Search

The relational well-being of families is an important factor affecting a family's economic success, physical and mental heath, the readiness and success of children in school, and the engagement of youth in positive and productive roles. In short, the strength of family bonds is crucial to a family's capacity to provide, nurture, and care for its members. "Strong Family Relationships" is defined as the relational well-being of families. While the successful promotion of "strong family relationships" is clearly tied to ensuring family economic success and family health, this brief focuses primarily on strengthening the formation of families, the interaction of parents and children, the connection of families to social networks, and the adequacy and quality of necessary family resources. Addressing these many facets of family life is important given the dramatic changes and pressures associated with contemporary American family life. For example, fewer couples are marrying or are choosing to marry at later ages, more are cohabiting, increasing numbers of children will spend some part of their childhood in a single parent home, and rising health care, housing, and child care costs are making it difficult for families to balance the competing demands of work and family. This brief is a companion to a complete policy and research paper that provides an overview of current trends affecting American families and offers a beginning framework for state policies that strengthen family relationships. (Contains 72 endnotes.) [For the full report, "Encouraging Strong Family Relationships. Policy Matters: Setting and Measuring Benchmarks for State Policies. A Discussion Paper for the "Policy Matters" Project," see ED536821.]

Aimed at low-income families in six of New York City's highest-poverty communities, Family Rewards ties cash rewards to a pre-specified set of activities and outcomes thought to be critical to families' short- and long-term success in the areas of children's education, family preventive health care, and parents' employment. The purpose of this project is to experimentally evaluate the effects of this three-year innovative holistic conditional cash transfer (CCT) initiative. This paper presents initial findings from an ongoing and comprehensive evaluation of Family Rewards. It examines the program's implementation in the field and families' responses to it during the first two of its three years of operations, and early findings on the program's impacts on children's educational processes and outcomes. More specifically, this paper addresses the following questions: (1) What are the effects of ONYC-Family Rewards on family income, poverty, and financial hardship?; (2) What are the effects of ONYC-Family Rewards on use of health care and health insurance?; (3) What are the effects of ONYC-Family Rewards on parents' employment and educational attainment?; and (4) What are the effects of ONYC-Family Rewards on children's educational outcomes? Overall, this study shows that, despite an extraordinarily rapid start-up, the program was operating largely as intended by its second year. Although many families struggled with the complexity of the program, most were substantially engaged with it and received a large amount of money for meeting the conditions it established. Specifically, nearly all families (98 percent) earned at least some rewards in both program years, with payments averaging more than $6,000 during the first two program years combined. The program reduced current poverty and hardship; increased savings; increased families' continuous use of health insurance coverage and increased their receipt of medical care; and increased employment in jobs that are not covered by the unemployment insurance (UI) system but reduced employment in UI-covered jobs. The program has had mixed success in improving children's academic performance specifically. Contrary to expectations, Family Rewards did not affect school attendance or annual standardized test scores in Math and English Language Arts (ELA) for either group of youngest children, but did lead to notable gains for a group of more academically prepared high school students. The program also had important effects on several key proposed mediators of the intervention. However, these effects vary by parents with different age groups of children. Appended are: (1) References; and (2) Tables and Figures. (Contains 2 tables.)

This paper examines the pattern of incentives for work versus retirement in five state teacher pension systems. We do this by examining the annual accrual of pension wealth from an additional year of work over a teacher's career. Accrual of wealth is highly nonlinear and heavily loaded at arbitrary years that would normally be considered midcareer. One typical pattern exhibits low accrual in early years, accelerating in mid-late fifties, followed by dramatic decline, or even negative returns in years that are relatively young for retirement. We consider five states for specific analysis: We identify key factors in the defined benefit formulas that drive such patterns, and likely consequences for employee behavior. We examine the efficiency and equity consequences of these systems and lessons that might be drawn for pension reform. (Contains 10 figures and 1 table.) [This paper was supported with funds from the National Center for Employment Incentives at Vanderbilt University and the Center for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data.] in Education Research at the Urban Institute.]

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) includes important, but limited, protections for millions of working Americans and their families around the ability to obtain and keep health coverage. Among its specific protections, HIPAA: (1) Limits the use of preexisting condition exclusions; (2) Prohibits group health plans from discriminating by denying coverage or charging extra for coverage based on past or present poor health; (3) Guarantees certain small employers and certain individuals who lose job-related coverage the right to purchase health insurance; and (4) Guarantees, in most cases, that employers or individuals who purchase health insurance can renew the coverage regardless of any health conditions of individuals covered under the insurance policy. The privacy provisions of HIPAA apply to health information created or maintained by health care providers who engage in certain electronic transactions, health plans, and health care clearinghouses. The privacy rule standards address the use and disclosure of individual health information, or "protected health information," by organizations (covered entities) subject to the privacy rule, as well as standards for individual's privacy rights to understand and control how their health information is used. A major goal of the privacy rule is to ensure that an individual's health information is properly protected while allowing the flow of health information needed to provide and promote high-quality health care and to protect the public's health and well being. The purpose of this paper is to provide clarification to educators regarding the privacy of records and information related to the requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996. The paper was originally distributed in 2003 and has been updated with resources and web page links. Additional resources and websites are provided for the reader to obtain current information regarding the required privacy regulations.

As states face increasing fiscal pressures, many are considering proposals to cut eligibility levels, eliminate outreach, and retract simplified enrollment procedures for children and families eligible for Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). This paper presents evidence on the importance of maintaining gains made in the number of children and families enrolled in these programs and of building further on improvements in Medicaid and SCHIP coverage. Following an executive summary are introductory remarks detailing the phased-in eligibility expansions for Medicaid and the enactment of SCHIP, the increased program participation, and the potential risk to coverage gains due to proposed state actions. The paper is then organized in two major parts. Part 1 examines research evidence on how public health insurance coverage enhances access to care, health, family finances, and quality of life. Part 2 examines evidence on Medicaid and SCHIP's importance to communities, focusing on economic, health, and social consequences of public health insurance coverage beyond the target population. Among the key findings presented are that previously uninsured children enrolled in Medicaid have fewer unmet needs and fewer delays in getting needed care. Medicaid reduces emergency room use and the rate of preventable hospitalizations. Medicaid expansions are related to reduced infant mortality. Low-income families of children enrolled in Medicaid spend considerably less out-of-pocket than families of uninsured Medicaid-eligible children. Medicaid brings federal matching funds into states, thereby promoting community economic development through job creation and income growth. Public coverage reduces uncompensated care burdens on providers and localities, thereby strengthening local providers capacity to serve all people; and provides access to care for low-income children and parents at risk of communicable disease, thereby reducing burdens on public health departments to provide medical services to the uninsured. The paper concludes by pointing out that research findings provide an objective foundation for state policymakers to evaluate the potential consequences of their choices. (Contains 70 references.) (KB)

Using data from the National Survey of America's Families (a nationally representative survey of the economic, social, and health characteristics of children, adults, and their families), this paper discusses health care coverage among child support eligible children. It begins with a detailed profile of child support eligible children living with their mothers, including their demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and their child support and health insurance characteristics. In addition to current health insurance status, it examines what types of health insurance coverage children have had over the prior year and how their health insurance status varies by child support award and receipt status and the mother's employment characteristics. The paper then examines what share of these children might have access to employer-sponsored health insurance through their mothers' employers whether or not they actually have this type of coverage. Finally, it asks what share is eligible for Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program, how much these programs can reduce the number of child support eligible children who are uninsured, and what opportunities and barriers are encountered by state officials in coordinating efforts to secure appropriate health insurance for children. (Contains 7 figures, 10 tables, and 30 references.) (SM)

This paper details the history of part-time faculty use in the California Community Colleges (CCCs). The status and use of part-time faculty hired on temporary assignments in the CCCs has been a long-standing and growing concern of the Academic Senate. In 1960, the ratio of full-time faculty to full-time students in the public junior colleges was 1/20; the current ratio is over 1/35, nearly doubling faculty responsibilities. Passage of the 60% law in 1967 reclassified any instructor teaching not more than 60% of the hours considered a full-time load as a temporary employee rather than a contract employee. Currently, 66.2% of faculty are part-time and they teach 46.1% of credit instruction. In addition to cataloging the legislation that has impacted part-time faculty status since 1967, this paper addresses state activity relating to part-time faculty issues: (1) hiring procedures; (2) health benefits; (3) student contact hours; and (4) comparable pay for comparable work. The paper concludes that the problems created by decades of arbitrary use and abuse of part-time faculty are complex and interdependent. During the 2000-2001 budget cycle, the Legislature and the Governor began to address the fundamental cause of the problems. The California Community College System must now try to formulate a comprehensive solution that avoids short-term and partial solutions that create new and unnecessary problems. (AUTH/NB)

States originally had until September 30, 2000 to spend their first year of funds under the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) or else lose any unspent funds. Funds remaining unused after 3 years were to be reallocated to states that had spent their SCHIP funds before the deadline. Only 12 states met the deadline, with many states reporting that they needed more time to design/initiate programs and to conduct outreach. In response, Congress passed the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act (BIPA) in December, 2000. Under this law, the 12 states that met the deadline received some reallocated funds, while the remaining 39 states were allowed to retain a share of their unspent funds. BIPA also created an option whereby the 39 states allowed to retain some of their unspent first-year SCHIP funds could spend up to 10 percent of these funds on outreach. After providing background on the SCHIP financing structure, this paper describes the modified reallocation process that Congress adopted in BIPA for unspent first-year SCHIP funds, the new 10 percent outreach option, and the accounting rules that may limit the ability of some states to take advantage of the option. The paper also contains state-by-state tables listing the states likely to be able to take advantage of the new outreach funding option, as well as rough estimates of the amount likely to be available for outreach in each of these states. The paper concludes by noting that for states with unspent SCHIP funds, BIPA extends their opportunity to use a share of these funds to provide health benefits to children. In addition, at least 23 states will be able to use federal SCHIP matching funds to strengthen and expand their outreach efforts. (KB)