In Resilient & Reaching for More: Challenges and Benefits of Higher Education for Welfare Participants and Their Children, Avis A. Jones-DeWeever and Barbara Gault of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) report on current and former welfare participants who have pursued higher education while receiving benefits, to analyze the effects on their families. They collaborated with LIFETIME: Low-Income Families Empowerment Through Education, an Oakland-based non-profit “dedicated to meeting the needs to welfare participants pursuing higher education,” to identify the subject pool, recruit focus group participants, and develop policy recommendations.

In addition to conducting a survey of ninety-two respondents, all of whom participated in the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program, IWPR staff also conducted focus groups with seventeen individuals, conducted interviews with eight of eleven campus-level Extended Opportunities Programs and Services Regional Coordinators, and developed policy recommendations for Temporary Assistance to Need Families (TANF) reform.

Unfortunately for participants, the welfare reform enacted in 1996 emphasized a work-first mentality that created significant barriers and restrictions to higher education for TANF participants. By 2002, TANF required work participation of over thirty hours per week for over half of the participants and did not require work assignments to be close to the participant’s home or be related to currently enrolled students’ course of study.

The changes in welfare policy also placed new limits on “vocational education,” limiting TANF participants’ enrollment in higher education to twelve months over their maximum five-years in the program and asserting that only 30 percent of working participants per state could be enrolled at any one time. States were granted significant flexibility in defining what constituted “work activity,” and by 2002, the District of Columbia, as well as forty-nine states, did allow limited access to higher education under “work activity.” Unfortunately, there is wide variation across states, and many still create significant barriers to accessing higher education. As a result, there were significant and distressing nationwide decreases in the number of welfare participants enrolled in college, which dropped from 172,176 in 1996 to 58,055 in 1998.

It is commonly understood that higher education can serve as a pathway to economic stability, and there is considerable research that demonstrates higher education’s particularly positive effects for women, especially women of color. Several studies have indicated that “in tough economic times…those with the least education tend to be disproportionately harmed.”

While women with some college experience increase their earnings over women with a high school diploma by only 5 percent, women who have completed a bachelor’s degree see a 59 percent increase in earnings. These benefits are intensified for women of color, who experience anywhere from an 88 percent earnings increase over their counterparts with only a high school diploma (Latinas) to a 92 percent increase (African Americans). There is also significant evidence indicating that higher education reduces the risk of poverty, particularly for women of color.

Major Findings

The researchers analyzed the student-parents’ experiences with negotiating higher education in the context of TANF, drawing findings with significant implications for welfare policy reform. Their findings can be divided into three major areas:

1. The difficulty of accessing higher education;
2. The challenging, yet worthwhile pursuit of higher education;
3. The ways in which the lives of both the parents and their children changed as a result of participating in higher education.

The difficulty of access

Many respondents indicated that gaining access to higher education was a difficult obstacle to overcome. This was partially because they lacked knowledge about how to pursue education while maintaining the support they needed for themselves and their families. Many sought the guidance of friends and acquaintances who had successfully navigated enrollment while receiving welfare benefits. Educational institutions themselves offered welfare participants almost no resources on how they might attend college.

In addition to not knowing how to get into college, respondents also indicated that their caseworkers presented a significant barrier. Fifty-four percent of respondents described their caseworkers as being more of a hindrance than a resource to their success in college. Many respondents reported that their caseworkers were hostile or resistant to their clients’ educational aspirations, providing incomplete information about higher education and welfare policies.

The women who participated in this study all had some connection with LIFETIME. Many of the study participants indicated that their involvement with LIFETIME aided their educational efforts considerably and that this organization helped provide support and guidance that was often missing from their relationships with their caseworkers. LIFETIME helped women access education in multiple ways, including making them “more aware of their rights, providing assistance with negotiating the appeals process, and advocating directly on their behalf.” 

Benefits, challenges, and expectations

Future economic stability was the primary motivation for most of the study participants to pursue higher education. Nearly 84 percent of respondents identified improving their economic situation as their main reason for attending college. However, 79 percent of respondents also indicated that they did so in order to set a good example for their children, and large majorities also identified the achievement of personal (70.7 percent) or career goals (67.4 percent) as sources of motivation.

This is not to say that their pursuit was easy or without sacrifices. There were significant challenges once they arrived on campuses, including “find[ing] adequate study time, meet[ing] financial obligations, and spend[ing] adequate time with their children.” These challenges were also noted by the college administrators who were interviewed for this study. Another challenge was completing a degree within the educational time limits of the CalWORKs system, which are highly restrictive. However, the educational experience was worth the sacrifice, according to 95 percent of study respondents.

The positive life changes afforded by higher education

Also encouraging are the findings that there were significant, positive social, economic, and emotional effects associated with enrollment in and/or completion of higher education for both low-income women and their children. Some of these effects include increased self-esteem (80.4 percent), feelings of contributing to society (68.5 percent), increased community involvement (66.3 percent), and experiencing better job opportunities (63 percent).

Not only are the personal rewards the participants experienced obvious, but so are the benefits to their communities. Upon enrolling in and completing degree-granting programs, women felt more personally secure and more able to and excited about engaging with their communities.

There were some differences between how those who had completed post-secondary degrees and those who were currently enrolled responded to many of the questions. On the positive side, 97.9 percent of those who had obtained degrees responded that their education had changed their life in positive ways, as did 93 percent of those currently enrolled.

The differences between degree holders and those still pursuing degrees were slightly more pronounced in other areas. For instance, 76.6 percent of degree holders indicated that they felt they were now contributing more to society, while 62.8 percent of currently enrolling students felt that way. Degree-holders also indicated greater community involvement (80.9 percent vs. 53.5 percent), improved personal relationships (57.4 percent vs. 37.2 percent), and increased self-esteem (87.2 percent vs. 76.7 percent).

Degree-holders also saw significant differences in the area of financial rewards. They indicated that they had access to better opportunities upon completion of the degree (83 percent vs. 44.2 percent), and also had more financial resources (68.1 percent vs. 34.9 percent) than those still enrolled in school. In addition, degree-holders earned a median hourly wage of $13.14, while those still enrolled in school earned only $7.50 per hour. The added financial independence also broadened opportunities and interest in other areas, including politics, global issues, and personal and community health and well-being.

Policy Recommendations

Jones De-Weever and Gault also developed a set of policy recommendations based on their analysis of women’s experiences negotiating access to and participation in higher education within the context of TANF. These include:

• “Allow TANF participants access to post-secondary education for their full TANF eligibility period.”
• “Allow TANF participants to count classroom time and study time as work,” or require that paid work be in the form of related internships or experiential learning, thereby decreasing barriers to education created by requiring paid work outside of class time.
• “Eliminate the cap on access to higher education,” by eliminating the 30 percent cap on education and training.
• “Stop the clock for college-bound TANF participants,” enabling participants to enroll in school full-time without reducing their TANF eligibility period.
• “Increase the real value of Pell Grant awards,” thereby making college more affordable and accessible to larger number of TANF participants.

Resilient & Reaching for More provides a comprehensive overview of the impact and implications of the 1996 welfare reform on women’s access to and participation in higher education. It also presents a strong case for why these reforms should be re-examined and altered in light of the immensely positive economic, social, and personal effects post-secondary education can have on women and their children.

To read the full report, visit: http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/D466.pdf (PDF document)

Strategies for becoming more involved in widening access to higher education for TANF participants: Ascertain pro-active steps admissions, financial aid, and other outreach offices might take to provide information on post-secondary education to TANF participants. Investigate what support systems to encourage retention are available for TANF participants at your institution. If inadequate, consider how they might be improved. Research what rules govern TANF restrictions to higher education in your state. See if there are existing coalitions or groups that are working to improve access. Contact your state representatives to voice your opinions about access to higher education for TANF participants. Do the same with your Congressional representatives.