1. Descriptive Infrmatin Wrkshp A-1 (Meeting Rm) Variatin in CCDF Family Friendly Administrative Practices: What Varies and Why and Hw it Matters fr Families and Children. Descriptin This wrkshp will discuss what varies in hw CCDF prgram plicies are implemented n the grund (bth between and within States) and what is knwn abut hw different practices influence target utcmes, including subsidy receipt stability, child care cntinuity, and parental wrk utcmes. Facilitatr Julia Henly, University f Chicag Presenters Gina Adams, Urban Institute Liz Davis, University f Minnesta Erin Hardy, Brandeis University Discussant Scribe Claire Lwe, Child Trends 2. Dcuments in Sessin Flder (Please list any electrnic dcuments r web links used during the sessin.) Dcuments in CCPRC jump drive Adams lcal implementatin presentatin CCPRC 2015 n ntes (2) Brandeis_Lcal Variatin_regins masked_final revised (3) CCPRC 2015 DAVIS Variatin in lcal admin practices (Maryland) (2) lcalvariatin 3. Brief Summary f Presentatins Gina Adams. Summary f Presentatin #1: Backgrund and Overview f Subsidy Implementatin Decisins that Affect Families and Children CCDF Reauthrizatin basic infrmatin: There is a 12 mnth eligibility re-determinatin Allws states the ptin t terminate assistance prir t re-determinatin fr nn-temprary lss f eligibility, thugh must prvide three mnths f jb search Key elements in eligibility criteria and hw they are peratinalized The eligibility criteria are ften verlked There are nly fur areas required by the federal law (age f child, incme f family, reasn fr needing care, citizenship f child) all ther criteria are at the state discretin. The issue is thinking abut hw t define and peratinalize these criteria because they can be defined in a number f ways either bradly r mre specifically. It is als imprtant t think abut hw the qualifying activities are defined Eligibility criteria are imprtant because state eligibility authrizatin plicies affect hw easy r difficult it is t get assistance Hw t simplify the prcess fr determining and mnitring eligibility each f these prcesses are affected by the cmplexity f the eligibility criteria described abve: Simplify dcumentatin and verificatin plicies and practices E.G.: Seek dcumentatin and verificatin nly fr elements that affect eligibility; Only verify infrmatin that has changed; Use eligibility determinatins frm ther prgrams as sufficient verificatin Simplify prcess fr the applicatin and enrllment E.G.: Make the applicatin shrter (hw easy/difficult is it t cmplete); Make the applicatin available in many frms (nline, in persn)
Simplify redeterminatin E.G.: What d parents have t d? Hw lng are the redeterminatin perids? Are the perids, dates, and prcesses aligned acrss different benefit prgrams? Simplify interim change reprting E.G.: Avid having interim reprting effectively functin as anther redeterminatin; Minimize changes that must be reprted; Simplify reprting prcess fr husehlds Cnclusin statements Reauthrizatin requirements fr family friendly plicies is an imprtant first step When thinking abut this, it is essential t knw state level plicy decisins beynd redeterminatin perids, as nitty gritty questins abut eligibility criteria, verificatin requirements, and what is required f parents as part f applicatin, redeterminatin, and interim change reprting is als critical. Liz Davis. Summary f Presentatin #2: Using administrative data t understand lcal variatin in plicy implementatin This presentatin was part f the MN-MD research partnership and lks at hw lng peple are using subsidies fr and hw lng the eligibility perids are fr families in Maryland. Basic infrmatin n the CCDBG Act f 2014 Includes a prvisin that states set a minimum eligibility perid fr CCDF subsidies fr 12 mnths Abut half f states had 12 mnth eligibility perid prir t reauthrizatin Maryland was f these states with a 12 mnth eligibility plicy prir t 2014 What is currently knwn abut subsidy stability and eligibility redeterminatin: Families typically receive subsidies fr shrt perid f time (median spell abut 6 mnths) Many return fr anther spell Families are mre likely t exit the subsidy prgram when it is time fr redeterminatin Subsidy spell length in Maryland (by cunty) There is a lt f variatin acrss cunties Spell length ranged frm 19 t 37 weeks acrss several cunties and these were nt explained by differences in the caselads The researchers then lked at what s ging n in the cunties that might explain this variatin Administrative prcess in Maryland Eligible families receive a vucher t take t the prvider f their chice The vucher is issued fr a specific perid f time with a specific prvider The vucher has an end date The plicy is t review a family s eligibility at least every 12 mnths The 12 mnth perid is a maximum length f time rather than a standard length f time Data and Methds The current study includes five years f subsidy administrative data in Maryland frm 2007 t 2012 Unit f analysis: Vucher Data includes characteristics f the child and family at time vucher begins Dates n vucher d nt change s they analyzed start and end dates f vucher and eligibility start and end dates Findings Eligibility perids are getting lnger ver time but mst are shrter than 12 mnths. 1/3 f vuchers have eligibility perids f abut 12 mnths, but majrity were shrter than a year Vuchers are shrter than eligibility perids Vuchers range frm 1 t a full 52 weeks
Half f vuchers are shrter than eligibility perid they are assciated with Half f vuchers were fr 13 weeks Variables related t differences in the length f vuchers Families n Temprary Cash Assistance had shrter vuchers Families receiving subsidy fr training r educatin had shrter vuchers than families receiving subsidy fr emplyment Variables related t differences in the length f eligibility Few statistically significant relatinships. Eligibility perids mstly nt related t family characteristics Eligibility perids vary acrss cunties Differences in cunty practices in setting redeterminatin dates and vucher authrizatin end dates Summary Many families were given eligibility perids shrter than 12 mnths Vuchers were shrter than eligibility perids fr half f all vuchers and seemed t be getting shrter ver time Results suggest that lcal ffices have different practices when it cmes t eligibility redeterminatin dates and vucher authrizatin end dates Questins fr implementatin f new 12-mnth eligibility plicy under CCDBG reauthrizatin Hw will the plicy be implemented n the grund? Will casewrkers r lcal managers have discretin abut wh is required t recertify in the than 12 mnths? What ther plices trigger need fr parents t take actin in rder t keep receiving subsidy? Erin Hardy. Summary f Presentatin #3: Studying lcal variatin: why it matters fr CCDF plicy, practice, and research Lessns frm a mixed methds study in Massachusetts This study lks at an administrative change that tk place in MA in 2012 The change fcused n making eligibility reassessment mre family friendly which means that families n lnger have t visit the CCR&R ffice. The change nly applied t a subset f incme-eligible vucher children. They are finding lcal variatin in Admin. practices Other administrative factrs, like family travel distances (burden) The relatinship between administrative factrs and subsidy stability Tday s presentatin will: Prvide examples f lcal variatin in CCDF administrative factrs frm the MA study Summarize what the study is saying abut the relatinship between lcal variatin in admin factrs and subsidy stability Backgrund Research questin: des changing reassessment frm CCR&Rs t prviders impact stability Sample: 2834 incme-eligible vucher children with new subsidy receipt spell in 2012 Treatment children reassess with prvider Cmparisn children reassess with CCR&R The gegraphy f assessment is very different acrss treatment and cmparisn grups Methds Used spell analysis
Used discrete-time event histry analysis Incrprated measures f administrative factrs that may vary lcally Integrated impact/implementatin findings t explain bserved lcal variatin Family friendliness f reassessment practice, by CCRR regin (table n slide 11) Develped a discrete list f practices CCR&R are engaging in Lked at whether r nt CCR&R acrss regins are engaging in these activities Distance t reassessment by CCR&R regin (figures n slide 12) There is a wide range in median distance that families will travel These distances are nt explained by size f the regin Subsidy spell analysis (figure n slide 14) Range between 14 t 20 mnths acrss age grups and regins Selected impact mdel results (figure n slide 15) Included distance and reginal cntrl variables The dds ratis greater than ne represent likelihd t exit, which indicates less stability Lagged reassessment variable Reginal cntrl variables: three regins with dds rati greater than ne CCR&R family friendliness and reginal stability patterns (figure n slide 16) Regin ne has children that d the best n the index Odds f exit in lagged reassessment mnth, by CCR&R regin (figure n slide 17) All statistically significant in the regin specific mdel Summary Admin factrs are the strngest predictrs f subsidy exits acrss all regins Hwever, sme regins may be better than thers Results suggest that even in a state with key CCDF prvisins in place, lcal admin factrs may play a rle in mving the needle n stability Implicatins It s imprtant t include several regins/cunties Lcal variatin in practices and lack f cnsistent lcal perfrmance metrics are challenges in lcal implementatin research Lcal implementatin studies are key t understanding lcal variatin in impacts 4. Brief Summary f Discussin Ideas and cncepts discussed: Simplificatin f rules is gd fr everyne (families, prviders, and casewrkers) When we think f these as statewide plicies, it s nt that we dn t care abut variatin, we just dn t initially think, let s lk at variatin - it s a statewide plicy! It says in plicy what families get fr eligibility but just because the plicy says smething, this des nt mean that this is what the families are experiencing. Due t this, we need mixed methds studies. Need administrative data and ther data t get at what families are experiencing. States d nt necessarily have the resurces t train their casewrkers r develp effective cmmunicatin systems. States are ging t have t d mre with less
There are different kinds f variatin: casewrker variatin, agency variatin, etc. Leadership matters a lt t variatin and determinatin perids. It s imprtant t find ut what the staff need Stable redeterminatin Families need t understand the plicies and eligibility. Things t think abut Hw d we think abut minimizing lcal variatin when it s detrimental and hw d we maximize it when it s psitive? Think abut intentinal verses unintentinal variatin in states. Due t this, we shuld als think abut administrative business practices and supprts. Implementatin science: hw d yu implement a change? State administratrs need research n this because they and their frnt line staff need t implement change- This idea need t be part f the cnversatin. Gathering and using infrmatin-what are we ding t give TAs infrmatin and help them use it? Evidence based practice fr CQI. 5. Summary f Key issues raised (facilitatrs are encuraged t spend the last 3-5 minutes f wrkshps summarizing the key issues raised during the sessin; bullets belw are prmpts fr capturing the kinds f issues we re lking fr) There are many different kinds f variatin and this variatin is nt always intentinal Simplificatin f eligibility may help decrease variatin and make eligibility easier fr all parties. In terms f methdlgy, it will be imprtant t use mixed methd studies in future variatin research. Plicies say what families get fr eligibility but that des nt necessarily align with families experiences. Mixed methd studies will help get at what the families are experiencing and what practices ffices are implementing in additin t what the admin data says.