How can social programs reach the poorest, highest need populations?

Reading about the amazing success of the Conditional Cash Transfer programs in Mexico and Brazil motivated me to learn more about Opportunities NYC: Family Rewards, the New York City experimental CCT program, and the reasons behind its mixed results changing lives. The findings show that Family Rewards only had a small impact on children’s education and no significant impact on family preventative health care. Surprisingly, Opportunities NYC found that there was little room to improve in these areas. Elementary school students already attended school more than 90% of the time and families already maintained consistent health insurance. Interestingly, the educational area where the program did make a big difference was with incoming ninth graders who scored “proficient” on the eighth grade state exam. These students, who were better positioned to take advantage of the program’s performance incentives, increased their attendance rates and performance.(http://www.npc.umich.edu/publications/policy_briefs/brief22/policybrief22.pdf)

On one hand this is good news. Low-income families are advocating for themselves and for their children. On the other hand, these findings raise two important questions. What is the target population of Family Rewards? How can social programs trying to capture the poorest, highest need populations ensure that they will be able to reach these groups? I believe this is a common obstacle for organizations and all too often the questions above don't get addressed until after the program has been implemented.

In my own experience in the education system I often saw well-intentioned programs fail to reach the most at-risk students. For example, the Chicago Public School program After School Matters (ASM). After School Matters is a nonprofit organization that provides out-of-school opportunities to high school students in the arts, science, sports, etc. In exchange for participation, students get paid for their involvement. This has been a very innovative approach to helping kids stay off the streets and results show that students who participate in the program have higher attendance, fewer course failures and higher graduation rates compared to their peers. Not surprisingly though, the study also found that students who participate were already attending school more and failing fewer courses before starting the program. (http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/publications/ChapinHallDocument(2)_0.pdf)

I can attest to these findings. The school where I taught had a strong gang presence and the students participating in After School Matters at were not the students running around in gangs. They were the students who were already performing well and on-track to graduate high school. The program definitely succeeded in boosting the opportunities for these students, helping develop their skill sets, and creating further incentives to stay away from gangs. Did After School Matters intentionally target this group? If so, what is being done to grasp the bottom line, the most difficult to reach student population? The answer to these questions is the difference between the results of Bolsa Familia and Family Rewards. Bolsa Familia reaches the poorest populations in Brazil whereas Family Rewards clearly involves families who are already advocating for themselves. Only once programs can effectively reach the neediest populations will we see strikingly positive results.