Skip to main content

Engaging young men involved in Chicago's justice system: A feasibility study of the Bridges to Pathways Program (Wasserman et al., 2019)

Absence of conflict of interest.

Citation

Wasserman, K., Walter, J., Luczywek, B., Wagner, H., & Redcross, C. (2019). Engaging young men involved in Chicago's justice system: A feasibility study of the Bridges to Pathways Program (Report No. 2019-79). Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Highlights

  • The study's objective was to examine the impact of Bridges to Pathways (Bridges) on earnings, employment, and education outcomes.
  • The study is a randomized controlled trial that randomly assigned young men to the Bridges group or to a control group. Using follow-up surveys and data from the National Directory of New Hires, the authors conducted statistical analyses to compare the outcomes between the treatment and control groups.
  • The study found that treatment participants were significantly more likely than control participants to report having been employed at some point since randomization.
  • This study receives a high evidence rating. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Bridges to Pathways (Bridges), and not to other factors.

Intervention Examined

Bridges to Pathways

Features of the Intervention

Launched in 2013, Bridges to Pathways (Bridges) was designed as a violence prevention program for young men at high risk of violence given their involvement in the juvenile or criminal justice system and disconnection from education and employment. Bridges offered an array of services including high school diploma or GED classes, paid (subsidized) internships, mentoring, social-emotional learning (SEL) workshops using a cognitive-behavioral therapy curriculum, and intensive case management. The program was designed as a six-month model consisting of three phases. Phase I was five hours per day for five weeks and included academic enrichment, SEL workshops, and employability skills training. Individual counseling was offered if necessary. Phase II occurred during weeks 6 through 17 and included academic enrichment to work toward academic goals, SEL workshops and individual counseling, and up to 12 hours per week in a subsidized internship. In Phase III, weeks 18 through 25, it was anticipated that participants would earn their high school credential and obtain unsubsidized employment. The target population was young men (17-21 years old) who did not have a high school degree or GED and were involved with the juvenile or criminal justice system (had a history of at least one incarceration).

Features of the Study

The study is a randomized controlled trial conducted at four sites in Chicago, Illinois: Healy, Little Village, Englewood, and Roseland. A total of 480 participants were enrolled in the study between June 2015 and July 2016. Of the eligible participants, 289 were randomly assigned to the treatment group to receive Bridges services and 191 were assigned to the control group. Control participants did not receive Bridges services but could choose to engage in standard community services. In accordance with the eligibility requirements for Bridges, participants were young men (ages 17-21) without a high school degree or equivalency certificate and with a history of juvenile or criminal justice involvement. The study sample was predominantly non-white, almost three-quarters of the sample were Black (74 percent) and one-fifth were Hispanic (22 percent). The average age of the participants was 18 years and one-quarter reported having children (26 percent). The data sources included follow-up surveys that study participants completed 11 months post random assignment and data from the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH). The authors conducted statistical analyses to compare the outcomes of the treatment and control groups.

Findings

Earnings and wages

  • The study found that there were no significant differences in quarterly earnings between the treatment and control participants over the follow-up period.

Education and skills gains

  • The study did not find any significant differences between treatment and control participants at follow-up in attainment of a high school diploma/GED or attainment of a professional license/certificate.

Employment

  • The study found that treatment participants were significantly more likely than control participants to report having been employed at some point since randomization.
  • The study did not find any significant differences between treatment and control participants in current employment or current employment at an internship at follow-up.

Considerations for Interpreting the Findings

The authors note that participant engagement and retention proved to be an ongoing challenge. The providers dedicated most of their resources to relationship-building, mentoring, and helping the young men overcome barriers to service engagement/attendance. The education and employment components were either only partially implemented or were only engaged in by a small proportion of participants.

Causal Evidence Rating

The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Bridges and not to other factors.

Reviewed by CLEAR

August 2022

Topic Area