Causal Impact Analysis

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 631 - 640 of 1084

Case management for dually diagnosed individuals involved in the criminal justice system (Godley et al. 2000)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the relationship between the Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities/Mental Illness Substance Abuse (TASC/MISA) program and a range of outcomes, including…
A controlled trial of supported employment for people with severe mental illness and justice involvement (Bond et al. 2015)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) intervention on employment and recidivism outcomes relative to a job club program called Work Choice.…
Prisoner reentry experiences of adult females: Characteristics, Service Receipt, and Outcomes of Participants in the SVORI multi-site evaluation (Lindquist et al. 2010)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of a violent prisoner reentry program, the Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative (SVORI), on several outcomes of female prisoners reentering…
Substance Use Treatment and Reentry (STAR) program: Final evaluation report (Hunter & Huang 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Substance Use Treatment and Reentry (STAR) program on post-release employment and recidivism outcomes for justice-involved young adults in…
Evaluating recidivism and job quality outcomes for participants in the Hoosier Initiative for Reentry Employment (HIRE) program (Northcutt Bohmert et al. 2017)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of job placement through the Hoosier Initiative for Reentry Employment (HIRE) program on recidivism among people released from Indiana prisons in 2014…
The role of intensive case management services in reentry: The northern Kentucky female offender reentry project (McDonald & Arlinghaus 2014)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
This study examined the impact of the Northern Kentucky Female Offender Reentry Project’s intensive case management (ICM) services on releasees’ education, employment, and recidivism outcomes. Using…
Prison-based education and reentry into the mainstream labor market (Tyler & Kling 2007)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of obtaining a general education diploma (GED) while in prison from 1994 to 2000 in Florida on male prisoners’ post-incarceration employment, earnings…
The relative importance of selected variables on the employment consistency of Virginia ex-offenders (Onyewu 2009)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence
This study examines the effectiveness of prison-based career and technical education (CTE) on post-incarceration employment among males released from Virginia prisons from July 2000 to June 2001.…
Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs [Comparison between Full-WIA Services versus Core-and-Intensive Services]. (McConnell et al. 2016)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 15 months.…
Providing public workforce services to job seekers: 15-month impact findings on the WIA Adult and Dislocated Worker programs [Comparison betwwen Full-WIA Services versus Core Services]. (McConnell et al. 2016)
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Adult and Dislocated Worker programs on training, employment, earnings, and service receipt after 15 months.…

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.