This report examines how well NY has been able to utilize the new federal Temporary Assistance to Needy Families to assist individuals in moving from welfare to work and to becoming economically independent.

Unfortunately, New York has done a poor job with its welfare to work efforts, as has been documented in study after study, including by government agencies. Even the federal government evaluates the overall effectiveness of the state’s welfare to work effort as one of the worst in the country. Like many states, New York’s elected officials have sought to evaluate success primarily by looking at the reduction in welfare caseloads rather than in reduction in poverty. Individuals who have left welfare for work in New York have not escaped poverty due to low wages and limited hours and benefits. Many welfare participants had hoped that federal welfare reform would help them obtain employment that enabled them to support their families.

New York needs to transform its welfare to work programs to address the fact that most people presently receiving welfare benefits have multiple barriers to employment. This requires more investment in education and job training to help participants become employable. Job creation targeted to low-income New Yorkers is also essential, including transitional jobs programs. New York instead relies heavily on workfare, much more so than other states. Numerous studies show that workfare has a poor track record in helping individuals become employable. It is particularly ineffective for individuals with multiple barriers to employment. The failure of NY’s welfare to work program is now driving up costs for local districts as individuals use up their five year’s of eligibility for federal benefits and then transfer to the state-local financed safety net program.

Over the last year New York has taken some promising steps to expand transitional jobs programs and to increase access to job training and education. However, these steps are too limited and need to be expanded. Much such stronger state leadership is needed in monitoring the performance of local districts. New York needs to undertake a more comprehensive cost benefit analysis of its welfare to work programs. This includes doing a multi-year analysis of programs. Programs such as transitional jobs require a higher up front investment but appear to reduce overall costs in a short period of time.

New York’s Jobs First approach to welfare reform has impeded the effort to make welfare participants economically independent and needs to be formally rejected.  State and local officials argue that it is most effective to place participants in any jobs, no matter how dead end or low paying, and then provide them with the education and training needed to help them become more employable. It is true that the most effective programs are those that combine a real job with education and training. Unfortunately Jobs First fails to do so because the state and local districts do not have effective programs to provide participants with needed training and education once they obtain employment.

Hunger Action surveyed former and present welfare participants about their experiences with welfare to work. Participants cite the need for more jobs and more education. They usually find jobs on their own, not through DSS / HRA. They want more vocational training related to computers and to degree / certification programs such as nursing. Local districts fail to provide comprehensive assessments to identify barriers to employment and to help individuals develop plans to overcome such barriers.

New York needs to invest in creating jobs targeted to welfare participants and other disadvantaged New Yorkers. Addressing the problems of poverty needs to be part of the Governor’s Economic Security Cabinet. Local districts need to focus on identifying sustainable employment opportunities in their community and to assist welfare participants in obtaining the training needed for such positions. New York needs to be realistic about the employability of many individuals receiving public assistance and provide a stronger safety net.