Citation
Navarro, D., Azurdia, G., & Hamilton, G. (2008). The Employment Retention and Advancement project: A comparison of two job club strategies: The effects of enhanced versus traditional job clubs in Los Angeles. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Highlights
- The study’s objective was to gauge the effect of a Los Angeles job club focused on participants’ career interests on employment, earnings, and benefits receipt outcomes after about 18 months. The Los Angeles site was one of 16 nationwide to participate in the Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) project. (See the CLEAR review of the final report here.)
- The authors randomly assigned almost 1,200 single-parent Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients to either a treatment group, which received Enhanced Job Club (EJC) services, or a control group, which received Traditional Job Club (TJC) services. The authors collected employment and earnings data from Unemployment Insurance (UI) records and used automated TANF and Food Stamps databases to obtain benefits receipt information.
- The study found that, 18 months after random assignment, there were no statistically significant differences between EJC and control group members’ employment, earnings, or public benefits receipt.
- The quality of causal evidence provided in this study is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the EJC and not to other factors. However, the study found no statistically significant impacts.
Intervention Examined
The Employment Retention and Advancement project, Los Angeles’s Enhanced Job Club
Features of the Intervention
The ERA project was introduced in 1999 as a nationwide exploration of factors that help welfare recipients not only find employment but retain their positions and advance in their careers. Los Angeles was one of 16 sites across the United States and one of 2 in California to receive funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to implement a program intended to improve welfare recipients’ employment outcomes.
The EJC was designed to help TANF recipients find work in their desired careers, rather than quickly accepting a job that did not necessarily align with long-term career goals. The program combined job search skills, career planning, and a step-down approach to employment that started the job application process with the highest-paying position accessible to the participant. If unsuccessful at the highest level, participants then focused on positions offering opportunities for advancement; those who still had not found a position after four weeks of intensive job searching targeted part-time roles that would enhance their skills while providing them time to participate in educational programs. By contrast, TJC, the standard model, provided job search assistance and encouraged recipients to accept the first available position, regardless of whether it aligned with the person’s career goals.
Features of the Study
Single-parent Los Angeles TANF applicants and recipients were randomly assigned to either EJC, the treatment group, or TJC, the control group, from June to September 2004. Most (91 percent) of the participants were women; their average age was 30; 57 percent had one or two children; 56 percent were Hispanic and 35 percent were black; most participants spoke English and 15 percent spoke Spanish; slightly more than half of the members did not have a high school diploma or a General Education Development certificate.
The authors estimated program impacts for employment and earnings 18 months after random assignment to the program using UI data. They also estimated EJC’s impact on public benefits receipt 18 months after random assignment using TANF and Food Stamps records.
Findings
- The study did not find any statistically significant differences between EJC and control group members on employment, earnings, or public benefits receipt 18 months after random assignment.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors noted that the study design compared an experimental program (EJC) designed to improve long-term job retention outcomes with a standard program (TJC) that had already been proven to produce short-term employment and earnings impacts. They hypothesized that this could explain the lack of statistically significant differences in outcomes between the two groups.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence provided in this study is high because it was based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the EJC and not to other factors. However, the study found no statistically significant impacts.