This topic area focuses on youth aged 14-24 who have not recently been in school or the labor force. In particular, CLEAR identified research that examined interventions to provide opportunities for youth to improve their labor market outcomes. This includes research describing these interventions and their implementation, along with studies of the interventions’ effectiveness.
Opportunities for Youth
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1992 - 2015.
Synthesis Reports
Synthesis reports look at the research evidence across studies within a topic area. They also highlight gaps in the literature, and suggest areas in which further research is needed.
201
Findings:
View full synthesis report: Evidence on the Effectiveness of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 81 - 90 of 106
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Becoming a Man (BAM) program on youths’ academic outcomes, including grade point averages (GPAs), course failures, and achievement test scores…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report explored and described in detail the experiences of youth in a mentoring program known as Youth Initiated Mentoring. The youth were 16- to 18-year-old school dropouts who were a part of…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study examined Youth Initiated Mentoring (YIM) within the context of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program (NGYCP). Unlike a traditional mentoring program in which mentors are assigned to…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Becoming a Man program on arrest and educational outcomes. The study was a randomized controlled trial. Eligible male youth from 18 public…Study Type: Implementation Analysis
Funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the Summer Youth Employment Initiative (SYEI) aimed to reverse the steep decline in youth employment during the recession by providing…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
Using personal stories of youth who participated in the Area IV Kansas Summer Youth Employment Program (SYEP), the author sought to describe the ecosystems of urban youth, their relationships with…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
This report presents preliminary findings for the impacts of the Year Up program, which provides technical skills training and internships to low-income adults ages 18 to 24. The authors randomly…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
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.…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study examined emerging practices used by Youth Corps sites to enhance their participants’ educational and employment opportunities. Youth Corps is a program that engages youth ages 16 to 25 in…Study Type: Implementation Analysis
The research examines the implementation of the Summer Youth Employment Initiative (SYEI). Funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, SYEI aimed to reverse the steep decline in…
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.