Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) of...
Year Up Professional Training Corps, a Lower-Cost Adaptation of Year Up’s Job Training Program for Low-Income Adults
Reviewed
Abt Associates (October 2022) published an RCT of Professional Training Corps (PTC) — a lower-cost version of Year Up’s proven-effective job training program for low-income young adults. This high-quality RCT found that PTC, as implemented at the time of the study, had no impact on workforce earnings or college enrollment in years 2 and 3 after program entry.
Relevant Excerpt from the Study Overview Section:
Summary of Findings
Study 1 found no difference in average earnings or months enrolled in college in follow-up Years 2 and 3 between young adults assigned to PTC and their control group counterparts. (As expected, the PTC group earned less and spent more time in college than the control group in Year 1, when participants were still in the program.) The results also show modest increases in receipt of credentials (mostly short-term certificates based on credit earned at partner college during PTC).
We offer several possible explanations for the absence of earnings impacts in Study 1. For example, compared to Year Up’s core program, PTC’s young adults were somewhat more disadvantaged, had lower program completion rates, and were more likely to continue in college after the program.
We have no suggested revisions to the study’s published overview.
No-Spin’s Study Overview
High quality RCT of Year Up’s Professional Training Corps (PTC), a lower-cost version of Year Up’s proven-effective job training program for low-income young adults, found that PTC had no impact on workforce earnings or college enrollment over 3 years. However, the PTC program model was still evolving at the time of the study.
Program:
- Year Up's original model was shown in a prior large, multisite RCT to produce major long-term earnings gains of 30%, or $8,000 per year.
- PTC is an adaptation of Year Up’s original model aimed at lowering program costs. Unlike the original model, PTC operates on college campuses, substitutes college courses for Year Up instruction, and reduces the intensity of some components – e.g. participants have fewer contact hours with Year Up staff and receive smaller financial stipends.
Study Design:
- The RCT sample comprised 552 low-income young adults ages 18-24 with a high school diploma or equivalent. 63% were Black, 17% were Hispanic, and 52% were male.
- Based on careful review, this was a high-quality RCT (e.g., baseline balance, low attrition, prespecified analyses).
Findings:
- In years two and three after program entry, the study found no impact on either of its primary outcomes – average total earnings or months enrolled in college.
- A possible explanation for the disappointing findings, compared to the study of Year Up’s original model, may be that the Year Up organization had less control over program delivery at colleges, and (perhaps as a result) PTC's program completion rate (66%) was lower than Year Up's original model (75%).
Comment:
- At the time of the evaluation, the PTC model was still evolving (e.g., testing additional adaptations such as enhanced coaching of participants). Subsequent versions of PTC may warrant rigorous evaluation to see if they can generate meaningful earnings gains at lower cost than Year Up’s original model.
- Disclosure: Arnold Ventures, which funds the No-Spin Evidence Review, helped fund the Year Up PTC RCT.
Click or tap a highlight to see No-Spin’s comment