Employment-Mod/high-No impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 121 - 130 of 153

The Employment Retention and Advancement project: How effective are different approaches aiming to increase employment retention and advancement? Final impacts for twelve models [Texas ERA—Houston] (Hendra et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to estimate the impact of pre- and post-employment job supports and intensive case management on welfare recipients’ employment and benefits receipt outcomes after four…
Working toward Wellness: Telephone care management for Medicaid recipients with depression, thirty-six months after random assignment (Kim et al. 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impacts of a telephone care management program, Working toward Wellness (WtW), on low-income depressed parents’ employment and earnings. The study used a…
A random assignment evaluation of learning communities at Kingsborough Community College: Seven years later (Weiss et al. 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study aimed to examine the impact of the Opening Doors learning communities at Kingsborough Community College in New York on progress toward completing a degree, actual completion of a degree,…
After-school programs for high school students: An evaluation of after-school matters (Hirsch et al. 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The report’s objective was to evaluate the impact of the After School Matters (ASM) apprenticeship program on academic outcomes in high school and on the likelihood of being hired for a summer or…
Job Training Partnership Act: Long-term earnings and employment outcomes (GAO/HEHS-96-40) (United States General Accounting Office 1996)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to estimate the impact of Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) programs on the long-term earnings and employment of male and female out-of-school youth and adults. This…
National evaluation of Youth Corps: Findings at follow-Up (Price et al. 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Youth Corps, a diverse set of programs that offer educational services, employment and training, and community service activities to young adults.…
Working with disadvantaged youth: Thirty-month findings from the evaluation of the Center for Employment Training replication sites (Miller et al. 2003)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
This report’s objective was to examine the effectiveness of the Center for Employment Training (CET) model. Under this model, local employers helped to design training programs and provide them in…
Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Study: FY 2005 Initiative: Final Report (Benus et al. 2008)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in North Dakota, a program that provided eligibility and reemployment case…
The Accelerated Benefits Demonstration and Evaluation Project: Impacts on health and employment at twelve months (Michalopoulos et al. 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
This is the 12-month survey impact report of the Accelerated Benefits Demonstration (ABD), an effort to provide immediate health insurance and employment and benefits counseling to new, uninsured…
A two-generational child-focused program enhanced with employment services: Eighteen-month impacts from the Kansas and Missouri sites of the enhanced services for the Hard-to-Employ Demonstration and Evaluation project (Hsueh et al. 2011)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Enhanced Early Head Start (EHS) participation on employment, earnings, public assistance receipt, and education for low-income families with young…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.