Absence of conflict of interest
Citation
Belville, J., Schoeph, K., Leger, R., Jenner, E., Maddox, D., Lass, K., & Beres, S. (2016). Vincennes University Logistics Training and Education Center: Final evaluation report. Retrieved from https://www.skillscommons.org/bitstream/handle/taaccct/9679/VU%20LTEC%20Final%20Evaluation%20Report%20TAACCCT%20R2_Sept%202016.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Highlights
- The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Logistics Training and Education Center (LTEC) initiative on employment and earnings outcomes. This summary focuses on the estimated outcomes of the Tractor-Trailer Driver Training (TTDT) program.
- The authors used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of TTDT program participants to a matched comparison group consisting of two student cohorts: a historical cohort of students from previous enrollment years and a concurrent cohort of students that attended a different college campus.
- The study did not find significant relationships between completion of the TTDT program and employment status or quarterly earnings.
- The quality of the 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 Logistics Training and Education Center initiative; other factors are likely to have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Logistics Training and Education Center (LTEC) Initiative
Features of the Intervention
The U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) program provided $1.9 billion in grants to community colleges to improve skills and support employment in high-demand industries, notably manufacturing, health care, information technology, energy, and transportation. Through four rounds of funding, DOL awarded 256 TAACCCT grants to approximately 800 educational institutions across the United States and its territories.
In 2012, Vincennes University (VU) was awarded a TAACCCT grant to establish the Logistics Training and Education Center (LTEC) initiative and purchase a facility to run the programs. The initiative was implemented to serve communities across nine counties in Indiana and prepare TAA-eligible workers and other participants for employment in the logistics industry. The main goal of the LTEC initiative was to increase the number of qualified candidates by providing them with the training and opportunity for employment. LTEC offered both academic and training programs. The academic programs included supply chain logistics management and tractor-trailer driver training. The training programs included global logistics associate, team lead essentials, and fork-lift essentials. The programs offered several support services to students which included academic coaching and advisement, distance education advisors for students enrolled in online courses, student meetings with employers during class time, tutoring and resume building assistance, job board, and soft skills incorporated into short-term training program courses. Additionally, a military education department for veterans was included in the initiative. Individuals could enter LTEC programs through referrals from the workforce system, partnerships with local companies, to word-of-mouth and walk-ins.
Several eligibility requirements had to be met before students could enroll in the Tractor-Trailer Driver Training (TTDT) program: 1) at least 18 years old, 2) pass a Department of Transportation (DOT) physical exam including a drug screen, 3) have a valid Indiana driver's license, 4) be able to read, write and speak English, 5) have a high school diploma, GED or be in the process of obtaining a GED, and 6) pass a minimum of three knowledge exams administered by the Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
Features of the Study
The study took place at the LTEC initiative facility in Central Indiana. The authors compared the outcomes of TTDT program participants to non-participants. A two-stage procedure was used that pre-screened treatment students with a pooled group of similar students and then employed a statistical technique to weight the analytic sample. The treatment group consisted of 64 students that completed the LTEC’s TTDT program between January 1, 2015 and September 30, 2015 with complete pre-program and outcome economic data. The comparison group was a pooled sample comprised of two cohorts of 54 students. The first were students who completed the TTDT program at LTEC between January 1, 2014 and September 30, 2014 before the implementation of the TAACCCT funding enhancements. The second were students who completed the TTDT program between January 1, 2015 and September 30, 2015 but at a different campus in the VU system (VU Fort Branch). Using administrative data collected by VU and economic data from the Indiana Department of Workforce Development (DWD), the authors conducted statistical models to examine differences in quarterly wages and employment status between treatment and comparison groups.
Findings
Earnings and wages
- The study did not find a significant association between completion of the TTDT program and quarterly wages.
Employment
- The study did not find a significant association between completion of the TTDT program and employment status.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors did not account for preexisting differences between the groups before the LTEC initiative. These preexisting differences between the groups—and not the LTEC initiative—could explain the estimated outcomes. Moreover, the authors use a pooled comparison group of two different cohorts of students: a historical group from previous enrollment years and a concurrent cohort of students that attended a different college campus. Because the outcome data for the historical cohort was collected from participants at different times, the estimated outcomes could be due to time-varying factors (such as overall changes in the economy) and not the intervention. The college varying characteristics of the concurrent cohort comparison group also creates a confound. 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 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 LTEC initiative; other factors are likely to have contributed.