Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable 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 21 - 30 of 37

Employment services utilization and outcomes among substance abusing offenders participating in California’s Proposition 36 drug treatment initiative (Evans et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the effect of California’s Proposition 36 employment services on employment, earnings, receipt of public benefits, and recidivism. The authors used a…
Two essays on unemployment insurance: Claimant responses to policy changes [Comparison between claimants who applied for UI benefits before and after WPRS] (Noel 1998)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
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…
Two essays on unemployment insurance: Claimant responses to policy changes [Comparison between claimants who applied for UI benefits after WPRS only] (Noel 1998)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
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…
Cost-effectiveness of targeted reemployment bonuses (O'Leary et al. 2005)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
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…
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 & Huang 2006)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
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…
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 Job Prep Training] (Hollenbeck & Huang 2006)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Community and Technical College (CTC) Job Preparatory Training program on the employment rate, earnings, and public benefit receipt of adults…
Net impact estimates for services provided through the Workforce Investment Act. ETA Occasional Paper 2005-06. [WIA Adult] (Hollenbeck et al. 2005)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult Program’s core, intensive, and training services on the employment rate, earnings, and benefits receipt of…
Net impact estimates for services provided through the Workforce Investment Act. ETA Occasional Paper 2005-06. [WIA Dislocated Worker] (Hollenbeck et al. 2005)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Dislocated Worker Program’s core, intensive, and training services on the employment rate, earnings, and…
Requiring Unemployment Insurance recipients to register with the Public Employment Service (Director & Englander 1988)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
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…
The economic impact of the Nevada Claimant Employment Program (Hanna & Turney 1990)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
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…

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.