Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the basic education for adults (BEdA) programs at community and technical colleges. The author investigated similar research questions for the net impact of other programs, the profiles of which can be found here:
- WIA/WIOA Adult Program
- WIA/WIOA Dislocated Worker Program
- WIA/WIOA Youth Program
- Professional-Technical Education Programs
- Worker Retraining Program
- Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) Programs
- Private Career School Programs
- Registered Apprenticeships
- Aerospace Training Programs
- WorkFirst Program
- Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) Program
- The study used a difference-in-differences design with a matched comparison group. Using administrative data, the author conducted statistical models to compare the outcomes of the program participants and the comparison group members one and three years after program exit.
- The study found that BEdA program participants were significantly more likely to be employed, have higher earnings, and earn more in public benefits than comparison group members.
- This study receives a moderate evidence rating. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the basic education for adults (BEdA) programs at community and technical colleges, but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Basic Education for Adults (BEdA) Programs
Features of the Intervention
Basic education for adults (BEdA) programs are workforce development programs that provide instruction on basic education topics. The instruction topics include reading, writing, listening, skills for employability, digital literacy, and mathematics. The programs also provide instruction for high school completion, GED test preparation, and development of academic skills that will help participants transition into continued education and additional career pathways.
Features of the Study
The study used a difference-in-differences design to examine the impact of BEdA in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. The author matched BEdA program participants to similar nonparticipants using propensity scores developed from socio-demographic information. The comparison group members included individuals who registered to use Washington’s WorkSource employment centers and online job-search portals as part of the Wagner-Peyser federal program, but did not participate in the BEdA programs. The study sample included two cohorts. The 2014-2015 cohort included 21,977 individuals (12,698 intervention and 9,279 comparison) and was primarily female (55%), less than half were White (43%), with an average age of 32. The 2016-2017 cohort included 21,543 individuals (13,105 intervention and 8,438 comparison) and was primarily female (56%), less than half were White (44%), with an average age of 32.
The primary data sources were administrative data from the BEdA programs and Washington’s WorkSource employment centers and online job-search portals. The author conducted statistical models to examine differences in outcomes between the intervention and comparison groups at one year and three years after program exit. Outcomes included employment rate, quarterly hours worked, hourly wage, quarterly earnings, and quarterly Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits received.
Findings
Employment
- The study found that BEdA program participants had significantly higher employment rates than comparison group members three years after program exit, but no significant differences at year one. The program participants also had significantly more quarterly hours worked at both one year and three years after program exit.
Earnings and wages
- The study found that BEdA program participants had significantly higher hourly wages than comparison group members at both one year and three years after program exit. The study also found that BEdA program participants had significantly higher quarterly earnings than comparison group members one year after program exit, but found no significant differences three years after program exit.
Public benefits receipt
- The study found that BEdA program participants received significantly more in quarterly UI benefits than comparison group members one year after program exit, but did not find a statistically significant difference three years after program exit.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The study reports a less stringent statistical significance level, considering p-values of less than 0.10 to be significant, though it is standard practice to consider statistical significance if the p-value is less than 0.05. Only results that demonstrate a p-value of less than 0.05 are considered statistically significant in this profile.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to basic education for adults programs at community and technical colleges, but other factors might also have contributed.