![]() ![]() But, in each case, WWC provides evidence of only one or two positive impacts on specific measures of education or earnings, while claiming zero or negative impacts on most others. 3īoth programs have been evaluated many times and are widely considered to be very successful. 2 The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), which will likely be reauthorized in 2022, also encourages state and local workforce boards to fund sector-based programs.īut the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) of the US Department of Education, which summarizes the results of rigorous evaluation studies for policymakers and practitioners, released reports in November casting doubt on the effectiveness of two of the best-known sector-based programs for disadvantaged workers: Project Quest and Year Up. Indeed, this record of success motivated the Biden administration and the House of Representatives to include at least $10B of training for jobs of “in-demand sectors” in the Build Back Better bill which the House recently passed. Several rigorous evaluations studies (reported below) have found large and lasting impacts of several such programs on worker earnings and sometimes on college credential attainment (Holzer, 2021). But a very promising model for such training has recently emerged: sector-based training, where people are trained for existing jobs in high-demand sectors that pay well for workers without four-year college degrees. John LaFarge Professor of Public Policy, Georgetown Universityįor decades policy analysts have sought to identify cost-effective job training programs with lasting impacts for disadvantaged or displaced workers, with limited success. Nonresident Senior Fellow - Economic Studies ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |