Program Profile: JOBSTART

This is a community- and school-based program designed to increase academic skills and job placement in disadvantaged youth. The program is rated No Effects. There was a statistically significant increase in educational attainment and a decrease in drug use for the intervention group, compared with the control group. However, there were no statistically significant differences between groups in employment, employment earnings, or receipt of public assistance.

A No Effects rating implies that implementing the program is unlikely to result in the intended outcome(s) and may result in a negative outcome(s).

This program's rating is based on evidence that includes at least one high-quality randomized controlled trial.

This program's rating is based on evidence that includes either 1) one study conducted in multiple sites; or 2) two or three studies, each conducted at a different site. Learn about how we make the multisite determination.

Program Goals

JOBSTART was created by the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC) and its partner organizations and funded by the Job Training Partnership Act of 1982. The goal was to address the high numbers of high school dropouts and provide them with an alternative source of education and vocational training in hopes of leading them to better and higher paying jobs. JOBSTART concentrates on four core components:

• Education
• Occupational training
• Support services
• Job placement assistance

Target Population/Eligibility

JOBSTART targets high school dropouts and economically disadvantaged youths. Because of the intertwining of socioeconomic status and race, many participants were minority youths with poor reading skills who were receiving some form of public assistance.

Program Activities

JOBSTART was modeled after the residential Job Corps program but was designed to be more cost effective. Instead of the intensive comprehensive support services and financial compensation offered at Job Corps residential centers, JOBSTART would provide the same basic components of the program but in a nonresidential setting. The JOBSTART program instructed youths in basic academic skills, concentrating on increasing communication, literacy levels, and math skills. In addition, youths received vocational/occupational skills training. Instructors in a classroom setting combined theory and hands-on practice to prepare participants for jobs in growing sectors and high-demand occupations. Support services in the form of transportation assistance, child care, counseling, and work readiness and life skills training were also provided. Lastly, JOBSTART personnel also helped youths find jobs related to the training they had received, matching trainees with positions available in the local community.

Program Theory

The underlying theory behind JOBSTART is that a reinvestment and emphasis on educational attainment will result in better employment and long-term gains in earnings. Essentially, the program attempted to give youths a second chance and tried to improve their lives and earning potential by combining education classes with vocational training, making them better potential candidates and employees entering the workforce.

Study

Cave and colleagues (1993) evaluated JOBSTART using an experimental design with random assignment to treatment and control groups across 13 sites from 1985 to 1988. The 13 sites ranged from community-based organizations to schools to Job Corp Centers. The six community based sites were Buffalo, N.Y.; New York, N.Y.; Hartford, Conn.; San Jose, Calif.; Chicago, Ill.; and Corpus Christi, Texas. The three vocational school sites were Pittsburgh, Pa.; Monterey Park, Calif.; and Denver, Colo. The three Job Corps Center sites were located in Atlanta, Ga.; Los Angeles, Calif.; and Phoenix, Ariz. The last site was in Dallas, Texas.

Youths who applied for the program were randomly assigned to receive JOBSTART services or a control condition. The evaluation sample across all sites was 2,312 youths who received follow-up surveys at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months after random assignment. The final analyses were conducted on 1,941 youth (84 percent of the initial sample) for whom there was complete follow-up data at all four assessments over the 4-year study. The treatment and control groups consisted of 988 and 953 youths, respectively. The treatment group participated in the JOBSTART program, while the control condition left youth free to access other services in the community without receiving anything from the JOBSTART program. There were no significant differences between the treatment and control groups in any background or demographic variables such as gender, ethnicity, or parental status.

The outcomes of interest included education, employment, earnings, receipt of public assistance, and drug use. These outcomes were measured by a self-reported survey at the 4-year follow up. The researchers also conducted a cost–benefit analysis to determine whether the investment in JOBSTART yielded subsequent returns to taxpayers. The study authors conducted subgroup analyses to determine the potential effects of gender on program outcomes.

Subgroup Analysis

Cave and colleagues (1993) conducted subgroup analyses to determine the potential effects of gender on program outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences found between men and women in the treatment group in GED attainment, employment, earnings, receipt of public assistance, or drug use.

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

Following are CrimeSolutions-rated programs that are related to this practice:

Noncustodial Employment Programs for Individuals with Recent Criminal Records

This practice involves job training and career development for people with a recent criminal record in order to increase employment and reduce recidivism. These programs take place outside of the traditional custodial correctional setting, after they are released. The practice is rated No Effects in reducing criminal behavior for participants in noncustodial employment training programs compared with those who did not participate.

Evidence Ratings for Outcomes

Crime & Delinquency - Multiple crime/offense types

Dropout Prevention Programs

School- or community-based programs targeting frequently absent students or students at risk of dropping out of school. These programs are aimed at increasing school engagement, school attachment, and the academic performance of students, with the main objective of increasing graduation rates. The practice is rated Effective for reducing rates of school dropouts, and rated Promising for improving test scores/grades, graduation rates, and attendance.

Evidence Ratings for Outcomes

	Education - Dropout
	Education - Academic achievement/school performance
	Education - Graduation
	Education - Attendance/truancy

Why might a practice's outcome ratings differ from the ratings of specific programs encompassed by that practice?