The registered apprenticeship and work-based learning topic area includes reviews of studies examining the effectiveness of work-based learning programs on participants’ employment and earnings outcomes. CLEAR assessed the strength of causal evidence provided in each study and summarized each study’s design, methods, findings, and the program examined.
Registered Apprenticeship and Work-Based Learning
Status: Literature reviewed in this evidence review covers 2005 – 2023. An updated review protocol has been posted as of June 2024.
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.
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 41 - 50 of 110
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Junior Apprenticeship Advantage (JAA) on education outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of individuals who…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Ready to Work (RTW) Partnership Grant Program on earnings, employment, education, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Ready to Work (RTW) Partnership Grant Program on earnings, employment, education, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Ready to Work (RTW) Partnership Grant Program on earnings and employment outcomes. This profile focuses on the Reboot Northwest (NW) program.…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Ready to Work (RTW) Partnership Grant Program on earnings and employment outcomes. This profile focuses on the Finger Lakes Hired (FLH) program…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Year Up program on long-term earnings. The study used a randomized controlled trial to assign participants to the Year Up program or the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of two approaches to subsidized employment for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients: Paid Work Experience (PWE) in the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of two approaches to subsidized employment for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients: Paid Work Experience (PWE) in the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of two approaches to subsidized employment for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients: Paid Work Experience (PWE) in the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Minnesota Subsidized and Transitional Employment Demonstration (MSTED) on participants’ employment, earnings, receipt of public benefits, and…
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.