Panel Paper: The Poor Pre-, During, and After the Recession: The Trajectories of Work Supports for SNAP Recipients

Friday, November 4, 2016 : 8:30 AM
Kalorama (Washington Hilton)

*Names in bold indicate Presenter

Robert Goerge, University of Chicago


The Great Recession saw an unprecedented increase in the use of the SNAP program.  However, the end of the Recession and two years following did not a significant decrease in the SNAP caseload.  In this presentation, we present an analysis of the outcomes of the SNAP caseload with children under 5 years of age in Illinois from 2000-2014 and view the change in the outcomes for participants over this time period.  For example, we expect that small, but significant, proportions of the cases on SNAP just prior to and after the Recession end their participation in work support programs, such as subsidized child care and transition out of welfare programs.  However, we expect that this dynamic changed during the Recession.

Our approach is to describe sub-populations of SNAP households using latent class analysis.  Identifying the characteristics and sizes of these sub-populations, or classes, is key for helping policymakers make resource allocation issues, but also to understand the condition of the poor in a state and how that changes across the economic cycle.

In consultation with Illinois policymakers, we found that they preferred an analysis of yearly point-in-time caseloads to understand how their task of providing work supports changed over time and how it may be driven by the characteristics of the caseloads.  Therefore, for each caseload, we looked both retrospectively and prospectively to understand prior and future status of the case—as a function of the work supports.  This allows us to provide a three-year window for each annual caseload and provides policymakers with a way to think about how to evaluate their prior use of resources, as well as plan future spending and allocations. A portion of this study has already impacted the child care subsidy program by the state deciding to broaden the program after shrinking it to only TANF recipients in 2015.

The classes that emerge are intuitive, but the sizes are somewhat surprising.  We see a small portion of zero-earned income cases, while we see a fairly large percentage of these families with young children using child care subsidies.  Some of these increase their income and some don’t, which creates two classes.