WWC review of this study

Accelerating Connections to Employment: Final evaluation report.

Modicamore, D., Lamb, Y., Taylor, J., Takyi-Laryea, A., Karageorge, K., & Ferroggiaro, E. (2017). Fairfax, VA: ICF International.

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    2,064
     Students
    , grade
    PS

Reviewed: August 2020

At least one finding shows strong evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Industry-recognized credential, certificate, or license completion outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earned a Vocational, Technical, or Professional Certificate or License

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
1,049 students

53.50

35.40

Yes

 
 
17
 
Short-Term Earnings outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earnings 1 Year After Program Completion

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Connecticut;
348 students

14125.19

12578.79

No

--
More Outcomes

Earnings 1 Year After Program Completion

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Maryland and Texas;
1,513 students

12897.00

11601.80

Yes

 
 
5
 

Earnings 1 Year After Program Completion

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Georgia;
203 students

5783.50

7154.60

No

--
Short-Term Employment outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Employed in First Year After Program Completion

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
2,064 students

62.60

51.90

Yes

 
 
10
 


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 71%
    Male: 30%

  • Rural, Suburban, Urban
    • 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Texas
  • Race
    Black
    71%
    Other or unknown
    13%
    White
    15%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    11%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    89%

Setting

The study took place at nine sites, including six sites in Maryland (Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Montgomery County, Prince George's County, and the Upper Shore), one site in Connecticut (New Haven), one site in Georgia (Atlanta), and one site in Texas (Austin).

Study sample

The 2,168 study participants were 71.3% African-American, 15.4% White, 1.2% Native American, 2.5% Asian, 0.5% Native Hawaiian, and 9.1% other. Moreover, 11% of study participants were Hispanic, and 70.5% of study participants were female. Almost two-thirds of study participants (64.9%) were unemployed at baseline, 34.5% were employed, and 0.6% were not in the labor force. On average, study participants were 35.5 years of age. Almost half of study participants (48.2%) had a high school diploma or GED, 18.0% had less than a high school diploma, 28.8% had some college or an Associate's degree, and 5.0% had a Bachelor's degree or higher.

Intervention Group

Accelerating Connections to Employment (ACE) is based in part on Washington State's Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) model. Like I-BEST, ACE provides integrated basic skills and occupational skills training, with at least 50% of total training hours using a co-teaching model. ACE also engages employers, industry partners, and Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs) to assess labor market demands, determine basic skills requirements, and design programs that prepare job seekers for high-demand occupations. ACE also provides a career navigator to students. Initially, the ACE career navigator was involved in all aspects of recruitment, onboarding, job readiness training, and job placement. Later, sites added a job developer position, which afforded career navigators more time to focus on forming strong relationships with participants and guiding them through the training program.

Comparison Group

Control group members had access to alternative services at the WIB. As with any non-ACE WIB customer, control group members generally had to navigate these alternative services on their own.

Support for implementation

The ACE model is supported by a the WIB-community college partnership. Technical assistance was provided by program partners, most especially The Annie E. Casey Foundation. Jobs for the Future (JFF) and The National Association of Workforce Development Professionals (NAWDP) supported implementation in Baltimore County.

Reviewed: March 2020

At least one finding shows strong evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Industry-recognized credential, certificate, or license completion outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earned a Vocational, Technical, or Professional Certificate or License

Accelerating Connections to Employment (ACE) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
1,049 students

53.50

35.40

Yes

 
 
17
 
Short-Term Earnings outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earnings 1 Year After Program Completion

Accelerating Connections to Employment (ACE) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Connecticut;
348 students

14125.19

12578.79

No

--
More Outcomes

Earnings 1 Year After Program Completion

Accelerating Connections to Employment (ACE) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Maryland and Texas;
1,513 students

12897.00

11601.80

Yes

 
 
5
 

Earnings 1 Year After Program Completion

Accelerating Connections to Employment (ACE) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Georgia;
203 students

5783.50

7154.60

No

--
Short-Term Employment outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Employed in First Year After Program Completion

Accelerating Connections to Employment (ACE) vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Full sample;
2,064 students

62.60

51.90

Yes

 
 
10
 


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 71%
    Male: 30%

  • Rural, Suburban, Urban
    • 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Texas
  • Race
    Asian
    3%
    Black
    71%
    Native American
    1%
    Other or unknown
    9%
    Pacific Islander
    1%
    White
    15%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    11%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    89%

Setting

The study took place at nine sites, including six sites in Maryland (Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Montgomery County, Prince George's County, and the Upper Shore), one site in Connecticut (New Haven), one site in Georgia (Atlanta), and one site in Texas (Austin).

Study sample

The 2,168 study participants were 71.3% African-American, 15.4% White, 1.2% Native American, 2.5% Asian, 0.5% Native Hawaiian, and 9.1% other. Moreover, 11% of study participants were Hispanic, and 70.5% of study participants were female. Almost two-thirds of study participants (64.9%) were unemployed at baseline, 34.5% were employed, and 0.6% were not in the labor force. On average, study participants were 35.5 years of age. Almost half of study participants (48.2%) had a high school diploma or GED, 18.0% had less than a high school diploma, 28.8% had some college or an Associate's degree, and 5.0% had a Bachelor's degree or higher.

Intervention Group

Accelerating Connections to Employment (ACE) is based in part on Washington State's I-BEST model. Like I-BEST, ACE provides integrated basic skills and occupational skills training, with at least 50% of total training hours using a co-teaching model. ACE also engages employers, industry partners, and WIBs to assess labor market demands, determine basic skills requirements, and design programs that prepare job seekers for high-demand occupations. ACE also provides a career navigator to students. Initially, the ACE career navigator was involved in all aspects of recruitment, onboarding, job readiness training, and job placement. Later, sites added a job developer position, which afforded career navigators more time to focus on forming strong relationships with participants and guiding them through the training program.

Comparison Group

Control group members had access to alternative services at the WIB. As with any non-ACE WIB customer, control group members generally had to navigate these alternative services on their own.

Support for implementation

The ACE model is supported by a the WIB-community college partnership. Technical assistance was provided by program partners, most especially The Annie E. Casey Foundation. Jobs for the Future (JFF) and The National Association of Workforce Development Professionals (NAWDP) supported implementation in Baltimore County.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top