Introduction
What influence did research have on welfare reform? By research I mean studies of the
poverty or welfare problems and how to solve them, for example the evaluations of welfare work
programs by the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC). By welfare reform I
mean the long-running struggle to transform Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), the
nation’s controversial family aid program. That effort culminated in the Family Support Act (FSA)
of 1988, which expanded welfare work programs, and in the radical Personal Responsibility and
Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. PRWORA recast AFDC as Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families (TANF), ended the federal entitlement to aid, limited families to five years on
the rolls, and stiffened work requirements, among other changes. By reform here I will chiefly mean
FSA and PRWORA at the federal level and parallel efforts by states to implement work
requirements and other changes at the local level.
Most observers think research affected reform, but that its influence was limited by ideology,
which led politicians to do some things unsupported by research. I agree, but I will argue that the
influence of research was also curbed by its own shortcomings. Much that scholars said about
poverty and welfare prior to reform turned out to be impolitic, incorrect, or simply irrelevant to
government. The limitations chiefly reflect how the social sciences have recently developed.
In what follows, I first describe more fully what welfare reform has meant, then the influence
research might have had, then the limited influence it did have, and the reasons for the limits. I
conclude with some suggestions for making research more relevant in future.