Skip to main content
  • Older Workers

    The older workers topic area examines a broad range of employment and training programs funded by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration and other organizations and broad federal or state policies that support and/or improve the employment prospects and financial security of workers age 40 and older. CLEAR assessed the strength of causal evidence provided in each study and summarized each study’s design, methods, findings, and the intervention examined.

    Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 2005 – 2017.

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.

1866
Findings:
View full synthesis report: Older Workers Synthesis

Recently Added

CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.

Export Results

Displaying 41 - 46 of 46

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

    High Causal Evidence Icon

    Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.

  • Moderate Causal Evidence

    Moderate Causal Evidence Icon

    Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.

  • Low Causal Evidence

    Low Causal Evidence Icon

    Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.

  • Causal Impact Analysis

    Causal Analysis (No Rating) Icon

    Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.

  • Descriptive Analysis

    Descriptive Analysis Icon

    Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.

  • Implementation Analysis

    Implementation Analysis Icon

    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.

    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.

    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.

    The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.

  • Unfavorable

    The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.

    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.

    Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.

  • Favorable - low evidence

    Plus Sign Icon representing a Favorable Rating

    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

    Mixed Results Rating Icon

    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

    slash icon

    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

    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.