Welfare Reform in Nebraska: An Evaluation of the Employment First Program

How is welfare reform being implemented in Nebraska? What personal and family obstacles do welfare clients face? What strategies are welfare offices and community partners using to address these obstacles and to support clients in their transition from welfare to work and self-sufficiency? How do experiences differ in rural and urban settings?

In 1998, Mathematica began an evaluation of Nebraska’s welfare reform program—Employment First—to examine program implementation and the role of case managers in delivering services. The first report provided a qualitative assessment of the state's early experiences in implementing welfare reform, including its case management model of service delivery. The report also offered formative feedback on program accomplishments, challenges, and opportunities for improvement.

For the second phase of the evaluation, Mathematica conducted a client barriers study and a second-round program implementation study to examine differences in the challenges facing rural and urban welfare clients and service providers. By January 2001, Mathematica completed telephone interviews with about 400 clients in rural and urban areas, with a focus on obstacles to employment, such as the lack of a high school education and work experience, transportation and child care problems, physical and mental health problems, substance abuse, domestic violence, and learning disabilities. The client study report examined how obstacles constrained clients’ employability and influenced their experiences with welfare-to-work activities and supportive services. It also highlighted important rural versus urban differences in clients' employment experiences and obstacles. 

Through the qualitative implementation study, Mathematica examined the strategies programs used to address welfare clients' obstacles and prepare them for employment. The study was based on two rounds of site visits to rural and urban communities. It identified key differences in service approaches and implementation challenges in these two types of communities. The evaluation’s final synthesis report blended quantitative analyses from the client study with qualitative analyses from the implementation study to highlight welfare clients’ obstacles and related service delivery issues in rural and urban areas. The report also discussed opportunities for Nebraska to enhance its welfare program. Despite facing similar obstacles, rural clients were more likely than urban ones to participate in employment and educational activities and to receive certain benefits and services. Rural clients were also in more frequent contact with program staff. They were less dependent on TANF and, consistent with other studies, more likely to be employed a year later.  Nevertheless, partly due to the weaker economic base in rural communities, rural clients were considerably less likely to find good-paying jobs with benefits and a little more likely to remain in poverty. To view the issue brief based on this report, click here.

To order copies of the reports, please contact Jackie Allen, Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., P.O. Box 2393, Princeton, NJ 08543-2393, (609) 275-2350.

Back to Top