Title,Citation,Topic_area,Study_type,Study_evidence_rating,Outcome_effectiveness,Findings,Intervention_program,Topics,Target_population,Firm_characteristics,Geographic_setting,Original_publication_date,Original_publication_link,"Review Protocol" "Synthesis Report: Reemployment Synthesis",,Reemployment,,,,"Findings: The majority of reemployment interventions reduced weeks of benefit receipt and amount of benefits paid. The reemployment interventions had varying degrees of effectiveness. The Reemployment and Eligibility Assistance (REA) program boosted short-and long-term employment and earnings. Job search assistance (JSA) services had favorable impacts on all outcomes examined, but employment and earnings impacts varied over time. Reemployment bonuses appear to work in the short term, but their long-term effects are not known. Lighter-touch interventions, such as profiling and changing employer contact requirements,yield more limited benefits.",,"Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Unemployment Insurance",Unemployed,,"United States",,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Oregon Credentials, Acceleration and Support for Employment (CASE) evaluation report: Results, key issues and implications for policy, practice and systems","Watrus, B., & Fercho, H. (2015). Oregon Credentials, Acceleration and Support for Employment (CASE) evaluation report: Results, key issues and implications for policy, practice and systems. Retrieved from https://www.roguecc.edu/Programs/CareerPathways/pdf/CASE%20final%20evaluation%20report_Final.pdf","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-No impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Credentials, Acceleration and Support for Employment (CASE) program on education and employment outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of students who were in the CASE program to a matched comparison group. The study found a positive relationship between participation in the CASE program and program completion and employment; however, the study did not include tests of statistical significance. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar or use sufficient. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the CASE program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Credentials, Acceleration and Support for Employment (CASE) Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, Other",,"United States",2020,https://www.roguecc.edu/Programs/CareerPathways/pdf/CASE%20final%20evaluation%2…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report","Klerman, J. A., Saunders, C., Dastrup, E., Epstein, Z., Walton, D., Adam, T., & Barnow, B. S. (2019). Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. [Comparison between multiple REA treatment group and single REA treatment group]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) program in four states (Indiana, New York, Washington, and Wisconsin) on people’s public benefit receipt, employment, and earnings. The authors investigated similar research questions for three other contrasts, the profiles of which are available using the study search. The authors used a randomized controlled trial to compare public benefit receipt outcomes among unemployment insurance (UI) claimants randomly assigned to states’ multiple REA treatment group as well as with the single REA treatment group. The authors drew on state administrative records from the UI benefit and case management systems for 28 weeks after random assignment. For this contrast, the study used data from New York and Washington. The study found that weeks of UI benefits were significantly lower for the multiple REA treatment group than the single REA treatment group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA program and not to other factors.","the Reemployment and Eligibility (REA) Program","RESEA Unemployment Insurance",Unemployed,,"United States",2019,https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/evaluation/pdf/REA%20Impact%20Study…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report","Klerman, J. A., Saunders, C., Dastrup, E., Epstein, Z., Walton, D., Adam, T., & Barnow, B. S. (2019). Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. [Comparison between existing REA group and partial REA group]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) program in four states (Indiana, New York, Washington, and Wisconsin) on people’s public benefit receipt, employment, and earnings. The authors investigated similar research questions for three other contrasts, the profiles of which are available using the study search. The authors used a randomized controlled trial to compare public benefit receipt and employment outcomes among unemployment insurance (UI) claimants randomly assigned to each state’s existing REA program as well as with a partial REA condition. The authors drew on state administrative records from the UI benefit and case management systems for 28 weeks after random assignment and National Directory of New Hires data for two years after random assignment. The study found that the existing REA treatment group received significantly fewer weeks of UI benefits and worked significantly more quarters than the partial REA treatment group. These findings were consistent in some of the individual states. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA program and not to other factors.","the Reemployment and Eligibility (REA) Program","RESEA Unemployment Insurance",Unemployed,,"United States",2019,https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/evaluation/pdf/REA%20Impact%20Study…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Information technology career preparation for rural areas.","Hahs-Vaughn, D. L., Swan, B., & Clark, M. H. (2019). Information technology career preparation for rural areas. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 1-13.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Florida Information Technology Careers for Rural Areas (XCEL-IT) program on education, employment, and earnings outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare the differences in outcomes between XCEL-IT program participants and a comparison group. The study found that XCEL-IT program participation was significantly related to program completion. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the XCEL-IT program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Florida Information Technology Careers for Rural Areas (XCEL-IT)","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) programs","Adult, Unemployed, Veteran or military",,"Rural, United States",2019,,"Community College Review Protocol" "Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report","Klerman, J. A., Saunders, C., Dastrup, E., Epstein, Z., Walton, D., Adam, T., & Barnow, B. S. (2019). Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. [Comparison between partial REA treatment group and control group]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) program in four states (Indiana, New York, Washington, and Wisconsin) on people’s public benefit receipt, employment, and earnings. The authors investigated similar research questions for three other contrasts, the profiles of which are available using the study search. The authors used a randomized controlled trial to compare public benefit receipt and employment outcomes among unemployment insurance (UI) claimants randomly assigned to a partial REA treatment group or a control group. The authors drew on state administrative records from the UI benefit and case management systems for 28 weeks after random assignment and National Directory of New Hires data for two years after random assignment. The study found that, across the four states, the partial REA treatment group received significantly fewer weeks of UI benefits. The study found no statistically significant differences between the groups in the number of quarters employed or longest job tenure one or two years after random assignment. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA program and not to other factors.","the Reemployment and Eligibility (REA) Program","RESEA Unemployment Insurance",Unemployed,,"United States",2019,https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/evaluation/pdf/REA%20Impact%20Study…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report","Klerman, J. A., Saunders, C., Dastrup, E., Epstein, Z., Walton, D., Adam, T., & Barnow, B. S. (2019). Evaluation of impacts of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Program: Final report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. [Comparison between existing REA services group and control group]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) program in four states on people’s public benefit receipt, employment, and earnings. The authors investigated similar research questions for three other contrasts, the profiles of which are available using the study search. The authors used a randomized controlled trial to compare the public benefit, earnings, and employment outcomes among unemployment insurance (UI) claimants randomly assigned to each state’s existing REA program or a control group. The authors drew on state administrative records from the UI benefit and case management systems for 28 weeks after random assignment and National Directory of New Hires data for two years after random assignment. The study found that, across the states, the existing REA treatment group received significantly fewer weeks and dollars of UI benefits than the control group did, and the existing REA treatment group had higher employment, longer job tenure, and higher earnings than the control group in the first or second year after random assignment. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA program and not to other factors.","the Reemployment and Eligibility (REA) Program","RESEA Unemployment Insurance",Unemployed,,"United States",2019,https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/evaluation/pdf/REA%20Impact%20Study…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Third-party evaluation of MoSTEMWINs: Implementation, outcomes, and impact","Cosgrove, J., & Cosgrove, M. (2018). Third-party evaluation of MoSTEMWINs: Implementation, outcomes, and impact. St. Louis, MO: Cosgrove & Associates, LLC.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Missouri STEM Workforce Innovation Networks (MoSTEMWINs) program on education and employment outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare education and employment outcomes of MoSTEMWINs participants to a historical comparison group. The study found that MoSTEMWINs participants were significantly more likely to complete the program and attain employment than the comparison group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the MoSTEMWINs program; other factors are likely to have contributed.",MoSTEMWINs,"Basic skills Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) programs","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, Veteran or military",,"United States",2018,http://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/10845/MoSTEMWINs%20Mid-Po…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Long-term effects of job-search assistance: Experimental evidence using administrative tax data","Manoli, D. S., Michaelides, M., & Patel, A. (2018). Long-term effects of job-search assistance: Experimental evidence using administrative tax data. (Report no. w24422). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impact of the Nevada Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) program on long-term employment, earnings, and Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefit receipt. This study was a randomized controlled trial that took place in the state of Nevada and involved new UI claimants from July to December 2009. The authors used program administrative and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) tax return data to compare outcomes of participants with outcomes of the control group for six years following the intervention. The study found that participants of the Nevada REA program experienced greater increases in employment and earnings relative to the control group for each of the six years following the intervention. Additionally, the study found that participants of the Nevada REA program experienced greater decreases in UI benefit receipt relative to the control group and lower benefit amounts in the first year after program entry. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Nevada REA program, and not to other factors. See more CLEAR profiles related to The Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment.","Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"Urban, United States",2018,http://www.daymanoli.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Manoli_Michaelides_Patel-nv…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Southern Regional Technical College TAACCCT: Healthcare Career Works! (HCW) program third-party evaluation final report","WorkED Consulting. (2018). Southern Regional Technical College TAACCCT: Healthcare Career Works! (HCW) program third-party evaluation final report. Burke, VA: WorkED Consulting.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-No impacts Education and skills gains","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Healthcare Career Works! (HCW) program on education outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare differences in education outcomes between HCW participants and a matched comparison group. The study found no statistically significant relationships between the HCW program and program completion. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the HCW program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Healthcare Career Works! (HCW)","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, Veteran or military",,"United States",2018,,"Community College Review Protocol" "Minnesota advanced manufacturing project: Final external evaluation report","Bucci, P., Evans, W.D., Friesenborg, L., Fox, D.A., Bishop, K., Balraj, N., & Jang, B. (2018). Minnesota advanced manufacturing project: Final external evaluation report. Retrieved from https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/18521/MnAMP%20Final%20Evaluation%20Report.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-Mixed impacts Education and skills gains","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Minnesota Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (MnAMP) program on education outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare education outcomes of MnAMP participants to a matched comparison group using institutional data. The study found that MnAMP program participation was significantly associated with earning fewer credits and fewer credentials relative to the comparison group. However, among students who attained credentials, participating in the MnAMP program was significantly associated with completing a one-year certificate in less time than comparison group students. The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is low because the authors used a comparison group from previous enrollment years, presenting a confounding factor. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the MnAMP program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Minnesota Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (MnAMP) Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Unemployed, Veteran or military",,"United States",2018,https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/18521/MnAMP%20Final%20Ev…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Orthotics, Prosthetics, and Pedorthics (HOPE) careers consortium: Final evaluation report","Good, K., & Yeh-Ho, H. (2017). Orthotics, Prosthetics, and Pedorthics (HOPE) careers consortium: Final evaluation report. Denver, CO: McREL International.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-No impacts Education and skills gains","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Orthotics, Prosthetics & Pedorthics (HOPE) careers consortium program on education outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare education outcomes of HOPE participants to a matched comparison group with institutional research data. The study found no significant associations between HOPE participation and program completion rates, completion of more than one certificate or degree, or furthering education status. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the HOPE program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Orthotics, Prosthetics & Pedorthics (HOPE) Careers Consortium Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Other barriers, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, Veteran or military",,"United States",2017,https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/13872/hope-consortium-tc…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Providing Public Workforce Services to Job Seekers: 30-Month Impact Findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs [Comparison Between Full-WIA Services versus Core-and-Intensive Services].","Fortson, K., Rotz, D., Burkander, P., Mastri, A., Schochet, P., Rosenberg, L., McConnell, S., & D'Amico, R. (2017). Providing Public Workforce Services to Job Seekers: 30-Month Impact Findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs (No. 42e8b3550e40408f854b966d0229c3b5). Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. [Comparison Between Full-WIA Services versus Core-and-Intensive Services]",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 30 months. This summary focuses on the comparison between the group who received the full-WIA services versus the group who received core-and-intensive services. The study was a randomized controlled trial, where customers in each local area were randomly assigned to one of three groups: full-WIA, core-and-intensive, or core. The authors compared the outcomes between the groups from baseline to 30 months after study enrollment. The study found that full-WIA customers were significantly more likely than core-and-intensive customers to complete a training program. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects are attributable to the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs and not to other factors.","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2017,https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/publications/prov…,"Review Protocol" "Final evaluation Golden Triangle Modern Manufacturing Project","Harpole, S. (2017). Final evaluation Golden Triangle Modern Manufacturing Project. SHH Consulting, LLC","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Golden Triangle Modern Manufacturing Project on education, earnings, and employment outcomes. The author used a nonexperimental design to compare outcomes of Golden Triangle Modern Manufacturing Project participants to a matched comparison group. The study found that program participation was significantly associated with increases in program retention, credential attainment, and earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is low because the author used a comparison group from previous enrollment years presenting a confounding factor. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Golden Triangle Modern Manufacturing Project; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Golden Triangle Modern Manufacturing Project","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, Low-skilled, Veteran or military",,"United States",2017,https://www.skillscommons.org/handle/taaccct/15669,"Community College Review Protocol" "Providing Public Workforce Services to Job Seekers: 30-Month Impact Findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs [Comparison Between Full-WIA Services versus Core Services].","Fortson, K., Rotz, D., Burkander, P., Mastri, A., Schochet, P., Rosenberg, L., McConnell, S., & D'Amico, R. (2017). Providing Public Workforce Services to Job Seekers: 30-Month Impact Findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs (No. 42e8b3550e40408f854b966d0229c3b5). Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. [Comparison Between Full-WIA Services versus Core Services]",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 30 months. This summary focuses on the comparison between the group who received the full-WIA services versus the group who received core services. The study was a randomized controlled trial, where customers in each local area were randomly assigned to one of three groups: full-WIA, core-and-intensive, or core. The authors compared the outcomes between the groups from baseline to 30 months after study enrollment. The study found that compared to core customers, full-WIA customers reported a higher number of hours worked, an increased likelihood to receive a credential and complete a training program, and a decreased likelihood to receive public assistance. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects are attributable to the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs and not to other factors.","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2017,https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/publications/prov…,"Review Protocol" "Providing Public Workforce Services to Job Seekers: 30-Month Impact Findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs [Comparison between Core-and-Intensive Services versus Core Services].","Fortson, K., Rotz, D., Burkander, P., Mastri, A., Schochet, P., Rosenberg, L., McConnell, S., & D'Amico, R. (2017). Providing Public Workforce Services to Job Seekers: 30-Month Impact Findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker Programs (No. 42e8b3550e40408f854b966d0229c3b5). Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. [Comparison between Core-and-Intensive Services versus Core Services]",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 30 months. This summary focuses on the comparison between the group who received core-and-intensive services versus the group who received core services. The study was a randomized controlled trial, where customers in each local area were randomly assigned to one of three groups: full-WIA, core-and-intensive, or core. The authors compared the outcomes between the groups from baseline to 30 months after study enrollment. The study found that compared to core customers, core-and-intensive customers were significantly more likely to receive a credential through a training program and have higher earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects are attributable to the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs and not to other factors.","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2017,https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/publications/prov…,"Review Protocol" "STEM-Connect at the University of Vermont, College of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences: Program evaluation final report","Farrell, R., Harris, D., Meyers, H., & Ratmeyer, S. (2017). STEM-Connect at the University of Vermont, College of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences: Program evaluation final report. Swanton, VT: Core Research and Evaluation.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the effects of the University of Vermont’s (UVM) Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) Connect program on earnings and employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of students who were enrolled in the UVM STEM-Connect program to a matched comparison group of students who took a STEM-Connect course but were not enrolled in the STEM-Connect program. The study found no statistically significant relationships between STEM-Connect program participation and average quarterly wages or employment rates. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the UVM STEM-Connect program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the UVM STEM-Connect Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) programs","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, Veteran or military",,"United States",2017,http://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/13127/STEM-Connect%20Fina…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Contra Costa Community College District Design it–Build it–Ship it (DBS) final evaluation report","Rayyes, N., Abe, Y., Sanchez, R., Lai, F., Akiya, K., Chan, V., & Jennings, E. D. (2016). Contra Costa Community College District Design it–Build it–Ship it (DBS) final evaluation report. Oakland, CA: Impaq International.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Unfavorable impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Unfavorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Design it–Build it–Ship it (DBS) program on education, employment, and earnings outcomes. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare education, earnings, and employment outcomes of DBS participants to a comparison group. The study found that DBS participation was significantly associated with lower rates of enrollment, fewer credentials/degrees earned, lower transfer rates to four-year colleges, and lower wages. The quality of causal evidence presented in this study 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 the DBS program, but other factors might also have contributed.","the Design it–Build it–Ship it (DBS) Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,https://www.impaqint.com/sites/default/files/files/IMPAQ%20FINAL%20DBS%20Evalua…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Evaluation of the Illinois Network for Advanced Manufacturing: Final Report","Westat. (2016). Evaluation of the Illinois Network for Advanced Manufacturing: Final Report. Rockville, MD: Westat & GEM Software Development, Inc.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Illinois Network for Advanced Manufacturing (INAM) program on education, earnings, and employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of students who were in the INAM program to a comparison group of students who took similar courses before the creation of INAM. Using data from college databases and the Illinois Department of Employment Security, the authors conducted statistical models to examine differences in outcomes between the groups. The study found that participation in the INAM program was significantly associated with improved rates of certificate or degree completion. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the INAM program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Illinois Network for Advanced Manufacturing (INAM)","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, Other, Veteran or military",,"United States",2016,https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315664265_Evaluation_of_the_Illinois_N…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs [Comparison betwwen Full-WIA Services versus Core Services].","McConnell, S., Fortson, K., Rotz, D., Schochet, P., Burkander, P., Rosenberg, L., Mastri, A., & D’Amico, R. (2016). Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. [Comparison betwwen Full-WIA Services versus Core Services]",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 15 months. This summary focuses on the comparison between the group who received the full-WIA services versus the group who received core services. The study was a randomized controlled trial, where customers in each local area were randomly assigned to one of three groups: full-WIA, core-and-intensive, or core. The authors compared the outcomes between the groups from baseline to 15 months after random assignment. The study found that full-WIA customers were significantly more likely than core customers to complete a training program and receive a training credential. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects are attributable to the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs and not to other factors.","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/publications/prov…,"Review Protocol" "The Green Jobs and Health Care impact evaluation: Findings from the impact study of four training programs for unemployed and disadvantaged workers","Martinson, K., Williams, J., Needels, K., Peck, L., Moulton, S., Paxton, N., Mastri, A., Copson, E., Comfort, A., & Brown-Lyons, M. (2016). The Green Jobs and Health Care impact evaluation: Findings from the impact study of four training programs for unemployed and disadvantaged workers. Retrieved from https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP-2017-07%20Findings%20from%20the%20Impact%20Study.pdf","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Grand Rapids Community College (GRCC) Pathways to Prosperity program on education, earnings, and employment outcomes. The study was a randomized controlled trial. The authors used a baseline information form, the National Directory of New Hires (NDNH), a follow-up survey, and administrative program data to compare the outcomes between the treatment and control groups over an 18-month follow-up period. The study found that the GRCC Pathways to Prosperity program had a significant positive impact on completion rates for vocational training and life skills classes, and receipt of a vocational credential. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the GRCC Pathways to Prosperity program and not to other factors.","the Grand Rapids Community College (GRCC) Pathways to Prosperity Program","Basic skills Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Justice-involved, Other barriers, Unemployed, Low income",,"United States",2016,https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP-2017-07%20Findings%20f…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs [Comparison between Core-and-Intensive Services versus Core Services].","McConnell, S., Fortson, K., Rotz, D., Schochet, P., Burkander, P., Rosenberg, L., Mastri, A., & D’Amico, R. (2016). Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs.  Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research. [Comparison between Core-and-Intensive Services versus Core Services]",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 15 months. This summary focuses on the comparison between the group who received core-and-intensive services versus the group who received core services. The study was a randomized controlled trial, where customers in each local area were randomly assigned to one of three groups: full-WIA, core-and-intensive, or core. The authors compared the outcomes between the groups from baseline to 15 months after random assignment. The study found that core-and-intensive customers were significantly more likely than core customers to complete a training program, receive a training credential, and have higher earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects are attributable to the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs and not to other factors.","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/publications/prov…,"Review Protocol" "Effects of the unemployment insurance work test on long-term employment outcomes.","Lachowska, M., Meral, M., & Woodbury, S.A. (2016). Effects of the unemployment insurance work test on long-term employment outcomes. Labour Economics, 41, 246–265.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of more-stringent work search requirements for unemployment insurance (UI) claimants on earnings, employment, and UI benefit receipt outcomes over a nine-year follow-up period. This study extended the work of Johnson and Klepinger (1991), the CLEAR profile of which is available here. The CLEAR profile of a related study, Lachowska et al. (2015), is available here. The study examined data from a randomized controlled trial conducted in the 1980s in Washington State. UI claimants were randomly assigned to one of four groups, each with different work search requirements and/or verification of that work search. The authors used administrative data to compare the outcomes of the groups up to nine years after the initial UI claims. The study found that the groups with more-stringent work search requirements were more likely to be employed than the group with less-stringent requirements in the first year following their claims. They also received UI benefits payments for fewer weeks, exhausted UI benefits at a lower rate, and received fewer conditional payments in the year following their initial UI claims. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the more stringent work search requirements, and not to other factors.","More stringent work search requirements","RESEA Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Third-party evaluation of implementation & impact of the Southwest Missouri Public Safety and Emergency Medical Initiative TAACCCT grant.","Cosgrove & Associates. (2016). Third-party evaluation of implementation & impact of the Southwest Missouri Public Safety and Emergency Medical Initiative TAACCCT grant. St. Louis, MO: Cosgrove & Associates.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Crowder College’s enhanced Public Safety and Emergency Medical Initiative (PSP) program on education and employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of students who were in Crowder College’s enhanced PSP program to a comparison group of students who were not enrolled in the program. The study found that participation in the PSP program was significantly associated with higher program completion and employment rates than the comparison group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Crowder College’s enhanced PSP program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Crowder College Public Safety and Emergency Medical Initiative (PSP) Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Other barriers, Unemployed, Low-skilled",,"United States",2016,https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/9128/Crowder%20College_P…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Final evaluation of Southwest Virginia Community College’s PluggedInVA TAACCCT Grant initiative","Topper, A., Munn, W., Bor, E., Clery, S., & Smith, B. (2016). Final evaluation of Southwest Virginia Community College’s PluggedInVA TAACCCT Grant initiative. Retrieved from: https://www.skillscommons.org//handle/taaccct/15650","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-No impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the PluggedInVA (PIVA) program on education and employment outcomes. Using college administrative and state workforce data, the authors conducted a nonexperimental study to compare outcomes between students in the PIVA program with a comparison group of non-participating students. The study found no statistically significant relationships between participation in the PIVA program and education or employment outcomes. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure the groups being compared were similar before the intervention or include sufficient control variables. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to PluggedInVA; other factors are likely to have contributed.","PluggedInVA (PIVA)","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Unemployed, Other",,"United States",2016,https://www.skillscommons.org//handle/taaccct/15650,"Community College Review Protocol" "Third party evaluation of MoManufacturingWINS: Implementation, outcomes, and impact","Cosgrove, J. J., Cosgrove, M. S., & Bragg, D. D. (2016). Third party evaluation of MoManufacturingWINs: Implementation, outcomes, and impact. St. Louis, MO: Cosgrove & Associates and Bragg & Associates.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Missouri’s Manufacturing Workforce Innovation Networks(MMW) program on student education and employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of students who were in MMW to a comparison group of students in other manufacturing-technology related programs. The study found that MMW participation was significantly associated with higher retention and employment rates. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention and they did not include sufficient controls. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to MMW; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Missouri’s Manufacturing Workforce Innovation Networks (MMW)","Basic skills Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Unemployed, Other, Low-skilled, Veteran or military",,"United States",2016,https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/10116/ThirdPartyFinalEva…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training II Grant Program (TAACCCT II): Summative Evaluation of the University of District of Columbia, Community College’s Transportation Academy","Yoder, B., & Ryland, A. (2016). Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training II Grant Program (TAACCCT II): Summative Evaluation of the University of District of Columbia, Community College’s Transportation Academy. Retrieved from https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/15654/University%20of%20the%20District%20of%20Columbia%20-%20Final%20Evaluation%20-%202017.01.05.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Low-No impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the TAACCCT funded Transportation Academy program on education, earnings, and employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare education, earnings, and employment outcomes of Transportation Academy participants to a matched comparison group from three different institutional data sources. The study did not find a significant association between participation in the Transportation Academy program and education, earnings, or employment outcomes. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Transportation Academy program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Transportation Academy Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Unemployed, Other",,"United States",2016,https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/15654/University%20of%20…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Final evaluation report: Summative evaluation TAACCCT round 2 accelerated, blended – online, 2 + 2 TAACCCT training project","Franco, E. O. (2016). Final evaluation report: Summative evaluation TAACCCT round 2 accelerated, blended – online, 2 + 2 TAACCCT training project. Cayey, PR: Colegio Universitario de San Juan.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Colegio Universitario de San Juan’s (CUSJ) modified electronics, engineering, and technology programs on education outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare education outcomes of CUSJ participants to a comparison group. Using CUSJ’s embedded course assessments, the author conducted statistical tests to examine differences between the groups. The study found that CUSJ participation was significantly associated with higher approval rates (defined as passing a course). The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not use sufficient controls in their analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the CUSJ course modifications; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Colegio Universitario de San Juan’s (CUSJ) Modified Courses","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) programs","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,https://www.skillscommons.org/handle/taaccct/15668,"Community College Review Protocol" "The labor market effects of U.S. reemployment programs during the Great Recession","Michaelides, M., & Mueser, P. (2016). The labor market effects of U.S. reemployment programs during the Great Recession. (Working paper 08-2015). Nicosia, Cyprus: University of Cyprus, Department of Economics.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Florida’s Priority Reemployment Services (PREP) program on Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants’ reemployment rates, earnings, and receipt of UI benefits. The study was a randomized controlled trial. UI claimants were randomly assigned to either a treatment group that could receive PREP services, another treatment group that could receive Reemployment Eligibility and Assessment (REA) services, or a control group that had access to neither. The authors examined administrative data from Florida’s UI claims and wage records. The study found that the PREP group had significantly higher reemployment rates and lower UI benefit receipt but had similar earnings as the control group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the PREP program, and not to other factors. The study also examined the impact of Florida’s REA program compared with the control group. CLEAR’s profile of that study is available here.","Profiling, Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,http://papers.econ.ucy.ac.cy/RePEc/papers/08-15.pdf,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Final evaluation report: Implementation and outcomes of Credentials to Careers","Skilton-Sylvester, P., Myran, S., Myran, G., Ross, S., & Williams, M. (2016). Final evaluation report: Implementation and outcomes of Credentials to Careers. Canadian Lakes, MI: Myran & Associates LLC.","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Credentials to Careers (C2C) program on earnings. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare outcomes of C2C participants to a matched comparison group using data provided by the college. The study found that C2C program participation was significantly associated with a larger average percent increase in wages relative to the comparison group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not use sufficient controls in their analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the C2C program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Credentials to Careers (C2C) Program","Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) programs","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/15623/Final%20C2C%20Impl…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs [Comparison between Full-WIA Services versus Core-and-Intensive Services].","McConnell, S., Fortson, K., Rotz, D., Schochet, P., Burkander, P., Rosenberg, L., Mastri, A., & D’Amico, R. (2016). Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 15 months. This summary focuses on the comparison between the group who received the full-WIA services versus the group who received core-and-intensive services. The study was a randomized controlled trial, where customers in each local area were randomly assigned to one of three groups: full-WIA, core-and-intensive, or core. The authors compared the outcomes between the groups from baseline to 15 months after random assignment. The study found that full-WIA customers were significantly more likely than core-and-intensive customers to complete a training program and receive a training credential. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects are attributable to the Adult and Dislocated Worker programs and not to other factors.","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2016,https://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our-publications-and-findings/publications/prov…,"Review Protocol" "A controlled trial of supported employment for people with severe mental illness and justice involvement","Bond, G. R., Kim, S. J., Becker, D. R., Swanson, S. J., Drake, R. E., Krzos, I. M., . . . Frounfelker, R. L. (2015). A controlled trial of supported employment for people with severe mental illness and justice involvement. Psychiatric Services, 66(10), 1027-1034.",Reentry,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) intervention on employment and recidivism outcomes relative to a job club program called Work Choice. The authors used an experimental design to estimate the impact of IPS and analyzed data from people’s self-reports on forms and interviews and electronic medical and employment records. The authors found positive statistically significant impacts of IPS on employment compared with the job club program. The authors found no statistically significant impacts of IPS on recidivism. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the IPS intervention and not to other factors.","the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) intervention","Health Reentry","Justice-involved, Unemployed",,"United States",2015,https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201400510,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Can compulsory dialogues nudge sick-listed workers back to work?","Markussen, S., Røed, K., & Schreiner, R. C. (2015). Can compulsory dialogues nudge sick-listed workers back to work? (IZA Discussion Paper No. 9090). Bonn, Germany: Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).","Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of a compulsory dialogue meeting (DM) on the return to partial or full-time employment for long-term sick-listed workers in Norway. The authors compared differences in outcomes between long-term sick-listed workers whose absence started in July 2004 through June 2006 and those whose absence started in January 2009 through December 2010, during which time the DM program became compulsory. The authors used salary and social insurance data from the Norwegian Social Security Administration (SSA) to measure program impacts. The study found that increasing the probability of a sick-listed worker attending a DM resulted in a significant increase in base salary, for those who returned to full-time employment, of $1,436. It also resulted in a significantly lower probability of receiving temporary disability benefits two years later for those who returned to full-time employment (1.4 percent) and those who returned to either part- or full-time employment (2.3 percent). The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not establish the comparability of the treatment and comparison groups. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to compulsory DMs; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Dialogue Meeting (DM)","Behavioral Interventions","Unemployed, Adult",,International,2015,http://ftp.iza.org/dp9090.pdf,"Behavioral Insights Review Protocol" "Job rationing in recessions: evidence from work-search requirements.","Toohey, D. (2015). Job rationing in recessions: evidence from work-search requirements. Newark, Delaware: University of Delaware.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Employment-Low-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of required contacts with employers on Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants’ employment and UI benefit receipt. The study used a nonexperimental design in which the author compared the labor market outcomes of UI claimants in different states who were subject to different job search requirements between 2001 and 2013. The study found that an increase in the number of required contacts with employers was associated with decreases in the unemployment rate. Accounting for expected employment growth along with changes in the number of required contacts also decreased the unemployment rate. The study found no statistically significant relationships between the number of required contacts and UI claim duration. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not account for differences in the age of UI claimants in the analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to required contacts with employers; other factors are likely to have contributed.","More stringent work search requirements","RESEA Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2015,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Net impact study on annual earnings for the training benefits program 2002-2012","Aviles, G., Bordelon, C., Greenwell, A., Pham, L., Sinkler, A., & Stromsdorfer, E. (2015). Net impact study on annual earnings for the training benefits program 2002-2012. Olympia, WA: Washington State Employment Security Department",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to evaluate the impact and cost-benefit of the Training Benefits program on participants’ employment, earnings, and unemployment benefits. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of individuals who participated in the program with those who did not, based on data from the Washington Employment Security Department. Using several demographic characteristics, the authors created a matched comparison group to test the impact of the program on time employed, annual earnings, and receipt of unemployment benefits. The study found that program participation was associated with a decrease in employment and earnings in early follow up years, but an increase in employment and earnings in later years. However, the study did not include tests of statistical significance. The quality of causal evidence provided in this study is moderate because it is based on a well-implemented non-experimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Training Benefits program, but other factors might have also contributed.","Training Benefits (TB) Program","Unemployment Insurance Work based and other occupational training","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2015,,"Review Protocol" "The effects of eliminating the work search requirement on job match quality and other long-term employment outcomes.","Lachowska, M., Meral, M., & Woodbury, S.A. (2015). The effects of eliminating the work search requirement on job match quality and other long-term employment outcomes. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Unfavorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Unfavorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of less-stringent work search requirements for unemployment insurance (UI) claimants on earnings, employment, and UI benefit receipt over a nine-year follow-up period. This study extended the work of Johnson and Klepinger (1991), the CLEAR profile of which is available here. The CLEAR profile of a related study, Lachowska et al. (2016), is available here. The study examined data from a randomized controlled trial conducted in the 1980s in Washington State. UI claimants were randomly assigned to one of four groups, each with different work search requirements and/or verification of that work search. The authors used administrative data to compare the outcomes of the groups up to nine years after the initial UI claims. The study found that the group with less-stringent work-search requirements was significantly less likely to be employed in the first quarter following their claims, compared with the groups with more-stringent requirements. In addition, they received more UI benefit payments for more weeks and exhausted UI benefits at a higher rate during the year following their initial claims. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the less-stringent work search requirements, and not to other factors.","Less stringent work search requirements","RESEA Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2015,https://www.dol.gov/asp/evaluation/completed-studies/2013-2014-scholar-programs…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of MoHealthWINS outcomes and impact","Cosgrove, J. J., Cosgrove, M. S., & Bragg, D. D. (2015). Evaluation of MoHealthWINS outcomes and impact. Retrieved from https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/5125/SEPTEMBER%202015%20FINAL%20VERSION%20OF%20MHW%20OUTCOME%20IMPACT%20EVALUATION%20REPORT.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y","Community College","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to assess the relationship between the MoHealthWINS program and education and employment outcomes. The study used a nonexperimental design, where the program participants were compared to a matched comparison group. Using college administrative data, state employment data, and employer data, the authors compared the program completion and employment rates between the treatment and comparison group. The study found a significant relationship between program participation and the likelihood to complete the program and be employed post-program completion. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention or include sufficient control variables. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to MoHealthWINS program; other factors are likely to have contributed.",MoHealthWINS,"Capacity building programs Community college education and other classroom training","Adult, Unemployed, Low-skilled, Veteran or military",,"United States",2015,https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/5125/SEPTEMBER%202015%20…,"Community College Review Protocol" "Learning about job search: A field experiment with job seekers in Germany","Altmann, S., Falk, A., Jäger, S., & Zimmermann, F. (2015). Learning about job search: A field experiment with job seekers in Germany. Unpublished manuscript.","Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine whether providing job search information to unemployed job seekers affected their labor market outcomes. German citizens identified as unemployed were randomly assigned to the treatment group, which was mailed an informational brochure, or to the control group, which was not mailed a brochure. The Integrated Employment Biographies, an administrative database available through the German Federal Employment Agency, was the primary data source for the study. The study did not find any statistically significant effects of the brochure on the employment or earnings outcomes of the treatment group relative to the control group. However, the study did find positive impacts of the brochure on earnings and employment outcomes for the subgroup of individuals who had been identified as being at risk of long-term unemployment. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the informational brochure, and not to other factors.",,"Job search assistance and supportive services Behavioral interventions","Adult, Unemployed",,International,2015,https://www.cens.uni-bonn.de/team/board/armin-falk/afjz-job-search-dp-150509.pdf,"Behavioral Insights Review Protocol" "Reference-dependent job search: Evidence from Hungary","DellaVigna, S., Lindner, A., Reizer, B., & Schmieder, J. (2014). Reference-dependent job search: Evidence from Hungary. Unpublished working paper.","Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to empirically test a behavioral model of job search using a reform in Hungary’s Unemployment Insurance (UI) program. The authors compared rates of exit from unemployment in groups of claimants who entered UI before and after the reform’s implementation in November 2005. The authors used social security and UI data from Hungary’s Institute of Economics and National Employment Service. The study found support for the behavioral job search model and theorized that approximately budget-neutral transitions to two-step UI systems could speed claimants’ exit out of unemployment. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because it cannot account for factors other than the UI program that also changed over the period of study and could also have influenced the outcomes of interest. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to Hungary’s 2005 UI reform; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Hungary’s Unemployment Insurance Reform","Unemployment Insurance Behavioral Interventions Job search assistance and supportive services","Adult, Unemployed, Dislocated or displaced worker",,International,2014,http://eml.berkeley.edu/~sdellavi/wp/HungaryUIRD_wp_2014_07_20.pdf,"Behavioral Insights Review Protocol" "Work-related CBT versus vocational services as usual for unemployed persons with social anxiety disorder: A randomized controlled pilot trial.","Himle, J., Bybee, D., Steinberger, E., Laviolette, W., Weaver, A., Vlnka, S., Golenberg, Z., Levine, D., Heimberg, R., & O’Donnell, L. (2014). Work-related CBT versus vocational services as usual for unemployed persons with social anxiety disorder: A randomized controlled pilot trial. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 63, 169-176.","Low-Income Adults","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the effect of group-based, work-related cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) on work-related outcomes of unemployed, homeless people diagnosed with social anxiety disorder. The study was a randomized controlled trial. The authors randomly assigned eligible participants to either a treatment group, which received work-related CBT and vocational services, or to a control group, which received vocational services alone. Trained independent evaluators collected the self-reported data used in the study. The study found that participants assigned to the treatment group had higher job search self-efficacy and activity than participants assigned to the control group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects on employment are attributable to work-based CBT; other factors are likely to have contributed.",,"Job search assistance and supportive services","Unemployed, Low income, Homeless",,"United States",2014,,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Does federally-funded job training work? Nonexperimental estimates of WIA training impacts using longitudinal data on workers and firms","Andersson, F., Holzer, H. J., Lane, J. I., Rosenblum, D., & Smith, J. (2013). Does federally-funded job training work? Nonexperimental estimates of WIA training impacts using longitudinal data on workers and firms (Discussion paper no. 7621). Bonn, Germany: IZA. [Adult Program ONLY]","Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) adult program’s training services on the employment and earnings of low-income adults. The authors investigated similar research questions in another study, whose profile can be found [here]. The other study examined the effects of WIA’s dislocated worker program’s training services on the employment and earnings of dislocated workers. The authors used statistical analysis to compare the earnings and employment outcomes of WIA-registered low-income adults who received training services to the outcomes of those who were registered in WIA, but did not receive training services. The study found that employment was significantly lower for the treatment group than it was for the comparison group in the first quarters after WIA registration (Quarters 1 and 2 in State A and Quarters 1–4 in State B), but later became and generally stayed significantly higher in Quarters 6 through 12 in both states. Total earnings in the third year after WIA registration were significantly higher for the treatment group than the comparison group. People in the treatment group earned $1,257 and $1,703 more than those in the comparison group in State A and State B, respectively. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented nonexperimental design; this is the highest causal evidence rating possible for a nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the WIA adult program training services, but other factors might also have contributed to the effects.","Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Program Training Services","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Unemployed, Low income",,"United States",2013,https://www.nber.org/papers/w19446.pdf,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Is Internet job search still ineffective?","Kuhn, P., & Mansour, H. (2013). Is Internet job search still ineffective? The Economic Journal, 124 (December), 1213-1233.",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Employment-Low-Mixed impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to determine whether the finding from a previous study that Internet job searches increased unemployment duration was upheld using more recent data. Specifically, the authors compared the impact of Internet job searches on unemployment duration using survey data from 2005–2008 to the estimated impact from a prior study on Internet job searches that used 1998–2001 survey data. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the impacts of Internet job searches on the duration of unemployment at two different time periods. For the first time period, the authors analyzed data from the United States Current Population Survey (CPS) from 1998 to 2001. For the second time period, the authors used data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY) 1997 sample, covering 2005 to 2008. The study found that in the earlier period (1998–2001) unemployed adults who used the Internet for any job search activities were unemployed 22 percent longer than those who did not use the Internet, whereas in the later period (2005–2008) young adults who used the Internet for job search activities were reemployed 25 percent faster than comparable workers who did not use the Internet as part of their job search strategy. Thus, the study found that the effect of using the Internet as part of a job search strategy on unemployment durations reversed in the 10 years covered by the two studies. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not account for other factors that might have affected unemployment duration. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the use of Internet search activities; other factors might have contributed.",,"Job search assistance and supportive services","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2013,,"Review Protocol" "Can post-employment services combined with financial incentives improve employment retention for welfare recipients?","Dorsett, R., Hendra, R., Robins, P. K., & Williams, S. (2013). Can post-employment services combined with financial incentives improve employment retention for welfare recipients? Evidence from the Texas Employment Retention and Advancement evaluation. (No. 1413-13). Madison, WI: Institute for Research on Poverty.",,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Texas Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) program on employment entry and retention in two sites: Corpus Christi and Fort Worth. The authors conducted a non-experimental study using data originally collected for a randomized controlled trial. They analyzed survey data and state Unemployment Insurance records to estimate the effects of the ERA program on employment entry and retention. The study found a positive and statistically significant relationship between participation in the ERA program and the likelihood of transitioning into employment and between ERA and employment retention at the Corpus Christi site. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not account for differences in wages or employment between the ERA and comparison groups before the beginning of the ERA program. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Texas ERA program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Texas Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA)","Job search assistance and supportive services Other wages and benefits","Unemployed, Low income, Female",,"United States",2013,http://www.niesr.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publications/dp409_0.pdf,"Review Protocol" "Stimulating opportunity: An evaluation of ARRA-funded subsidized employment programs","Roder, A. & Elliott, M. (2013). Stimulating opportunity: An evaluation of ARRA-funded subsidized employment programs. New York: Economic Mobility Corporation. Retrieved from http://economicmobilitycorp.org/uploads/stimulating-opportunity-full-report.pdf.","Low-Income Adults","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of subsidized employment programs in five states on the employment and earnings outcomes of unemployed people. The focus of this profile is Florida’s Back to Work program, which placed participants in partially subsidized jobs in which employers were expected to cover 5 to 20 percent of the employee’s wages for up to one year. For the evaluation of the Florida Back to Work program, the authors used administrative wage data to compare the employment and earnings outcomes of program participants with the employment and earnings outcomes of a similar group of people who were not placed in subsidized employment. The study found that participants in Florida Back to Work were more likely to be employed and earned $1,921 more in the year following the program than those in the comparison group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not include sufficient controls in their analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the subsidized employment program. Other factors are likely to have contributed.","Florida's Back to Work Program","Other employment and reemployment","Unemployed, Low income",,"United States",2013,http://economicmobilitycorp.org/uploads/stimulating-opportunity-full-report.pdf,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Notes on behavioral economics and labor market policy","Babcock, L., Congdon, W., Katz, L., & Mullainathan, S. (2012). Notes on behavioral economics and labor market policy. IZA Journal of Labor Policy, 1(1), 1-14.","Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Descriptive Analysis",,,"Summary: The article’s objective was to assess how behavioral economics can inform labor policy reforms to increase policy efficiency. The authors used behavioral economic theory to explain barriers to successful policies related to unemployment insurance, job search assistance, and job training. They also proposed policy solutions to overcome these barriers. For unemployment insurance, the authors recommended implementing wage loss insurance that subsidizes reemployment wages to counteract individuals’ tendencies to set high reservation wages when seeking employment, which slows their return to work. They also recommended providing small, immediate, and high frequency reminders and incentives to search for work. To increase participation in job search assistance, the authors recommended policies that automatically put unemployed individuals into services and/or to make job search assistance more user-friendly and personalized. Similarly, to increase participation in job training programs, the authors recommended streamlining or simplifying training offerings and providing guidance to reduce the burden on the prospective users to select and start a program. Simplifying the decision-making process by creating a competitive training market could also be beneficial to prospective users.",,"Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance Other training and education","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2012,,"Behavioral Insights Review Protocol" "Returning to work after prison: Final results from the Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration","Jacobs, E. (2012). Returning to work after prison: Final results from the Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration. New York: MDRC.","Low-Income Adults","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration (TJRD) on ex-offenders’ employment and wages. The author used a randomized controlled trial to assign former prisoners to the transitional jobs program or to a group that was offered job search assistance and compared the two groups’ employment and earnings outcomes two years after random assignment, controlling for participants’ characteristics before random assignment. The study found that members of the transitional jobs group were significantly more likely (by 29 percentage points) than control group members to be employed at any point during the two years after random assignment. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the TJRD, and not to other factors.","the Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration (TJRD)","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Reentry","Justice-involved, Unemployed, Male",,"United States",2012,http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/full_626.pdf,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Nevada","Michaelides, M., Poe-Yamagata, E., Benus, J., & Tirumalasetti, D. (2012). Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Nevada. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International, LLC.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to estimate the impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Nevada on Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits receipt, employment, and earnings after six quarters.  The study was a randomized controlled trial. Of some 33,000 first-time UI claimants eligible for the study, about 5,100 were randomly assigned to the treatment group, which had to take part in REA and reemployment services (RES) to retain UI eligibility, and the rest were randomly assigned to the control group, which was not required to participate in such services. The authors compared state administrative records on UI payments and covered employment of the two groups to estimate the program’s effectiveness. The study found that, in the first six calendar quarters following the initial claim, REA services substantially reduced the average duration and amount of UI benefits receipt, increased employment rates, and increased earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA services, and not other factors.","Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2012,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_08_REA_Nevada_Foll…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative","Poe-Yamagata, E., Benus, J., Bill, N., Carrington, H., Michaelides, M., & Shen, T. (2011). Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [Nevada sample]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Nevada, a program that provided eligibility and reemployment case management services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants, on duration and amount of UI benefits receipt. The study was a randomized controlled trial. Of some 33,000 first-time UI claimants eligible for the study, about 5,100 were randomly assigned to the treatment group, which had to take part in REA and reemployment services (RES) to retain UI eligibility, and the rest were randomly assigned to the control group, which was not required to participate in such services. The authors compared state administrative records on UI benefits to estimate the program’s effectiveness. The study found statistically significant reductions in weeks of UI benefits receipt, total amount of UI benefits received, total number of weeks receiving UI benefits, and the probability of benefits exhaustion for the treatment group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA initiative, and not to other factors.","Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2011,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_08_Impact_of_the_R…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative","Poe-Yamagata, E., Benus, J., Bill, N., Carrington, H., Michaelides, M., & Shen, T. (2011). Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [Illinois sample]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Illinois, a program that provided eligibility and reemployment case management services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants, on duration and amount of UI benefits receipt. The study was a randomized controlled trial that assigned 3,112 eligible UI claimants to the treatment or control group. Those in the treatment group were required to participate in REA services to retain their UI eligibility. Data for the analysis came from UI administrative records. The study found no statistically significant impacts on any UI benefits receipt outcomes examined. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA initiative, and not to other factors.","Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed, High-skilled",,"United States",2011,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_08_Impact_of_the_R…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative","Poe-Yamagata, E., Benus, J., Bill, N., Carrington, H., Michaelides, M., & Shen, T. (2011). Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [Idaho sample]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Idaho, a program that provided eligibility and reemployment case management services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants, on duration and amount of UI benefits receipt. The study randomly assigned 18,156 eligible claimants to either the treatment group, which was eligible for REA services, or the control group, which was not offered REA services. Within the treatment group, claimants were randomly assigned either to receive a letter requiring them to enter work search activities into an online system, or to receive both the letter and an in-person interview. Data for the analysis comes from UI administrative records. The study found statistically significant reductions in weeks of UI benefits receipt, total amount of UI benefits received, total number of weeks receiving UI benefits, and the probability of benefits exhaustion for the treatment group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA initiative, and not to other factors.","Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2011,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_08_Impact_of_the_R…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Workforce Investment Act training for older workers: Toward a better understanding of older worker needs during the economic recovery (ETA Occasional Paper 2011-10).","Zhang, T. (2011). Workforce Investment Act training for older workers: Toward a better understanding of older worker needs during the economic recovery (ETA Occasional Paper 2011-10). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration.","Older Workers","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Employment-Low-Mixed impacts Employment","Summary: The study examined the impacts of various Workforce Investment Act (WIA) programs and services on the employment rates of older participants who exited these programs. The study used a statistical model (fixed and random effect) to estimate the correlation between WIA programs and services and the Entered Employment Rate one quarter after participants age 55 and older exited the programs. The study used the WIA Standardized Record Data from January 1, 2006, to September 30, 2007, and data on state-level unemployment rates and trends from a Bureau of Labor Statistics data set. The study found that some characteristics of the WIA training programs and services are associated with higher employment rates, while other characteristics are associated with lower employment rates. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the study did not demonstrate that participants across different training programs were similar before the study and did not account for possible differences in the groups. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the WIA programs and services; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) training for older workers","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2011,,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative","Poe-Yamagata, E., Benus, J., Bill, N., Carrington, H., Michaelides, M., & Shen, T. (2011). Impact of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment Initiative. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [Florida sample]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Florida, a program that provided eligibility and reemployment case management services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants, on UI benefits receipt, employment, and earnings. The study randomly assigned 80,531 eligible UI claimants to either the treatment group or the control group. Those in the treatment group were required to participate in REA services to retain their UI eligibility. Data for the analysis came from UI administrative and wage records.  The study found statistically significant reductions in weeks of UI benefits receipt, total amount of UI benefits received, and the probability of benefits exhaustion for the REA treatment group. In addition, participants in REA had a statistically significantly higher probability of employment and earnings over the four follow-up quarters. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the REA initiative, and not to other factors.","Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2011,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_08_Impact_of_the_R…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Earnings progression among workforce development participants: Evidence from Washington State.","Chrisinger, C.K. (2011). Earnings progression among workforce development participants: Evidence from Washington State. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration.","Job Search Assistance, Low-Income Adults","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult Program on the earnings of low-income adults ages 18 to 64 in Washington State. The author assigned workers to the treatment group if they received employment-related services through the WIA Adult Program from January 2002 to June 2008. Workers who participated in the Labor Exchange program during this time comprised the comparison group. The study found no statistically significant relationships between receiving services through the WIA Adult Program and quarterly earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before program participation. This means we would not be confident that the estimated effects would be attributable to the WIA Adult Program; however, the study did not find statistically significant effects.","the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult Program","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Job search assistance and supportive services Labor Exchange Other employment and reemployment Other training and education Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Unemployed, Low income",,"United States",2011,https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2011-11.pdf,"Job Search Assistance, Low-Income Adults Review Protocol" "Effect of job skills training on employment and job seeking behaviors in an American Indian substance abuse treatment sample.","Foley, K., Pallas, D., Forcehimes, A., Houck, J., Bogenschutz, M., Keyser-Marcus, L., & Svikis, D. (2010). Effect of job skills training on employment and job seeking behaviors in an American Indian substance abuse treatment sample. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 33(2010), 181-192.","Job Search Assistance","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Unfavorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of workshops for job seekers on employment and training outcomes. The study used a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, in which eligible participants were randomly assigned to the treatment group, which could participate in the job seeker workshops, or the control group, which could not participate. The authors used follow-up surveys three and six months after random assignment to measure self-reported employment and training outcomes. The study found that three months after workshop participation, the treatment group spent fewer hours on training activities than the control group; the study did not find any significant impacts of the job seekers’ workshop on the number of hours spent on work or percentage of each group who were employed at the three-month follow-up. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high for the percentage employed and hours spent on work and training outcomes collected at the three-month follow-up because those outcomes were based on a well-implemented RCT with low attrition. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the job seekers’ workshop, and not to other factors. However, the quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low for the days to employment outcomes at the three-month follow-up and all outcomes at the six-month follow-up. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the job seekers’ workshop; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Job Seekers’ Workshop","Job search assistance and supportive services","Other barriers, Unemployed, American Indian or Alaska Native",,"United States",2010,,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Toward reduced poverty across generations: Early findings from New York City’s conditional cash transfer program","Riccio, J., Dechausay, N., Greenberg, D., Miller, C., Rucks, Z., and Verma, N. (2010). Toward reduced poverty across generations: Early findings from New York City’s conditional cash transfer program. New York: MDRC.","Low-Income Adults","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Education and skills gains-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Family Rewards, an experimental privately funded conditional cash transfer program in New York City, on earnings, employment, public benefits receipt, and education. The study was based on a randomized controlled trial and estimated the effect of the Family Rewards program on low-income families. The authors used New York City and New York State administrative data to compare average outcomes among those offered access to the program against the average outcomes of those excluded, after adjusting for chance initial differences between the groups. The study found that, on average, the Family Rewards program decreased the likelihood of ever being employed at a job covered by unemployment insurance (UI) in the first year. However, the Family Rewards program increased the likelihood of being employed at a job not covered by UI after 18 months, total monthly income after 18 months, and the likelihood that adult recipients had received an associate’s degree after 18 months. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Family Rewards program, and not to other factors.","the Family Rewards Program","Other employment and reemployment Other training and education Unemployment Insurance","Unemployed, Low income, Parent",,"United States",2010,http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/FamRewards2010ONYC%20FULL%20Report%20RE…,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Assessment of the impact of WorkSource job search services","Lee, K., Weeks, G., Bodeutsch, G., Clay-Poole, S., Garoflo, T., Petritz, M., Stromsdorfer, E., Field, J., Paterson, T., & Jennings, K. (2009). Assessment of the impact of WorkSource job search services. Washington: Washington State Employment Security Department Labor Market and Economic Analysis.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of Washington State WorkSource job search services. WorkSource services included staff-assisted job matching, provision of labor market information, job search and placement assistance, and initial assessments. Using a nonexperimental design, the authors compared the employment and earnings of Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants who received at least one WorkSource service with those of UI claimants who did not receive any WorkSource services using state UI administrative records for more than 64,000 Washington State UI claimants with no UI-reported wage earnings in the third quarter of 2007. The study found that WorkSource services were associated with a higher probability of employment and higher earnings growth for men and women who were intermittently (rather than continuously) employed in the baseline period. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to WorkSource services. Other factors are likely to have contributed.","JSA services","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services","Unemployed, Female, Male",,"United States",2009,https://esdorchardstorage.blob.core.windows.net/esdwa/Default/ESDWAGOV/labor-ma…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "The effects of goal orientation on job search and reemployment: A field experiment among unemployed job seekers","van Hooft, E., & Noordzij, G. (2009). The effects of goal orientation on job search and reemployment: A field experiment among unemployed job seekers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1581-1590.","Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the effects of goal orientation—the way individuals frame their objectives in a given situation—on job search and reemployment among unemployed job seekers. The study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in which participants were assigned to one of three workshops: a learning goal-oriented (LGO) workshop, a performance goal-oriented (PGO) workshop, and a control workshop. The authors compared the job-search and reemployment outcomes of participants in the LGO or PGO workshops to the outcomes of those in the control workshop. The study found that participants in the LGO workshop were 22 percentage points more likely to be reemployed eight weeks after the workshop than were participants in the control workshop, a statistically significant difference. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high for the comparison of PGO versus control participants’ reemployment statuses because these outcomes derived from a well-conducted RCT with low attrition. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to workshop type and not to other factors. However, the quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low for the comparison of LGO and control participants’ job-search behaviors and reemployment statuses and the comparison of PGO and control participants’ job-search behaviors because these outcomes derived from an RCT with high attrition that did not control adequately for potential differences in the analytic samples. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to workshop type; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Workshops Studied","Behavioral Interventions","Unemployed, Adult",,International,2009,,"Behavioral Insights Review Protocol" "Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Study: FY 2005 Initiative: final report","Benus, J., Poe-Yamagata, E., Wang, Y., & Blass, E. (2008). Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Study: FY 2005 Initiative: final report. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [Minnesota sample]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) initiative in Minnesota, a program that provided eligibility and reemployment case management services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants, on UI benefits receipt, wages, and employment. The study randomly assigned 5,898 eligible claimants to one of two treatment groups, which received REA services of varying intensity, or the control group. Those in the treatment groups were required to participate in the services to retain their UI eligibility. The authors estimated the program’s effectiveness by analyzing state administrative records on UI payments and information from a follow-up survey of a subsample of study participants. The study found that UI claimants in the more-intensive treatment group claimed fewer weeks of UI benefits and were less likely to have an overpayment detected. There were no significant impacts on employment or earnings for either treatment group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it is a randomized controlled trial with different selection processes for the treatment and control groups, but the authors controlled sufficiently for baseline characteristics in the analysis. This means we have some confidence that the estimated effects are attributable to REA, although other factors might also have contributed.","the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in Minnesota","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2008,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Reemployment%20and%20Eligibil…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Workforce Investment Act non-experimental net impact evaluation. [Dislocated worker sample]","Heinrich, C., Mueser, P., & Troske, K. (2008). Workforce Investment Act non-experimental net impact evaluation. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [Dislocated worker sample]","Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training, Job Search Assistance","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Dislocated Worker Program’s impact on workers’ employment and earnings in 12 states. The authors analyzed administrative data to compare the employment and earnings outcomes of people receiving different tiers of WIA Dislocated Worker Program services with two different matched comparison groups for 16 quarters after program entry. The study found that WIA Dislocated Worker Program services had positive impacts on earnings and employment in most quarters examined. However, those WIA Dislocated Worker Program participants who received core and/or intensive services had significantly better earnings and employment outcomes in the first seven quarters than those who also received training. 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 the WIA Dislocated Worker Program services, but other factors might also have contributed. The report also examined the impacts of WIA Adult Program services; that profile is available here.","the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Dislocated Worker Program","Other employer services Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Job search assistance and supportive services Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2008,https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Workforce%20Investment%20Act…,"Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training, Job Search Assistance Review Protocol" "Workforce program performance indicators for the Commonwealth of Virginia. (Upjohn Institute Technical Report No. 08-024). [WIA-Adult]","Hollenbeck, K., & Huang, W-J. (2008). Workforce program performance indicators for the Commonwealth of Virginia. (Upjohn Institute Technical Report No. 08-024). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. [WIA-Adult]","Job Search Assistance","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Education and skills gains-Low-Favorable impacts Education and skills gains Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Title I program for adults (including dislocated workers) on participants’ employment and credential completion rates. The study used administrative records to compare the outcomes for low-income adults who took part in the WIA program with a nonexperimental-matched group of adults who did not take part in the program. The study found that the WIA program participants had higher employment and credential completion rates than those of people who did not participate in the program. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups compared were similar before program participation. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the WIA Title I program for adults (including dislocated workers); other factors are likely to have contributed. This study also examined the effectiveness of other workforce development programs. Please click here to find CLEAR profiles of those studies.","the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Title I Program for Adults","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Other training and education Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)","Unemployed, Low income",,"United States",2008,http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1027&context=up_technica…,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Study: FY 2005 Initiative: final report","Benus, J., Poe-Yamagata, E., Wang, Y., & Blass, E. (2008). Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Study: FY 2005 Initiative: final report. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [North Dakota sample]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Reemployment and Eligibility Assessment (REA) Initiative in North Dakota, a program that provided eligibility and reemployment case management services to Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants, on UI benefits receipt, wages, and employment. The study randomly assigned nearly 2,000 eligible claimants to either the treatment group, which could receive REA services, or the control group, which could not access the same REA services. Those in the treatment group were required to participate in the services to retain their UI eligibility. The authors estimated the program’s effectiveness by analyzing state administrative records on UI payments and information from a follow-up survey of a subsample of study participants. The study found no statistically significant impacts of REA on UI benefits receipt, employment, or earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high for the UI benefits receipt outcomes because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. For the employment and wages outcomes, the quality of evidence presented in this report is moderate.","JSA services","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2008,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Reemployment%20and%20Eligibil…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Workforce Investment Act non-experimental net impact evaluation. [Adult sample]","Heinrich, C., Mueser, P., & Troske, K. (2008). Workforce Investment Act non-experimental net impact evaluation. Columbia, MD: IMPAQ International. [Adult sample]","Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training, Job Search Assistance","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult Program’s impact on workers’ employment and earnings in 12 states. The authors analyzed administrative data to compare the employment and earnings outcomes of people receiving different tiers of WIA Adult Program services with two different matched comparison groups for 16 quarters after program entry. The study found that WIA Adult Program services had positive impacts on earnings and employment in most quarters examined. Those WIA Adult Program participants who received training earned more and were more likely to be employed than those who received only core and intensive services. 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 the WIA Adult Program services, but other factors might also have contributed. The report also examined the impacts of WIA Dislocated Worker services; that profile is available here.","the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult Program","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Wagner-Peyser Act Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Other training and education","Unemployed, Low income",,"United States",2008,https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Workforce%20Investment%20Act…,"Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training, Job Search Assistance Review Protocol" "The Employment Retention and Advancement project: Results from Minnesota’s Tier 2 program","LeBlanc, A., Miller, C., Martinson, K., & Azurdia, G. (2007). The Employment Retention and Advancement project: Results from Minnesota’s Tier 2 program. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.","Low-Income Adults","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to determine the 18-month impact of Minnesota’s Tier 2 welfare-to-work program compared with existing Tier 1 services. Minnesota’s Tier 2 program was part of the nationwide Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) project. The authors randomly assigned approximately 1,700 long-term Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients to either a treatment group, which received Tier 2 services including intensive assessments and case management, or a control group, which received Minnesota’s existing Tier 1 TANF services. The authors analyzed data from Minnesota Unemployment Insurance (UI), TANF, and Food Stamps administrative records. The study found that, 12 months after random assignment, more people in the Tier 2 group (79.2 percent) reported that they received Food Stamps than in the control group (70.0 percent). After 18 months however, there were no statistically significant differences between treatment and control group members’ employment, earnings, or benefits receipt. The quality of causal evidence provided in this study is high because it is based on a well-conducted randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects are attributable to Minnesota’s Tier 2 program and not to other factors.","the Employment Retention and Advancement project, Minnesota’s Tier 2 Program","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Unemployed, Low income, Parent",,"United States",2007,http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/minnesota_tier2.pdf,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Labor market shocks and retirement: Do government programs matter?","Coile, C., & Levine, P. (2007). Labor market shocks and retirement: Do government programs matter? Journal of Public Economics, 91(10), 1902-1919.","Older Workers","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Employment-Low-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impact of the generosity of unemployment insurance (UI) benefits on retirement decisions. The study used a statistical model and data from the March Current Population Survey for 1980–2004 to estimate impacts. The study found no relationship between the generosity of UI benefits and the likelihood of retirement or receipt of UI. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before changes in the generosity of UI benefits were observed. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to changes in the generosity of UI benefits; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Unemployment Insurance (UI)","Unemployment Insurance","Adult, Older worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2007,http://academics.wellesley.edu/Economics/Coile/PDF%20files/coile-levine%20JPubE…,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. (Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). [WIA Adult]","Hollenbeck, K., & Huang, W-J. (2006). Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. (Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. [WIA Adult]","Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training, Job Search Assistance","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-Unfavorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult Program on the employment rate, earnings, and public benefit receipt of low-income adults in Washington State. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare the short-term (3 quarters after program exit) and long-term (9 to 12 quarters after program exit) employment, earnings, and public benefit receipt between those who took part in the WIA Adult Program and those who registered for employment services at the state Labor Exchange. The study found that, compared with those who registered for services at the Labor Exchange, participants in the WIA Adult Program had higher employment, earnings, and public benefit receipt. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors compared the treatment and comparison groups at different follow-up points and the groups were therefore not equivalent. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the WIA Adult Program; other factors are likely to have contributed. This study also examined the effectiveness of other workforce development programs. Please click here to find CLEAR profiles of those studies.","the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult Program","Adult and Dislocated Worker programs Job search assistance and supportive services Labor Exchange Other employment and reemployment Workforce Investment Act (WIA)/Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Other training and education","Unemployed, Low income",,"United States",2006,http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=up_technica…,"Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training, Job Search Assistance Review Protocol" "Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). [Private career school programs]","Hollenbeck, K., & Huang, W-J. (2006). Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. [Private career school programs]","Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Private Career School program on the employment rate, earnings, and public benefit receipt of adults with a high school education. The authors used a nonexperimental method to compare the short-term (3 quarters after program exit) and long-term (9 to 12 quarters after program exit) employment, earnings, and public benefits of those who took part in the Private Career School program relative to those who registered for services at the Labor Exchange. The study found that, compared with those who registered for Labor Exchange services, Private Career School program participants had higher employment and earnings, and lower receipt of several types of public benefits. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups compared were similar before program participation. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Private Career School program; other factors are likely to have contributed. This study also examined the effectiveness of other workforce development programs. Please click here to find CLEAR profiles of those studies.","the Private Career School Programs","Other training and education","Adult, Unemployed","Other services, Transportation and warehousing","United States",2006,http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=up_technica…,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. (Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). [Comm. and Tech. ABE]","Hollenbeck, K., & Huang, W-J. (2006). Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. (Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. [Comm. and Tech. ABE]","Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-Mixed impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Community and Technical Colleges Adult Basic Education (ABE) program on the employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt of low-income adults. The authors used a nonexperimental method to compare the short-term (3 quarters after program exit) and long-term (9 to 12 quarters after program exit) employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt between those who took part in the ABE program relative to those who registered for services at the Labor Exchange. The study found that, compared with those who registered for Labor Exchange services, ABE program participants had higher employment and earnings, and lower public benefits receipt. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups compared were similar before program participation. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the ABE program; other factors are likely to have contributed. This study also examined the effectiveness of other workforce development programs. Please click here to find CLEAR profiles of those studies.","the Community and Technical Colleges Adult Basic Education (ABE) Program","Other training and education","Adult, Unemployed",,"United States",2006,http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=up_technica…,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. (Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). [Community and Technical College Worker Retraining Program]","Hollenbeck, K., & Huang, W-J. (2006). Net impact and benefit-cost estimates of the workforce development system in Washington State. (Upjohn Institute technical report no. TR06-020). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. [Community and Technical College Worker Retraining Program]","Apprenticeship and Work-Based Training","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-Mixed impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Community and Technical College (CTC) Worker Retraining program on the employment rate, earnings, and public benefit receipt of long-term unemployed and dislocated workers in Washington State. The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare the short-term (3 quarters after program exit) and long-term (9 to 12 quarters after program exit) employment, earnings, and public benefit receipt between those who took part in the CTC Worker Retraining program and those who registered for employment services at the state Labor Exchange. The study found that, compared with those in the comparison group, participants in the CTC Worker Retraining program had higher employment and earnings, and lower public benefits receipt. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors compared the treatment and comparison groups at different follow-up points and the groups were therefore not equivalent. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to CTC Worker Retraining program; other factors are likely to have contributed. This study also examined the effectiveness of other workforce development programs. Please click here to find CLEAR profiles of those studies.","Community and Technical College Worker Retraining (CTC WR) Program","Community college education and other classroom training Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2006,http://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=up_technica…,"Employment and Training Review Protocol" "Evaluation of the strengthening the connections between unemployment insurance and the One-Stop Delivery Systems Demonstration Project in Wisconsin","Almandsmith, S., Ortiz Adams, L., & Bos, H. (2006). Evaluation of the strengthening the connections between unemployment insurance and the One-Stop Delivery Systems Demonstration Project in Wisconsin. Oakland, CA: Berkeley Policy Associates.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impact of the Worker Profiling Reemployment Services program for Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants in Wisconsin on several outcomes: the rate at which the UI claimants went back to work, average earnings, and UI benefit receipt.  The authors used a matching procedure and several statistical models to compare the outcomes of demonstration and comparison group members, using administrative data.  The study found that demonstration participants had higher average quarterly earnings, shorter durations of UI benefits, smaller proportions of maximum UI benefits paid, and a lower average total payout of UI benefits. The study found no statistically significant relationship between demonstration participation and employment outcomes.  The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Worker Profiling Reemployment Services program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","JSA services","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2006,https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/Evaluation%20of%20the%20Stre…,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Cost-effectiveness of targeted reemployment bonuses","O’Leary, C.J., Decker, P.T., Wandner, S.A. (2005). Cost-effectiveness of targeted reemployment bonuses. Journal of Human Resources, 40, 270-279.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impact of the Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration on the amount of Unemployment Insurance (UI) receipt and on earnings of UI claimants approximately one year after program enrollment, both overall and for subgroups of claimants defined by their likelihood of exhausting UI benefits. The authors also examined the impact of the Washington Reemployment Bonus Demonstration; this study is an additional source to the main source examining that intervention, profiled here. About 15,000 eligible claimants were randomly assigned to one of six treatment groups or a control group. The six treatment groups were offered different combinations of reemployment bonus amounts and periods within which they were required to find a job in order to claim the bonus. The authors analyzed state administrative data and survey data of a subsample of approximately 5,000 participants from the original demonstration. The study found that the pooled bonus treatments in Pennsylvania reduced the total UI benefit amount received, but did not have a significant impact on earnings. Pooling across all bonus treatments, Pennsylvania treatment group members received $113 less in UI benefits, on average, than their control group counterparts. The quality of causal evidence for the Pennsylvania demonstration is low because the authors did not demonstrate that they adjusted for changes in rates of assignment to treatment and control conditions and did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration; other factors are likely to have contributed. See more CLEAR profiles related to The Reemployment Bonus Experiments.","Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration","Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2005,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Is the threat of reemployment services more effective than the services themselves? Evidence from random assignments in the UI system","Black, D., Smith, J., Berger, M., & Noel, B. (2003). Is the threat of reemployment services more effective than the services themselves? Evidence from random assignments in the UI system. American Economic Review, 93(4), 1313-1327.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impact of the Kentucky Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services (WPRS) on Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefit receipt and earnings.  In this study, about 2,000 UI claimants in Kentucky were randomly assigned to the treatment group, which was required to participate in reemployment services, or to the control group, which was not required to participate but could receive services voluntarily. The authors collected administrative data on UI benefit receipt and earnings for all study participants. The study found that those in the WPRS treatment group had a statistically significant reduction in UI benefit receipt of 2.2 weeks during the six-quarter follow-up period, compared to the control group. There were no statistically significant impacts of the program on the fraction of recipients exhausting benefits or total UI benefits received. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial (RCT). This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the WPRS and not to other factors.",Profiling,"RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2003,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of the Significant Improvement Demonstration Grants for the provision of reemployment services for UI claimants","Needels, K., Corson, W., & Van Noy, M. (2002). Evaluation of the Significant Improvement Demonstration Grants for the provision of reemployment services for UI claimants. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Low-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impacts of the Significant Improvement Demonstration Grants—awarded to 11 states to improve reemployment services for Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants—on weeks of UI receipt and UI benefit exhaustion. For each state, the authors compared outcomes before and at the end of the grant period using monthly data that states reported to the UI Service. The study found no statistically significant relationships between the Significant Improvement Demonstration Grants and UI benefit receipt outcomes. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Significant Improvement Demonstration Grants; other factors are likely to have contributed.","Significant Improvement Demonstration Grants","Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2002,https://www.doleta.gov/reports/searcheta/occ/papers/UI_final.pdf,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Two years after a job loss: Long-term impact of the JOBS Program on reemployment and mental health","Vinokur, A., Schul, Y., Vuori, J., & Price, R. (2000). Two years after a job loss: Long-term impact of the JOBS Program on reemployment and mental health. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(1), 32-47.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the JOBS II program on long-term employment, earnings, and monthly hours worked. The authors randomly assigned eligible unemployed individuals to either a treatment group, which could participate in JOBS II, or the control group, which could receive other services in the community, but not JOBS II. The study included a pre-test two weeks before the intervention and follow-up questionnaires 2, 6, and 24 months after the intervention. The authors found that JOBS II was associated with positive effects on the treatment group’s rate of reemployment and monthly earnings as measured two years after assignment, compared with the control group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the study was a randomized controlled trial with unknown attrition and lack of sufficient controls in the analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the JOBS II program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the JOBS II Program","Job search assistance and supportive services","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2000,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Measuring the effect of public labor exchange (PLX) referrals and placements in Washington and Oregon","Jacobson, L., & Petta, I. (2000). Measuring the effect of public labor exchange (PLX) referrals and placements in Washington and Oregon (Workforce Security Research Publications 2000–06). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Low-Mixed impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impact of receiving public labor exchange (PLX) job referrals and placements on the duration of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefit receipt for UI recipients in Oregon and Washington. The authors used statistical models to compare two distinct treatment groups to a comparison group within each state. The treatment groups both received PLX job search assistance, a job referral, and a job offer; one group did not actually work at the position offered while the other did. The comparison group received job search assistance but not PLX job referrals or placements. The authors used data from the Oregon Employment Department and the Washington State Employment Security Department. The study found that individuals in the treatment group tended to receive UI benefits for fewer weeks than individuals in the comparison group; this was a statistically significant difference. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated relationships are attributable to PLX job referrals or placements; other factors are likely to have contributed.",Other,"RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Labor Exchange Wagner-Peyser Act",Unemployed,,"United States",2000,https://wdr.doleta.gov/owsdrr/00-6/00-6.pdf,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Assisting Unemployment Insurance claimants: The long-term impacts of the Job Search Assistance Demonstration","Decker, P., Olsen, R., & Freeman, L. (2000). Assisting Unemployment Insurance claimants: The long-term impacts of the Job Search Assistance Demonstration. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Job Search Assistance Demonstration in Washington, D.C., and Florida on Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits receipt, earnings, and employment. In this demonstration, about 20,000 UI claimants were randomized into one of three intervention groups, all of which received some variation of job search assistance services, or into a control group, which could receive existing services in the community. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data, which provided information on UI receipt, earnings, and employment. The study found that structured job search assistance was generally successful at reducing UI benefits receipt and increasing earnings in Washington, D.C., but not in Florida. The findings for individualized job search assistance treatment groups were less robust. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the job search assistance strategies tested, and not to other factors.","JSA services","Job search assistance and supportive services Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",2000,,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services systems: Final Report.","Dickinson, K., Kreutzer, S., West, R., & Decker, P. (1999). Evaluation of Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services systems: Final report. Research and Evaluation Report Series 99-D. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment, and Training Administration.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study assessed the effectiveness of Worker Profiling and Reemployment Services (WPRS), a system for predicting which Unemployment Insurance (UI) recipients are at greatest risk of exhausting benefits and offering them early intervention services.  The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the UI benefit receipt, employment, and earnings outcomes of WPRS participants in six states to the outcomes of similar UI claimants who did not receive WPRS. The main data source was state UI administrative records for nearly 457,000 UI claimants. The study found that WPRS reduced UI benefit weeks and amounts in three of the states during the benefit year. However, there were few statistically significant impacts on employment rates or earnings in the four quarters after the initial claim, and some of the impacts were in an unexpected direction. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate, because it is a well-implemented nonexperimental study. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to WPRS, but other factors might also have contributed.",Profiling,"RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1999,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Two essays on unemployment insurance: Claimant responses to policy changes [Contrast 1: Comparison between claimants who applied for UI benefits after WPRS only]","Noel, B. J. (1998). Two essays on unemployment insurance: Claimant responses to policy changes (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from UMI (UMI No. 9922624). [Comparison between claimants who applied for UI benefits after WPRS only]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of reemployment services through the Worker Profiling and Reemployment System (WPRS) on unemployment insurance (UI) benefit receipt and earnings for individuals who applied for UI in Kentucky. The authors investigated a similar research questions in another contrast, the profiles of which can be found here. The author compared outcomes for treatment group members, who were eligible to receive reemployment services, and comparison group members, who were not eligible to receive the reemployment services but could access other services in the community, using data from the Kentucky Department of Employment Services Unemployment Insurance administrative records. The study found statistically significant relationships between reemployment services and UI benefit receipt, where those who were offered the reemployment services received less UI benefits in 26 weeks, compared to those who did not receive reemployment services. There were no statistically significant relationships between reemployment services and earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not ensure that the groups compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated relationships are attributable to the WPRS reemployment services; other factors are likely to have contributed.",Profiling,"RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1998,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Two essays on unemployment insurance: Claimant responses to policy changes. [Comparison between claimants who applied for UI benefits before and after WPRS]","Noel, B. J. (1998). Two essays on unemployment insurance: Claimant responses to policy changes (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from UMI (UMI No. 9922624). [Comparison between claimants who applied for UI benefits before and after WPRS]",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of reemployment services through the Worker Profiling and Reemployment System (WPRS) on unemployment insurance (UI) benefit receipt and earnings for individuals who applied for UI in Kentucky. The authors investigated similar research questions for another contrast, the profile of which can be found here. The author compared outcomes for treatment group members, who were eligible to receive reemployment services, and comparison group members, who were not eligible to receive the reemployment services but could access other services in the community, using data from the Kentucky Department of Employment Services Unemployment Insurance administrative records. The study found statistically significant relationships between the WPRS reemployment services and UI benefit receipt and earnings, where those offered the reemployment services received fewer UI benefits in 26 weeks and earned more in one year, compared to those who did were not eligible to receive reemployment services. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not account for trends in outcomes before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated relationships are attributable to the WPRS reemployment services; other factors are likely to have contributed.  ",Profiling,"RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1998,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of the Maryland Unemployment Insurance Work Search Demonstration","Benus, J., Johnson, T., Klepinger, D., & Joesch, J. (1997). Evaluation of the Maryland Unemployment Insurance Work Search Demonstration. Prepared for the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation, 1-43. Baltimore, MD: Maryland Department of Labor.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study assessed the effectiveness of four interventions designed to encourage rapid reemployment among Unemployment Insurance (UI) recipients. The study was a randomized controlled trial with more than 27,000 participants. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups, each of which had different work search requirements, or to a control group that abided by existing requirements for receipt of UI benefits. The study used state UI administrative records to estimate impacts on employment, earnings, and UI benefit receipt. The authors found that the three treatments that imposed stricter work search requirements than those imposed on the control group reduced the amount of benefits received by $75 to $116 and duration of benefit receipt by 0.6 to 0.9 weeks, on average. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment and control groups on employment or earnings. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the work search treatments, and not to other factors.","the Maryland Unemployment Insurance Work Search Demonstration","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1997,http://wdr.doleta.gov/owsdrr/98-2/98-2.pdf,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "The New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project: Six-year follow-up and summary report","Corson, W., & Haimson, J. (1996). The New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project: Six-year follow-up and summary report. Revised edition. Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper 96-2. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the long-term impacts of the New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project on the unemployment insurance (UI) receipt, employment, and earnings of UI claimants in New Jersey approximately six years after program enrollment. In this demonstration, about 11,000 UI claimants were randomized into one of three treatment groups, all of which received some variation of Job Search Assistance (JSA) services, or into the control group, which could receive only existing services in the community. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data, which provided information on UI receipt, employment, and earnings. The study found that the treatment group that received JSA services and a reemployment bonus had a statistically significant reduction in UI dollars received and UI weeks paid, compared with the control group. There were no significant impacts on the probability of working, level of earnings, or weeks worked in the long run for any of the treatment groups. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the interventions studied, and not to other factors.","JSA services","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1996,http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/dmstree/op/op95/op_02-95.pdf,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluating pooled evidence from the reemployment bonus experiments","Decker, P., & O’Leary, C. (1995). Evaluating pooled evidence from the reemployment bonus experiments. The Journal of Human Resources, 30(3), 534-550.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of Pennsylvania and Washington programs that aimed to encourage faster reemployment among Unemployment Insurance (UI) recipients by offering them financial incentives for faster reemployment. Randomized controlled trials were conducted separately in both Pennsylvania and Washington State and included a total of about 27,500 UI claimants. The authors estimated impacts of the reemployment bonus programs on UI benefits receipt and earnings using state UI administrative records. The study found that, on average, UI claimants who had been randomly assigned to receive any of the reemployment bonus offers received 0.5 fewer weeks and $85 less in total UI benefits than those assigned to the control group. However, they were no more or less likely to exhaust UI benefits or have higher earnings in the year following random assignment than control group members. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on pooled analysis of two well-implemented randomized controlled trials. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to reemployment bonus incentives, and not to other factors.","the Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration and the Washington Reemployment Bonus Experiment","Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1995,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Lessons from the US unemployment insurance experiments","Meyer, B. (1995). Lessons from the US unemployment insurance experiments. Journal of Economic Literature, 33(1), 91-131.","Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Descriptive Analysis",,,"Summary: The article provided an overview of experimental evaluations of unemployment insurance (UI) reforms conducted from 1977 to 1992 in the United States. These reforms typically tried to improve the employment prospects of beneficiaries and reduce UI costs. The author reviewed 10 randomized controlled trials of UI reforms—4 cash bonus experiments and 6 job-search experiments—and provided a comparative analysis on how these reforms affected average weeks of UI benefits paid, UI program costs, and recipients’ earnings, when available. The cash bonus experiments offered a cash payment to participants who quickly found and kept a job for an indicated length of time, although the details varied greatly across experiments. Job-search assistance reforms also varied but typically involved changes in the way job-search programs were implemented in terms of services offered and reporting and participation requirements. The review found that some cash bonus reforms reduced the average number of weeks participants spent on UI by a statistically significant margin, compared with the control group. The review also found that some job-search assistance reforms reduced participants’ average number of weeks on UI and increased average quarterly earnings compared with the control group; however, not all findings for all reforms were statistically significant.",,"Disability insurance Job search assistance and supportive services","Adult, Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1995,,"Behavioral Insights Review Protocol" "The Jobs I Preventive Intervention for Unemployed Individuals: Short- and long-term effects on reemployment and mental health","Vinokur, A., Price, R., Caplan, R., van Ryn, M.,& Curran, J. (1995). The Jobs I Preventive Intervention for Unemployed Individuals: Short- and long-term effects on reemployment and mental health. In L.R. Murphy, J.J. Hurrell, Jr., S.L. Sauter, & G.P. Keita (Eds.), Job Stress Interventions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association (125-138).",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Jobs Program on short-term earnings. The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Researchers administered a pre-test two weeks before the intervention and two post-tests one and four months after the intervention, comparing the outcomes of Jobs Program participants against those of a control group. The study found statistically significant associations between being offered access to the Jobs Program and increased earnings one and four months later. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the study was an RCT with post-intervention subsampling based on participation in the intervention. In addition, the authors did not include sufficient controls in their analysis. This means we are not confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the Jobs Program; other factors are likely to have contributed.","the Jobs Program","Job search assistance and supportive services","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1995,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "The impact of Reemployment Bonuses on Insured Unemployment in the New Jersey and Illinois Reemployment Bonus Experiments","Decker, P. (1994). The impact of Reemployment Bonuses on Insured Unemployment in the New Jersey and Illinois Reemployment Bonus Experiments. Journal of Human Resources, 29(3), 718-741.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: This study’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of New Jersey and Illinois programs that aimed to encourage faster reemployment among Unemployment Insurance (UI) recipients by offering them financial incentives for faster reemployment. Each state conducted separate randomized controlled trials. The authors calculated weekly UI exit rates using state UI administrative records. The study found that both programs significantly increased the weekly rates at which bonus-eligible UI claimants left the UI rolls during the qualification period relative to claimants who were not bonus-eligible, by 14 percent in New Jersey and 18 percent in Illinois. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on two well-implemented randomized controlled trials. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to reemployment bonus incentives and not to other factors.","the New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project and Illinois Job Search Incentive Experiment","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1994,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Expressive writing and coping with job loss","Spera, S., Buhrfeind, E., & Pennebaker, J. (1994). Expressive writing and coping with job loss. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 722-733.","Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of expressive writing activities on the reemployment of people who had recently lost their jobs. The authors randomly assigned 41 people who had recently been laid off to either a treatment group, which was instructed to write daily about their feelings on their job loss, or to a control group, which was instructed to write about their plans for the day, but not about their feelings. Another 22 participants were assigned (non-randomly) to a comparison group that did not participate in a writing activity. The authors compared outcomes for the three study groups collected from administrative records and four surveys. The study found that participants who wrote about their feelings and attitudes about being laid off were more likely to find employment eight months after the program than those who wrote about other topics and those who did no writing activities. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high for comparisons between the treatment group and the writing control group because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to expressive writing, and not to other factors. However, the quality of causal evidence is moderate for comparisons between the treatment group and the non-writing comparison group because there was non-random assignment to this group. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to expressive writing, but other factors might also have contributed.",,"Behavioral Interventions","Unemployed, Adult",,"United States",1994,,"Behavioral Insights Review Protocol" "Self-employment as a reemployment option: Demonstration results and national legislation","Benus, J., Johnson, T., Wood, M, & Grover, N. (1994). Self-employment as a reemployment option: Demonstration results and national legislation. Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper, 94(3), 1-61.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study estimated the impacts of Washington State’s Self-Employment and Enterprise Demonstration (SEED) and the Massachusetts Enterprise Project. Both programs sought to determine how feasible self-employment was as a reemployment option for Unemployment Insurance (UI) recipients. This profile focused only on the program design and outcomes of the Enterprise Project. The Enterprise Project was evaluated using a randomized controlled trial in which program applicants were randomly assigned to either a treatment group, which could receive Enterprise Project services, or a control group, which received UI benefits as usual. Outcomes of interest included measures of employment, self-employment, earnings, and UI benefit receipt. The study found that applicants in the treatment group entered self-employment and wage employment at higher rates than those in the control group. They also had higher earnings, on average, and reduced UI benefit duration and amount received. The quality of the causal evidence presented in this study is high. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Enterprise Project, and not to other factors.","the Enterprise Project Demonstration","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1994,http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/dmstree/op/op94/op_03-94.pdf,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "First impact analysis of the Washington State Self-Employment and Enterprise Development (SEED) demonstration","Benus, J., Johnson, T., & Wood, M. (1994). First impact analysis of the Washington State Self-Employment and Enterprise Development (SEED) demonstration. Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper, 94(1), 1-172.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study examined the impact of Washington State’s Self-Employment and Enterprise Demonstration (SEED) on reemployment via self-employment for Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants. SEED was evaluated using a randomized controlled trial in which SEED applicants were randomly assigned to a treatment group, which could receive several types of business start-up training and support services, or a control group, which received UI benefits as usual. Outcomes of interest included measures of employment, self-employment, earnings, and UI benefit receipt. The study found that applicants in the treatment group entered self-employment at significantly higher and faster rates than those in the control group did. SEED participants also earned significantly more from self-employment than nonparticipants did. The quality of the causal evidence presented in this study is high because it was a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to SEED, and not other factors.","Washington State’s Self-Employment and Enterprise Demonstration","Other employment and reemployment Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1994,http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/op_01-94.pdf,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration final report","Corson, W., Decker, P., Dunstan, S., & Kerachsky, S. (1992). Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration final report. Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper 92-1. Washington, DC: Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Mixed impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impacts of the Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration Project on the unemployment insurance (UI) receipt, employment, and earnings of UI claimants approximately one year after program enrollment. In this demonstration, about 15,000 eligible claimants were randomly assigned to one of six treatment groups with varying financial incentives and qualification periods or a control group. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data, which provided information on UI benefits receipt, employment, and earnings. The study team also surveyed a subsample of approximately 5,000 participants about their experiences in the year following random assignment. The study found that two of the bonus treatments reduced the weeks of UI benefits and total UI benefit dollars received, but the others did not. The study found very few impacts of the bonus treatments on claimants’ reemployment rates or earnings. The quality of causal evidence is high for UI benefits receipt outcomes because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to reemployment bonus incentives, and not to other factors. However, the quality of causal evidence is moderate for the employment and earnings outcomes because study attrition could not be determined for those outcomes.","the Pennsylvania Reemployment Bonus Demonstration","Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1992,http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/~/media/publications/PDFs/pennreemploy.pdf,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "The Washington Reemployment Bonus Experiment: Final report","Spiegelman, R., O’Leary, C., & Kline, K. (1992). The Washington Reemployment Bonus Experiment: Final report. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to assess the impacts of the Washington Reemployment Bonus experiment, which aimed to encourage faster reemployment rates among Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants by offering them financial incentives, on the UI benefits receipt of UI claimants. In this demonstration about 15,500 eligible claimants were randomized into one of six treatment groups or a control group. The six treatment groups were offered different combinations of reemployment bonus amounts and periods within which they were required to find a job in order to claim the bonus. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data, which provided information on UI benefits receipt. The study found that three of the bonus treatments reduced the weeks of UI benefits and total UI benefits dollars received, but the other three did not. Pooling across all bonus treatments, treatment group members received 0.4 fewer weeks and $65 less in UI benefits, on average, than their control group counterparts. The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the reemployment bonuses, and not to other factors.","the Washington Reemployment Bonus Experiment","Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1992,http://research.upjohn.org/externalpapers/44/,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Time-varying effects of recall expectation, a reemployment bonus, and job counseling on unemployment durations","Anderson, P. (1992). Time-varying effects of recall expectation, a reemployment bonus, and job counseling on unemployment durations. Journal of Labor Economics, 10 (1), 99-115.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study assessed the effectiveness of a reemployment bonus on the reemployment rates of Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants with differing expectations of being recalled to their previous jobs. The study used data from the New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project. For the demonstration, about 11,000 UI claimants were randomized into one of three treatment groups, all of which received some variation of Job Search Assistance (JSA) services, or into the control group, which could receive only existing services in the community. The author estimated weekly UI exit rates from state UI administrative records. The study found that the JSA-plus-reemployment-bonus group members were more likely than members of the JSA-only group to leave UI for a new job during weeks 7 through 12, which corresponded to the first half of the bonus qualification period, suggesting the bonuses were effective in spurring UI claimants to find new jobs more quickly. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it is a secondary analysis of data from a well-implemented randomized controlled trial for which attrition cannot be calculated. However, the author included sufficient statistical controls to receive a moderate evidence rating. This means we have some confidence that the estimated effects are attributable to the interventions studied, although other factors also could have contributed.","the New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1992,,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "Long-term follow-up and benefit-cost analysis of the Jobs Program","Vinokur, A., van Ryn, M., Gramlich, E., & Price, R. (1991). Long-term follow-up and benefit-cost analysis of the Jobs Program. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(2), 213-219.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Low-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Low-No impacts Employment","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Jobs Program on long-term earnings and monthly hours worked. The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Researchers administered a pre-test two weeks before the intervention and three post-tests at 1, 4, and 30 months after the intervention comparing the outcomes of Jobs Program participants against a control group. The study found no statistically significant relationships between the Jobs Program and increased long-term earnings or time in work during the follow-up period. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the study was an RCT with post-intervention subsampling based on participation in the intervention. In addition, the authors did not include sufficient controls in their analysis. This means we are not confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the Jobs Program; however, the study found no statistically significant effects.","the Jobs Program","Job search assistance and supportive services","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1991,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "The New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project: Follow-up report","Anderson, P., Corson, W., & Decker, P. (1991). The New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project: Follow-up report. Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper 91-1. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project on the unemployment insurance (UI) receipt, employment, and earnings of UI claimants in New Jersey three to four years after program enrollment. In this demonstration, about 11,000 UI claimants were randomized into one of three treatment groups, all of which received some variation of Job Search Assistance (JSA) services, or into the control group, which could receive only existing services in the community. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data, which provided information on UI receipt, employment, and earnings. The study found that, over the claim year and three follow-up years, the JSA-plus-reemployment-bonus group had statistically significant differences from the control group on UI dollars received ($293 fewer than control) and UI weeks paid (1.6 fewer weeks than control). The study found few statistically significant impacts on the probability of working, earnings, or weeks worked for any of the treatment groups compared with the control group. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the interventions studied, and not to other factors.","JSA services","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1991,http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/dmstree/op/op91/op_01-91.pdf,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of the impacts of the Washington Alternative Work Search Experiment","Johnson, T., & Klepinger, D. (1991). Evaluation of the impacts of the Washington Alternative Work Search Experiment. Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper, 91(4), 1–90.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study assessed the impacts of four different work search policy approaches implemented through the Washington Alternative Work Search Experiment on Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits receipt, employment, and earnings outcomes. Eligible UI claimants were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups or a control group. The four study groups faced different work search requirements to continue receiving UI benefits. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data, which provided information on UI benefits receipt, employment, and earnings. The study found that UI claimants facing less-stringent work search requirements received more UI benefits for longer and were more likely to exhaust their benefits, on average, than those facing standard work search requirements. There were few differences in UI benefits, employment, or earnings among claimants subject to more stringent work search requirements compared with those facing standard work search requirements. The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the alternative work search requirements, and not to other factors.","the Washington Alternative Work Search Experiment","Job search assistance and supportive services Unemployment Insurance","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1991,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "The economic impact of the Nevada Claimant Employment Program","Hanna, J., & Turney, Z. (1990). The economic impact of the Nevada Claimant Employment Program. Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper 90(4), 79-92.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study determined the effect of reemployment services, particularly job training for those with insufficient skills or education, on Unemployment Insurance (UI) receipt duration. The study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT), with sample members’ outcomes drawn from Nevada state UI records. The study found that reemployment services reduced UI receipt duration by 1.6 weeks, on average, during the first year. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Nevada Claimant Employment Project; other factors are likely to have contributed.","JSA services","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1990,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Back to work: Testing reemployment services for displaced workers","Bloom, H. (1990). Back to work: Testing reemployment services for displaced workers. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-No impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Texas Worker Adjustment Demonstration on the Unemployment Insurance (UI) receipt, employment, and earnings of UI claimants one year after program enrollment. In this demonstration, about 2,200 UI claimants across three sites were randomized into a treatment group, which received job-search assistance services and, if needed, occupational training, or into the control group, which could receive only existing services in the community. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data and conducted a one-year follow up survey. The study found that women who received services at the two El Paso sites earned $987 more and received $193 less in UI benefits in the first year, and were 10 to 20 percentage points more likely to be employed in the first three quarters after entering the program, compared with the control group. The study also found that men in the treatment groups at all three sites received $143 less in UI benefits than men in the control group, but there were no other statistically significant impacts one year after random assignment. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it is an analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial for which attrition cannot be calculated, but for which the author included sufficient statistical controls. This means we have some confidence that the estimated effects are attributable to the demonstration services, although other factors also could have contributed.","JSA services","Job search assistance and supportive services Basic skills Community college education and other classroom training Work based and other occupational training","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1990,,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "The New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project: Final evaluation report","Corson, W., Decker, P.T., Dunstan, S.M., Gordon, A.R., Anderson, P., & Homrighausen, J. (1989). The New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project: Final evaluation report. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Earnings and wages Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the short-term impacts of the New Jersey Unemployment Insurance Reemployment Demonstration Project on the unemployment insurance (UI) receipt, employment, and earnings of UI claimants in New Jersey approximately one year after program enrollment. In this demonstration, about 11,000 UI claimants were randomized into one of three treatment groups, all of which received some variation of Job Search Assistance (JSA) services, or into the control group, which could receive only existing services in the community. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data, which provided information on UI receipt, employment, and earnings. The study team also surveyed a subsample of roughly 7,500 participants about their experiences in the year following random assignment. The study found that all three treatments reduced at least one measure of UI benefits received in the benefit year. According to the survey data, the JSA-only and JSA-plus-bonus groups had higher employment and earnings in the year following participants’ initial UI claims than control group members (no difference was found for the JSA-plus-training group). However, these impacts were not observed in the administrative data. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the interventions studied, and not to other factors.","JSA services","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment Other training and education","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1989,http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/dmstree/op/op89/op_03-89.pdf,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "Requiring Unemployment Insurance recipients to register with the Public Employment Service","Director, S., & Englander, F. (1988). Requiring Unemployment Insurance recipients to register with the Public Employment Service. The Journal of Risk and Insurance, 55(2), 245-258.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of New Jersey’s repeal of mandatory Employment Services (ES) registration for Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants on the length of claimants’ UI spells and their probability of exhausting available UI benefits. The authors compared UI outcomes before and after repeal using an interrupted time series design based on monthly, state-level time series data from 1971 to 1981. The study found that the UI exhaustion rate and weeks of UI benefits received were lower when ES registration was mandatory than when it was voluntary. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to mandatory ES registration; other factors are likely to have contributed.","More stringent work search requirements","RESEA Unemployment Insurance Wagner-Peyser Act","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1988,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "The Illinois Unemployment Insurance Incentive Experiments","Spiegelman, R., & Woodbury, S. (1987). The Illinois Unemployment Insurance Incentive Experiments. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. UpJohn Institute for Employment Research.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts Earnings and wages Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Job Search Incentive Experiment and the Hiring Incentive Experiment in Illinois on Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefit receipt and earnings. In this study, about 17,000 new UI claimants were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups, both of which could participate in a reemployment bonus program, or the control group, which faced existing UI program rules and could not receive a reemployment bonus. For all participants, the study team collected administrative data on UI benefits receipt. The study found that those in the job search incentive group had a significant reduction in UI benefits received, length of UI receipt, and proportion of claimants exhausting UI benefits, compared with the control group. Those in the hiring incentive group had a significant reduction in UI benefits received relative to the control group, but no other outcomes.  The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it is based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the reemployment bonuses, and not to other factors.","the Illinois Job Search Incentive and Hiring Incentive Experiments","Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1987,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of the perceivable demand list pilot project","Behrens, J. (1987). Evaluation of the perceivable demand list pilot project. Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Department of Labor.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The report’s objective was to evaluate the Perceivable Demand List (PDL) Pilot Project on the duration of unemployment insurance (UI) receipt among recent beneficiaries laid off from high-demand occupations.  For this evaluation, UI recipients in Hackensack, New Jersey, who were recently laid off from high-demand occupations, as determined by the New Jersey Department of Labor, were randomly assigned to either participate in the PDL pilot or receive services as usual. The PDL pilot reduced UI receipt by an average of 2.6 weeks, reduced total UI benefits received by $340, and reduced the proportion of UI recipients who exhausted their benefits by 9.8 percentage points. The quality of the causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated impacts are attributable solely to the PDL Pilot, not other factors.","More stringent work search requirements","RESEA Other employment and reemployment Wagner-Peyser Act","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1987,,"Reemployment Review Protocol" "Evaluation of the Charleston Claimant Placement and Work Test Demonstration","Corson, W., Long, D., & Nicholson, W. (1985). Evaluation of the Charleston Claimant Placement and Work Test Demonstration. Department of Labor Unemployment Insurance Occasional Paper, 85(2), 1-113.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Employment-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Employment Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to determine the impact of a more-stringent work test and enhanced employment services on Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants’ benefits receipt and reemployment outcomes. The authors randomly assigned UI claimants to four conditions, comprising three distinct treatment groups and one control group. Administrative data sources, including UI and Employment Service (ES) records as well as records of claimants’ interactions with program staff provided outcomes for sample members in all four conditions. The study found that UI claimants in the more-intensive treatment conditions—treatment groups 1 and 2—collected UI benefits for fewer weeks than those in the control condition, by 0.76 weeks in treatment group 1 and 0.61 weeks in treatment group 2; these differences were statistically significant. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the Charleston Claimant Placement and Work Test Demonstration, and not to other factors.","JSA services","Job search assistance and supportive services","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1985,,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "Wisconsin Job Service: ERP Pilot Project final report","Wisconsin Department of Industry, Labor, and Human Relations (1984). Wisconsin Job Service: ERP Pilot Project final report. Madison, WI: DILHR.","Job Search Assistance, Reemployment","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Mod/high-No impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study estimated the effect of mandatory participation in a job search workshop for Unemployment Insurance (UI) recipients separated indefinitely from their previous employers. The study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted in six sites in Wisconsin. Eligible UI recipients were randomly assigned to either the treatment group, which was required to attend a six-hour workshop, or a control group, which was not required to attend the workshop. In general, there were no statistically significant differences in duration of UI benefit receipt between treatment and control group members across all six sites or for individual sites. The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is high because it was based on a well-implemented RCT. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the job search workshop and not to other factors.","JSA services","Job search assistance and supportive services","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1984,,"Job Search Assistance, Reemployment Review Protocol" "The Nevada claimant placement project.","Steinman, J. (1978). The Nevada claimant placement project. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Employment & Training Administration.",Reemployment,"Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts Public benefit receipt","Summary: The study’s objective was to estimate the impact of the Nevada Claimant Placement Project (NCPP), an intervention designed to accelerate labor force reattachment among Unemployment Insurance (UI) claimants through mandatory, intensive case management. The study was a randomized controlled trial; UI claimants were randomly assigned to either a treatment group, which received enhanced case management services, or to a control group, which received typical services available to UI claimants. The author used UI administrative records to compare the UI benefit receipt of treatment group members with that of control group members. The study found that the treatment group members received $318 less in UI benefits than control group members. The quality of the causal evidence presented in this report is low because attrition could not be determined and the study did not include controls for claimant characteristics in its analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the NCPP.","Reemployment Eligibility Assessment","RESEA Job search assistance and supportive services Other employment and reemployment","Dislocated or displaced worker, Unemployed",,"United States",1978,,"Reemployment Review Protocol"