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 41 - 50 of 153

Three essays on labor and health economics (Jun, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the intervention on job mobility and compensation. This study uses a difference-in-difference design to compare the job mobility and…
Medicaid expansion and the unemployed (Buchmueller et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of state Medicaid expansion (following the Affordable Care Act) on re-employment trends among unemployed adults in expansion and non-expansion…
Evaluating two approaches to case management: Implementation, participation patterns, costs, and three-year impacts of the Columbus Welfare-to-Work Program (Scrivener & Walter, 2001)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of case management approaches on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt. This profile focuses on the comparison of participants in the…
Building a future: Interim impact findings from the YouthBuild evaluation (Miller et al., 2016)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of YouthBuild on employment, earnings, and education outcomes. The study was a randomized controlled trial that randomly assigned young adults to…
Forging a Path: Final Impacts and Costs of New York City's Young Adult Internship Program (Cummings, Farrell, & Skemer, 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Young Adult Internship Program (YAIP) on employment and earnings. The study was a randomized controlled trial that used data from the…
Vocational coaches for justice-involved emerging adults (Davis et al., 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Multisystemic Therapy for Emerging Adults (MST-EA) on employment outcomes. The study was a randomized controlled trial that assigned…
Implementation and Relative Impacts of Two Job Search Assistance Programs in New York City the Job Search Assistance Strategies Evaluation (Martinson et al., 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Back to Work (B2W) and Independent Job Search (IJS) programs on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. The study used a…
Final impact findings from the child support noncustodial parent employment demonstration (CSPED) (Cancian, Meyer, & Wood, 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Child Support Noncustodial Parent Employment Demonstration (CSPED) on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt. The study used a…
Long-term effects of a sectoral advancement strategy: Costs, benefits, and impacts from the WorkAdvance demonstration (Schaberg & Greenberg, 2020)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the WorkAdvance sectoral training program on employment and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the evaluation at the Towards Employment…
New perspectives on creating jobs: Final impacts of the next generation of subsidized employment programs (Barden et al., 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Enhanced Transitional Jobs Demonstration (ETJD) on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt in seven sites. This profile focuses on…

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.