Introduction

At the request of the S & R Pieper Family Foundation, The Dieringer Research Group conducted a study on the needs of single parent families. The purpose of the research was to explore how individuals, living at or below a poverty existence feel about the services that are available and whether or not these services are supporting their needs.

It is the belief of the Foundation that "user friendly" input is crucial in defining the problem and solutions. The question could be asked, "Why look to a population, possibly in distress financially and personally, for suggestions?" The answer is, many lower income individuals have been in, or have been exposed to, crisis situations; they are in a unique position to help identify and substantiate potential solutions.

In 1991, The Dieringer Research Group conducted a similar project for the PPC Foundation regarding the issue of AFDC. The purpose of the project was to explore the "make-up" of a person receiving AFDC and to compare AFDC recipients to non-recipients who have similar levels of income.

In this year’s study, The Dieringer Research Group first took a look at the major program designed to serve lower income single mothers -- Wisconsin Works (or "W-2"). Wisconsin Works provides job placement assistance and other services to parents with dependent children; under W-2 a less complicated financial eligibility test requires that the family's gross income be at or below 115% of the Federal Poverty Level. In designing this project, we have taken into consideration the revised assistance program.

The primary objective of this study was to understand the issues facing single mothers living at or below a poverty existence and the circumstances that cause single mothers to apply for assistance programs and services. The goal was to get feedback directly from the individuals most involved and able to articulate their personal successes and concerns.

	Explore how single mothers feel about the services that are available and whether or not these services are supporting their needs,

	Determine their opinion of the success of the W-2 program and collect suggestions for improving the program from the viewpoint of those who use or need the assistance,

	Understand why and how some individuals, potentially eligible for benefits, choose not to participate in the W-2 program.

In order to address the above objectives, a three phase research design was developed, similar to 1991:

1.	Focus groups with single mothers, one with W-2 users and one with non-users (who would qualify for W-2)

2.	400 telephone interviews with single mothers, 200 with W-2 users and 200 with non-users (who would qualify for W-2)

3.	Mail survey of organizations who provide services (directory to be compiled)

On August 30, 2000, two focus groups were conducted with respondents who met the following profile: single mothers, age 18 - 50, had custody of at least one dependent child, were residents of Wisconsin and did not receive Social Security Disability income. One group consisted of individuals currently participating in the W-2 program and one group consisted of individuals who qualified for the program but were not presently enrolled in the program. Based on the focus groups, key similarities and differences between the groups were:

KEY SIMILARITIES/DIFFERENCES BETWEEN USERS AND NON-USERS
W-2 Users	W-2 Non-Users
Users were participating in job training, W-2 jobs, or unemployed	Non-users were "working poor," working at low paying jobs (sometimes 2 jobs) with no benefits
Complained about being alone	More likely to have family support
Not always aware of services available	Not always aware of services available
Concerned about quality day care	Concerned about quality day care
Believe there are past and present abuses of the system	Thought abuses of AFDC created W-2
Believe W-2 is creating a group of people prepared to work in minimum wage jobs	Also believe the jobs in W-2 will not help them raise their standard of living
Question why W-2 does not address higher education – college	Question why W-2 does not address higher education – college
Believe under W-2, there should be a plan to address needs of each individual
Are concerned about W-2 "FEPS" who are not qualified, rude, or arbitrarily sanction participants

Phase II of the research further explored these issues among a larger sample of the population. Telephone interviews were conducted with 400 single mothers in Milwaukee County from September 15 to October 16, 2000. The margin of error for a sample of 400 is ±4.9%.

A respondent was initially qualified if they were a single mother with dependent children living in the household and with a total yearly income (before deductions) at or below 115% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) per size of family. Two hundred respondents were W-2 users and 200 respondents qualified for W-2, but were not on W-2. The income qualifier was 115% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) per size of family, as shown in the following table:

Size of Family	115% FPL Monthly	115% FPL Annual
1	$800	$9,603
2	$1,078	$12,938
3	$1,356	$16,273
4	$1,634	$19,608
5	$1,912	$22,943
6	$2,190	$26,278
7	$2,468	$29,613
W-2 income information provided by Employment Solutions, Inc, and the Milwaukee Job Center North.

Respondents were then classified as either a user or non-user of W-2. For this study, a W-2 user has actual experience with the program, by either using the Wisconsin Works (W-2) program currently or in the past.

The survey questionnaire used in this phase was developed using the 1991 AFDC survey questionnaire as a starting point, however the 2000 survey instrument was modified to reflect the changes in the assistance program (W-2). It also the incorporates the results received from the focus groups in Phase I. A copy of the survey questionnaire is located in Appendix A of this report.

The sample used in interviewing was a random sample of Milwaukee County zip codes, targeting those zip codes with a higher proportion of individuals with average incomes under $25,000.

In addition to this introductory section, the report consists of the Summary and Conclusions and the Detailed Findings. A discussion on the Statistical Reliability and Limitations of the results can be found in Appendix B.