What Portion of Illinois Residents Eligible for Safety Net Benefits Receive Those Benefits?: Estimates by Program, Population Subgroups, and Counties

Safety net benefits can help to improve the economic well-being of families with lower income levels, but many families and individuals who are eligible for benefits do not receive them. Designing the best interventions to increase participation rates requires knowing more about who receives assistance. We explored program participation rates in Illinois, focusing on seven programs: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), Public and Subsidized Housing, the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF), and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). The analysis rests on detailed estimates of program eligibility produced by the Urban Institute's ATTIS (Analysis of Transfers, Taxes, and Income Security) microsimulation model. Statewide participation rates in 2018 varied from a low of 13 percent among families eligible for TANF to a high of 57 percent among those eligible for SNAP. Some subgroups of eligible families—for example, families with children with a single parent compared to those with two parents—are generally more likely to participate. Other patterns, including differences by race and ethnicity and by county population-size, vary across the programs

Measuring Poverty at the State Level

Outlines a model for using the National Academy of Sciences poverty measure, which accounts for all income, non-discretionary work and out-of-pocket health expenses, and geographic cost variations, to estimate the effects of poverty reduction policies

How Do States' Safety Net Policies Affect Poverty?

Using Georgia, Illinois, and Massachusetts as illustrative examples, examines how states' narrow, medium, or broad policies on cash, non-cash, and tax elements of the safety net affect poverty rates among non-elderly adults and children

Efficacy of anti PD-1 therapy in children and adolescent melanoma patients (MELCAYA study)

Background: Data on the efficacy and safety of anti PD-1 antibodies in children and adolescents (CA) with melanoma are lacking. The aim of this study was to determine outcomes of CA melanoma patients receiving anti PD-1 antibodies. Methods: Melanoma patients ≤18 years treated with anti PD-1 were retrospectively retrieved from 15 academic centers. Information on histopathological diagnosis, surgical treatment, systemic therapy, objective response rate (ORR), safety profile was collected. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed by Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Between April 2016 and March 2024, 99 patients treated with systemic therapy were retrieved, 81 treated with anti PD-1 therapy. Median age was 14 years (range 2–18 years), 37 pts were ≤12 yrs. Overall, 38 CA patients received anti PD-1 in adjuvant setting, and the 3-year PFS and OS were 70.6 % and 81.1 %, respectively. Two patients received anti-PD-1 based neoadjuvant treatment, both had a pathologic complete response and remain disease free. Fifty-six received a systemic therapy for advanced disease and among them, 43 received anti PD-1-based therapy for advanced disease in 1st line, while 12 and 5 pts received a 2nd and 3rd line, respectively. Among patients receiving a 1st line therapy with anti PD-1 monotherapy the ORR was 25 %, and the 3-year OS was 34 %. Toxicities were consistent with previous studies in adult melanoma patients. Conclusions: Our study provides the first evidence of efficacy of anti PD-1 in CA melanoma patients and supports the use of anti PD-1 therapy in pts ≤18 years, included those <12 years

The Economic Impact of Naturalization on Immigrants and Cities

Using American Community Survey data for 21 cities, we find that if the immigrants who are eligible for naturalization became citizens, their earnings would increase 8.9 percent, and combined earnings for the 21 cities would increase $5.7 billion. Federal, state, and city tax revenue would increase$2.0 billion. Expenditures in government benefits would decline $34 million in New York City and increase$4 million in San Francisco. With an additional $789 million in taxes for New York City and$90 million for San Francisco, the net fiscal impact of naturalization on these two cities is overwhelmingly positive

How Do States' Safety Net Policies Affect Poverty?

How do state safety net policies affect poverty? Safety net policies can dramatically reduce poverty. A full assessment requires use of a Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) that adds near-cash benefits and tax credits to cash income, deducts necessary expenses, and uses up-to-date, geographically-sensitive poverty thresholds. This analysis implements the SPM in Georgia, Illinois, and Massachusetts to examine the effects of the key safety net programs on poverty. The results show that safety net policies in these three states have substantially different effects on poverty, but federal programs reduce poverty differences across the states.Social Welfare, Poverty Measurement, Safety Net Programs