Jump to main navigation. Jump to main content

The CURA publications library is currently being digitized by the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy. When the project is complete, the entire CURA publications library will be online and fully searchable. Unfortunately, during this process we are not able to honor individual requests for publications . Additionally, we no longer have physical copies of publications to send out.

New publications are digitized daily and the publications catalog on the CURA website is not automatically updated with links to scanned copies, so please search the CURA collection at the Digital Conservancy for the publications you are looking for:

Work, Race, and Welfare Reform: A Study of the Minnesota Family Investment Program in Hennepin County, 1998-2002.

Martin, Mary, David Hollister, Jessica Toft, Ji-in Yeo, and Youngmin Kim.

The Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP) is Minnesota's response to the 1996 federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, commonly referred to as welfare reform. Minnesota, like all states, receives a block grant from the federal government to fund economic assistance to families in need, with the flexibility to design its own program. The Minnesota Department of Human Services characterizes the MFIP approach as 'tough but fair reform,' with a focus on quick job placement. This study was conducted to assess the impacts of MFIP on the well-being of families in Hennepin County, Minnesota, from 1998 to 2002. Based on extensive interviews with 84 MFIP participants, the authors conclude that MFIP clearly is tough in its imposition of time limits, sanctions, and pressure for quick job placement, regardless of salary or advancement potential, as well as in its emphasis on training rather than formal education. However, the analysis also showed that participants entered MFIP with racially/ethnically specific advantages and disadvantages, and their experience in MFIP was similarly varied based on their racial/ethnic group. Although most participants worked moderately or extensively during the 42-month study period, racial/ethnic differences emerged in relation to nearly every dimension studied, including salary, type of job, years in the United States, resident mobility, insurance coverage, use of childcare, and participation in MFIP training. Based on their analysis, the authors call for a formal public examination of and dialogue about racial/ethnic-group strengths and needs, and their implications for MFIP policy and practices.

CURA Reporter
Publication date: 
Minneapolis: Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA), University of Minnesota.
Funding provided by a CURA New Initiative grant, the Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare (CASCW), and the College of Human Ecology at the University of Minnesota, as well as Hennepin County and private contributions.
35 (1): 13-20.
Online availability
Download from CURA: 
CURA call number: 
Reporter 35 (1)

CURA Programs: