Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of ASPIRE (Achieving Success by Promoting Readiness for Education and Employment) program on youth employment and educational activities.
- The study was a randomized control trial that compared the outcomes of youth who participated in ASPIRE to a control group who applied to the program but were not enrolled.
- The study found that the ASPIRE youth had higher part-time employment rates than the control youth after 12 months, but not after 24 months. The study found no statistically significant effects on full-time employment.
- This study receives a high evidence rating. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to ASPIRE, and not to other factors. We must note, however, that the 36-month follow-up outcomes provide causal evidence rated as low. In the case of the 36-month outcomes, this means that we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the intervention; other factors are likely to have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Achieving Success by Promoting Readiness for Education and Employment (ASPIRE)
Features of the Intervention
Jointly funded by the U.S. Department of Education, Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Labor, and the Social Security Administration, the Promising Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income (PROMISE) initiative aims to improve the educational and employment outcomes of youth with disabilities that receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The PROMISE Initiative required that demonstration projects provide a consistent and coordinated set of services focused on improving SSI youth self-sufficiency.
ASPIRE is one of the six demonstration projects of the PROMISE initiative. ASPIRE services included case management, career and work-based experiences planning assistance benefits planning, self-determination training, parent transition training, and financial literacy training. Each youth and their family participated in monthly in-person case management services to identify their needs, develop individualized goals, link them to appropriate services, and participate in career exploration activities.
The program served adolescents aged 14 to 16 receiving SSI benefits and their families. In order to meet SSI qualifications, youths must fit Social Security's definition of disability and also fall within specific income resource eligibility guidelines.
Features of the Study
The study was a randomized control trial that assigned those eligible to participate to the treatment or control group. Youth that did not participate in the ASPIRE intervention could access the existing services provided by their state transition and education systems. The primary data sources were surveys conducted at enrollment and at 12-months, 24-months, and 36-months post-enrollment. The authors used a statistical model to compare the outcomes of the intervention and control groups.
2,051 youth were randomly assigned to the ASPIRE intervention (1,033 youth) or the control group (1,018 youth). The sample for the 12-month and 24-month follow up periods included 725 intervention and 704 control youth. The 36-month follow up sample included 648 intervention and 593 control youth. The majority of the youth, aged 14-16, were male (66%) and Caucasian (63%).
Study Sites
There were 6 states that were part of the ASPIRE consortium that were included in the study:
- Arizona
- Colorado
- Montana
- North Dakota
- South Dakota
- Utah
Findings
Employment
- The study found that ASPIRE youth had a statistically significant higher part-time employment (less than 30 hours per week) rates than the control group after 12 months, but not after 24 or 36 months. The study found no statistically significant effects between participation in the ASPIRE program and full-time employment.
Education and Skills Gains
- The study suggested there was no relationship between the ASPIRE intervention and job training or vocational school attendance, attending college part-time, or attending college full-time.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The study enrolled participants over a 20-month time period. Due to implementation challenges, youth who enrolled earlier might not have received the same level of services as youth who enrolled later. As a result, estimated impacts might reflect this variation in service delivery.
Additionally, the surveys were often completed by proxy raters, rather than the youth themselves, although the percentage of surveys completed by proxy raters was similar among treatment and control groups.
For the 36-month follow-up, the outcomes are not eligible for the highest rating available for experimental designs. These outcomes had high attrition and the authors did not account for preexisting differences between the groups before program/intervention participation. These preexisting differences between the groups—and not the program/intervention— could explain the observed differences in outcomes in the 36-month follow-up.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report for the 12- and 24-month outcomes is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the overall estimated effects are attributable to ASPIRE, and not to other factors.
However, the 36-month follow-up outcomes provide causal evidence rated as low. In the case of the 36-month outcomes, this means that we are not confident that the 36-month estimated effects are attributable to the intervention; other factors are likely to have contributed.