Testing Case Management in a Rural Context: An Impact Analysis of the Illinois Future Steps...

"In this report, we (1) chronicle the design and operation of Future Steps, assessing program participation, service delivery, and costs; (2) examine 30-month impacts on employment, earnings, welfare dependence, self- sufficiency, and well-being; and (3) draw lessons and recommendations about implementing, designing, and testing future welfare-to-work programs in rural areas." (p. 2) (Abstractor: Author)

Full Publication Title: Testing Case Management in a Rural Context: An Impact Analysis of the Illinois Future Steps Program Findings from the Rural Welfare-to-Work Strategies Demonstration Evaluation: Final Report

The key findings from the Future Steps evaluation are: • Program Design and Operation. The Future Steps implementation study showed that participation rates were high, and the program operated largely as planned, especially in the first year (Meckstroth et al. 2006). However, one potentially important component—employer-focused job readiness and vocational training—was not implemented. In the second year, organizational and budget pressures weakened implementation, although participation remained fairly steady. • 30-Month Impacts. Despite relatively good fidelity in implementing its case management assistance and job placement services, Future Steps had few positive impacts on the employment, self-sufficiency, and well-being of low-income people in rural Illinois. Still, Future Steps clients were more likely than control group members to receive services, which supported their access to public benefits and financial support at somewhat higher rates than control group members. They were also employed at higher rates than the control group during a couple of the very early and late months of the 30- month follow-up period, but this was not enough to improve earnings or self- sufficiency, and in most months there were no impacts on employment. • Lessons Learned. Although Future Steps was not shown to be an effective means to alleviate rural poverty, the evaluation does provide some lessons for policy and practice. First, implementation challenges confounded Future Steps’ efforts to provide an intervention that truly went beyond case management. Foremost among these problems were limited ties with local employers and difficulty retaining and supporting qualified staff. Moreover, the program was not able to capitalize on the job-training resources and employer connections available through its community college partner. Second, while case management may have helped clients address some barriers to work and self- sufficiency, many obstacles remained, at least some of which may be structural in nature, such as the limited availability of jobs and public transportation. This suggests that expanded job opportunities and infrastructural improvements may be needed to overcome persistent barriers to self-sufficiency common to depressed rural areas." (p. 3) (Abstractor: Author)

• Last Updated:
• Created:
• Resource Publication Date: 2008
• Author(s): Meckstroth, Alicia; Person, Ann; Moore, Quinn; Burwick, Andrew; McGuirk, Andrew et al.
• Organizational Author(s): Mathematica Policy Research
• Funding Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
• Resource Availability: Publicly available
• Posted by: Wesley Peterson
• Posted in: Workforce System Strategies