Study Details | Pathways to Work

3021.01R-Study of Guided Cust

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition, suggesting that findings can be attributed to the program.

Program: Guided Customer Choice (as compared with Structured Customer Choice)

Characteristics of study participants:

At least a high school diploma or equivalent, Unemployed

Services provided:

Employment coaching, Job readiness, Tuition assistance/financial aid

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Methods and Standards Protocol version used for impact review: Version 2.0

Learn about our protocol

Cost: This study includes cost information reviewed by Pathways to Work (under the cost standards in Methods and Standards Protocol Version 2.0).

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Individuals who were eligible to receive training funded by the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) during the study intake period and consented to study participation were randomly assigned by study staff on a rolling basis as their names were submitted by site staff. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: the Structured Customer Choice group, the Guided Customer Choice, or the Maximum Customer Choice group. A random sample of 4,800 of the 7,920 study enrollees were selected for follow-up surveys. This study focused on Guided Customer Choice as the program group and Structured Customer Choice as the comparison group, with 2,649 participants assigned to the program group and 2,644 participants assigned to the comparison group. A total of 3,210 individuals in this study were randomly selected for inclusion in the survey sample, with 1,598 individuals in the program group and 1,612 individuals in the comparison group.

Time period of study:

The study ran from December 2001 to June 2010. Study enrollment ran from December 2001 to March 2004. Data collection occurred from December 2001 to June 2010, with outcomes collected at a 15-month and seven-year follow-up surveys among a randomly selected sample of study participants and using administrative data for all participants over a seven-year follow-up period.

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase short-term earnings, Increase very long-term earnings, Increase short-term employment, Increase very long-term employment, Decrease short-term benefit receipt, Decrease very long-term benefit receipt, Increase education and training

Other outcome domains examined:

Participation in training programs, job quality

Study funded by:

This study was funded by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (Contract Numbers N-7731-9-00-87-30 and DOLJ081A20615).

Results

View table definitions

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

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Program group mean	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase short-term earnings	Total earnings over follow-up period, UI data	Quarter 5	High	14,687.00	15,431.00	744.00	2004 dollars	5,288
Increase very long-term earnings	Average quarterly earnings, follow-up period, UI data	Year 6	High	4,565.00	4,540.00	-25.00	2009 dollars	5,274
Increase short-term employment	Currently employed, survey data	Month 15	High	72.00	70.00	-2.00	percentage points	2,631
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly, UI data	Quarter 5	High	63.00	64.00	1.00	percentage points	5,288
Increase short-term employment	Number of weeks employed, follow-up period, survey data	Month 15	High	30.80	29.90	-0.90	weeks	2,631
Increase very long-term employment	Currently employed, survey data	Year 7	High	88.00	89.00	1.00	percentage points	2,184
Increase very long-term employment	Percentage of quarters employed, follow-up period, survey data	Year 7	High	77.00	76.00	-1.00	percentage points	2,184
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of food stamps/SNAP payments, follow-up period, survey data	Month 15	High	374.00	296.00	-78.00	2004 dollars	2,631
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of other cash assistance, follow-up period, survey data	Month 15	High	618.00	564.00	-54.00	2004 dollars	2,631
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of UI payments, follow-up period, survey data	Month 15	High	2,388.00	2,270.00	-118.00	2004 dollars	2,631
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Amount of UI payments, follow-up period, UI data	Quarter 5	High	3,412.00	3,266.00	-146.00	2004 dollars	5,293
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received food stamps/SNAP, follow-up period, survey data	Month 15	High	20.00	19.00	-1.00	percentage points	2,631
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received other cash assistance, follow-up period, survey data	Month 15	High	11.00	11.00	0.00	percentage points	2,631
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received UI payments, follow-up period, survey data	Month 15	High	43.00	40.00	-3.00	percentage points	2,631
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received UI payments, follow-up period, UI data	Quarter 5	High	66.00	66.00	0.00	percentage points	5,293
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Amount of food stamps/SNAP payments, annual, survey data	Year 7	High	341.00	356.00	15.00	2010 dollars	2,186
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Amount of other cash assistance, annual, survey data	Year 7	High	1,141.00	1,199.00	58.00	2010 dollars	2,186
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Amount of UI payments, annual, survey data	Year 7	High	1,216.00	1,205.00	-11.00	2010 dollars	2,186
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Received food stamps/SNAP, annual, survey data	Year 7	High	18.00	19.00	1.00	percentage points	2,186
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Received other cash assistance, annual, survey data	Year 7	High	14.00	14.00	0.00	percentage points	2,186
Decrease very long-term benefit receipt	Received UI payments, annual, survey data	Year 7	High	21.00	22.00	1.00	percentage points	2,186
Increase education and training	Earned a certificate or degree from a training program, survey data	Year 7	High	57.00	53.00	-4.00	percentage points	2,186

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.

Means are not displayed when not reported or not aligned with the impact estimates. For example, if the impact estimate is regression-adjusted but only unadjusted means are reported in the study, the unadjusted means are not displayed as they are not aligned with the adjusted impact estimate.

Impact estimates are not shown when the estimate units cannot be converted to natural units.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

The findings quality describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the program. 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 program, rather than due to chance. Findings are described as moderate-to-large if the program 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 sample was composed of adult and dislocated workers with low income. Most participants had at least a high school diploma or equivalent (95 percent) and were unemployed (90 percent). The majority of participants were female (55 percent) and parents (54 percent). Over a third (36 percent) of participants had a postsecondary credential.

Characteristics may sum to greater than 100 percent due to rounding.

Age

Mean age

41 years

Sex

Female	55%
Male	45%

Race and ethnicity

Black or African American	38%
White, not Hispanic	44%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	9%

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	42%
Parents	54%

Employment and public benefit status

Were employed	10%
Were unemployed	90%
Public benefits recipients	17%

Education

Had some postsecondary education	36%
Had a high school diploma or GED	95%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	6%
Postsecondary credential	36%
English learners	9%

Program implementation

Implementing organization:

Local workforce agencies provided services and funding for training. Individuals could obtain training from multiple public and private locations.

Program history:

Individual training accounts (ITAs) were a common approach used by One-Stop centers to assist individuals seeking occupational training by connecting them with state-approved programs and training providers. The structure of ITAs varied significantly across states, with some providing more intensive assistance in customizing to individual needs than others. The study tested three different ITA models reflecting differing intensities and structures of assistance.

Program services:

Dislocated workers and adults (18 years of age and older) eligible for Workforce Investment Act (WIA) training assigned to the Guided Customer Choice group received mandatory weekly counseling that guided them to appropriate training selections given their skills and experience. Guided Customer Choice participants 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. Counseling sessions covered training options in the participant’s selected occupation and the feasibility of the participant’s training selection. Counseling provided to the Guided Customer Choice group was less intensive compared to counseling provided to the Structured Consumer Choice group (that is, counselors did not direct participants toward particular occupations, and participants had fewer mandatory counseling activities). Counselors could not reject participants’ selection of training sessions under this group. Individuals in the Guided Customer Choice group also received a fixed ITA established for their area ($3,000 to $5,000). ITAs covered direct training costs and other training-related expenses.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

Dislocated workers and adults (18 years of age and older) eligible for funding for training through the WIA and assigned to the Structured Customer Choice group received intensive, mandatory weekly counseling. Counselors directed participants to training selections that maximized return on investment and could reject participant selections that did not do so. Individuals in this group could also use an ITA to cover the full cost of training (up to $8,000). Counseling sessions covered high-return training, high-wage occupations that were in demand, training options in the participant’s selected occupation, returns-to-training for prospective programs, and the feasibility of the participant’s training selection.

Service receipt duration:

The typical participant received 29 weeks of services.

Program funding:

This program was funded through federal Workforce Investment Act funds.

Study publications

McConnell, Sheena, Elizabeth Stuart, Kenneth Fortson, Paul Decker, Irma Perez-Johnson, Barbara Harris, and Jeffrey Salzman (2006). Managing customers' training choices: Findings from the Individual Training Account experiment, final report appendices, Series: ETAOP 2007-01, Washington, DC: Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. Available at https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/publications/appendicies_07_01.pdf

McConnell, Sheena, Elizabeth Stuart, Kenneth Fortson, Paul Decker, Irma Perez-Johnson, Barbara Harris, and Jeffrey Salzman (2006). Managing customers' training choices: Findings from the Individual Training Account experiment, final report, Series: ETAOP 2007-01, Washington, DC: Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. Available at https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/managing_customers_choices.pdf

Perez-Johnson, Irma, Quinn Moore, and Robert Santillano (2011). Improving the effectiveness of Individual Training Accounts: Long-term findings from an experimental evaluation of three service delivery models, Series: ETAOP 2012-06, Washington, DC: Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. Available at https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP_2012_06.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.

Study of Guided Customer Choice (as compared with Structured Customer Choice)