Social Work Research: Program Evaluation Major federal legislation was enacted in 1996 related to welfare reform. Financial assistance programs at the national level for low- income families have been in place since the mid-1960s through the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, or welfare reform, created TANF (Temporary Assis- tance for Needy Families). Major components of the new TANF program were to limit new recipients of cash aid to no more than 2 years of TANF assistance at a time and to receive no more than 5 years of combined TANF assistance with other service programs during their lifetimes. The goal was to make public assistance a temporary, rather than a long-term, program for families with chil- dren. Beyond these general rules, each of the 50 states was given substantial latitude to adopt requirements to fit their own objectives. The new law also allowed states that reduced their public assistance expenses to keep whatever support was already being provided by the federal government for use at their own discretion. This was seen as a way to encourage states to reduce welfare dependency. In response, the state of California decided to call its new program CalWORKs, the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids program. CalWORKs is California’s appli- cation of the new TANF federal law. Like most of the other states, CalWORKs provided its 58 counties with a fair amount of discre- tion in how to implement the new provisions. Some counties chose to develop strong upfront “employment-first” rules that mandated recipients be employed as soon as possible. Others chose a response that included testing and assessment and the provision of education and training services. One of the largest counties in the San Francisco Bay Area developed several options for CalWORKs recipients, including immediate job readiness (Job Club) help, remedial education for recipients lacking basic skills, and vocational training at local community colleges and adult education centers for those seeking higher level education and skills. Recipients could take up to 66 5 years to complete these activities and even longer in certain circumstances to maximize their chances of success. Recipients were predominantly single mothers. If recipients fully complied with the rules, they received a variety of financial incentives, while those who did not comply received sanctions that often resulted in reduced benefit levels. The county provided grants to a wide array of education, training, and service programs to work as partners in serving the needs of participants. In 1996, the county’s CalWORKs program enrolled approxi- mately 22,000 families in various forms of public assistance programs. Of these, approximately 10,000 elected to participate in one of the education and training programs, 9,000 elected to attend intensive job placement (Job Club) classes, and.

1. Social Work Research: Program Evaluation
Major federal legislation was enacted in 1996 related to welfare
reform. Financial assistance programs at the national level for
low- income families have been in place since the mid-1960s
through the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)
program. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996, or welfare reform, created TANF
(Temporary Assis- tance for Needy Families). Major
components of the new TANF program were to limit new
recipients of cash aid to no more than 2 years of TANF
assistance at a time and to receive no more than 5 years of
combined TANF assistance with other service programs during
their lifetimes. The goal was to make public assistance a
temporary, rather than a long-term, program for families with
chil- dren. Beyond these general rules, each of the 50 states was
given substantial latitude to adopt requirements to fit their own
objectives. The new law also allowed states that reduced their
public assistance expenses to keep whatever support was
already being provided by the federal government for use at
their own discretion. This was seen as a way to encourage states
to reduce welfare dependency.
In response, the state of California decided to call its new
program CalWORKs, the California Work Opportunity and
Responsibility to Kids program. CalWORKs is California’s
appli- cation of the new TANF federal law. Like most of the
other states, CalWORKs provided its 58 counties with a fair
amount of discre- tion in how to implement the new provisions.
Some counties chose to develop strong upfront “employment-
first” rules that mandated recipients be employed as soon as
possible. Others chose a response that included testing and
assessment and the provision of education and training services.
One of the largest counties in the San Francisco Bay Area
developed several options for CalWORKs recipients, including
immediate job readiness (Job Club) help, remedial education for

2. recipients lacking basic skills, and vocational training at local
community colleges and adult education centers for those
seeking higher level education and skills. Recipients could take
up to
66
5 years to complete these activities and even longer in certain
circumstances to maximize their chances of success. Recipients
were predominantly single mothers. If recipients fully complied
with the rules, they received a variety of financial incentives,
while those who did not comply received sanctions that often
resulted in reduced benefit levels. The county provided grants
to a wide array of education, training, and service programs to
work as partners in serving the needs of participants.
In 1996, the county’s CalWORKs program enrolled approxi-
mately 22,000 families in various forms of public assistance
programs. Of these, approximately 10,000 elected to participate
in one of the education and training programs, 9,000 elected to
attend intensive job placement (Job Club) classes, and the
remaining 3,000 opted to not comply with the new program and
accepted reduced benefit sanctions.
To meet its state and federal mandates, the county carefully
tracked the progress of all program participants and compiled
comprehensive quarterly reports that summarized assignments
and outcomes at each of the contracted partner sites as well as
countywide trends. During the first 11 years of the program,
from 1996 through 2007, the county’s public assistance roles
were reduced by approximately 40%, from more than 22,000 to
about 13,000 families. The best results were obtained among
participants in education and training programs, who accounted
for about two-thirds of long-term outcome success, although
this group was also found to be more costly to the local
CalWORKs program during their years of study. These costs, in
addition to the longer period of monthly benefits received, also
included the cost of education and training and, in some cases,
childcare expenses. Among the participants who were placed in
the immediate job search (Job Club) program, total costs to the

3. county were some- what less per year, but more than 50% were
still not successful in gaining employment, and those that did
find a job received a much lower salary and fewer benefits, and
another 23% fell back on CalWORKs after later losing their
employment.
Although the results of the CalWORKs program in this county
seemed to be following a mostly positive trend from 1996
through
RESEARCH
67
SOCIAL WORK CASE STUDIES: FOUNDATION YEAR
2007, the situation changed dramatically in the opposite
direction during the national economic downturn from 2007
through 2011. Total public assistance rolls more than doubled to
about 30,000 during this time as the local and state
unemployment rate rapidly grew from about 7% to more than
12%. The county was initially successful in getting the state to
grant it waivers to allow recipients to extend their period of
benefits during education and training, but these waivers were
considerably restricted after 2011 due to major state budget
cuts. Between 2011 and early 2013 the total number of
recipients began to decline again by about 10% from its peak 2
years earlier. However, the total number of CalWORKs
recipients is at 27,000, still about 5,000 recipients higher than
when the program started in 1996.
Compounding the difficulty of more people becoming eligible
for CalWORKs’ benefits due to poor economic conditions, the
state’s budget crisis prompted a reduction in state allocations to
counties and recipients. Nonetheless, county administrators
were still pleased to report that more than more than 16,000
recipients during the program were able to obtain employment
or other support that eliminated their dependency on cash public
assistance.
68
2. Which theory or theories did you use to guide your practice?
Theoretical frameworks included a feminist empowerment

4. model and the strengths perspective.
3. What were the identified strengths of the client(s)?
The identified strengths of the group were resiliency and a will-
ingness to process their trauma, testify to their losses, and vali-
date their own survivorship.
4. What were the identified challenges faced by the client(s)?
Most of the group faced the challenges of setting boundaries in
their interpersonal relationships along with a lack of trust, low
self-esteem, self-blame, and anger issues.
5. What were the agreed-upon goals to be met to address the
concern?
Goals to be met included acceptance of events that could no
longer be changed and integrating the event into the survivor’s
life narrative so they could move on.
6. How can evidence-based practice be integrated into this
situation?
Evidence-based practice was indicated in the form of the DASS
tests measuring clients’ emotional baselines before and after
exposure to group therapy. The 12-week group format and topic
structure was based on previously successful DASS outcomes
and validity.
7. Describe any additional personal reflections about this case.
The 12-week group format I developed has empowered many
survivors of sexual abuse by giving them the knowledge and
skills needed to move ahead in their spectrum of healing.
Social Work Research: Program Evaluation
1. What specific intervention strategies (skills, knowledge, etc.)
did you use to address this client situation?
The most salient theories related to welfare reform programs
include the ecosystems theory and the person-in-environment
(PIE) theory. Both of these theories focus on the effects of envi-
ronments on people and cultures and could be used in examining
APPENDIX
121
SOCIAL WORK CASE STUDIES: FOUNDATION YEAR
the marginalization of those in poverty from the prevailing

5. economic system and the patterns of poverty being transmitted
through successive generations of families and communities.
2. What were the agreed-upon goals to be met to address the
concern?
The goals of the CalWORKs program were to facilitate greater
self-sufficiency among welfare recipients; confront long-term
dependency; reduce the cost of welfare services; and provide
expanded job training, placement, and other employment
support assistance to families. The problem was that these goals
sometimes conflicted with each other and that many states and
localities faced the challenges of prevailing macroeconomic
trends, especially during years of economic recession.
3. Did you have to address any issues around cultural compe-
tence? Did you have to learn about this population/group prior
to beginning your work with this client system? If so, what type
of research did you do to prepare?
Cultural competency has been a major concern throughout
efforts of welfare reform. These include the high proportion of
recipients with limited English-speaking skills, physical and
mental health disabilities, and differences in cultural perspec-
tives about the concepts of self-sufficiency versus shared
responsibilities. The expanding trend of more single-parent
families, blended families, and extended families added addi-
tional program administration complications.
4. How can evidence-based practice be integrated into this
situation?
Evidence-based practice should be seen as a critical compo-
nent of any welfare reform effort because success is clearly
dependent on the outcomes of program participants.
5. Describe any additional personal reflections about this case.
It is important to note that welfare reform measures have a great
range of variability between various states and counties. This
diversity presents both challenges for assessing results and
opportunities to examine the outcome of the different strategies.

6. 3RAI F203A HR
CIPD Assessment Activity Template
Title of unit/s
Recording, Analysing and Using Human Resources Information
Unit No/s
3RAI (HR)
Level
3
Credit value
2
Assessment method
Written
Expiry date
September 2019
Learning outcomes:
1. Understand what data needs to be collected to support HR
practices.
2. Know how HR data should be recorded and stored.
3. Be able to analyse HR information and present findings to
inform decision-making.
Both activities should be completed.
Activity 1
You have a new HR Director, they have requested that you
review the organisation’s approach to collecting, storing and
using HR data and produce a briefing note on your findings.
Within your note, you should cover the following:
· At least two reasons why the organisation needs to collect HR
data.

7. · At least two types of data that is collected within the
organisation and how each supports HR practices.
· A description of at least two methods of storing records and
the benefits of each.
· A statement of at least two essential items of UK legislation
relating to the recording, storage and accessibility of HR data.
Activity 2
Using your own organisation information or the CIPD Survey
Reports https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/hr-learn-develop-
database to identify a specific area of data. Analyse the data
and present your findings in a way that will assist an aspect of
decision making in the area of data selected. Your analysis
should be presented in a report covering:
· An introduction to the HR area being investigated.
· An explanation of how you analysed and interpreted the data.
· Your findings, presented so that they enable decision making.
Assessment Criteria
1.1
1.2
2.1
2.2

8. 3.1
3.2
Evidence to be produced
Activity 1
Briefing note of approximately 500 words.
Activity 2
Report of approximately 500 words.
Assessment Bank – Foundation Level