Objective: We explore common income/benefits combinations by demographic characteristics among low-income families with young children. Understanding how such families package their income sources can help identify critical components of the economic safety net and the relative contributions these income sources make in supporting low-income families’ basic needs. Method: We used longitudinal state administrative data on means-tested benefits, child support, and earnings, as well as data from a survey of primary caregivers (N = 1,065) in Wisconsin families receiving WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children) benefits in 2010–2011. We used cluster analysis techniques to identify unique income packaging strategies. Results: Respondents were most likely to rely on Medicaid, followed by SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and employment income. Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income were the most stable safety net components. We identified 4 groups distinguished by the extent to which individuals worked for pay and received various types of benefits or child support and found significant demographic differences across clusters. Conclusions: This study reaffirms past findings illustrating the complexity of the U.S. economic safety net and highlighting the need for staff across programs serving low-income families to understand eligibility criteria and rules of local safety net components.

中文翻译：

---

WIC计划参与者中包装收入和经家庭检验的福利来源的策略

目的：我们通过人口特征研究低收入家庭中有小孩的普通收入/福利组合。了解这类家庭如何打包其收入来源可以帮助确定经济安全网的关键组成部分以及这些收入来源在满足低收入家庭的基本需求方面的相对贡献。方法：我们使用了纵向的州行政管理数据，包括经济状况调查所得的福利，儿童抚养费和收入，以及接受WIC（妇女，婴儿，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，儿童，婴儿，儿童和婴儿的特殊补充营养计划）的主要看护人的调查（N = 1,065）。和儿童）在2010-2011年的福利。我们使用聚类分析技术来确定独特的收入打包策略。结果：受访者最有可能依靠医疗补助，其次是SNAP（补充营养援助计划）和就业收入。医疗补助和补充安全收入是最稳定的安全网组成部分。我们确定了4个群体，这些群体的区别在于个人从事有偿工作和获得各种类型的福利或子女抚养费的程度，并且发现各个群体之间存在显着的人口差异。结论：这项研究重申了过去的发现，这些发现说明了美国经济安全网的复杂性，并强调了为低收入家庭服务的各个计划的员工需要了解当地安全网组成部分的资格标准和规则。我们确定了4个小组，这些小组的区别在于个人从事有偿工作和获得各种类型的福利或子女抚养费的程度，并且发现各个群体之间存在显着的人口差异。结论：这项研究重申了过去的发现，这些发现说明了美国经济安全网的复杂性，并强调了为低收入家庭服务的各个计划的员工需要了解当地安全网组成部分的资格标准和规则。我们确定了4个小组，这些小组的区别在于个人从事有偿工作和获得各种类型的福利或子女抚养费的程度，并且发现各个群体之间存在显着的人口差异。结论：这项研究重申了过去的发现，这些发现说明了美国经济安全网的复杂性，并强调了为低收入家庭服务的各个计划的员工需要了解当地安全网组成部分的资格标准和规则。