Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 241 - 250 of 482
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of participation in a Workforce Investment Act (WIA) occupational skills training (OST) or on-the-job training (OJT) program on employment and…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of participation in building trades apprenticeship programs sponsored jointly by employers and unions on apprentices’ program completion rates. The…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Jobs Program on long-term earnings and monthly hours worked. The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Researchers…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Jobs Program on short-term earnings. The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Researchers administered a pre-test two weeks…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to measure employment and earnings impacts for the four State Partnership Initiative (SPI) sites that implemented the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Work Incentives…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
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…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
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…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to estimate the impact of the Nevada Claimant Placement Project (NCPP), an intervention designed to accelerate labor force reattachment among Unemployment Insurance (UI)…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the relationship between the risk factor-based decision making (RFBDM) program and employment attainment. The study used a non-experimental comparison-group…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the effects of the 2008 GI Bill on post-9/11 veterans’ employment and educational attainment. The study used a statistical model to compare outcomes between…
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.
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.