Earnings and wages-Mod/high-No impacts

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Search
for studies on
this topic using
keywords
and filters

Displaying 71 - 80 of 182

A randomized clinical trial of supported employment for inner-city patients with severe mental disorders (Drake et al. 1999)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of Individual Placement and Support (IPS) services on employment and earnings outcomes. The study was a randomized controlled trial that assigned…
Forging a Path: Final Impacts and Costs of New York City's Young Adult Internship Program (Cummings, Farrell, & Skemer 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Young Adult Internship Program (YAIP) on employment and earnings. The study was a randomized controlled trial that used data from the…
Can sector strategies promote longer-term effects? Three-year impacts from the WorkAdvance demonstration (Schaberg 2017)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the WorkAdvance sectoral training program on year three employment and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the evaluation at the Madison…
Long-term effects of a sectoral advancement strategy: Costs, benefits, and impacts from the WorkAdvance demonstration (Schaberg & Greenberg 2020)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the WorkAdvance sectoral training program on employment and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the evaluation at the Towards Employment…
Can sector strategies promote longer-term effects? Three-year impacts from the WorkAdvance demonstration (Schaberg 2017)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the WorkAdvance sectoral training program on year three employment and earnings outcomes. This profile focuses on the evaluation at the St. Nicks…
Evaluating two welfare-to-work program approaches: Two-year findings on the labor force attachment and human capital development programs in three sites (Hamilton et al. 1997)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) on earnings and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the comparison…
Evaluating two welfare-to-work program approaches: Two-year findings on the labor force attachment and human capital development programs in three sites (Hamilton et al. 1997)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) on earnings and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the comparison…
Evaluating two welfare-to-work program approaches: Two-year findings on the labor force attachment and human capital development programs in three sites (Hamilton et al. 1997)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Job Opportunities and Basic Skills Training (JOBS) on earnings, education, employment, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses…
Final impact findings from the child support noncustodial parent employment demonstration (CSPED) (Cancian, Meyer, & Wood 2019)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Child Support Noncustodial Parent Employment Demonstration (CSPED) on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt. The study used a…
New perspectives on creating jobs: Final impacts of the next generation of subsidized employment programs (Barden et al. 2018)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Enhanced Transitional Jobs Demonstration (ETJD) on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt in seven sites. This profile focuses on…

CLEAR Icon Key

Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.

High Causal Evidence

Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence

Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence

Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis

Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis

Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis

Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable

Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence

The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence

The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence

The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence

The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.