The ChalleNGe program consisted of three phases. In Phase 1, participants attended a two-week, intensive orientation and assessment. Following this orientation, participants were formally enrolled in the program and considered cadets. The cadets then began Phase 2, which consisted of a 20-week education program focused on preparation for the GED exam and positive youth development. Phases 1 and 2 required the cadets to live on-site and experience a quasi-military environment. During Phase 3, the cadets participated in a nonresidential structured mentoring program for a year. The ChalleNGe program aimed to recruit disconnected youth between the ages of 16 and 18 who had dropped out of school and were not employed. Program applicants were required to be drug-free and not currently on parole or probation (other than juvenile status offenses), not serving time or awaiting sentencing, and not convicted of a felony or capital offense. Ten ChalleNGe programs were evaluated: Camp San Luis Obispo, CA; Camp Blanding, FL; Fort Gordon, GA; Rantoul, IL; Battle Creek, MI; Camp Shelby, MS; Roswell, NM; Salemburg, NC; Galveston, TX; and Fort McCoy, WI.
- 0.14,3.00
- 0.14,3.00
- 0.21,3.00
Summary
The ChalleNGe Program aimed to improve the lives of youth who were out of school and under- or unemployed by providing education, positive youth development, and mentorship.
Effectiveness rating and effect by outcome domain
Need more context or definitions for the Outcome Domain table below?
View the "Table help" to get more insight into terms, measures, and definitions.
Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns
| Outcome domain | Term | Effectiveness rating | Effect in 2018 dollars and percentages | Effect in standard deviations | Sample size |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Increase earnings | Short-term |  |
|||
| Long-term | 
|
$2,991 per year
|
0.143 | 1173 | |
| Very long-term | |
||||
| Increase employment | Short-term | |
|||
| Long-term |
|
6% (in percentage points)
|
0.143 | 1173 | |
| Very long-term | |
||||
| Decrease benefit receipt | Short-term | |
|||
| Long-term | |
||||
| Very long-term | |
||||
| Increase education and training | All measurement periods |
|
11% (in percentage points)
|
0.213 | 1173 |
Effectiveness rating key:
-
Well-supported
-
Supported
-
Not supported
-
Mixed support
-
Insufficient evidence
-
No evidence
Studies of this intervention
| Study quality rating | Study counts per rating |
|---|---|
 High
|
1 |
Implementation details
Dates covered by study
The ChalleNGe evaluation enrolled participants between 2005 and 2006 at 10 program sites. Evaluators measured impacts at 9, 21, and 36 months after sample members entered the study, and data collection ended in December 2009. ChalleNGe began as a pilot in 1993, was made permanent in 1998, and is currently operating as of 2021.
Organizations implementing intervention
States operated the ChalleNGe intervention under a Master Cooperative Agreement with the National Guard Bureau in the U.S. Department of Defense.
Populations served
The ChalleNGe intervention provided services to youth between the ages of 16 and 18 who were disconnected from secondary education (either dropped out or expelled), unemployed, drug-free, and had limited involvement with the criminal justice system. ChalleNGe did not have any income-based eligibility criteria.
The following statistics describe ChalleNGe sample members at the time of random assignment. The study population was 84 percent male and 16 percent female. About 37 percent were age 16, 52 percent were age 17, and 11 percent were age 18. Although the program served younger people, the evaluation only included applicants at least 16.5 years old. About equal numbers of study participants were White, not Hispanic (41 percent) and Black or African American, not Hispanic (40 percent). Fourteen percent were Hispanic or Latino of any race, and 4 percent identified as another race or ethnicity. Almost 30 percent of participants indicated they lived in a household that received public assistance. The majority of participants (84 percent) had only completed up to 10th grade, and about half reported receiving mostly D and F grades in school. Eighty-two percent of participants reported being suspended from school at least once, and 31 percent indicated being arrested at least once.
The majority of referrals to ChalleNGe came from relatives or self-referrals by youth who learned of the program through its outreach activities such as television, radio, Internet, and newspaper advertising. ChalleNGe was a voluntary program, and there were no requirements for participants to serve in the military.
Description of services implemented
ChalleNGe consisted of three sequential phases: (1) the Pre-ChalleNGe Phase (2 weeks), (2) the Residential Phase (20 weeks), and the Post-residential Phase (1 year). For the first two phases, participants lived at the program site with their peers and received case management, education, soft-skills training, work-readiness activities, and job search assistance services. The first two phases were intense with a highly structured schedule that actively engaged cadets with classes, physical training, maintaining barracks, group meetings, counselor meetings, homework, and meals from 5:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. The sites were often on a military base.
- Pre-ChalleNGe Phase. The first component of ChalleNGe was a two-week assessment and orientation characterized by its demanding physical and psychological activities. During the Pre-ChalleNGe Phase, participants were busy for 16 hours a day with formal physical activities, drilling, and training on ChalleNGe operating procedures. This initial two-week period sought to build teamwork and identity among candidates and develop soft skills such as self-esteem and self-efficacy. Cadets learned the program’s rules and expectations; learned military bearing, discipline, and teamwork; and began physical fitness training. During this period, staff assessed candidates’ readiness for the program related to physical fitness, instruction following, leadership, and attitude. Candidates who successfully completed this phase formally enrolled and started the second phase.
- Residential Phase. The Residential Phase was the most intense segment of the intervention, consisting of eight distinct core components focused on promoting positive youth development among participants. ChalleNGe staff indicated that they framed their focus on positive youth development as helping youth achieve their full potential rather than as addressing problems or deficits. Staff exposed participants to activities and environments intended to promote healthy development. Services included case management, education, soft-skills training, work-readiness activities, and job search assistance. The eight core components were as follows: Leadership/Followership, Responsible Citizenship, Service to Community, Life-Coping Skills, Physical Fitness, Health and Hygiene, Job Skills, and Academic Excellence. The structure of the program was quasi-military, in which cadets were separated into platoons and squads, resided in barracks, received short haircuts, wore uniforms, and were subject to military-style discipline. Staff supervised cadets very closely and planned their daily schedules with little personal free time. Cadets had to demonstrate 80 percent achievement on competency measures related to the eight core components to graduate. Cadet evaluations included written tests, oral examinations, and staff observation of progress. As participants reached the end of the residential phase, cadets and staff worked together to secure a post-residential placement that included either employment, education, or military service. For participants who chose employment placements, all programs provided career exploration resources and helped identify employment interests to pursue in the Post-residential Phase. Program sites also required participants to take the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery to help identify future interests.
- Post-residential Phase. Successful Residential Phase completers proceeded to the Post-residential Phase, during which they received structured mentoring services. Participants nominated their own mentors (for example, friends or family outside of the program) at the time of initial program application. The Post-residential Phase aimed to help participants maintain newly learned attitudes and behaviors from the Residential Phase when they returned to their home communities and began their job, education, or military placements. Initiation of the mentor-cadet relationship occurred halfway through the Residential Phase after staff screened and trained mentors on the ChalleNGe approach and model. Staff maintained monthly contact with participants and mentors to help mediate issues and capture outcomes on participant progress.
Findings from site visits conducted across the 10 program sites included in the evaluation indicated that ChalleNGe programs offered across the country were similar in terms of terminology used, staff structure, and the core components of the Residential Phase. However, the study found differences across sites in their approach to discipline, the delivery of educational activities, and the military characteristics embedded in the program.
Challenges. Despite ChalleNGe programs operating in accordance with an established national model, program staff highlighted several challenges they faced in service delivery at the time of the study. This included staffing shortages when staff who were also active National Guard members were deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, flat or decreasing funding levels, inconsistency in academic readiness of participants, and the ability to effectively monitor cadet-mentor relationships in the Post-residential Phase because of the lack of in-person interactions.
Service intensity
ChalleNGe was a 17-month intervention consisting of 22 weeks of residential services (PreChalleNGe and Residential Phases) and a 1-year Post-residential Phase. In the Post-residential Phase, cadets were required to have a minimum of four contacts with their mentors each month, with two being in person.
Based on an analysis of graduation data, 83 percent of the intervention group entered the Pre-ChalleNGe Phase, 68 percent completed the Pre-ChalleNGe Phase and 53 percent completed the Residential Phase. Among ChalleNGe graduates (those who completed the Pre-ChalleNGe and Residential phases), 93 percent had a placement sometime in the 12-month Post-residential Phase, with 81 percent reporting any contact with a mentor in the same period.
Comparison conditions
For each class cycle that the 10 program sites operated from June 2005 to December 2006 (there were 2 class cycles per year, starting in January and July) the participating programs conducted recruitment and enrollment as they normally would if the evaluation were not happening. If a cycle included at least 25 percent more eligible applicants than there were slots available, the programs randomly assigned eligible individuals to an intervention group that was offered the ChalleNGe program services or a comparison group that was not offered services. Youth in the comparison group could access services like those ChalleNGe offered, such as participating in GED preparation programs, elsewhere in the community.
Partnerships
ChalleNGe sites engaged in a variety of partnerships to deliver services, instruction, and post-residential placement activities. This included agreements for participants at some sites to receive credits at local community colleges. Some ChalleNGe sites also partnered with local training centers to offer courses to expose them to potential career paths. Courses included culinary arts, welding, auto mechanics, health care, and computer programming. Sites also partnered with local job search agencies to provide information on projected employment options over the next three to five years.
Staffing
A program director (who reported to the state’s adjutant general, the official in charge of the state’s Military Affairs Agency) oversaw each program site. Other staff included a deputy director, cadre supervisor, cadre (team leaders who supervised cadets day and night), teachers, counselors, mentor coordinators, and case managers. Typical sites included about 50 staff, with half of staff being cadre. Many ChalleNGe staff had military experience or were active National Guard members.
Fidelity measures
The study did not discuss any tools to measure fidelity to the intervention model.
Funding source
The program was funded through a cost-sharing model between states and the federal government. The federal government paid 60 percent of costs, and states made up the remaining 40 percent. The state share of funding was assembled from a variety of state and local resources. Some sites had local school districts provide volunteer teachers. In some cases, small nonprofits raised funds to support other program activities such as uniforms, graduation stipends, and yearbooks.
Cost information
The average cost per participant was $12,847 in 2018 dollars.
This figure is based on cost information reported by authors of the study or studies the Pathways Clearinghouse reviewed for this intervention. The Pathways Clearinghouse converted that information to a single amount expressed in 2018 dollars; for details, see the FAQ. Where there are multiple studies of an intervention rated high or moderate quality, the Pathways Clearinghouse computed the average of costs reported across those studies.
Cost information is not directly comparable across interventions due to differences in the categories of costs reported and the amount of time interventions lasted. Cost information is not an official price tag or guarantee.
State(s) where implemented
The Pathways Clearinghouse refers to interventions by the names used in study reports or manuscripts. Some intervention names may use language that is not consistent with our style guide, preferences, or the terminology we use to describe populations.