Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Youth program. The author investigated similar research questions for the net impact of other programs, the profiles can be found here:
- WIA/WIOA Adult Program
- WIA/WIOA Dislocated Worker Program
- Professional-Technical Education Programs
- Worker Retraining Program
- Basic Education for Adults Programs
- Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) Programs
- Private Career School Programs
- Registered Apprenticeships
- Aerospace Training Programs
- WorkFirst Program
- Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) Program
- The study used a difference-in-differences design with a matched comparison group. Using administrative data, the author conducted statistical models to compare the outcomes of the program participants and the comparison group members one and three years after program exit.
- The study found that WIA/WIOA Youth program participants were significantly more likely to be employed than comparison group members one year after program exit.
- This study receives a moderate evidence rating. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to WIA/WIOA Youth program, but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Youth program
Features of the Intervention
The Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Youth Program is a workforce development program that provides supports and services to young people, ages 14 to 24, with educational or employment barriers. Eligible participants had to face barriers such as low-income status, experiencing homelessness, a history of foster care, offender status, pregnant or parenting, or have disabilities. For youth in schools, eligible participants had to be younger than 21. There were additional eligibility requirements for English language learners and people with basic skills deficiencies. Services included guidance and counseling, tutoring, job training, mentoring, summer employment, work experience, leadership development, supportive services, and follow-up services. The programs give priority to young people that are not attending schools, accounting for over 75% of the participants.
Features of the Study
The study used a difference-in-differences design to examine the impact of the WIA/WIOA Youth program in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. The author matched WIA/WIOA Youth program participants to similar nonparticipants using propensity scores developed from socio-demographic information. The comparison group members included individuals who registered to use Washington’s WorkSource employment centers and online job-search portals as part of the Wagner Peyser federal program, but did not participate in the WIA/WIOA Youth program. The study sample included two cohorts. The 2014-2015 cohort included 2,174 individuals (1,318 intervention and 856 comparison) and over half of the cohort was male (51%) and White (52%), with an average age of 19. The 2016-2017 cohort included 956 individuals (517 intervention and 439 comparison) and over half of the cohort was male (56%) and White (51%), with an average age of 20.
The primary data sources were administrative data from the WIA/WIOA Youth program and Washington's WorkSource employment centers and online job-search portals. The author conducted statistical models to examine differences in outcomes between the intervention and comparison groups at one year and three years after program exit. Outcomes included employment rate, quarterly hours worked, hourly wage, quarterly earnings, and quarterly Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits received.
Findings
Employment
- The study found that WIA/WIOA Youth program participants had significantly higher employment rates and more quarterly hours worked than comparison group members one year after program exit. However, the study found no significant differences between the groups three years after program exit.
Earnings and wages
- The study found no significant differences between the groups in hourly wages or quarterly earnings at one year or three years after program exit.
Public benefits receipt
- The study found no significant differences in quarterly UI benefits receipt between the groups at one year or three years after program exit.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The study reports a less stringent statistical significance level, considering p-values of less than 0.10 to be significant, though it is standard practice to consider statistical significance if the p-value is less than 0.05. Only results that demonstrate a p-value of less than 0.05 are considered statistically significant in this profile.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to WIA/WIOA Youth program, but other factors might also have contributed.