This topic area focuses on youth aged 14-24 who have not recently been in school or the labor force. In particular, CLEAR identified research that examined interventions to provide opportunities for youth to improve their labor market outcomes. This includes research describing these interventions and their implementation, along with studies of the interventions’ effectiveness.
Opportunities for Youth
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1992 - 2015.
Synthesis Reports
Synthesis reports look at the research evidence across studies within a topic area. They also highlight gaps in the literature, and suggest areas in which further research is needed.
201
Findings:
View full synthesis report: Evidence on the Effectiveness of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Displaying 31 - 40 of 102
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study examined the impact of the Los Angeles County Repeat Offender Prevention Program (ROPP) on youths’ recidivism and educational outcomes. The authors randomly assigned eligible youth to…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Harford County (Maryland) Juvenile Drug Court on recidivism. The authors used administrative records to estimate the impact of the drug court…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study examined the impact of structured after-care and reentry services for justice-involved youth on their recidivism rates. The study used a nonexperimental design to compare youth who…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Reentry Services Project (RSP) on juvenile recidivism. The authors estimated regression models comparing the number of criminal and official…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Boys & Girls Clubs of America’s Targeted Re-Entry Initiative on youth’s recidivism. The authors used administrative data to match…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of providing summer employment support on the employment of youth with emotional and behavioral difficulties. The authors used a randomized controlled…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the JOBSTART program on employment, earnings, and education and training outcomes over a four-year follow-up period. About 2,300 youth were…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of being matched to employment through the Demand-Side Youth Offender Demonstration Project (DSYODP) Phase I on youths’ average weekly earnings. The…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This study explored the successes and challenges of implementing Youth Opportunity grants, which were awarded to 36 low-income communities in May 2000 to address high unemployment, low graduation…Study Type: Descriptive Analysis
This report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) summarizes the findings of a descriptive study of Youth Opportunity Grants. The 36 grants issued under this program, which began in 2000…
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.