Search

"Year Up" is an occupational and technical education intervention that targets high school graduates to provide them with six months of training in the information technology and financial service sectors followed by a six-month internship and supports to ensure that participants have strong connections to employment. This What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) report, part of the WWC's Postsecondary Career and Technical Education topic area, explores the effects of "Year Up" on short- and medium-term earnings and employment and on industry-recognized credential completion. The WWC identified two studies of "Year Up." Both meet WWC standards. The evidence presented in this report is from studies of the impact of "Year Up" on young adults ages 18 to 24 with a high school diploma or equivalent--including Black and Hispanic individuals--in urban areas around the country. [For the Intervention Brief, see ED615760. For the Intervention Snapshot, see ED615761.]

Higher education is essential to accessing high-demand jobs with family-supporting wages and improving family financial wellbeing. This was true before the COVID-19 pandemic and is especially true now as the nation continues the process of recovering from one of the worst public health, economic, and social crises in modern U.S. history. To achieve recovery goals, states will need to invest in systemic reform that aims to increase affordable postsecondary opportunities and better service provision for student parents across higher education and workforce sectors. This briefing paper provides insight into some of the policy actions states have taken, both prior to and during the pandemic, that could promote the systemic change needed to increase access to educational opportunities and improve outcomes for student parents. It focuses on three states--Georgia, Texas, and Washington--to describe new and existing policies that impact student parents' access to postsecondary opportunities and supports needed for pandemic recovery and long-run economic stability. This brief highlights how applying a student parent lens to policy and decision-making at the state level could benefit recovery among current and prospective student parent families, providing concrete examples from the three states examined. It aims to equip advocates and state policy leaders with information needed to design strategic investments that will promote parents' access to education, accelerate economic recovery, and improve the wellbeing of families. [This brief was written with support from Susana Contreras-Mendez.]

The "Annual Partnership Report" catalogs partnerships that Wyoming community colleges established and maintained for each fiscal year. This partnership report fulfills statutory reporting requirement W.S. 21-18-202(e)(iv) which mandates the development of annual reports to the legislature on the outcomes of partnerships between colleges and the University of Wyoming and other entities. Each community college partner maintains numerous partnerships for the development and provision of academic, occupational-technical, workforce development, and enrichment educational programs. These partnerships are essential for colleges to meet higher educational needs of Wyoming's citizens and communities. Seven public Wyoming community colleges provided information for ten of their major partnerships during academic year 2020/2021. The seven colleges included: Casper College, Central Wyoming College, Eastern Wyoming College, Laramie County Community College, Northern Wyoming Community College, Northwest College, and Western Wyoming Community College. The partnerships were divided into three partnering categories as follows: (1) Educational (P-12 Education, University of Wyoming and Other Higher Education); (2) Community Participation (Community Organizations, Cultural, Human Services, Non-Profit Organizations, and Professional Organizations); and (3) Regional Development (Business and Industry, Economic Development, Workforce Training, and Government--Local, State, Federal). [For the 2020 report, see ED624686.]

Employer-provided training is the dominant form of skill development among American workers, but when it comes to training that people can seek out on their own, community colleges are just one of many options that include job training programs run by government agencies, nonprofits, proprietary schools, online programs, and unions. This brief describes results from a nationally representative survey of American workers between the ages of 24 and 64 to learn what training providers they have used and what their experiences have been with these providers. The survey finds that 48% of working adults have utilized community colleges at some point in their lives and that Black, Hispanic, and female workers have done so at a somewhat higher rate than White and male workers. Of those who used community colleges, 26% did so as adults, well after graduating from high school. A large majority of those who used community colleges--68%--reported positive outcomes such as earning a degree or certificate or transferring to a four-year college. One challenge that community colleges face is that they are often competing with other programs for students. The author provides some evidence on the nature of this competition and the underlying factors that drive it.

In Pennsylvania, subgrantee Philadelphia Works, Inc. partnered with JEVS Human Services to implement the National Health Emergency (NHE) demonstration grant. JEVS Human Services offers both employment and training services and behavioral health treatment and recovery services. By developing partnerships with behavioral health providers, the workforce system can reduce barriers to accessing employment and training services for people in recovery by providing these services on-site at locations where potential participants already gather and are comfortable. This strategy spotlight highlights an innovative effort, funded through an NHE Dislocated Worker Demonstration Grant to Address the Opioid Crisis to the state of Pennsylvania, to provide employment services in opioid treatment clinics. It is part of a study funded by the U.S. Department of Labor's Chief Evaluation Office, and conducted in collaboration with the Office of Policy Development and Research within the Employment and Training Administration (ETA). The study explores the implementation of the NHE Dislocated Worker Demonstration Grants to Address the Opioid crisis, which six states received in 2018. These grants, funded by ETA's Office of Workforce Investment (OWI), encouraged states to test innovative approaches to address the economic and workforce-related impacts of the opioid epidemic. [This is the first report in a four-part series.]

The Agricultural Act of 2014 authorized $200 million for the development, implementation, and evaluation of up to 10 pilot projects to test innovative strategies to reduce dependency on and increase employment among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. The 10 States that received grants were California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington and began implementing their pilots between January and April 2016. All grantees concluded pilot services by April 2019. The Interim Summary Report presents short-term outcome findings that cover each individual for 12 months after enrollment in the pilots for individuals who enrolled by December 2017. The report also includes findings on the implementation evaluation and cost analysis. The report summarizes findings drawn from interim evaluation reports prepared for each of the 10 pilots. The final evaluation reports will present longer-term (36-month) outcomes that may offer more conclusive evidence about the effectiveness of pilot services. This brief document describes the methods and findings of the Interim Summary Report. [For the full report, see ED620376.]

The Agricultural Act of 2014 authorized $200 million for the development, implementation, and evaluation of pilot projects to test innovative strategies to reduce dependency on and increase employment among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants. California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington received grants in March 2015 and began implementing their pilots between January and April 2016. All grantees concluded pilot services by April 2019. The interim summary report presents short-term outcome findings for the 12 month period after pilot enrollment for individuals who enrolled by December 2017. This report summarizes findings from the 10 pilot-specific interim reports. Key findings include: (1) The 10 pilots implemented diverse service models and served various target groups; (2) Grantees faced steep implementation challenges such as hiring staff and developing partnerships; (3) Both pilot engagement and exit rates were high during the 12 month follow-up period; and (4) The pilots had few impacts on employment and did not decrease SNAP participation during the fourth quarter. [Staff from the following organizations assisted with this study: Insight Policy Research; Koné Consulting; Decision Information Resources; Food and Nutrition Service's Office of Policy Support (OPS); and FNS Office of Employment and Training (OET). For the summary of the Interim Summary Report, see ED620375. For the Interim Report Technical Supplement, see ED620378.]

In 2015, the U.S. Department of Agriculture awarded pilot grants to 10 States--California, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington--to test innovative strategies for providing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Employment and Training (SNAP E&T). As part of the pilots, all grantees offered support services, generally in the form of financial assistance, to offset an individual's barriers to participation and employment. These included gas cards or bus passes for transportation, books or fees associated with a pilot activity, or uniforms or tools to help with a new job. Support services were integral in reducing barriers that individuals participating in the pilots faced and helping them engage in activities. This brief highlights available support services, approaches to providing these services, and lessons learned.

In 2015, the U.S. Department of Agriculture awarded pilot grants to 10 States--California, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington--to test innovative strategies for providing employment and training services through Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Employment and Training (SNAP E&T). Most grantees spent roughly the first year of the pilot in a planning phase, which included establishing new partnerships, creating service models, developing new activities, and hiring pilot staff. Grantees began enrolling individuals between January and April 2016, depending on the pilot. This brief presents five implementation challenges and the resulting lessons learned from a cross-pilot analysis of the planning and early implementation periods from March 2015 through July 2017. The implementation-related lessons identified in this brief are based on analysis of qualitative data collected through telephone calls and in-person interviews with pilot staff from State agencies, partners, and providers, and focus groups conducted with individuals participating in the pilot.

Widespread layoffs resulting from the coronavirus pandemic have put the labor market challenges facing workers, especially those without a college degree, into sharp focus. Workforce training can support the economic outcomes of displaced and unemployed workers, but only if it is carefully designed to connect directly to durable, high-quality jobs. State policies can support effective, employer-connected training programs and overall economic growth by providing targeted financial support for training participants, training providers, and employers who provide training themselves. In Indiana and Washington, state policymakers have combined different funding streams to encourage collaborative partnerships and ensure that all workers have opportunities to make their next career step.

The rising number of forcibly displaced persons (FDPs) and the growing duration of displacement have made building economic resilience a priority, particularly for young people. By 2019, the global population of FDPs had doubled to 80 million. The majority of FDPs (86 per cent) live in low- or middle-income countries where host communities are themselves affected by food insecurity, malnutrition and weak labour markets. Youth comprise a significant share of the forcibly displaced population. Half of all refugees are aged under 18, with young adults aged 18-24 constituting another 13 per cent of the total. In addition, there are nearly 10 million internally displaced persons between the ages of 15 and 24 full of hope but lack opportunities to realize their potential. Technology is playing a growing role to provide education, training and employment, including in humanitarian and migration responses. By driving a shift to online work and training on an unprecedented scale, albeit not universally, the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly accelerated the use of digital technologies in programmes that support school-to-work transition, including solutions focused on youth who are FDPs, in host communities, or are otherwise vulnerable. This report, funded in part by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands' PROSPECTS partnership, provides an overview of how digital technologies are being used to support youth's transition from school to work, 'learning to earning', in displaced and host communities. Based on a rapid analysis of emerging approaches and lessons in this burgeoning space, the report's purpose is to inspire concerted attention and action to ensure effectiveness and scale of such digital enablers. [This report was partially funded through the Partnership for improving prospects for forcibly displaced persons and host communities (PROSPECTS), which is supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. For the Executive Summary, see ED627533. For the "Compendium of Solutions," see ED627535.]

Hiring people who have served prison sentences has never been a priority in the United States. For men and women who were once incarcerated, finding any job is difficult; finding a sustainable, family-supporting job is nearly impossible. Today the country is at a critical crossroads on this issue, and it's time for change. As the nation works in earnest toward an equitable economic recovery and focuses on preparing people for the jobs of the post-pandemic world, action must be taken to ensure the reentry population is positioned for employment. This report argues that the nation must match the breadth and scale of the investments that support U.S. systems of incarceration by investing in a comprehensive and scalable approach to workforce development that connects returning citizens with jobs and equips them for long-term careers. [This report was supported by the Justice and Mobility Fund.]

Several federal agencies, including the Small Business Administration (SBA), provide training and other assistance to veterans seeking civilian employment. In recent years, the unemployment rate among veterans as a whole has generally been similar to or lower than the unemployment rate for nonveterans 18 years and older. However, veterans who have left the military since September 2001 have experienced higher unemployment than other veterans and, in some years, higher unemployment than nonveterans. As a result, Congress has focused much of its attention on finding ways to assist veterans who have left the military since September 2001. The SBA provides management and technical assistance services to more than 100,000 veterans each year through its various management and technical assistance training partners. This report opens with an examination of the economic circumstances of veteran-owned businesses. It then provides a brief overview of veterans' employment experiences, comparing unemployment and labor force participation rates for veterans, veterans who have left the military since September 2001, and nonveterans. The report also describes employment assistance programs offered by several federal agencies to assist veterans in their transition from the military to the civilian labor force and examines, in greater detail, the SBA's veteran business development programs, the SBA's efforts to assist veterans' access to capital, and the SBA's service-disabled veteran-owned contracting program. It also discusses the SBA's Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan program and P.L. 114-38, the Veterans Entrepreneurship Act of 2015, which authorized and made permanent, under specified circumstances, the SBA's recent practice of waiving the SBAExpress loan program's one time, up-front loan guarantee fee for veterans (and their spouses).

This case study describes a small randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing alternative strategies for monitoring and supporting academic achievement in Year Up's Professional Training Corps (PTC) program. Year Up is a nonprofit organization dedicated to preparing economically disadvantaged young adults for well-paying jobs with advancement potential. As part of the study, Year Up and its research partners designed and tested strategies for more quickly identifying and supporting participants struggling with their college coursework. To ensure the credibility of the study findings, the team randomly assigned participants either to a coach who would use the new monitoring and support strategies or to a coach who would follow existing practices, which did not place much emphasis on academics. Over two cycles of testing, the study found strong evidence that the alternative strategies tested substantially improved success in courses and, thus, advancement to internships. Three factors contributed to the resulting evidence being actionable: (1) it focused on low- to no-cost, field-initiated practice changes that could be implemented widely; (2) site staff could tailor strategies to local needs and opportunities; and (3) the research team encouraged local staff to modify the strategies being tested between enrollment cohorts. [This case study was commissioned by the Actionable Evidence Initiative and led by Project Evident. Funding from the GreenLight Fund also supported this work.]

Veterans Affairs (VA) offers education benefits to veterans with disabilities through the GI Bill, VA's largest education program, and Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E), which helps veterans with service-connected disabilities re-enter the workforce. Each offers distinct features that may better serve veterans depending on their individual circumstances. However, veterans with disabilities may not know that VR&E can help pay for education as part of its employment services. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) was asked to what extent eligible veterans are aware of the comparative features of the programs. This report examines (1) the reported factors that influence whether veterans with disabilities select the Post-9/11 GI Bill or VR&E, and (2) how VA informs veterans with disabilities about the education benefits available to them from each program, and the effectiveness of those efforts. For both programs, GAO reviewed relevant federal laws; analyzed participant data; conducted semistructured interviews with officials from schools and VSOs selected for their depth of knowledge about veteran affairs, and reviewed relevant VA informational materials. GAO is making two recommendations to VA to take steps to 1) provide veterans with more information about VR&E's education benefits and 2) inform veterans about the comparative program features of the GI Bill and VR&E. VA concurred with the recommendations.

Opportunity America received a grant from Lumina Foundation to conduct a national research study of community colleges' credit and noncredit occupational education programs and their relationships with employers. Opportunity America contracted with Wilder Research to manage data collection and analysis for the study. The purpose of this study was to learn more about the important role that community colleges have in training and upskilling the U.S. workforce and how these institutions work with employers to address local and regional workforce demands. The study aims to answer the following questions: (1) How extensive is the workforce education offered on community college campuses? (2) How extensive are the workforce programs offered by community college noncredit divisions? and (3) What share of colleges are adopting the innovations seen at pioneering two-year schools, including intensive employer partnerships, shorter job-focused programs, and stackable credentials? The goal of this study is to produce and share knowledge with researchers, administrators, state-level leaders, and policymakers to inform community college workforce education policies and programs. This report describes the study methods and includes a data book of the study results. The Appendix includes supplementary information, including the survey instrument and glossary. [The individual studies are indexed in ERIC.]

To be prepared for the work of today and tomorrow, more than just the right skills are needed. There needs to be an infrastructure that supports continuous and transformative learning throughout a lifetime. This market scan takes a deep dive into the complex and evolving alternative education and training market, focusing on high-quality solutions that have a measurable impact on workers' wage and employment prospects. The providers of these programs and platforms are crucial resources for employers, helping them to recruit, develop, and retain workers from diverse talent pools. They also make up an ecosystem of opportunity that workers can turn to throughout their careers as they navigate new pathways in an ever-evolving economy. Through the proprietary evaluation process, hundreds if not thousands of companies were reviewed to assess their approach to and concern for social impact, and the traction their efforts have gained. This market scan identifies the most innovative and advanced technologies connecting people to rewarding jobs and careers, valuable education and training opportunities, effective workforce and education systems, and equitable, resilient opportunities for economic security and mobility--at scale. [This report was developed by JFFLabs and funded by The Workday Foundation.]

Rural communities are not a monolith; they have unique challenges that require unique policy solutions. One of the best ways to understand the diversity of those challenges -- and, in turn, identify the most effective solutions -- is to hear directly from rural communities. This Special Report analyzes data from a 2020 Strada Education Network/Gallup survey on the perceptions of postsecondary education and training, focusing on the responses from rural residents specifically. In general, rural respondents answered favorably when asked about motivations for past and future education and indicated perceived value in pursuit of education and training. However, most respondents indicated they would not pursue additional education and training in the next five years, in part because of the barriers they identified -- including COVID-19, costs in general, and uncertainty in career pathways. Additionally, this Policy Brief outlines three policy considerations for developing intentional, outcomes-focused connections between postsecondary education and work.

Based on comprehensive data from the Washington Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board, this analysis explores short-term training programs, including which providers offer them and in which occupation-specific programs of study; the demographics of those who enroll in programs; and outcomes for program completers or graduates. Given limitations on the maintenance and matching of student-level data at the federal level, state-specific analyses of training program participation and outcomes provide the best glimpse into who accesses and benefits most from short-term training.

New York City (NYC) ended 2020 with roughly 600,000 fewer jobs than it had when the COVID-19 pandemic began. But even amid the economic carnage of the past year, some employers in New York have been hiring. While new jobs are being created in fields from warehousing and delivery to healthcare, technology (tech) positions are growing the fastest. Despite the pandemic-fueled surge in healthcare hiring, there were more job openings in tech roles (67,923) than in healthcare occupations (60,266) between April and November 2020. Tech is also fueling demand for well-paying jobs. Tech occupations account for a bit more than 18 percent of total job postings but make up a whopping 40.1 percent of demand for roles that pay an average starting salary of $80,000 or more. In fact, 41 of the 138 occupations that pay $80,000 or more were in tech. However although tech occupations outpaced all other sectors in job postings during the pandemic, tech hiring in New York was not nearly as robust as it was in the pre-pandemic economy, an indication that tech firms were not immune to the challenges of the pandemic and also a testament to the remarkable growth in technology jobs in the years leading up to 2020. This report examines which roles are in demand and what it will take to get more New Yorkers access to the quality tech jobs fueling NYC's economic recovery. [The report was published with Per Schola.]

Inclusive apprenticeship programs--those that support and are designed to be inclusive of apprentices with disabilities--hold promise for improving long-term employment outcomes for participants. However, little is known about the prevalence and operations of inclusive apprenticeship programs. This report summarizes current information on experiences of people with disabilities in apprenticeship, drawing on the research literature, interviews with experts on inclusive apprenticeship, and administrative and survey data. We discuss several key findings on inclusive apprenticeship: (1) partnerships are essential to these programs' success; (2) inclusive apprenticeships employ specific strategies to supplement traditional occupational skills training; (3) employers often need specialized training to support inclusive apprenticeship programs; (4) apprentices themselves play a key role in crafting accommodations; and (5) mentors and job coaches can support inclusive apprenticeship programs. Inclusive apprenticeship programs benefit apprentices with and without disabilities through improved skill levels, increased earnings, and a sense of pride and accomplishment. These programs also benefit employers through reduced turnover, improved productivity, and a broader talent pipeline. We argue that these benefits are likely to outweigh any major program costs. Finally, our review of existing data on inclusive apprenticeship programs reveals that the prevalence of registered apprenticeship among people with disabilities is low, but increasing, and varies widely between states. We find that apprentices with a disability are more likely to be white and to be women than apprentices without a disability. They are also older, more likely to be veterans, and more likely to work in math and computer occupations. These findings help inform best practices for the expansion of inclusive apprenticeship and identify the knowledge gaps that still exist.

The Families Forward Demonstration (FFD) examined new strategies to increase the earnings of parents who owe child support but are unable to fully meet their obligations due to low earnings. It also focused on "responsive" child support services that helped parents understand their support obligations, and even suspended certain enforcement actions while parents participated in the program. Child support agencies in five locations implemented FFD: Cuyahoga County, Ohio; Franklin County, Ohio; Calhoun and Jackson counties in Michigan; New York City; and Benton and Franklin counties in Washington State. They operated the program in partnership with local colleges, training providers, workforce development agencies, and community-based organizations that offered screening and enrollment, employment, and training services. The child support agencies began designing their FFD programs in 2016 and launched the programs between 2018 and 2019 as they finalized their plans for service delivery and partnerships. This report presents the findings from the implementation and outcome studies of FFD.

Investing in community college workforce training is a central part of the Biden administration's agenda for improving the lives of American families. Now more than ever, as the nation's economy enters a post-pandemic period of significant organizational and technological change, community colleges are well-situated to help millions of low-income Americans, particularly adults, get back into and advance in the labor market. This brief highlights ways in which new federal funding can best support community college workforce training. It first describes the landscape of community college workforce education and presents evidence on the earnings and employment outcomes of students who earn workforce credentials. Next, it reviews current CCRC research on how innovative community colleges are responding to evolving skill demands from employers and to ongoing needs both for better integration of degree and non-degree programming and for more robust student support services. It concludes with suggestions on how a federal investment could encourage community colleges to expand and improve their workforce efforts by strengthening their capacity to deliver high-quality programs and by reducing inequities in access and outcomes by race and income.

Research shows that employers are less likely to hire workers with little to no experience for the "first jobs" that many younger workers rely on to build their skills and credentials. Without those first jobs, many will face fewer paths to enter the workforce. To help the non-college-bound, the nation's education system needs to create alternative pathways to careers. The Biden administration and Congress have the opportunity to create a revamped system that addresses inequality by building continuous pathways between high school and work. As part of his Build Back Better plan, President Biden has called for grants to states to accelerate students' attainment of quality credentials, degrees, and opportunities in job training programs. This paper reviews several case studies to provide evidence-based examples of how to better connect students to careers. It first addresses the need for broad-based pathways to careers and then focuses on four key themes across school-to-career models, including: (1) the importance of work-based learning that connects students to employers; (2) curriculums that emphasize soft skills and social capital to prepare young adults for their first jobs; (3) the need for supportive or wraparound services to help students get across the finish line; and, (4) high schools that help students earn credits toward postsecondary education along the way to graduation.

The new Lifelong Loan Entitlement (LLE), due to start in 2025, is a major and positive improvement to how the student support system in England enables lifelong participation in higher education. It also has the prospect of commanding cross-party support, at least in broad design if not in the detail. However, in this timely Policy Note, Rose Stephenson raises important questions about how it will work. The LLE is part of the Government's reforms to post-18 education and training in England. It will offer students a loan equivalent to four years' worth of tuition fees (currently £37,000), which can be used flexibly over their working lives. This can be used to pay for short courses, modules or full courses at colleges or universities. The Lifelong Loan Entitlement has five main objectives, which are presented in this report: (1) to enable greater parity of access between technical and academic courses; (2) to fund modules regardless of whether they are provided in colleges or universities; (3) to ensure that credit-bearing provision will support flexible, lifelong learning; (4) to transform the way learners access funding to enable learners to study, train, retrain or upskill at any stage in their lives; and (5) to encourage individuals to train, retrain and upskill in response to changes in labour markets and employment patterns. [Foreword written by Professor Tim Blackman. This report was produced with The Open University.]

People invest £7.3 billion a year and £55 billion worth of time in learning. This is more than the Government and employers invest in learning and skills, but there are stark inequalities between groups. This report provides the most detailed snapshot seen of which groups of adults are investing in learning, and how much, and lays bare stark inequalities in learning. It calls for a new Lifelong Learning Entitlement to simplify the overly-complex system, boost participation in learning by those currently most likely to miss out and boost the UK economy. Based on analysis of Learning and Work Institute's long-running Adult Participation in Learning Survey, the research finds that younger people are three times more likely to participate in learning than older people and also invest three times as much per year (£3,900 v £1,300). This lower investment by older people is a problem given longer working lives and economic change require people to update their skills more often through life. The same is true of investment by region and country. People in London (£1,400) invest more than double per person compared to the South East (£565) and Scotland (£624). This could put 'levelling up' at risk given the impact learning has on economic growth and individual opportunity. The data come after previous L&W research showed that Government investment in skills is set to be £1 billion lower in 2025 compared to 2010, and that employer investment in training per employee has fallen 28% since 2005. Taken together, they suggest the UK is under-investing in skills and learning, and risks staying stuck in the middle of the pack by international standards. This would put future growth and prosperity at risk.

The Agricultural Act of 2014 authorized $200 million for the development, implementation, and evaluation of up to 10 pilot projects to test innovative strategies to increase employment and reduce the need for SNAP among program participants. The 10 States that received grants were California, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington. Grantees began implementing their pilots between January and April 2016, and all pilot services concluded by April 2019. The Final Summary Report presents employment, earnings, SNAP participation, and other outcome findings that cover a 36-month period for individuals enrolled in the pilots by December 2017. It also presents findings from the implementation evaluation and cost-benefit analysis. The report summarizes findings from the 10 pilot-specific final evaluation reports. This summary highlights the methods and findings of the final summary report. [For the Final Summary Report, see ED620374.]

The Exploring Making Through Mobile Emergent Technologies (EMMET) program sought to disrupt the trajectory from rural high school to factory floor by introducing STEM and computational thinking (STEM+C) skills through mentorship training and hands-on activities involving creative production--often referred to as "making." The program also bridged the divide between formal school science education and informal opportunities for science learning outside of school--a division that has marginalized young people from science class and devalued everyday science experiences (Stocklmayer et al., 2010). The overall project focused on designing maker experiences, training local high school students as "maker-mentors" for their community, developing partnerships with area community-based organizations, and researching what program participants learn about STEM and computational thinking. The work described in this white paper offers a model for regions with distributed, rural populations to build capacity for young people to develop skills and self-efficacy in STEM+C fields. This paper aims to answer the following questions: (1) How are rural communities impacted by mobile making experiences that involve community mentors as instructors? (2) What do maker-mentors learn as a result of their participation in facilitating mobile making experiences? and (3) What aspects of the community-involved maker experiences are sustained beyond institutional intervention? [This paper was written with contributions from Tim Fetting, Vicki Jeppesen, and Darren Ackley.]

For many years the co-operative education program at Madison Park Technical Vocational High School in Boston has fallen short of supporters' hopes for it. The number of students it placed in paid jobs with local employers was often below that of co-op programs at other career vocational technical education (CVTE) schools and mostly focused on three or four of Madison Park's 20 industry disciplines. Much of the reason for the disappointing performance has been attributed to struggles the school has endured during the last decade, by now a well-worn story. In 2016 Madison Park was designated a Level 4 school by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), earning an "underperforming" label. Accordingly, school officials created a turnaround plan that they began implementing in June of that year. The co-operative education program, in which students receive hands-on training while being paid, is showing positive signs. The number of students working co-op jobs, though still well behind other regional voc-tech schools, has grown. But can Madison Park notch a win beyond its own walls? More specifically, can it play a larger role in creating educational and economic opportunity in Boston by supplying needed skilled labor for Boston-based businesses? State officials forecast thousands of job opportunities during the next eight years for workers who have the skills and education to do the job. Will the school created to train those workers fulfill its promise? This is the second of two papers by Pioneer Institute about the recovery effort at Madison Park. The first report, published in September of this year, examined the turnaround plan and reported on its progress as judged by the 10-year review of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges. This paper looks at the school's co-operative education program because of its important place within the curriculum and the potential it holds. The paper draws on interviews with school officials, state employment data and other CVTE educators and advocates. [For the first report, "Madison Park Technical Vocational High School Turnaround Update. White Paper No. 215," see ED607841.]

Starting this Parliament, the United Kingdom (UK) Government is providing £2.5 billion (£3 billion when including Barnett funding for devolved administrations) for a new National Skills Fund (NSF) to help adults learn valuable skills and prepare for the economy of the future. The NSF builds on extensive user research and engagement with local areas and employers undertaken through the National Retraining Scheme (NRS). Further education (FE) providers have a key role in delivering learning and training. As such, the Department for Education (DfE) commissioned Learning and Work Institute (L&W) to undertake research to explore what needs to be in place to ensure providers can successfully engage with the NRS. Specifically, the research sought to establish a better understanding of: (1) FE providers' behaviour and how they make decisions about their learning offer; (2) Challenges that may affect providers' engagement in, and delivery of the NRS, and how these can be overcome; and (3) How the DfE can influence the behaviour of FE providers to ensure the successful delivery of the NRS. This summary report presents the key findings of the research and highlights considerations for the DfE in relation to the future engagement with FE providers.

Starting this Parliament, the United Kingdom (UK) Government is providing £2.5 billion (£3 billion when including Barnett funding for devolved administrations) for a new National Skills Fund (NSF). This is a significant investment which has the potential to deliver new opportunities to generations of adults who may have been previously left behind. The NSF builds on extensive user research and engagement with local areas and employers undertaken through the National Retraining Scheme (NRS). To ensure the effective implementation of adult training initiatives and encourage a positive employer response, it is crucial to understand how employers make hiring and training decisions to meet their skills needs. As such, the Department for Education (DfE) commissioned Learning and Work Institute (L&W) to undertake research to explore the views of employers in sectors considered to be at lower risk of automation and showing potential for future growth: Professional, Scientific and Technical; Accommodation and Food; Information and Communication; and Construction. The research sought to: (1) establish a better understanding of employer behaviour, motivations and decision-making in relation to training provision; (2) review their initial views on the proposed elements of the NRS; and (3) explore what needs to be in place to ensure employers can successfully engage with the NRS. This summary report presents the key findings of the research and highlights considerations for the DfE in relation to the future design and development of adult skills initiatives. The report refers to the NRS, as this was the context in which the research took place, but the findings will continue to be used to inform wider adult skills policy, including the National Skills Fund.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently projected record-breaking growth in 2021, but it is premature to celebrate this rosy macroeconomic picture. In the same document, the CBO also made an alarming prediction: The U.S. labor market will not fully recover until 2024. Recent U.S. jobs reports reveal the depth of the pandemic-created unemployment crisis: 10 million fewer jobs than 10 months ago, unemployment close to double the 3.5 percent level in December 2019, and more than 20 million workers collecting unemployment insurance. The Labor Department's January jobs report announced anemic job growth of less than 50,000, with over 800,000 Americans filing new claims for unemployment insurance. High unemployment and labor force dropout rates could persist and spawn a repeat of the "lost decade" and unequal recovery that followed the Great Recession. Workers suffering the greatest economic harm in the current crisis include people of color, low-wage earners in the service sector, women, and individuals with lower education levels. Avoiding another jobless recovery that leaves millions of Americans unemployed must be a top priority for policymakers at every level of government. Americans now overwhelmingly support a strong and sustained government response to the economic crisis. A representative national survey of 800 Americans conducted by the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University in late 2020 found that they want government intervention to solve the economic crisis. When asked to choose between the government, employers, and workers themselves, fully half of Americans hold the government primarily responsible for helping laid-off workers. This is the largest percentage who think the government has a primary obligation to help the unemployed since the Great Recession. There is also widespread support for direct job creation among Democrats and Republicans alike. More than nine in ten respondents support government-funded infrastructure projects, and more than eight in ten support a federally funded temporary community service jobs program. Other strategies earning widespread approval include sending aid to state and local governments to avert public sector layoffs (86 percent), extending unemployment insurance payments (79 percent), and funding education and training for laid-off workers (74 percent). Eight in ten say it is very important for Democrats and Republicans to work together to strengthen the economy, yet only 6 percent say that it is very likely to happen. The federal government must take action to avoid repeating the tragic experiences of the Great Recession era, when millions of people remained jobless for years, defaulted on loans, lost their homes, and fell into poverty. Below, we offer a set of recommendations for using job-generating infrastructure spending to advance President Biden's plan for a more equitable and inclusive economy.