Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Pacific Research and Evaluation. (2018). Final evaluation report: Trade Adjustment Assistance Community – round 4: Nevada Community College Consortium. Retrieved from https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/18580/NCCC%20TAACCCT%20Final%20Evaluation%20Report-Pacific%20Research%20and%20Evaluation.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Highlights
- The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Nevada Community College Consortium (NCCC) Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) grant program on education, earnings, and employment.
- Using community college data, the authors used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of students in the program to a comparison group comprised of both concurrent and historical cohorts of students.
- The study found no statistically significant relationships between NCCC and education, earnings, and employment outcomes.
- The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not include sufficient control variables. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to NCCC; other factors are likely to have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Nevada Community College Consortium (NCCC)
Features of the Intervention
The U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) program provided $1.9 billion in grants to community colleges to improve skills and support employment in high-demand industries, notably manufacturing, health care, information technology, energy, and transportation. Through four rounds of funding, DOL awarded 256 TAACCCT grants to approximately 800 educational institutions across the United States and its territories.
Nevada Community College Consortium (NCCC) received a four-year, $9.9 million TAACCT grant. The grant was administered by Western Nevada College (WNC), as the lead college and partnered with Great Basin College (GBC) and Truckee Meadows Community College (TMCC). The NCCC program was designed to create or enhance courses in four industries that included healthcare, transportation, advanced manufacturing, and Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC). Program components as part of the grant included accelerated coursework, hands-on learning with equipment, and work-based experiences such as internships. Additionally, the program included a student support component to provide academic and career guidance. The program also partnered with local industries in curriculum development, financial assistance, supplies, recruitment, and job/internship placement.
Features of the Study
Using data from each of the three colleges, the authors used a nonexperimental design with a comparison group of historical and concurrent students to assess differences between the groups on academic, earnings, and employment outcomes. The comparison group varied for each of the eight programs across the three schools. Two of the programs had a concurrent comparison group, while four included a historical comparison group. Two of the programs did not have a comparison group available and were not included. The sample sizes for the impact study varied across schools: GBC had 323 in the treatment and 131 in the comparison group; TMCC had 292 in the treatment and 33 in the comparison; and WNC had 339 in the treatment and 105 in the comparison group.
Findings
Education and skills gain
- Using community college data, in a separate analysis for each of the three community colleges as part of the NCCC, the study found no statistically significant relationships between NCCC and completion rates, credits earned, and certificates earned.
Earnings and wages
- Using data from WNC, the study found no statistically significant relationships between NCCC and earnings increases.
Employment
- Using data from WNC, the study found no statistically significant relationships between NCCC and employment or employment retention.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors did not account for other factors that could have affected the difference between the treatment and comparison groups such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, pre-intervention measures of financial disadvantage or pre-intervention measures on the outcomes. These preexisting differences between the groups—and not the NCCC program—could explain the observed differences in outcomes. The authors also used a cohort from previous enrollment years as the comparison group in some of their analyses. Because the outcome data on the two groups were collected from participants at different times, differences in outcomes could be due to time-varying factors (such as overall changes in the economy) and not the intervention. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not include sufficient control variables. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to NCCC; other factors are likely to have contributed.