Escalating gains: Project QUEST’s sectoral strategy pays off
Elliott, M., & Roder, A. (2017). Economic Mobility Corporation.
-
examining410Students, gradePS
Project QUEST Intervention Report - Postsecondary Career and Technical Education (CTE) Interventions
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2021
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Project QUEST.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Earned a vocational certificate or license |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
Full sample;
|
72.60 |
49.10 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Earnings |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
5 Years |
Full sample;
|
27755.00 |
25228.00 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Earnings |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
7 Years |
Full sample;
|
33496.00 |
28006.00 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Earnings |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
29961.00 |
27301.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Earnings |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
24713.00 |
20792.00 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Earnings |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
Full sample;
|
26995.00 |
21478.00 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Employment (Year-Round) |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Full sample;
|
66.60 |
59.20 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Employment (Year-Round) |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
Full sample;
|
72.00 |
57.10 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Earned a college degree |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
Full sample;
|
18.20 |
26.30 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Earnings |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
19092.00 |
17159.00 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Earnings |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
22873.00 |
18635.00 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Employment (Year-Round) |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
48.20 |
55.00 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Employment (Year-Round) |
Project QUEST vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Full sample;
|
65.70 |
59.00 |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 88%
Male: 12% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Texas
-
Race Black 14% Other or unknown 77% White 10% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 74% Not Hispanic or Latino 26%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted with residents of San Antonio and Bexar County in Texas.
Study sample
Of the 410 participants who were eligible to participate in the study and were randomly assigned to either the intervention group or comparison group, 14% were Black, 10% were White, and race was not specified for 77% of participants. The majority of participants were Hispanic (74%) and female (89%). The average age was 30 years old. The highest degree earned for the majority of participants was a GED® (25%) or a high school diploma (70%); 5% had earned a college degree. Almost half (45%) had previously attended college but did not earn a degree. The majority (84%) had been employed at any time during the past year. The average annual earnings in the past year was $11,722.
Intervention Group
Project QUEST is a workforce development program that serves residents of San Antonio and Bexar County, Texas. For the study, program participants were required to enroll full-time in a certificate program at an area community college or professional training institute in the field of healthcare such as nursing, medical records coding, or technician programs. Project QUEST provides comprehensive support services aimed at helping individuals to (1) complete occupational training programs at community colleges and professional training institutes, (2) pass certification exams, and (3) secure relevant employment. In addition to attending the occupational training program full-time, participants were required to attend weekly group meetings that focused on life skills, including time management, study skills, critical thinking, and conflict resolution. Participants received: (a) financial assistance to cover tuition, fees, books, transportation, uniforms, licensing exam fees, and tutoring; (b) basic skills instruction to improve their math and reading skills to pass college placement test; (c) counseling to address personal and academic concerns and provide motivation and emotional support; (d) referrals to other agencies for assistance with utility bills, childcare, food, and other services as needed; and (e) job placement assistance, including help with writing resumes and interviewing, and referrals to employers that were hiring.
Comparison Group
Participants in the comparison group could enroll in an occupational training program at an area community college or professional training institute and access job placement assistance through the college, available supports in the community, or find jobs on their own. However, they did not receive any of the benefits of the Project QUEST program.
Support for implementation
The operating costs of Project QUEST were financed by a combination of private and public funding. The primary funder was the City of San Antonio, Texas. Other funders included Bexar County, Texas and the Charles Stewart Mott, Meadows, and Annie E. Casey Foundations.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Roder, A., & Elliott, M. (2019). Nine year gains: Project QUEST’s continuing impact. Economic Mobility Corporation. Retrieved from https://economicmobilitycorp.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/NineYearGains_web.pdf
-
Roder, A., & Elliott, M. (2018). Escalating gains: The elements of Project QUEST’s success. New York: Economic Mobility Corporation. Retrieved from https://economicmobilitycorp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Elements-of-Project-QUESTs-Success.pdf
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).