Study Details | Pathways to Work

3190.03-Individualized Job S

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the intervention.

Intervention: Individualized Job Search Assistance with Training (IJSA+)

Services provided:

Case management, Training (Occupational or sectoral training), Work and work-based learning (On-the-job training), Work readiness activities (Job search assistance)

Setting: Urban only

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Evaluators determined who was eligible for the demonstration through a two-stage screening process that first identified unemployment insurance (UI) claimants who were permanently separated from their previous job and then selected the claimants who were mostly likely to exhaust their UI benefits. The evaluators then randomly assigned eligible claimants to one of three treatment groups—Structured Job Search Assistance, IJSA, or IJSA+—or to a comparison group. This review focuses on comparisons of the IJSA+ group to the comparison group in Washington, DC. Other reviews examine additional contrasts.

Time period of study:

Assignment occurred from June 1995 to June 1996, and individuals were followed for 10 quarters.

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase short-term earnings, Increase long-term earnings, Increase short-term employment, Increase long-term employment, Decrease short-term benefit receipt, Decrease long-term benefit receipt

Other outcome domains examined:

None

Study funded by:

The funder for the study was the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, Unemployment Insurance Service.

Results

View table help Need more context or definitions for the table below? View the table help to get insight into terms, measures, and definitions.

Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase short-term earnings	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 6	High	106.00	1996 dollars	4,015
Increase long-term earnings	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 10	High	51.00	1997 dollars	3,527
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	1.00	percentage points	4,015
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 10	High	0.20	percentage points	3,527
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of UI payments, annual	Year 1	High	-38.00	1996 dollars	4,023
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of UI payments, annual	Year 2	High	15.00	1997 dollars	4,023

Short-term outcomes are those measured 18 months or fewer after participants are first offered services. Long-term outcomes are those measured between 18 months and 5 years after participants are first offered services. Very long-term outcomes are those measured 5 years or more after participants are first offered services.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

The findings quality describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the intervention. We do not display findings that rate low.

Findings key:

A moderate-to-large favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large favorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that might be due to chance
A favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A favorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that might be due to chance
An unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
An unfavorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size or direction
A finding of no effect that might be due to chance

Favorable findings are impacts in a direction that is socially desirable. Statistical significance indicates the likelihood that a study finding is due to the intervention, rather than due to chance. Findings are described as moderate-to-large if the intervention produced a sufficiently large change in the outcome. An impact receives this designation if the standardized effect size is equal to or greater than 0.25 or equal to or less than -0.25.

Sample characteristics

UI claimants eligible for the demonstration in the District of Columbia were slightly more likely to be female (55 percent) than male (45 percent), and the majority of participants were Black (83 percent). At the start of the study, 15 percent of participants did not have a high school diploma. Before the study, 59 percent had been employed in clerical or sales occupations, and 62 percent had been employed in their previous job for fewer than three years.

Age

Mean age

38 years

Sex

Female	55%
Male	46%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	83%
White	10%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	5%

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if the authors reported race and ethnicity separately; in these cases, we report the category White, rather than White, not Hispanic.

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were unemployed

100%

Participant education

Had some postsecondary education	30%
Had a high school diploma or GED	85%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	15%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Local UI offices oversaw service provision by local job service agencies. Economic Dislocation and Worker Adjustment Act staff enrolled individuals in training.

Program history:

The program was developed for the demonstration.

Intervention services:

UI claimants were required to participate in an orientation and a one-on-one assessment interview. During the interview, program staff developed a service plan to address the claimant's needs; the plan’s demonstration-specific services, such as aptitude and interest testing, job search workshops, or additional counseling, were mandatory. In addition, a special effort was made to enroll interested claimants in training through coordination with local Economic Dislocation and Worker Adjustment Act staff; however, very few individuals enrolled in a training program.

Mandatory services:

All participants were required to receive services in order to remain eligible for UI.

Comparison services:

UI claimants were required to fulfill the usual requirements in the District of Columbia to continue receiving unemployment compensation benefits. They could receive any services available in the community.

Service receipt duration:

On average, UI claimants completed service receipt 62 days after they began receiving UI benefits.

Intervention funding:

U.S. Department of Labor

Cost information:

The average cost of providing the intervention was $336 per participant. The average cost of providing comparison group services was $0 per person. The net intervention cost, or difference between the two, was $336 per person. This represents how much more it cost to provide intervention services compared to comparison services.

These figures are based on cost information reported by study authors. The Pathways Clearinghouse converted that information to a single amount expressed in 2018 dollars; for details, see the FAQ. This information is not an official price tag or guarantee.

Study publications

Decker, Paul T., Lance Freeman, and Daniel H. Klepinger (1999). Assisting unemployment insurance claimants: The one-year impacts of the Job Search Assistance Demonstration, Washington, DC: Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor.

Decker, Paul, Robert Olsen, Lance Freeman, and Daniel Klepinger (2000). Assisting unemployment insurance claimants: The long-term impacts of the Job Search Assistance Demonstration, Washington, DC: Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. Available at https://wdr.doleta.gov/owsdrr/00-2/00-02.pdf.

View the glossary for more information about these and other terms used on this page.

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.

Study of Individualized Job Search Assistance with Training (IJSA+)—Washington, DC