Seasonal Employment Dynamics and Welfare Use in Agricultural and Rural California Counties

Abstract

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) changed welfare as we knew it, dramatically altering the social safety net for poor Americans.PRWORA repealed the entitlement welfare program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, replacing it with a new federal block grant program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.The act also introduced program cuts and changes in the nation's food assistance programs.With these changes came new roles, responsibilities, and expectations for low-income families, their communities, and their local governments.With new opportunities come a great number of challenges to implementing welfare reform.Many issues resulting from welfare reform confront rural and urban areas alike.Meeting work requirements, achieving economic independence, and maintaining family and child well-being are concerns for both rural and urban people.Once employment is secured, ensuring the availability and affordability of child care, transportation, health care, housing, and other support services is needed.However, rural areas have unique demographic, economic, and geographic characteristics that may translate into unique challenges for welfare reform implementation.Compared with urban areas, many rural communities have higher poverty levels, greater unemployment, lower education levels, lower incomes, and longer distances between home, child care, and work sites.Because of lower population density, rural areas tend to have higher costs for services and frequently lack a full range of services.These characteristics all present a unique context in which to implement welfare reform.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.