Cash incentives versus case management: Can money replace services in preventing school failure?

The Partners in Prevention Program: The Evaluation and Evolution of the Task-Centered Case Management Model

“…In the initial evaluation report , children receiving PIP services improved significantly in behavior and academic grades. Results were impressive considering earlier studies (Bailey-Dempsey, 1993;Reid, Bailey-Dempsey, Cain, et al, 1994) that showed a statistically significant decline in the grade point averages of students who did not receive services. At that time, the evaluator concluded "through PIP, the seemingly inevitable downward trend in the school performance of at-risk students was not only halted, but reversed" (Bailey-Dempsey & Reid, 1995, p. 6).…”

The Partners in Prevention Program: Further Development of the Task-Centered Case Management Model

“…The quasi-experiment was designed by the authors and Dr. William J. Reid during the 2002-03 academic school year. Although the task-centered case management approach had been demonstrated as effective in comparison to monetary incentives (Reid & Bailey-Dempsey, 1995;Reid, Bailey-Dempsey, Cain, Cook, & Burchard, 1994), there was no reason to believe that it was superior to other school-based intervention programs. The study reported here compares the PIP Program and a school counseling approach on change in academic achievement and the behaviors that are barriers to academic success.…”

Don't Jump, Mother Loves You: The Rescue of Social Work From the Suicide of Its Own Research

“…Riccio and Hasenfeld (1996) is marred by the same methodological problems that bedevil MDRC's evaluations of Greater Avenues to Independence, California's famous job placement effort. Icard et al (1995) employ outcome measures that undermine their research task; Magen and Rose (1994) torture their data for hope yet still come up with largely negative findings; Rife and Belcher (1994) ignore alternative explanations of their outcomes -professional supports -that are more reasonable than their own preferred causes; Reid et al (1994) also ignore alternative explanations for their findings (in this case surveillance) and Reid and Bailey-Dempsey's (1995) replication fails to blind evaluators while violating randomization. Together with the remaining forty six studies enumerated by Aaron et al (1999) the best of the modern scientific enterprise in social work constitutes a graveyard of failed investigations: case examples, subjective assessments, small samples, lack of controls, biased measures and measuring procedures, trivial investigations, and so forth.…”