Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 14
Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report built on the process and descriptive analyses of the National Job Corps Study to understand which Job Corps program features led to positive results for applicants and participants. Job…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report aimed to explore in greater detail the findings of the National Job Corps Study, an impact study whose final report was published in 2001. Specifically, the authors sought to understand…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study’s objective was to collect information to help Job Corps program and policy staff improve participant retention in the program. Job Corps offers intensive academic classroom instruction…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This Government Accountability Office brief studied the costs and outcomes of the Job Corps program during program year 1991 (covering calendar year July 1991 through June 1992). Job Corps offers…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
An analysis for the National Job Corps Study found no relationship between estimated impacts on participants and Job Corps center aggregate performance measures. This study sought to determine…Study Type: Implementation Analysis
The purpose of the study was to identify areas in which Job Corps can improve its delivery of literacy services. Job Corps is a national program that provides youth with job training skills while…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The National Job Corps Study produced several reports, including a main impact report (see CLEAR profile of Schochet et al. 2001 ) that found positive impacts of Job Corps—a national vocationally…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to estimate the impact of Job Corps on the employment and earnings of participants who obtained a general education development (GED) certificate or vocational training…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
The study’s objective was to determine whether the benefits of Job Corps exceeded its costs. The authors used data on impacts from the National Job Corps Study to estimate the program’s benefits and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The National Job Corps Study included several reports, including this final impact report. The report’s objective was to examine the impact of the Job Corps program on participants’ long-term…
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.