Study Details | Pathways to Work

3149.03-Work Advancement and

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: Work Advancement and Support Center (WASC) Demonstration

Population and employment barriers:

Employment status and income level (Employed)

Services provided:

Case management, Education, Employment retention services, Supportive services, Training (Occupational or sectoral training), Work and work-based learning (On-the-job training)

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

The study used a lottery-like process to randomly assign study participants to the WASC group or to a comparison group. Specifically, once an eligible individual consented to participate and filled out a baseline questionnaire, site staff submitted the individual’s information online to the evaluator, and an algorithm created by the evaluator performed random assignment. The WASC was implemented in three locations (Dayton, OH; Bridgeport, CT; and San Diego, CA), and this review examines results for Bridgeport. Other reviews on this site examine the other two locations. The research sample size was 705, with 351 people in the WASC group and 354 people in the comparison group. Random assignment occurred from fall 2006 to early 2008. The authors examined 12-month survey data and administrative data. Those eligible for the survey spoke English or Spanish and had been randomly assigned between October 18, 2006, and August 31, 2007. Of the 706 participants, 387 met these eligibility criteria. Of those eligible, 375 were randomly selected to participate in the survey.

Time period of study:

The WASC Bridgeport study site enrolled clients from fall 2006 through early 2008. Individuals were followed for a three-year period.

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, Increase education and training

Other outcome domains examined:

Physical health, Mental health

Study funded by:

Funding for the demonstration project came from the U.S. Department of Labor, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Earlier grants that supported this project were from the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Joyce Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the James Irvine Foundation, and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation.

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	Comparison group mean	Intervention group mean	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase short-term earnings	Annual earnings	Year 1	High	14.00	13.00	-662.00	2008 dollars	705
Increase long-term earnings	Annual earnings	Year 3	High			2,244.00	2010 dollars	705
Increase short-term employment	Employed for four consecutive quarters	Year 1	High	65.70	66.50	0.80	percentage points	705
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, annual	Year 1	High	96.20	92.40	-3.80	percentage points	705
Increase long-term employment	Employed for four consecutive quarters	Year 2	High	56.90	58.30	1.40	percentage points	705
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, annual	Year 2	High	80.70	83.30	2.60	percentage points	705
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 1	High			-4.00	2008 dollars	705
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP, annual	Year 1	High			2.20	percentage points	705
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Amount of Food Stamps/SNAP benefits, annual	Year 2	High			51.00	2009 dollars	705
Decrease long-term benefit receipt	Received Food Stamps/SNAP, annual	Year 2	High			0.50	percentage points	705
Increase education and training	Obtained a license or certificate	Year 1	High			8.90	percentage points	306
Increase education and training	Obtained any degree or diploma	Year 1	High			0.50	percentage points	306

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

The study recruited low-wage workers and reemployed dislocated workers with income eligibility guidelines. Eligible study participants were those who earned less than $10 per hour and had a household income below 130 percent of the federal poverty level. The study also focused on a population that had a limited prior connection to the welfare system and thus was in most need of assistance with work supports. As a result, current recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) were not eligible to enroll in the demonstration, and current recipients of Food Stamps made up a maximum of 50 percent of the sample. In Bridgeport, 67 percent of participants were women, and the average age for the full research sample at baseline was between 33 and 34 years old. The sample was 61 percent Black and 23 percent Hispanic. In addition, 72 percent of participants were single, and 56 percent had at least one child. About two-thirds worked part time, and 37 percent had some education beyond high school.

Age

Mean age

33 years

Sex

Female	67%
Male	34%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	61%
White, not Hispanic	8%
Asian	1%
Another race	7%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	23%

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.

Family status

Married	19%
Parents	56%
Single parents	42%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were employed	100%
Had low incomes	100%

Participant education

Had some postsecondary education	37%
Had a high school diploma or GED	83%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	17%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

One-stop career center (Southwestern CTWorks Center)

Program history:

The WASC expanded the mission of one-stop career centers to include low-wage workers and therefore was more comprehensive than the existing workforce development system. The Bridgeport WASC site operated from October 2006 through March 2009.

Intervention services:

The WASC program delivered integrated, intensive retention and advancement services to incumbent workers. It provided information about, and simplified access to, financial work supports, such as the earned-income tax credit and child care subsidies. Services were offered at one-stop career centers where workforce development and welfare staff worked together in the same unit as a team. Retention and advancement services included career coaching and access to training and education to stabilize individuals' employment and help them find better-paying jobs. The WASC model in Bridgeport, CT, focused mostly on providing access to, and funding for, vocational training. Bridgeport’s program offered access to work supports through a designated work support specialist.

Mandatory services:

None.

Comparison services:

Existing employment services with a focus on job placement (instead of advancement) for low-wage workers were implemented in the comparison group.

Service receipt duration:

WASC services were available for two years to all intervention group members.

Intervention funding:

Southwestern CTWorks Center funds, including Workforce Investment Act (WIA) training funds and non-WIA discretionary funds.

Study publications

Miller, Cynthia, Betsy L. Tessler, and Mark Van Dok (2012). Strategies to help low wage workers advance implementation and final impacts of the Work Advancement and Support Center (WASC) demonstration, New York: MDRC. Available at https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/full_627.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 Work Advancement and Support Center (WASC) Demonstration—Bridgeport, CT