Table 4.
NEWWS LFA program impacts on the probability of experiencing patterns of employment and job loss.
| High Employment (≥9 Quarters) |
Low Employment (< 9 quarters) |
|||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continuously Unemployed |
No Job Loss | 1 Job Loss | 2 + Job Losses | No Job Loss | 1 Job Loss | 2 + Job Losses | ||||||||
| Control Group (CG) |
Program Impact (PI) |
CG | PI | CG | PI | CG | PI | CG | PI | CG | PI | CG | PI | |
| Atlanta | 0.09 | −0.009 (0.031) |
0.14 | 0.075 † (0.040) |
0.17 | −0.016 (0.039) |
0.20 | 0.016 (0.042) |
0.03 | 0.026 (0.022) |
0.17 | −0.053 (0.037) |
0.19 | −0.04 (0.041) |
| Grand Rapids | 0.09 | −0.065* (0.028) |
0.07 | 0.088* (0.038) |
0.15 | 0.001 (0.041) |
0.29 | 0.043 (0.056) |
0.07 | −0.054* (0.025) |
0.09 | −0.010 (0.035) |
0.25 | 0.00 (0.052) |
| Riverside | 0.31 | −0.087 (0.053) |
0.12 | −0.007 (0.038) |
0.11 | 0.004 (0.038) |
0.05 | 0.176** (0.036) |
0.07 | −0.046 (0.028) |
0.20 | −0.040 (0.049) |
0.14 | 0.00 (0.042) |
Note: Estimates are the coefficients on a dichotomous variable indicating treatment status in 21 separate OLS regression models predicting the probability of experiencing each of the seven employment/job loss pattern in each of the three sites. Standard errors shown in parentheses. High versus low employment is defined by median quarters worked. NEWWS five-year follow-up data were used in the analysis. Baseline covariates included in all models are earnings in year prior to RA divided by 1,000, earnings squared in year prior to RA divided by 1,000, time on AFDC, high school diploma, parent 18 or under at child’s birth, never married, separated, number of kids, black, white, Latino, length of follow-up, employed in year prior to RA, age of youngest child, and child gender.
†p < 0.10
p < 0.05
p < 0.01.