Policy Challenge
Path 2 Copy Created with Sketch.
Program Type
Path 2 Copy Created with Sketch.
4
5
15
Adult Earnings
Job training with other services (eAE)
7
0
Evaluation Effect Average Age Observations Experimental Evaluation Country Intervention
GAO 1996 4 16-65 191,522 Yes United States Specific-job training with job search assistance and remedial education
Martins 2014 1 35 161,680 No Portugal Activation program (Job search counseling, training,traineeships, workfare)
Dyke 2006 i -13 18-65 134,320 No United States Basic education, vocational skills training or other longer-term program
Mueser 2007 9 36 107,335 No United States Job-specific training with job search assistance and remedial education
Schochet 2008 5 19 11,313 Yes United States Intensive vocational training, education services and other (counseling, social skills training, etc.)
Corson 1996 1 43 6,195 Yes United States Job-search assistance with either technical training or geographical relocation assistance
Centro de Microdatos 2008 9 22 3,680 No Chile In-classroom job training with internship, technical assistance and monitoring
Friedlander 1988 ii 7 21-30 3,150 Yes United States Job search for all participants, internships and training as required
Friedlander 1988 i 10 21-30 2,757 Yes United States Mix program (includes job search, unpaid work experience and training)
Miller 2012 0 33 2,147 Yes United States Career coaching with education/training programs and information about work programs
Mourelo 2017 35 26-65 2,127 No Argentina Skills upgrading, vocational training, self-employment and job search assistance
Quint 1994 -8 19 2,088 Yes United States Education services and employment-focused skills training with internships
Black 2003 i 8 37 1,981 Yes United States Job search assistance and intensive training services
De Hoop 2018 -1 16-60 1,673 Yes Nicaragua Capital transfers and technical skills training in agriculture
Geckeler 2017 -7 16-24 1,620 Yes United States Tutoring services to re-enroll participants at school, jobs, and in internships

Graph of Effects

This graph shows the effects of [Number of Evaluations] evaluations of [Program Type] programs. The first evaluation, [Evaluation name 1], estimated an effect of [Estimated effect Eval. 1] points (graphed with the top grey circle). Because this is an estimate, there is uncertainty about what the true effect is. But we know that the true effect will probably lie between a low value of [True effect lie between – Low value, Eval. 1] and a high value of [True effect lie between – High value, Eval. 1] (graphed with the top horizontal line). We can combine the estimates from all the evaluations and compute an average effect of [Estimated effect, Average] (graphed with the black circle). There is also uncertainty about where the true average effect is. But we know that the true average effect probably lies between [True effect lie between – Low value, Average] and [True effect lie between – High value, Average] points (graphed with the bottom horizontal line).
Evaluation Effects Low Value High Value Weight in Average Effect (%)
Black 2003 i 8 1 16 6
Centro de Microdatos 2008 9 3 14 7
Corson 1996 1 -3 5 7
De Hoop 2018 -1 -9 7 6
Dyke 2006 i -13 -14 -12 8
Friedlander 1988 i 10 4 16 6
Friedlander 1988 ii 7 1 14 6
GAO 1996 4 3 5 8
Geckeler 2017 -7 -16 2 5
Martins 2014 1 0 2 8
Miller 2012 0 -7 7 6
Mourelo 2017 35 27 42 6
Mueser 2007 9 7 10 8
Quint 1994 -8 -16 0 6
Schochet 2008 5 2 8 7
Overall