Guided Customer Choice was designed to broadly represent the approach that most local areas were implementing on their own under WIA. Participants in Guided Customer Choice had to complete six mandatory counseling activities to select a training program and then had to assess whether they had enough resources to complete the training. Counselors were directed to help customers make an informed decision about training. However, counselors did not direct participants toward particular occupations, and participants could independently select their training program. Participants received an ITA in the amount of $3,000 to $5,000, depending on the program site. Program participants were dislocated workers and adults, 18 years or older, who were eligible to receive training funded by WIA. The program operated in eight sites: Atlanta, GA; Bridgeport, CT; Charlotte, NC; Jacksonville, FL; Maricopa County, AZ; North Cook County, IL; northeast GA; and Phoenix, AZ.
Comparing the effectiveness of Guided Customer Choice to the effectiveness of Structured Customer Choice indicates the effect of being referred to a set of services that includes those unique to Guided Customer Choice; the comparison indicates how much better the offer of Guided Customer Choice meets participants’ needs than the offer of Structured Customer Choice. Participants in Guided Customer Choice had less intensive, mandatory counseling (that is, counselors did not direct participants toward particular occupations, and participants had fewer mandatory counseling activities), could independently select their training program, and had relatively lower ITA amounts of $3,000 to $5,000 (fixed by program site). In contrast, participants in Structured Customer Choice received an ITA of up to $8,000; were required to participate in eight vocational counseling activities (including a mandatory orientation, guidance on selecting a high-return occupation, and guidance on assessing the relative costs and benefits of various training programs); and received directive counseling, in which program staff could reject participants’ training selections. The study that compared Guided Customer Choice with Structured Customer Choice also evaluated Maximum Customer Choice.
Low
