Skip to main content
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

A longitudinal evaluation of government-sponsored job skills training and basic employment services among U.S. baby boomers with economic disadvantages (Oh, DiNitto, & Powers, 2020)

Review Guidelines

Causal Evidence Guidelines

Absence of conflict of interest

Citation

Oh, S., DiNitto, D.M., & Powers, D.A. (2020). A longitudinal evaluation of government-sponsored job skills training and basic employment services among U.S. baby boomers with economic disadvantages. Evaluation and Program Planning, 82, 101845.

Highlights

  • The study’s objective was to examine the impact of government-sponsored employment programs on employment and earnings outcomes. 
  • The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of individuals who received government-sponsored employment training to individuals who did not. Using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979, the authors conducted statistical models to compare the outcomes between the groups. 
  • The study found that receipt of government-sponsored employment training was significantly related to increased employment and annual earnings.  
  • This study receives a low causal evidence rating. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to government-sponsored employment training; other factors are likely to have contributed.  

Features of the Intervention

  • The study’s objective was to examine the impact of government-sponsored employment programs on employment and earnings outcomes. 
  • The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of individuals who received government-sponsored employment training to individuals who did not. Using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979, the authors conducted statistical models to compare the outcomes between the groups. 
  • The study found that receipt of government-sponsored employment training was significantly related to increased employment and annual earnings.  
  • This study receives a low causal evidence rating. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to government-sponsored employment training; other factors are likely to have contributed.

Features of the Study

The study used a nonexperimental design to examine the impact of government-sponsored employment programs on employment and earnings outcomes. The authors compared differences in outcomes between individuals who received government-sponsored job skills training (treatment group) and individuals who received basic services (comparison group). The primary data source for this study was the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 (NLSY79). Study participants were those who completed the NLSY79 and its follow up interviews over the next 33 years. The baseline NLSY79 consisted of 12,686 individuals who would be considered late baby boomers. The analytic sample excluded respondents who did not complete follow up interviews, leaving a total of 1,496 participants in the study. Of the 1,496 participants, 465 were in the treatment group and 1,031 were in the comparison group. At baseline, over half of the treatment group were male (53.3%) and White (52.3%), between the ages of 14 and 16 (40.2%), were employed (38.5%), and had an annual household income less than $10,000 (42.3%). The comparison group was primarily White (73.3%), over half were male (54.6%), between the ages of 17 and 19 (38.4%), employed (51.9%), and had an annual household income of less than $10,000 (30.5%) at baseline. The authors used statistical models to compare differences between the groups. 

Findings

Employment 

  • The study found that individuals who received government-sponsored employment training were significantly more likely to be employed than individuals who received basic training.  
  • The study also found that Black and Hispanic individuals with government-sponsored employment training had significantly higher odds of employment compared to White individuals. 

Earnings and wages 

  • The study found that individuals who received government-sponsored employment training saw increases of 49.8 to 69.6 percent in annual earnings compared to individuals who received basic training. The study found this to be a statistically significant relationship.

Considerations for Interpreting the Findings

The authors used propensity score analysis to estimate the effects of the government-sponsored programs to account for differences between the groups. However, the study did not account for regional characteristics or training center accessibility and these differences can create a confound. Also, the authors did not account for the differences in government-sponsored training programs that may have influenced program outcomes, including the target population, support services included in the programs, training site providers, and training facilities. These program varying differences can lead to a confound which could impact the results. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs. 

Causal Evidence Rating

The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the study has confounds that may have affected the outcomes of interest. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to government-sponsored employment training; other factors are likely to have contributed.

Reviewed by CLEAR

May 2024