Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 521 - 530 of 589
Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The National Job Corps Study produced several reports, including a main impact report (see CLEAR profile of Schochet et al. 2001 ) that found positive impacts of Job Corps—a national vocationally…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
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…Study Type: Implementation Analysis
The Center for Employment Training (CET) was shown by rigorous research conducted in the 1980s to increase the earnings and employment prospects of disadvantaged youth. The U.S. Department of Labor…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of the Year Up program on employment, earnings, and education outcomes. Year Up is an intensive, yearlong program that provides training and…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 determine the effect of the YO! Baltimore initiative, which included a diverse set of programs offering comprehensive educational, employment preparation, support, and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The National Job Corps Study included several reports, including this longer-term impact report. The report’s objective was to examine the impact of the Job Corps program on participants’ long-term…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
This report’s objective was to examine the effectiveness of the Center for Employment Training (CET) model. Under this model, local employers help design training programs and provide them in a work…National Job Corps Study: Findings using administrative earnings records data (Schochet et al. 2003)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to estimate the impact on long-term earnings and employment of the Job Corps program, which offers intensive academic classroom instruction and vocational skills training…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report provides a high-level summary of a study on Youth Corps programs, which have engaged disadvantaged youth in community service projects since 1933. An in-depth impact analysis is…
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.