Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of Ban the Box (BTB) on employment of formerly incarcerated individuals in the public sector.
- The study used a difference-in-differences design to compare the employment probability of individuals in areas that adopted BTB policies with the employment probability of individuals in areas that did not adopt BTB policies. The authors used data from the 1997 cohort of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth and statistical models to compare the outcomes of those in the treatment and comparison conditions.
- The study found that Ban the Box policies significantly increased the likelihood of public employment.
- This study receives a moderate evidence rating. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Ban the Box (BTB), but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Ban-the-Box (BTB) Policies
Features of the Intervention
The Ban the Box (BTB) movement was started in 2003 by a civil rights organization in Oakland, California and looked to remove criminal history questions on job applications. This local movement gave rise to a national movement in later years and by April 2019 the federal government, 35 states, Washington D.C. and 150 municipalities had a BTB policy in place. BTB policies prohibit the inclusion of any questions related to criminal history on job applications for public employment. Private employers are not subject to abide by BTB policies. The policy also does not prohibit employers inquiring later about an applicant’s criminal history or conducting a criminal background check, typically at the time of a conditional job offer. These policies aim to help formerly incarcerated individuals secure employment.
Features of the Study
The study used a difference-in-differences estimation to measure the change in the probability of public employment for those with convictions in response to the BTB policy. The treatment sample consisted of 834 formerly incarcerated individuals who lived in a county or state which had implemented a BTB policy. The sample was predominantly male (70%), White (61%), with at least a high school diploma (66%), and had an average age of 28.6. The sample came from 214 counties and 32 states and Washington D.C. The comparison condition were previously incarcerated individuals living in a jurisdiction that did not have a BTB policy. The authors used individual level data from the 1997 cohort of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. The analysis focused on responses from 2005 to 2015 and only included respondents who had available baseline characteristics and geographical locations and were above the age of 25. The authors used statistical models to compare the outcomes of those in the treatment and comparison conditions.
Findings
Employment
- The study found that Ban the Box policies significantly increased the likelihood of pubilc employment by 3.8 percent.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors noted two key limitations to the study, the first being that the policies took effect following the Great Recession in a relatively tight labor market which may mean that the findings are not representative of all stages of the business cycle. The authors also note that the sample size used is relatively small; however, they conducted power analyses and survey comparisons to confirm that the data were adequate to evaluate policy impacts.
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 Ban the Box (BTB), but other factors might also have contributed.