Welfare to Work: Approaches That Help Teenage Mothers Complete High
School (Letter Report, 09/29/95, GAO/HEHS/PEMD-95-202).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on local
programs that help teenage mothers complete their secondary education as
a step toward self-sufficiency.

GAO found that: (1) communities have responded to the growth of unwed
teenage mothers by creating programs to help them achieve economic
self-sufficiency by completing their secondary education; (2) three of
the five programs studied increased secondary education completion by
actively monitoring school attendance and providing access to child care
and transportation; (3) innovative approaches to help teenage mothers
complete high school included alternative public schools for pregnant
and parenting students, residential facilities for homeless teenage
mothers on welfare, and home visiting; (4) all of the 15 cities surveyed
required teenage mothers on welfare to continue their secondary
education, but 12 of the cities did not monitor the teenage mothers'
attendance; and (5) states use of these successful approaches will
depend on Congress' decision on whether welfare benefits should be
provided to teenage mothers.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  HEHS/PEMD-95-202
     TITLE:  Welfare to Work: Approaches That Help Teenage Mothers 
             Complete High School
      DATE:  09/29/95
   SUBJECT:  Aid to families with dependent children
             Disadvantaged persons
             Secondary education
             Single parents
             Welfare recipients
             Minors
             Women
             Welfare benefits
             Employment or training programs
             State-administered programs
IDENTIFIER:  AFDC
             JOBS Program
             Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program
             Medicaid Program
             Food Stamp Program
             Albuquerque (NM)
             Transitional Living Program (El Paso, TX)
             DOL Jobstart Program
             Time of Your Life Program (Milwaukee, WI)
             New Jersey School-Based Youth Services Program
             Wisconsin Learnfare Program
             Teen Parenting Program (Plainfield, NJ)
             Ohio Learning, Earning, and Parenting Program
             Cal-Learn Program (Los Angeles, CA)
             
**************************************************************************
* This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a GAO        *
* report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter titles,       *
* headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major divisions and subdivisions *
* of the text, such as Chapters, Sections, and Appendixes, are           *
* identified by double and single lines.  The numbers on the right end   *
* of these lines indicate the position of each of the subsections in the *
* document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the page       *
* numbers of the printed product.                                        *
*                                                                        *
* No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although figure    *
* captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but may not resemble     *
* those in the printed version.                                          *
*                                                                        *
* A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO Document    *
* Distribution Facility by calling (202) 512-6000, by faxing your        *
* request to (301) 258-4066, or by writing to P.O. Box 6015,             *
* Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015. We are unable to accept electronic orders *
* for printed documents at this time.                                    *
**************************************************************************


Cover
================================================================ COVER


Report to Congressional Requesters

September 1995

WELFARE TO WORK - APPROACHES THAT
HELP TEENAGE MOTHERS COMPLETE HIGH
SCHOOL

GAO/HEHS/PEMD-95-202

Teenage Mothers on Welfare

(105592)


Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  ACF - Administration for Children and Families
  AFDC - Aid to Families With Dependent Children
  FSA - Family Support Act of 1988
  GED - General Educational Development certificate
  JOBS - Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training
  LEAP - Learning, Earning, and Parenting
  MDRC - Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation
  SBYSP - School-Based Youth Services Program
  TASA - Teenage Services Act
  TPD - Teenage Parent Demonstration

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER


B-259612

September 29, 1995

The Honorable Edolphus Towns
Ranking Minority Member
The Honorable Christopher Shays
Chairman
Subcommittee on Human Resources
 and Intergovernmental Relations
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight
House of Representatives

As the Congress and the administration consider how to reform the
nation's welfare system and reduce the number of families that are
dependent on welfare, concerns have focused on the increasing numbers
of births to unmarried teenagers.  This issue is of particular
concern because families started by teenage mothers represent almost
half\1

the families receiving welfare and are likely to receive assistance
for long periods of time, at great cost to the public.  While
low-income teenage mothers stand a better chance of avoiding
long-term welfare dependency if they obtain a high school education,
there is uncertainty about how to achieve this outcome. 

Because of this uncertainty, you asked us to provide you with
information on (1) approaches that show promise in helping teenage
mothers complete their secondary education as a step toward
self-sufficiency and (2) Aid to Families With Dependent Children
(AFDC)\2 program activities that enable teenage mothers on welfare to
complete their secondary education. 

To develop this information, we visited 13 local programs in New
Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin that were
recognized by experts as being exemplary in helping disadvantaged
teenage mothers complete their secondary education.  Since most of
these programs had not been formally evaluated, we also examined
published impact evaluations of programs serving teenage mothers to
determine which approaches had demonstrated success.  We synthesized
the results of the five impact evaluations whose methods we judged to
be rigorous enough to produce credible results.  (App.  I provides
additional information about these evaluations and our synthesis of
their results.) Finally, we conducted interviews with AFDC and JOBS
program administrators in the 15 cities across the country that had
the highest numbers of births to unwed mothers under the age of 20 in
1992.\3

We did our work between June 1994 and July 1995 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.  We did not,
however, verify the information given to us by the AFDC and JOBS
program administrators. 


--------------------
\1 Families on Welfare:  Teenage Mothers Least Likely to Become
Self-Sufficient (GAO/HEHS-94-115, May 31, 1994). 

\2 AFDC provides cash assistance to members of low-income families
with children who were deprived of support due to the absence, death,
disability, or unemployment of at least one parent.  Since 1988, AFDC
has had a training and education component, the Job Opportunities and
Basic Skills Training (JOBS) program. 

\3 Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Detroit, Houston,
Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Memphis, Miami, Milwaukee, New Orleans,
New York, Philadelphia, and Phoenix. 


   RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1

Communities throughout the country have responded to the growth in
the number of disadvantaged unwed teenage mothers by creating a
diverse range of programs aimed at helping them move toward economic
self-sufficiency--in particular, to obtain a high school diploma or
General Educational Development certificate (GED).  Our synthesis of
rigorous evaluations of five such programs found that three increased
high school or GED completions, and thus showed promise for
increasing economic self-sufficiency in the long run.  All three of
these programs actively monitored school attendance and followed up
on attendance with either financial incentives or sanctions and/or
aided in resolving barriers to school attendance.  In addition, they
provided access to child care and transportation.  The two programs
of the five that did not monitor and follow up on attendance failed
to increase school completions.  The common features associated with
the successful programs were also found in the 13 programs that we
visited. 

The 13 programs we visited, as well as the 3 successful evaluated
programs, exemplified a variety of approaches to serving teenage
mothers and provided insight into the types of services that program
administrators believe are necessary to help some teenage mothers
complete their education and to encourage responsible parenting. 
These programs also provided examples of the different ways that
services can be structured to address these young mothers' needs. 

Moreover, some of the 13 programs we visited also provided examples
of innovative approaches for helping teenage mothers complete high
school that were different from the approaches taken by the programs
included in the evaluation synthesis.  These approaches included
alternative schools for pregnant and parenting students within the
public school system, residential facilities for homeless teenage
mothers on AFDC, home visiting to assist teenage mothers and their
families, and school-based programs that served teenage mothers as
part of a larger effort aimed at all at-risk teenagers. 

Although city welfare officials told us that they required teenage
mother welfare recipients to continue their high school education, 12
of the 15 cities we contacted did not take the additional step of
monitoring the attendance of young welfare mothers who were attending
high school.  Welfare offices in 3 of the 15 cities we reviewed stood
out, however, because they reported monitoring and following up on
the educational activities of all their teenage mothers on welfare,
even if they were still attending high school when they applied for
AFDC benefits. 

The Congress is currently deliberating several reforms to the welfare
system, including whether to provide benefits to teenage mothers. 
Our work shows that a number of approaches can work to help teenage
mothers complete high school; however, whether states will use these
approaches will likely be influenced by the final form of the
legislation. 


   BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2

The birth rate for unmarried women aged 15 to 19 increased threefold
between 1960 and 1992 (see fig.  1).  While the increase in births to
unwed teenagers is part of an increasing trend in births to unwed
mothers of all childbearing ages, the economic consequences are
usually more severe for teenagers because many teenagers who have a
child forgo their high school education.  Having disrupted her
education, the teenage mother may never attain the diploma that the
labor market increasingly demands, even for low-wage jobs.  Women who
begin childbearing during their teenage years are significantly more
likely than women who postpone having children to live in poverty, to
receive public assistance, and to have long periods of welfare
dependency. 

   Figure 1:  Birth Rate for
   Unmarried Teenage Mothers, Aged
   15-19, 1960-92

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Source:  Division of Vital Statistics, National Center for Health
Statistics, Centers for Disease Control. 

Nearly half of all unmarried teenage mothers are likely to go onto
AFDC within the first 48 months after giving birth.  While unwed
teenage mothers as a group tend to stay on welfare for a relatively
long time, those who have not completed high school are likely to
remain on public assistance even longer.  We reported last year that
AFDC families headed by women who did not have a high school diploma
or its equivalent were less likely to leave AFDC than those with at
least a high school diploma or equivalent.\4

Estimates of the public costs associated with supporting teenage
mothers and their children are high and growing.  The Center for
Population Options estimates that in 1992 the federal government
spent $34 billion in AFDC, Medicaid, and Food Stamp benefits to
support families started by teenagers.\5 This was a 17-percent
increase from 1991 and a 36-percent rise from 1990. 

In passing the Family Support Act of 1988 (FSA), the Congress
recognized the importance of a high school education to avoiding
long-term welfare dependence, especially for young parents.  The act
created the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training program to
provide employment training and assistance for recipients of AFDC
benefits.  JOBS directs states to require custodial parents aged 16
to 19, regardless of the age of their child(ren), who have not
completed their secondary education to participate in educational
activities directed toward the attainment of a high school diploma or
its equivalent, to the extent that these activities are available and
that state resources permit. 

States are afforded substantial discretion in deciding how they will
serve AFDC recipients, including teenage mothers in the JOBS program. 
Although FSA emphasizes the importance of education for teenage
mothers on AFDC, it does not require states either to provide all
their high school dropout teenage mothers slots in JOBS or to ensure
that these teenage mothers actually participate in educational
activities by tracking their attendance.  As a result, teenage
mothers who have dropped out of high school may not be required to
participate in JOBS if a state lacks the resources to provide child
care, transportation, or JOBS education or training.  Moreover, those
referred to educational activities through JOBS may not actually
attend.  In fact, states have moved unevenly to enroll teenage AFDC
mothers, including those who have dropped out of school, in JOBS.  We
reported recently, for example, that one state enrolled as few as 7
percent of AFDC teenage parents, while another enrolled more than
half.\6 The number who actually attend high school or GED classes is
unknown. 

The Congress is now considering welfare reform proposals that include
provisions that relate directly or indirectly to the AFDC program's
approach to teenage mothers.  A provision in the House proposal would
deny cash benefits to unmarried mothers under age 18, but permit
provision of noncash benefits such as child care or transportation
assistance.  Both the House and Senate propose to increase the
proportion of welfare recipients who must participate in a work
program and to reduce states' funding if they fail to meet
participation goals.  Most importantly for teenagers, the House
proposal would no longer consider enrollment in a high school or
equivalency program as work program participation unless the student
was also employed an average of 20 hours a week.  In contrast,
although the Senate's proposal permits states to deny cash benefits
to unwed teenage mothers, they are not required to do so.  However,
if states do pay benefits to teenage mothers, those teenagers must
live under an adult's supervision and be working toward high school
completion. 


--------------------
\4 Families on Welfare:  Focus on Teenage Mothers Could Enhance
Welfare Reform Efforts (GAO/HEHS-94-112, May 31, 1994). 

\5 Data for 1992 were the most recent data available. 

\6 Welfare to Work:  States Move Unevenly to Serve Teen Parents in
JOBS (GAO/HRD-93-74, July 7, 1993). 


   CERTAIN APPROACHES SHOW PROMISE
   IN HELPING YOUNG MOTHERS
   COMPLETE HIGH SCHOOL OR GED
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3

Numerous programs have been established in communities throughout the
country to reduce the negative consequences of teenage parenting. 
Our synthesis of rigorous impact evaluations of five such programs
operating in multiple sites identified one feature that distinguished
the programs that increased high school or GED completions from those
that did not:  active monitoring and follow-up of school
attendance.\7 All five programs also provided child care and
transportation assistance; otherwise, these programs were quite
different.  Table 1 outlines the programs' major characteristics (see
app.  II for descriptions of the programs and their outcomes).  While
many of the programs we visited shared the common features found in
the five evaluated programs, they also provided examples of, but had
not yet evaluated, promising approaches to helping teenage mothers
overcome obstacles to high school completion.  These approaches
included providing services in special schools, residential centers,
or the teenagers' homes, as well as offering school-based programs
for all at-risk youth. 


--------------------
\7 To assess program impact, each study compared program
participants' outcomes with those of a comparison group of
nonparticipants and applied a statistical test to determine whether
the difference was likely to have occurred by chance.  See appendix I
for more detail on the selection and review of these studies. 


      SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS HAD
      ATTENDANCE MONITORING AND
      FOLLOW-UP IN COMMON
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.1

All five program evaluations provided outcome data on secondary
education completion.  Although all five programs increased school
enrollment, only three were successful in helping young mothers
complete high school or obtain a GED:  Learning, Earning, and
Parenting (LEAP), New Chance, and Jobstart.  While the ultimate goal
is for teenage mothers to be economically self-sufficient, only three
of the evaluations included in our synthesis measured economic
impacts 2 years or more after teenagers entered the program, and only
one had successful results on postprogram employment or AFDC receipt. 
No feature clearly set this program apart.\8 Consequently, we focused
on how to help teenagers complete their secondary education. 
Although currently there is some debate as to whether the GED
provides the same earnings potential as a high school diploma, we
combined these measures because the programs we reviewed encouraged
either or both as routes to prepare teenagers for employment. 

One program feature clearly distinguished between programs that
increased school completions and those that did not:  The three
successful programs actively monitored school attendance and followed
up either with financial incentives and sanctions or with intensive
case management.  However, attendance monitoring and follow-up took
place in different forms in the three programs that practiced them. 

The LEAP program, run by the Ohio welfare department, combined active
monitoring with financial sanctions and incentives.  AFDC offices
coordinated closely with school districts to obtain teenage AFDC
parents' attendance records on a monthly basis.  When attendance
problems arose, LEAP followed up by reducing teenage parents' monthly
AFDC checks by $62 for unexcused absences from school.  When
attendance was good, LEAP followed up with a comparable bonus in
recipients' AFDC checks.  LEAP participants in Cleveland had
statistically significant, higher rates of high school graduation or
GED completion than those of nonparticipants 1 and 3 years after
enrollment.  The statewide program also resulted in slightly higher
GED completion rates over the short term (18 months after enrollment)
but had no information on high school graduations. 

The community-based New Chance and Jobstart programs combined direct
attendance monitoring with either financial rewards or case
management.  In both, most classes and other activities were held
on-site so attendance could be monitored through personal
observation.  When classes or activities were held off-site, these
programs coordinated with providers to monitor the teenagers'
attendance.  New Chance's follow-up consisted of intensive case
management to help resolve participants' problems that were
identified through monitoring.  For example, case managers approached
teenagers who had attendance problems to help identify the barriers
to good attendance.  They then offered assistance, such as
counseling, on-site child care, or, for more specialized needs, help
in accessing the appropriate resources.  Jobstart's follow-up at a
majority of sites involved small financial rewards for maintaining
good attendance or for making academic progress; financial sanctions
were not used.  New Chance participants had significantly higher
rates of high school or GED completions than did nonparticipants 1
and 1-1/2 years after enrollment.  The Jobstart program participants
had higher rates of high school or GED completions than did
nonparticipants 4 years after enrollment in the program. 

Neither Project Redirection nor the Teenage Parent Demonstration was
successful in increasing high school or GED completions.  The
community-based Project Redirection was largely a mentoring program
that offered service referrals and sent teenagers to other sites for
classes, but did not routinely observe or keep track of their
attendance, nor did it follow up on their daily absences.  This
program, as well as others, experienced attendance problems.  In
fact, teenagers attended GED classes only about half the time, and
those enrolled in regular and alternative school classes failed to
attend about a quarter of the time.  The Teenage Parent Demonstration
staff kept track of participants' mandated enrollment in educational
and other activities, but did not monitor or keep track of daily
attendance, nor did the program routinely follow up on an
individual's attendance problems.  Project Redirection participants
did not have significantly higher rates of high school or GED
completions than did nonparticipants at 1, 2, or even 5 years after
enrollment in the program.  Teenage Parent Demonstration
participants' completions of high school or GED were also not
different from those of nonparticipants at 2-1/2 years after
enrollment in the program.\9

We observed close monitoring of teenagers' school attendance in many
of the 13 programs we visited.  In six of these programs, monitoring
and follow-up were carried out formally through intensive case
management.  The residential centers in Albuquerque and El Paso
provided strict supervision of the teenage mothers' school attendance
and performance, as well as their other program activities, along
with clear consequences when teenagers failed to comply with rules. 
In some cases, teenagers who did not obey rules were required to
leave the facility; in some centers, they could earn privileges by,
for example, making good progress in school or attending counseling
sessions. 

Other innovative programs monitored the activities of the young women
on-site in the public or alternative schools that they attended.  For
example, students in the alternative schools we visited were required
to sign in daily.  Child care centers in the schools offered
additional opportunities for monitoring because child care
administrators and teachers were quick to connect the absence of an
infant from the center with the possibility that a problem had
emerged in the teenage mother's life. 



                                Table 1
                
                  Components of the Five Programs With
                           Impact Evaluations

                                                            Teenage
                                                Project     Parent
Program                                         Redirectio  Demonstrat
component   LEAP\a      Jobstart    New Chance  n           ion
----------  ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------
Number of   7           13          16          4           3
sites

High        X           X           X           X           X
school
diploma,
GED, or
basic
skills
preparatio
n

Vocational              X           X                       X
or job
training

Career                              X           X
exploratio
n and
preemploym
ent skills
training

Job search              X           X                       X
and
placement
assistance

Life                    X           X           X           X
skills/
life
management
instructio
n

Parenting                           X           X           X
education

Work                    X                                   X
expenses

Attendance  X           X           X
monitoring

Case                                X
management
follow-up

Financial   X           X                                   X
incentives
or
sanctions

Child care  X           X           X           X           X
and
transporta
tion
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a The LEAP program operates in all Ohio counties, but the statewide
evaluation includes seven counties.  Full school completion data were
available from only one site, the city of Cleveland. 


--------------------
\8 However, even 4 to 5 years may be too soon for many teenagers to
be expected to have self-supporting jobs.  Despite the program
impacts, many teenage mothers still had not completed their
education, and many were barely over age 20, by the end of these
studies. 

\9 School completion data reported here are from a limited
availability report by Rebecca Maynard, Walter Nicholson, and Anu
Rangarajan, Breaking the Cycle of Poverty:  The Effectiveness of
Mandatory Services for Welfare-Dependent Teenage Parents, prepared
for the U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services, Contract
#HHS-100-86-0045 (Princeton, N.J.:  Mathematica Policy Research,
Inc., Dec.  1993). 


      CHILD CARE AND
      TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE
      ALSO SEEN AS CRUCIAL
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.2

Teenage mothers' need for child care was viewed as so important that
all 5 of the evaluated programs as well as the 13 programs we visited
attempted to provide it, either directly or through reimbursement. 
Some programs provided child care directly in the schools, in the
residential facilities, at the job training sites, or in the
community.  In some instances, the teenage mothers chose to rely on
family members rather than the more formal care provided by the
programs.  Unfortunately, some programs could not meet the needs of
all program participants, either because of limitations in the number
of available child care slots or because they lacked the resources to
reimburse the teenagers for the care.  Program directors told us that
there were waiting lists for child care at many of the on-site
centers, and at one alternative school, teenage mothers who arrived
at school with their children after the center was full were sent
home for the day.  Without child care, these young mothers were
unable to attend school. 

Many programs also recognized lack of transportation as a barrier to
teenagers' ability to complete high school.  In addition to having to
get to and from school themselves, teenage mothers often have to take
their child to and from a child care provider.  As a result, many
teenage mothers were given transportation assistance, either directly
or through reimbursement, which was considered crucial by most
program administrators to the success of these programs.  The
Director of the rural Salem, New Jersey, School-Based Youth Services
Program (SBYSP) told us of the complicated provisions she had to
make--sometimes arranging special school bus rides--to get teenagers
to and from appointments, school, and home. 


      DIFFERENT PROGRAM MODELS
      HELPED TEENAGE MOTHERS
      COMPLETE HIGH SCHOOL OR GED
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.3

Aside from monitoring and following up on attendance problems and
providing child care and transportation assistance, the three
programs that demonstrated increased school completions--Jobstart,
New Chance, and LEAP--represent quite different program models. 
Their differences in approach and the nature and extent of services
offered demonstrate that a variety of approaches can help young
mothers complete their high school education.  Many of the programs
that we visited resembled the evaluated programs in the types of
services they provided.  (See fig.  2 for a summary of services
provided by the 13 programs visited.) However, because of differences
in the populations they served, we cannot directly compare the
effectiveness of these programs. 

   Figure 2:  Services Provided by
   Innovative Programs to Support
   High School Completion

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)



   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

\a Pivot is a New Chance site. 


         SUPPORTING VOCATIONAL
         PREPARATION WITH
         EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.3.1

The Jobstart program represented a vocational preparation model for
disadvantaged high school dropouts--not just teenage mothers, but
other young women and men.  It provided GED preparation and basic
skills instruction as well as training and job placement assistance. 
Counseling and assistance with child care and work expenses were
provided, as needed, to facilitate participation.  Many of the
programs we visited recognized the importance of employment-related
services.  For example, the New Jersey School-Based Youth Services
Program offered job training and placement services, assistance with
career development, and preparation for the world of work.  Program
directors remarked on these teenagers' need to develop the good work
habits--such as punctuality, self-discipline, and reliability--that
are required for school completion as well as for future success on
the job.  In addition to offering special workshops, the Plainfield,
New Jersey, Teenage Parenting Program also engaged volunteer mentors
from AT&T and the community to provide moral support and counseling,
as well as career development and training services. 


         PROVIDING A COMPREHENSIVE
         PACKAGE OF EDUCATIONAL,
         VOCATIONAL, AND SOCIAL
         SERVICES
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.3.2

New Chance represented a comprehensive services model designed to
meet the wide range of needs of young AFDC mothers who had dropped
out of school and those of their children.  It combined education and
employment preparation with case management and an array of health
and social services.  New Chance's one-stop, drop-in centers offered
basic education (or GED preparation) in an initial phase and
employment preparation in a later phase; classes in parenting and
life skills; and workshops on family planning and substance abuse to
most participants on-site.  Comprehensive health services for mothers
and children and job skills training were often provided off-site. 

While few of the programs we visited incorporated the diverse
components of the New Chance model,\10 many found the need to provide
a range of supportive social services.  The majority of programs we
visited provided personal counseling or support groups to help
teenagers deal with a range of personal problems that slowed their
progress toward attaining a diploma.  A number of programs offered
courses in life skills covering a variety of topics, including
substance abuse prevention and communication skills.  Several
administrators identified low self-esteem among these young women as
a contributor to school failure.  Consequently, some programs, like
Milwaukee's Time of Your Life, provided group workshops specifically
designed to build self-esteem. 

Most of the programs we visited offered parenting education in which
the young women learned about child development, maternal and child
health, and appropriate methods of discipline.  Such training was
considered especially important because of the relative immaturity of
these young women facing the challenges of parenting, as well as the
history of abuse that many of these teenagers had experienced. 
Programs reinforced parenting skills in a variety of ways, such as by
pairing communication and parenting skills in a job training program,
and by incorporating instruction with modeling and observation in
their child care centers. 

New Chance, as well as many of the programs we visited, explicitly
aims to improve the life chances of both the teenager and her child. 
Routine health care for mother and child was provided on-site in some
of the programs we visited, while other programs developed close
connections with local community providers to ensure continuity of
care.  For example, in the New Futures alternative high school, day
care center and clinic staff counseled mothers on what to look for
and do for their children when they appeared sick. 


--------------------
\10 We did visit the Pivot program in Oregon, a New Chance site. 


         PROVIDING LIMITED
         SERVICES WITH FINANCIAL
         INCENTIVES
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.3.3

LEAP had the simplest of the program models evaluated, representing
no more than the common features described in the previous section: 
monitoring and following up on attendance in high school (or for
some, GED classes) and providing assistance with child care and
transportation on an as-needed basis.\11 Teenage parents were
enrolled in JOBS (including many still in high school), and program
follow-up took the form of tying AFDC benefit levels to their
attendance records.  AFDC programs in Wisconsin and California, which
are experimenting with similar ways of using financial incentives to
back up their requirement for teenage parents (in Wisconsin, all
teenagers) to attend school, are discussed later in this report. 

The fact that LEAP successfully increased the rate of school
completions without providing extensive services may mean that such
services are not required to obtain improvements on average, or it
may reflect other differences between the evaluated programs.  In
particular, the three programs served different populations of
teenage mothers:  LEAP served both students and dropouts, and was
less successful with dropouts; New Chance and Jobstart served only
high-school dropouts.  It is possible that the less extensive LEAP
services may not be successful with young women who have already been
out of school for some time.  On the other hand, many of the social
services offered by programs like New Chance are aimed not so much
toward helping these teenagers complete high school as toward
improving their parenting behavior and breaking the intergenerational
cycle of poverty. 

We are unable to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the
individual services offered in these programs because there were no
independent tests of their contribution to the effects of each
program as a whole.  Each evaluation provides evidence only on the
impact of the services as they were delivered, that is, in a package
with monitoring and follow-up.  The small number of programs
evaluated offered a limited range of variation and thus limits our
ability to examine such effects. 


--------------------
\11 In addition, LEAP participants in Cleveland, as well as the
control group, had access to special instruction and services through
their high school.  The effects of providing additional case
management services were examined in a separate study. 


      ADDITIONAL APPROACHES TO
      HELPING TEENAGE MOTHERS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.4

In addition to the approaches taken in the programs included in our
evaluation synthesis, the programs we visited provided examples of
innovative approaches to helping teenage mothers complete their high
school education that are quite different from those evaluated. 
These approaches included the use of alternative schools; residential
programs; home-based programs; and school-based programs that
provided services to all teenagers in the school, not just those who
were pregnant or parenting. 


         ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS
         BRIDGE STUDENT AND PARENT
         ROLES
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.4.1

Alternative schools provide an opportunity for teenage mothers to
continue their education in a setting that also actively supports
their role as a parent.  We visited two such programs:  the Teen
Parent Academy in El Paso and New Futures in Albuquerque.  Both
schools provided a wide range of on-site services to support pregnant
and parenting teenagers.  Although a student could choose to return
to a regular high school after the birth of her child, she could also
continue at the alternative school, which provided on-site child care
and a range of other services to enable teenagers to continue their
education while raising a child.  Parenting education classes at the
Academy taught skills vital to young teenagers in their multiple
roles of child, student, parent, and future employee.  New Futures
had on-site prenatal and perinatal clinics for teenagers, and all
students participated in child development classes.  Students were
required to work in the child care centers as part of their
curriculum, and pregnant teenagers were to take a personal and child
health care class.  The school district provided transportation for
students and their children, and counselors were available for
individual counseling. 


         RESIDENTIAL PROGRAMS
         OFFERED REFUGE AND
         STRUCTURE
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.4.2

In some cases, programs have been developed to deal with the very
serious, if not widespread, problem of homelessness among teenage
mothers.  In Albuquerque, homelessness was identified as a reason
that some teenage mothers were unable to continue their high school
education.  In response, a teenage parent residence was developed. 
In addition, the El Paso Transitional Living Program aimed to enable
homeless young women to remain with their children as well as to
strengthen their ability to become self-sufficient.  Transitional
housing for teenage mothers and their children was one component of
the Teenage Services Act (TASA)\12 program in Syracuse, New York: 
Families could remain there for 2 to 3 years, or until they became
self-sufficient.  These programs offered more than just shelter. 
They provided a variety of support services designed to assist the
teenager in obtaining a high school diploma or GED; on-site
counselors to monitor the residents' activities; and rules with
severe consequences for breaking them, including eviction from the
residence. 


--------------------
\12 TASA is New York State legislation that requires AFDC teenage
mothers to be offered case management. 


         HOME VISITS ATTEMPTED TO
         SERVE THE ENTIRE FAMILY
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.4.3

Two programs used home visits to ensure that teenage mothers received
the services that they needed to continue their education.  The
Addison County Parent/Child Center served a rural population. 
Professional staff visited families in their homes to determine what
help might be needed, giving priority to pregnant teenagers, young
mothers, extended families of teenage parents, families with
handicapped children, and families with abused and neglected
children. 

Home visiting was the centerpiece of Milwaukee's Time of Your Life
Program, an intergenerational program for teenage mothers and their
families.  The Time of Your Life approach reflected the staff's
belief that since most of their teenage mothers came from
multigeneration AFDC families and continued to live at home, the
teenage mothers' problems could not be addressed without educating
and supporting the entire family unit.  A prenatal community nurse
and a family therapist visited clients in their homes, developing a
unique program for each client that involved the entire family, then
attempted to link the families to the appropriate services. 
Individual teenagers and their families signed contracts saying that
the teenager would complete school and that all concerned would
provide a loving and healthy environment for the teenager and her
baby.  This attempt to directly involve the family is meant to
overcome what program staff referred to as welfare families' frequent
"sabotage" of teenage mothers' efforts to complete school and find
work. 


         SCHOOLS OFFERED SERVICES
         TO TEENAGE MOTHERS AS
         PART OF A LARGER PROGRAM
         TO SERVE ALL AT-RISK
         STUDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------- Letter :3.4.4

The statewide New Jersey School-Based Youth Services Program was
designed to serve all teenagers, not just teenage parents.  It aimed
to prevent, and where needed, address the problems facing many of
them, including unemployment, the break-up of families, suicide, drug
and alcohol abuse, alienation from school possibly leading to
dropping out of school, and unplanned pregnancy.  The program
emphasized early intervention, family involvement, and the provision
of comprehensive services at a single, accessible setting.  While the
program was school-based, a wide range of community resources
supported each local site, and in fact were required in order to
receive state funds. 

In addition, three SBYSP sites we visited created special programs
for their teenage parents.  In two of the three sites, the teenage
parenting program provided on-site child care, in addition to the
other services necessary to keep pregnant and parenting teenagers in
school.  This included life skills and parenting training, mentors
who provided moral support, and other community volunteers who were
once teenage mothers themselves.  Further, Plainfield used its
on-site child care center as a tool to provide the teenage parents
with the information and support they needed to assist them in their
parenting role.  To have access to this child care center, teenage
mothers had to maintain at least a "C" average, perform community
service, participate in case management and support services, and not
have another child.  Finally, teenagers in SBYSP were encouraged to
use the available resources in the community, many of which could be
accessed through the program. 


   AFDC OFFICES MET FSA
   REQUIREMENTS, BUT MOST DID NOT
   MONITOR ALL TEENAGERS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4

The city welfare officials we spoke with told us that they required
certain teenage AFDC recipients to continue their high school
education and referred high-school dropouts to the JOBS program for
continuing education.  But most AFDC/JOBS offices did not take the
additional step of monitoring the attendance of young AFDC mothers
who were attending high school or those who were under age 16 (and
thus exempted).  Programs in three cities stood out, however, because
they monitored and followed up on the educational activities of all
their teenage mothers on welfare, even if they were still attending
high school when they applied for AFDC. 


      MOST YOUNG MOTHERS WERE NOT
      MONITORED UNLESS THEY
      DROPPED OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.1

All 15 of the city welfare offices we surveyed reported requiring
teenage mothers, aged 16 through 19, who were on AFDC and had not
completed high school to participate in educational activities aimed
at a high school diploma or GED.\13 When teenage mothers who had
already dropped out of school applied for AFDC benefits, the welfare
offices referred them to the JOBS program to continue their
education.  (However, not all of these dropouts necessarily
participated in educational activities, because localities sometimes
lacked resources to serve all those referred to JOBS.) JOBS
participants--including those in high school who volunteered for JOBS
to obtain child care or transportation assistance--were generally
monitored on a monthly basis.  If they failed to attend classes, or,
in some cases, did not make satisfactory progress, we were told, case
managers intervened to find out why.  The case managers attempted to
identify the problem and to provide the services or link the
teenagers with the services necessary to enable them to continue
their education.  If there was no justifiable explanation for a
teenage mother's failure to attend school, she was threatened with a
sanction--a reduction in the amount of her monthly AFDC benefit. 
However, city AFDC and JOBS officials told us that few teenage
mothers actually had their benefits reduced, since most complied with
the attendance requirements as a result of the sanctioning process
and the case managers' intervention. 

On the other hand, when teenage mothers who were enrolled in high
school applied for AFDC benefits, they were exempted from
participation in JOBS.  In most cities, once these teenage mothers
were exempted from JOBS, the AFDC office paid no further attention to
their education until 6 months had passed and their eligibility for
AFDC was being reverified.  These teenage mothers could have dropped
out of school at any time during those 6 months, and months could
have elapsed before AFDC discovered they had dropped out.  Once
identified as dropouts, these teenage mothers would be referred to
JOBS and, depending on resources, might participate in educational
activities. 

Further, teenage mothers under the age of 16, admittedly a small
proportion of welfare recipients, are exempted by FSA from
requirements that states compel them to attend school as a condition
of receiving AFDC benefits.  However, 3 cities-- Cleveland,
Milwaukee, and Los Angeles--of 15 that we surveyed reported routine
monitoring of the school attendance of mothers that young.  These
three cities are part of special waiver programs--LEAP, Learnfare,
and Cal-Learn, respectively. 


--------------------
\13 One city reported exempting all teenagers with children under the
age of 3 from the participation requirement, which conflicts with the
requirement that all teenagers without a high school education
participate (regardless of the age of their child). 


      A FEW PROGRAMS MONITORED
      EDUCATION OF ALL TEENAGE
      AFDC RECIPIENTS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.2

Only three of the city welfare offices we interviewed routinely
monitored the school attendance of teenage mothers who were still
attending high school when they applied for AFDC.  These AFDC offices
stood out because they monitored and followed up on the educational
activities of all their teenage mothers on welfare:  Cleveland
participated in Ohio's LEAP program (previously discussed); Milwaukee
participated in Wisconsin's Learnfare program; and Los Angeles became
part of the Cal-Learn demonstration project in 1995.\14

Like LEAP, participation in Cal-Learn and Learnfare was mandatory for
all teenage mothers on welfare who did not have a high school
diploma, whether they were attending school or had dropped out. 
Dropouts were required either to return to high school or to attend a
GED preparation program.  Each program monitored attendance
routinely, but these programs differed in their use of rewards and
sanctions and in whether they offered case management services before
applying sanctions.  The Cleveland demonstration of the LEAP program
operated like the statewide program, but also provided case
management and supportive services for teenage parents with recurrent
attendance problems. 

California's Cal-Learn program used financial incentives and
sanctions to reward attendance and academic achievement and also
provided case management and supportive services.  A welfare family
with a teenage parent or parents might receive up to four $100
bonuses in a 12-month period for each teenage parent who maintained a
C average or better, or, conversely, up to four $100 reductions in
its AFDC benefit for each teenage parent who failed to make adequate
progress.  Cal-Learn also provided a $500 bonus for high school
completion. 

Wisconsin's statewide Learnfare program coordinated with the public
schools to monitor the attendance of all teenagers on AFDC but used
only sanctions, not rewards.  When receiving notice of a possible
reduction in benefits, a teenage mother on welfare would also be
offered case management to help her overcome barriers to school
attendance.  If her attendance still did not improve, her benefits
were reduced. 

A provision in the House welfare reform proposal regarding teenagers
and AFDC could, if passed, affect these three states' programs for
teenage mothers on welfare, by denying cash benefits to mothers under
age 18.  However, a possible similar approach could be to monitor
these younger teenagers' attendance and use noncash benefits such as
child care and transportation assistance to reward satisfactory
attendance.  Further, it is unclear whether these three AFDC offices
would continue to monitor the attendance of teenage mothers 18 years
and older if certain provisions to strengthen work program
requirements were enacted.  These provisions would raise work program
participation goals and no longer permit states to count a parent's
high school attendance as participation in a work program unless the
parent also was employed.  Because a state would not gain credit for
teenagers enrolled solely in a secondary school, it might be
dissuaded from spending money on programs to monitor and follow up on
their attendance. 


--------------------
\14 Los Angeles and Milwaukee are demonstration sites for statewide
programs and have only preliminary or no impact results as yet. 


   CONCLUSIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5

A variety of local programs aim to help teenage mothers avoid welfare
dependence through completing their secondary education.  Our
analysis suggests that close monitoring of teenage mothers'
educational activities with follow-up, when their attendance drops,
is effective in increasing the likelihood that they complete their
education.  Leveraging the welfare benefit as a sanction or reward
for attendance has contributed to high school completion for teenage
mothers attending school.  Providing supportive services to overcome
barriers to continued attendance, with or without financial
incentives, also seems to be effective, especially for dropouts. 
Finally, assistance in meeting their child care and transportation
needs may be particularly helpful but did not appear to be
sufficient, without attendance monitoring, to enable these young
mothers to complete their secondary education. 

Although current federal AFDC policy emphasizes the importance of
teenage mothers' participation in the JOBS program, it does not
require states to serve all teenage mothers in JOBS, nor does it
require states to monitor the school attendance of all teenage
mothers on AFDC.  This was confirmed by local welfare officials who
indicated that teenagers' attendance is not monitored, nor are they
referred to JOBS, unless they have already dropped out of school.  A
preventive strategy of monitoring the attendance of all teenagers,
such as that observed in LEAP, was reported in only 3 of the 15
cities we surveyed.  These three AFDC offices coordinate with
educational providers to ensure that welfare benefits are contingent
on teenagers' continuing their education. 

The Congress is currently deliberating several reforms to the welfare
system, including whether to provide benefits to teenage mothers. 
Although our work shows that a number of approaches can work to help
teenage mothers complete high school, whether states will use these
approaches will likely be influenced by the final form of the
legislation. 


   AGENCY COMMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), within the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services, commented on a draft of this
report and generally agreed with our conclusions about promising
program approaches, but expressed several concerns. 

First, ACF claimed that our evaluation synthesis was not a
statistically rigorous methodology, given the small number of studies
reviewed.  Because the evaluated programs were too dissimilar to be
aggregated for a statistical analysis, we employed the evaluation
synthesis method, which is not intended to yield statistically
significant conclusions.  Although it may not provide conclusive
answers, this analysis did show that certain factors were
consistently associated with positive educational outcomes, while
others were not.  Second, ACF believed that we should more
prominently discuss the difference between voluntary and mandatory
programs.  However, this characteristic did not distinguish between
programs that did and did not increase school completions.  Third,
ACF asked us to clarify that the limitation on work program
participation requirements would not apply to teenagers if they were
excluded from receiving cash benefits.  The text has been changed to
clarify this.  Fourth, ACF pointed out that the education system also
bears responsibility for helping teenage parents complete school.  We
agree, but examination of this issue was outside the scope of this
report.  Fifth, ACF believed that we should note that the follow-up
periods for these evaluations were too short to see employment and
earnings impacts.  We do recognize and discuss this issue in
explaining the focus of our analysis on school completions (see
p.  6).  Finally, although ACF believed that we had failed to cite
the latest report on the Teenage Parent Demonstration program, the
report referred to was included in our evaluation synthesis (see p. 
40, Maynard, Nicholson, and Rangarajan, 1993).  In addition, ACF
provided detailed suggestions, which we have incorporated as
appropriate throughout the text.  ACF's comments are reprinted in
appendix III. 


---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :6.1

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents
earlier, we will not distribute this report until 30 days after the
date of this letter.  At that time, we will send copies to the
Secretary of Health and Human Services and other interested parties. 
We will also make copies available to others on request. 

Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix IV.  If you
have any questions concerning this report or need additional
information, please call Jane L.  Ross on (202) 512-7215. 

Jane L.  Ross
Director, Income Security Issues

Joseph F.  Delfico
Acting Assistant Comptroller General for
 Program Evaluation and Methodology


EVALUATION SYNTHESIS METHODOLOGY
=========================================================== Appendix I

To assist us in identifying promising approaches for helping teenage
mothers achieve economic independence, we conducted an evaluation
synthesis--a systematic review and analysis of the results of
previous evaluation studies of programs sharing this goal.  Whereas
some evaluation syntheses examine similar studies to learn whether a
single program or treatment consistently has the desired effect, this
synthesis examined programs that used a range of different approaches
toward the same goal to learn which approaches were successful in
achieving that goal. 

The evaluation synthesis consisted of several steps.  The first step
was locating programs serving teenage mothers, and screening them to
identify rigorous impact studies with reliable results on the desired
outcomes.  In the second step, we identified the commonalities and
differences among the programs and assessed whether these were
related to whether the programs demonstrated the desired impacts. 
From this analysis, we drew conclusions from the cumulative picture
of existing rigorous research about which approaches have been
demonstrated to be successful in assisting these young women.  In
addition, we asked evaluators of these programs to review our
analysis and characterization of the programs and their evaluations. 
We incorporated their comments where appropriate, including
unpublished evaluation findings provided by one of the reviewers. 


   SEARCH FOR AND SELECTION OF
   STUDIES
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1

We began our search for relevant studies by identifying as many
existing evaluation impact studies as possible of programs serving
disadvantaged teenage mothers.  We conducted computerized
bibliographic searches of the literature on disadvantaged teenage
mothers (using keywords such as adolescents and early parenthood) in
periodicals on education, psychology, sociology, and program
evaluation.  Program summaries and bibliographies of research studies
were reviewed to identify other studies that might have been missed. 
We also contacted external experts regarding important studies to
consider.  From hundreds of citations, we selected over 50 for
further review. 

Our criteria for selecting studies for our synthesis were that: 

  the program served young mothers under the age of 20, or provided
     separate data on them if it served a broader group;

  the evaluation measured education, employment, or AFDC receipt as
     outcomes; and

  there was some form of comparison with nonparticipants (but not
     necessarily a control group). 

These criteria excluded programs that focused exclusively on
teenagers' health outcomes and repeat pregnancies, and many
school-based programs without impact evaluations.  After applying
these criteria, we arrived at a group of eight studies designed
either especially for teenage parents or for disadvantaged teenagers
in general. 


   QUALITY REVIEW OF EVALUATION
   STUDIES
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2

We rated the quality of the eight studies to ensure that the research
was rigorous and would produce reliable results.  We used six
specific criteria that together would reflect the rigor, consistency,
and reliability of an evaluation study.\15 These criteria are as
follows: 

  similarity of the comparison group to the project's clients,

  adequacy of the sample size for the analyses performed,

  standardization of data collection procedures,

  appropriateness of the measures used to represent the outcome
     variables,

  adequacy of the statistical or other methods used to control for
     threats to validity, and

  presence and appropriateness of the methods used to analyze the
     statistical significance of observed differences. 

Each study was rated on a three-point scale from "unacceptable"
(because the report provided no information on the dimension or the
method was so flawed that the data were probably wrong) to
"acceptable," indicating an appropriate method was used or that
attempts were made to minimize problems. 


--------------------
\15 See GAO/PEMD-10.1.2, p.  31.  Another GAO report used a similar
set of dimensions:  Teenage Pregnancy:  500,000 Births a Year But Few
Tested Programs (GAO/PEMD-86-16BR, July 21, 1986), p.  34. 


      RESULTS OF QUALITY REVIEW
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2.1

In general, most of these programs had well-designed and rigorously
implemented evaluations with experimental or quasiexperimental
designs.  Five of the eight evaluations met our criteria.  We
identified problems in three evaluations (Learnfare, the Teenage
Services Act program (TASA), and Young Families Can Programs) that
were serious enough to question the reliability of their results, and
thus we did not include these evaluations in our synthesis. 

The five evaluations selected for our synthesis were Project New
Chance; Jobstart; the Learning, Earning, and Parenting (LEAP)
program; Project Redirection; and the Teenage Parent Demonstration
(TPD).  A confounding factor found in two of the programs was the
similarity in services received by the program participants and the
comparison group (as a result of their availability elsewhere in the
community).  This type of confounding factor means that the standard
measure of program impact--the difference between outcomes for the
two groups--will most likely underestimate the program's true impact
relative to receiving no services. 


      OVERVIEW OF PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2.2

All five of the selected programs served teenage mothers, most of
whom were receiving AFDC benefits, and encouraged them to complete
their education before seeking employment.  These programs operated
in the 1980s in multiple sites, although LEAP operated in only one
state.  All programs provided child care and transportation or
reimbursed their costs.  Each program offered basic education, but
most also offered vocational preparation or training.  Some programs
required mandatory participation; others were voluntary.  Some served
primarily young, first-time mothers (aged 14 to 17), whereas others
served older teenage mothers (19 to 22 years old), and one served
other young men and women as well.  The programs delivered services
in different ways--sequentially or concurrently, on-site and
off-site, and brokered services (linked services to participants) or
provided services directly to participants. 


   SYNTHESIS OF PROGRAM EVALUATION
   RESULTS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:3

To develop a cumulative picture about which approaches were
successful in increasing the economic self-sufficiency of teenage
mothers, we first identified the impacts each program had achieved
and then compared the programs' characteristics and results with each
other. 


      DETERMINING INDIVIDUAL STUDY
      IMPACTS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:3.1

The impacts we focused on for the evaluation synthesis were directly
related to economic self-sufficiency:  employment, public assistance
receipt, and school completion measured as receipt of a high school
diploma or GED.  For each outcome in each study, we compared the
results of the participants receiving program services (treatment
group) with those of the control (or comparison) group, and any
differences were deemed to be program impacts.  The evaluation
reports estimated the likelihood that these differences were due to
random chance using standard tests of statistical significance.\16
For our interpretation, we used a common significance level of 5
percent (.05) or less, which was stricter than that used by some of
the evaluations. 


--------------------
\16 The bibliography lists the program and evaluation reports used
for our review. 


      SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS ACROSS
      STUDIES
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:3.2

We used a structured approach to look for program features or
characteristics that might explain why some programs had positive
impacts and others did not, on each of the desired outcomes.  For
example, we looked for features that were common, yet unique, to the
three programs with positive outcomes on educational attainment. 
First, we compared the programs' results by the general program
approach they represented:  education, training, and comprehensive
services.  We then compared them along more detailed single features
that were discussed in the literature as being important for serving
this population.  These features included the set of services
provided; whether the program created services specially tailored to
the needs of teens, such as an alternative school; whether
participation was mandatory or voluntary; the age group served; and
service delivery method used.  We also examined features of the
studies themselves that might influence the likelihood of
demonstrating statistically significant results, such as whether the
comparison group received services similar to those provided by the
program.  The synthesis entailed comparing program features of the
programs with positive outcomes, and contrasting them with the
features of the other programs without positive outcomes, excluding
those studies with no data on that particular outcome.  Thus, for
example, we also looked for similarities and differences in features
within the set of comprehensive service programs. 

After we found no single unique program feature, we looked beyond
individual program features to combinations that might explain the
results.  We reviewed the comments of the evaluators about any
problems encountered in program or study implementation.  We
considered not only which services were delivered and how, but how
they might influence the participants and their behavior.  All of the
programs monitored program participation, but we noted that one of
the programs with no school completion gains, Project Redirection,
had problems with school absenteeism.  This led us to discover that
the other three programs with positive impacts on school completion
monitored attendance instead of just enrollment or participation, and
that all three also followed up on the results of that monitoring. 


   STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF
   THIS ANALYSIS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:4

Looking across the studies gave us the opportunity to uncover
information not readily seen by looking at only one of them. 
Including several program approaches in our review allowed us to see
that while a particular approach can be successful, it is not the
only successful approach.  Nor do single studies ordinarily allow one
to make inferences about which of the variety of program components
were probably responsible for its observed effects, while examining
patterns across a group of studies may.  However, a sample of five
studies cannot provide conclusive answers, since many potential
differences between them might be related to why one program had
significant results and another did not.  Because only three of the
studies had longer-term data on employment and AFDC receipt, we had
insufficient data to identify features distinguishing success on
these longer-term outcomes. 


PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS
========================================================== Appendix II


   NEW CHANCE
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1

This voluntary, multisite (16 sites in 10 states)\17 demonstration
focused on the well-being of school dropout teenage mothers (aged 16
to 22) as well as their children.  New Chance provided 20 to 30 hours
per week of basic skills, high school diploma, or GED preparation in
an initial phase and job skills training afterward.  Local community
organizations offered a one-stop, drop-in center where participants
also received life skills and parenting classes; workshops on family
planning and substance abuse; counseling, child care (often free and
on-site), and transportation; and intense case management monitoring
and assistance.  Skill training, work internships, job placement
assistance (offered later), and health services were often provided
off-site.  Participants could remain in the program for up to 18
months, but the average length of stay was about 8 months. 

The New Chance evaluation used an experimental design with a randomly
assigned control group, but many members of the control group
received similar services from other providers in the community.  The
evaluation also reported problems with participants leaving the
program (dropping out) after the educational component (even when
program providers worked to keep them involved) and thus not getting
employment-related services in the later phase of the program. 

The New Chance evaluation reported educational enrollment and school
completion gains after 1 and 1-1/2 years, but had no statistically
significant employment gains or AFDC reductions in this short
term.\18 It also measured many other outcomes in areas such as
parenting, family planning, life skills, and health status.  Positive
effects on the mother's democratic style of disciplining and raising
a child were reported.  But the evaluation reported negative effects
on reducing subsequent pregnancies; participants were actually more
likely to become pregnant again. 


--------------------
\17 New Chance sites operated in California, Colorado, Florida,
Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and
Pennsylvania. 

\18 Statistical significance was measured at the .05 level, which was
the standard we used. 


   JOBSTART
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2

This voluntary job training program at 13 sites,\19 run by local
community colleges or employment-oriented organizations, served
disadvantaged teenagers aged 17 to 21 who had dropped out of school,
including substantial numbers of teenage mothers.  It linked
teenagers to occupational training and to training-related
employment, as well as provided training in-house.  Sites often
provided support services to facilitate participation (such as lunch
or clothing money), and directly provided individualized self-paced
GED instruction.  The average stay in the program was 7 months (even
though the program could last 1-1/2 years), so some participants
might not have been in the program long enough to get much beyond
their GED certificate. 

This evaluation used an experimental design with control groups and
reported no major problems with control group comparability or
participation rates.  It reported data separately on teenage mother
participants, thus allowing comparison with our other programs. 

The program reported educational enrollment and school completion
gains at 4 years after program entry, but no employment gains or AFDC
benefit reductions.  The program did not provide family planning
services, and participants experienced more subsequent pregnancies
than the control group over the 4 years following the start of the
program.  Concerning the other participants, the program also
reported school completion gains programwide, earnings increases for
young men who had been arrested, and lower rates of AFDC receipt
among young women who had not been mothers or who were not living
with their children at program entry. 


--------------------
\19 Jobstart sites were located in Arizona, California, Colorado,
Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas. 


   LEARNING, EARNING, AND
   PARENTING
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3

This ongoing mandatory program enforces school attendance for all
pregnant or parenting teens (under 20 years old) who do not have a
high school diploma or GED and are receiving AFDC in the state of
Ohio.  It provides incentives and sanctions to attend school
(increases and decreases in their AFDC benefits) and reimbursement
for child care and transportation.\20 Welfare offices obtain
information from the public schools to monitor school attendance,
note absences (excused and unexcused), and apply sanctions or
incentives as appropriate.  When needed, a case manager reimburses
teenagers for child care or transportation costs, and in some locales
has regular personal contact with a subset of teenagers.  Program
participation ends when the participant reaches age 19 or receives a
high school diploma. 

There have been two evaluations of this program.  The evaluation of
the statewide program used an experimental design with a randomly
assigned control group and was based on a subset of randomly selected
counties in Ohio.\21 A second evaluation provided long-term follow-up
on a subset of the statewide program (Cleveland only) and an
evaluation of a special demonstration offering additional services. 
A recently published evaluation reported the long-term results for
both the Cleveland subset and the special demonstration.\22

The statewide evaluation reported improved educational enrollment and
attendance as well as increased GED completions after 1-1/2 years. 
But it had no information on high school graduations, nor did it
separately note the GED results for those who were in school and for
those who had already dropped out by the time they entered LEAP.  The
evaluation of the long-term Cleveland data showed increases over 3
years in GED or high school completions (but not for GED completions
alone) for those who were in school on program entry, but not for
school dropouts.  The program did help dropouts return to school or
an educational program.  It did not, however, result in getting even
a majority of teenage mothers into school, and only a small portion
received their diploma or GED.  Neither employment nor AFDC benefits
were measured by these evaluations. 

In addition, the second evaluation assessed the addition of dropout
prevention and truancy reduction services for selected participants
in Cleveland.\23 The study resulted in school completion gains over 3
years, but the comparison of the basic LEAP program with the
LEAP-plus-additional-services program was inconclusive since many
participants never received the extra services. 


--------------------
\20 Originally the program intended to guarantee summer jobs for all
participants, but the program later simply encouraged participation
in the Job Training Partnership Act's summer job program. 

\21 See Dan Bloom, Veronica Fellerath, David Long, and Robert G. 
Wood, LEAP:  Interim Findings on a Welfare Initiative to Improve
School Attendance Among Teenage Parents (New York:  Manpower
Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC), May 1993).  MDRC's final
LEAP evaluation report is expected to provide both high school and
GED completions, and may include data from all 12 counties studied. 

\22 See David Long, Robert G.  Wood, and Hillary Kopp, LEAP:  The
Educational Effects of LEAP and Enhanced Services in Cleveland (New
York:  MDRC, Oct.  1994). 

\23 For a discussion of the effects of extra dropout prevention
services (such as on-site child care, case management, and parenting
and life skills classes), plus community-based outreach services in
Cleveland, see Long, Wood, and Kopp, 1994. 


   PROJECT REDIRECTION
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4

This voluntary program, with sites in Boston; New York City; Phoenix;
and Riverside, California, served young teens (aged 14 to 17)
receiving AFDC, about half of whom were not attending school.  While
its approach was comprehensive, it mainly linked participants to
existing services.  It offered employment and basic skills training
(mostly off-site), while a drop-in center provided individual
counseling, pregnancy prevention, and parenting and life skills
workshops after classes.  Its unique characteristic was the use of
community women who provided mentoring and friendship.  Participants
could remain in the program for up to 18 months, or until the
participant reached 19 years old or received a GED, whichever came
first; the average stay was 12 months. 

The quasiexperimental evaluation used comparison groups of teenagers
from different cities, raising the possibility that existing
differences between these groups (and not program participation)
could account for some of the differences in their outcomes.  In
addition, the program also had difficulties carrying out the research
as planned:  the comparison group members received similar services
in their communities, and program participation as well as school
absenteeism was a problem.  The program did not routinely monitor
program or school attendance. 

The program realized school enrollment gains after 1 year, but no
school completion gains after 1, 2, and 5 years.  It was one of the
few programs that measured long-term impacts, but it had no
statistically significant employment gains or reduction in AFDC
benefits.  The results of parenting education were measured in more
positive home environment and positive child development scores. 
After 5 years, it reported increased subsequent pregnancies. 


   TEENAGE PARENT DEMONSTRATION
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5

The Teenage Parent Demonstration (TPD) program\24 is a mandatory
program with 3 sites (in Chicago and Newark and Camden, New Jersey). 
It required first-time parents (under age 19) receiving AFDC to
enroll in education, training, or employment activities.  The
program, which was run by the local welfare office, sanctioned those
who did not enroll in activities by reducing their AFDC benefits. 
Case management, some educational services, and workshops on
parenting, survival skills, and family planning were provided
on-site.  The program offered services for the length of the
evaluation (almost 4 years) until age 20, and reimbursed child care
and transportation expenses, with all participants receiving services
for at least 1-1/2 years. 

The evaluation used an experimental design with control groups.  The
program reported good enrollment rates but periods of inactivity
(failure to attend activities) of up to 6 months for some
individuals, which suggests that some participants did not receive
the intended treatment. 

The program aimed to change enrollment or participation rates (in
school, training or a job) and was successful in doing so
(participation rates were over 90 percent), but it had no significant
school completion gains.\25 It was the only program to have
significant impacts on employment and AFDC receipt.  Although
participants experienced increased earnings and reductions in average
AFDC benefits after 2 years, there was no significant change in their
poverty status.  Further, the incidence of subsequent births did not
change significantly. 



(See figure in printed edition.)Appendix III

--------------------
\24 TPD is also referred to as the Teenage Parent Welfare
Demonstration. 

\25 Results on school completions were obtained from a limited
availability paper by Rebecca Maynard, Walter Nicholson, and Anu
Rangarajan, Breaking the Cycle of Poverty:  The Effectiveness of
Mandatory Services for Welfare-Dependent Teenage Parents, prepared
for the U.S.  Department of Health and Human Services, Contract
#HHS-100-86-0045 (Princeton, N.J.:  Mathematica Policy Research,
Inc., Dec.  1993). 


COMMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
========================================================== Appendix II



(See figure in printed edition.)



(See figure in printed edition.)


GAO CONTACTS AND STAFF
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
========================================================== Appendix IV

GAO CONTACTS

Lynne Fender, Assistant Director, HEHS, (202) 512-7229
Stephanie Shipman, Assistant Director, PEMD, (202) 512-5885

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The following team members made important contributions to this
report:  Margaret Boeckmann, Senior Social Science Analyst, was the
team leader; Elaine Vaurio, Social Science Analyst, was the project
manager for the evaluation synthesis; Rathi Bose, Vernette Shaw, and
Lois Shoemaker, Evaluators, conducted site visits and prepared work
papers; Gale Harris, Senior Evaluator, provided advice throughout the
development of the report; and Nancy Crothers, Senior Evaluator,
provided writing assistance. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY
============================================================ Chapter 0

REPORTS ON THE FIVE PROGRAMS
REVIEWED

Bloom, Dan, Veronica Fellerath, David Long, and Robert G.  Wood. 
LEAP:  Interim Findings on a Welfare Initiative to Improve School
Attendance Among Teenage Parents.  New York:  Manpower Demonstration
Research Corporation, May 1993. 

Cave, George, Hans Bos, Fred Doolittle, and Cyril Toussaint. 
JOBSTART:  Final Report on a Program for School Dropouts.  New York: 
Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, Oct.  1993. 

Hershey, Alan.  Enrolling Teenaged AFDC Parents in Mandatory
Education and Training Programs:  Lessons From the Teenage Parent
Demonstration.  Princeton, N.J.:  Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.,
Dec.  1991. 

Long, David, Robert G.  Wood, and Hilary Kopp.  LEAP:  The
Educational Effects of LEAP and Enhanced Services in Cleveland.  New
York:  Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, Oct.  1994. 

Maynard, Rebecca, ed.  Building Self-Sufficiency Among Welfare-
Dependent Teenaged Parents:  Lessons From the Teenage Parent
Demonstration.  Princeton, N.J.:  Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.,
June 1993. 

Maynard, Rebecca, Walter Nicholson, and Anu Rangarajan.  Breaking the
Cycle of Poverty:  The Effectiveness of Mandatory Services for
Welfare-Dependent Teenage Parents.  Prepared for the U.S.  Department
of Health and Human Services, Contract # HHS-100-86-0045.  Princeton,
N.J.:  Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., Dec.  1993. 

Maynard, Rebecca, Denise Polit, Alan Hershey, John Homrighausen,
Ellen Kisker, Myles Maxfield, Charles Nagatoshi, Walter Nicholson,
and Shari Dunstan.  The Evaluation Design for the Teenaged Parent
Demonstration.  Prepared for the U.S.  Department of Health and Human
Services, Contract # HHS-100-86-0045.  Princeton, N.J.:  Mathematica
Policy Research, Inc., Sept.  1988. 

Polit, Denise, and Janet R.  Kahn.  "Project Redirection:  Evaluation
of a Comprehensive Program for Disadvantaged Teenage Mothers," Family
Planning Perspectives (July/Aug.  1985), pp.  150-55. 

Polit, Denise, Janet R.  Kahn, and David Stevens.  Final Impacts From
Project Redirection:  A Program for Pregnant and Parenting Teens. 
New York:  Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, Apr.  1985. 

Polit, Denise, Janet C.  Quint, and James A.  Riccio.  The Challenge
of Serving Teenage Mothers:  Lessons from Project Redirection.  New
York:  Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, Oct.  1988. 

Polit, Denise, and Cozette Morrow White.  The Lives of Young
Disadvantaged Mothers.  Saratoga Springs, N.Y.:  Humanalysis, Inc.,
May 1988. 

Quint, Janet C.  "Project Redirection:  Making and Measuring a
Difference." Evaluation and Program Planning, 14 (1991), pp.  75-86. 

Quint, Janet C., Barbara L.  Fink, and Sharon L.  Rowser.  New
Chance:  Implementing a Comprehensive Program for Disadvantaged Young
Mothers and Their Children.  New York:  Manpower Demonstration
Research Corporation, Dec.  1991. 

Quint, Janet C., Denise F.  Polit, Hans Bos, and George Cave.  New
Chance:  Interim Findings on a Comprehensive Program for
Disadvantaged Young Mothers and Their Children.  New York:  Manpower
Demonstration Research Corporation, Sept.  1994. 

_____.  New Chance:  Interim Findings on a Comprehensive Program for
Disadvantaged Young Mothers and Their Children.  Executive Summary. 
New York:  Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation, June 1994. 

OTHER REFERENCES

Bogenschneider, Karen, and Thomas Corbett, eds.  Welfare Reform:  Can
Government Promote Parental Self-Sufficiency While Ensuring the
Well-Being of Children?  2nd ed.  Wisconsin Family Impact Seminars
Briefing Report.  Madison, Wis:  University of Wisconsin, Jan.  1995. 

Burke, Vee.  Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) Program: 
Basic Facts.  Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. 
94-282 EPW, Mar.  30, 1994. 

Corbett, Thomas.  "Changing the Culture of Welfare." Focus, 16:2
(Winter 1995), pp.  12-21. 

Granger, Robert C.  "The Policy Implications of Recent Findings From
the New Chance Demonstration, Ohio's Learning, Earning, and Parenting
(LEAP) in Cleveland, and the Teenage Parent Demonstration (TPD)."
Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.  Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy and Management,
Chicago, Oct.  27-29, 1994. 

Gueron, Judith, and Edward Pauly.  From Welfare to Work.  New York: 
Russell Sage, 1991. 

Gwat-Yong Lie and Robert Moroney.  "A Controlled Evaluation of
Comprehensive Services Provided to Teenaged Mothers Receiving AFDC."
Research on Social Work Practice, 2:4 (Oct.  1992), pp.  429-46. 

Harris, Kathleen Mullan.  "Teenage Mothers and Welfare Dependency."
Journal of Family Issues, 12:4 (Dec.  1991), pp.  492-518. 

Kisker, Ellen, and Marsha Silverberg.  "Child Care Utilization by
Disadvantaged Teenage Mothers.  Journal of Social Issues, 47:2
(1991), pp.  159-77. 

Marsh, Jeanne C., ed.  "Special Issue:  Services to Teenage Parents."
Evaluation and Program Planning, 14:1/2 (1991). 

Maynard, Rebecca.  "The Effectiveness of Interventions Aimed at
Reducing the Incidence of Teenage Pregnancy and Mitigating the
Consequence of Early Childbearing." Paper presented at Annual Meeting
of Association for Public Policy and Management, Chicago, Oct. 
27-29, 1994. 

New York State Department of Social Services, Office of Program
Planning, Analysis & Development and Division of Family & Children
Services.  Evaluation of the Teenage Services Act Program (TASA). 
Albany:  Feb.  1990. 

Nickel, Phyliss S., and Holly Delany.  Working With Teen Parents:  A
Survey of Promising Approaches.  Family Focus, Inc., Chicago:  Family
Resource Coalition, 1985. 

Rudd, Nancy, Patrick McHenry, and Myungkyun Nah.  "Welfare Receipt
Among Black and White Adolescent Mothers." Journal of Family Issues,
11:3 (Sept.  1990), pp.  334-52. 

The Center for Population Options.  Teenage Pregnancy and Too-Early
Childbearing:  Public Costs, Personal Consequences.  6th edition,
Washington, D.C.:  1992. 

University of Southern California School of Social Work. 
California's Adolescent Family Life Program:  Evaluating the Impact
of Case Management Services for Pregnant and Parenting Adolescents. 
Final report, Aug.  1990. 


RELATED GAO PRODUCTS
============================================================ Chapter 1

Welfare to Work:  State Programs Have Tested Some of the Proposed
Reforms (GAO/PEMD-95-26, July 14, 1995). 

Welfare to Work:  Current AFDC Program Not Sufficiently Focused on
Employment (GAO/HEHS-95-28, Dec.  19, 1994). 

Families on Welfare:  Teenage Mothers Least Likely to Become
Self-Sufficient (GAO/HEHS-94-115, May 31, 1994). 

Families on Welfare:  Focus on Teenage Mothers Could Enhance Welfare
Reform Efforts (GAO/HEHS-94-112, May 31, 1994). 

Welfare to Work:  States Move Unevenly to Serve Teen Parents in JOBS
(GAO/HRD-93-74, July 7, 1993). 

The Evaluation Synthesis (GAO/PEMD-10.1.2, Mar.  1992). 

Teenage Pregnancy:  500,000 Births a Year but Few Tested Programs
(GAO/PEMD-86-16BR, July 21, 1986).