information can include names, addresses, telephone numbers and identifying case number

information, and can only be shared with WtW grantees who are PICs (or local workforce

investment boards). The State must ensure that the PIC has procedures in place for safeguarding

the privacy of this information and for ensuring that the information will be used solely for WtW

recruiting purposes.
123

How do the 1999 Amendments affect the Performance Bonus for Formula grants?

As originally enacted, $100 million was set-aside from FY1999 funds to provide a bonus to

successful States. The 1999 Amendments reduce the amount to $50 million, and require that no

outlays of these funds occur before October 1, 2000.

When do the 1999 WtW Amendments take effect?

WtW Competitive grantees may implement the new eligibility criteria and begin serving

individuals under these criteria on January 1, 2000. Competitive grantees may also provide

vocational education and job training immediately upon enactment. Further, competitive grantees

who are not PICs (or local workforce investment boards) may immediately provide job

placement, job readiness and post-employment services directly to WtW participants.

Formula grantees may implement the new eligibility criteria and begin serving individuals under

these criteria, and providing vocational education and job training, as of July 1, 2000, except that

federal formula funds may not be expended for these purposes until October 1, 2000.

For Indian and Native American grantees all applicable provisions are effective immediately.

The grid below outlines the various provisions and when they become effective for different

types of grantees.

Effective Dates

GRANTEE TYPE Formula Grants Competitive

Grants

Indian/

Native

American

Grants

NOVEMBER 1999

AMENDMENTS -

Eligibility and Allowable

Activities

Expanded eligible population

July 1, 2000, except that

no federal funds may be

expended

October 1, 2000

(expending federal WtW

funds permitted)

January 1,

2000

November

29, 1999

Six month vocational

education

and job training allowed

July 1, 2000, except that

no federal funds may be

expended

October 1, 2000

(expending federal WtW

funds permitted)

November

29, 1999

November

29, 1999
124

Allowable Activities

GRANTEE TYPE Formula

Grants Competitive Grants

Indian/Native

American

Grants

NOVEMBER 1999 AMENDMENTS -

Other Provisions

Grantee is

PIC/local

board

Grantee is not

PIC/local

board

Information sharing between PICs/local

boards and Child Support Enforcement

agency

November

29, 1999

November

29, 1999

Not

applicable. Not applicable*

Direct provision of job readiness, job

placement and post-employment services

Not

applicable*

Not

applicable.

November 29,

1999

November 29,

1999

* Except in rare cases.