Study Details | Pathways to Work

25447.01-Study of Rapid Emplo

Study quality: Low

Low

Reason for the rating: This study received a low study quality rating because it is a quasi-experimental design that does not demonstrate that the program and comparison groups were sufficiently similar before the program.

Program: Rapid Employment Model (REM)

Characteristics of study participants:

Justice involvement

Services provided:

Job placement, Job search assistance, Occupational or sectoral training, Performance- or behavior-based financial incentives, Soft skills training

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Methods and Standards Protocol version used for review: Version 1.0

Learn about our protocol

Study design

Design:

Quasi-experimental design

Study group formation:

Individuals were referred to REM from one of three programs: Project Re-Integration of Offenders, Choices (a workforce program for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families recipients), or Food Stamp Employment and Training. The comparison group was created by matching each program group member to the most similar comparison group member, with each comparison group member matched to no more than one program group member. Participants were exactly matched on the year they entered the program, their county, and whether their earnings had recently dipped at least 20 percent. Researchers also used the following variables for matching: race and ethnicity, gender, age, percentage of time spent in workforce development services the year before entering the program, and measures of earnings and employment. This review analyzes the 2006 cohort. A review elsewhere on this site analyzes findings from the 2007 cohort for REM.

Time period of study:

REM and its impacts were studied from January 2006 to March 2010. This review examines impacts for individuals that enrolled in the program in 2006.

Pathways to Work only reports results from studies with a study quality rating of high or moderate.

Sample characteristics

Employment and public benefit status

Cash assistance recipients

14%

Specific employment barriers

Were involved with the justice system

83%

Program implementation

Implementing organization:

Travis County, WorkSource—Greater Austin (the local workforce investment board, which operates three career centers), and local providers (five training providers: Austin Academy, Austin Community College, Construction Gateway, Institute for Child Care Excellence, and Professional Institute of Dental Assisting; and one job placement provider: Goodwill Industries).

Program services:

REM combined short-term training with job placement services and incentive payments. All participants were offered occupational training in areas such as construction, truck driving, or clerical work for up to six weeks. Individuals with limited work histories completed pre-employment training that included job-readiness and employment skills. Participants worked with case managers to select their training. Participants could receive $100 in cash or gift cards for each week they attended all training sessions. They could also receive supportive services while participating in the trainings, though the type and availability of services varied by referral source and training provider. Supportive services included access to child care, work clothing, and transportation assistance. Training providers received $100 for every participant who was employed within three weeks of completing training (if the wage was at least $9 per hour). Participants who were not employed within those three weeks received job placement services from the local workforce investment board. If those services were unsuccessful, participants received intensive job placement services through Goodwill. Participants earned an additional $50 if they were hired and reported their employment to their training provider.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

The comparison group could receive other workforce services available in the community, including Workforce Investment Act services like job matching and resume development or job search through the WorkInTexas program. Comparison group members did not participate in the trainings offered by REM.

Study publications

Smith, Tara Carter, Christopher T. King, and Daniel G. Schroeder (2011). Rapid employment model evaluation: 2011 update, Austin, TX: Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources, the University of Texas at Austin. Available at https://raymarshallcenter.org/files/2006/01/REM_2011_Update_Final_%205-16-11.pdf

Smith, Tara Carter, Christopher T. King, and Daniel G. Schroeder (2007). Rapid employment model evaluation: Initial findings, Austin, TX: Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources, the University of Texas at Austin. Available at https://raymarshallcenter.org/files/2007/12/WFE_REM_Final_Rpt_Draft_12-5-07.v3.pdf

Smith, Tara Carter, Christopher T. King, and Daniel G. Schroeder (2008). Rapid employment model evaluation: Update, Austin, TX: Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources, the University of Texas at Austin. Available at https://raymarshallcenter.org/files/2008/12/REM_eval_update_01-28-09.pdf

Smith, Tara Carter, Christopher T. King, and Daniel G. Schroeder (2010). Rapid employment model evaluation: Update #2, Austin, TX: Ray Marshall Center for the Study of Human Resources, the University of Texas at Austin. Available at https://raymarshallcenter.org/files/2006/01/REM_eval_update_Jan2010.pdf

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

Pathways to Work refers to programs by the names used in study reports or manuscripts. Some program names may use language that is not consistent with our style guide, preferences, or the terminology we use to describe populations.

Return to top

Study of Rapid Employment Model (REM), 2006 cohort