Table 5.5 Program Impacts on Employment, Based on Survey Data Sample Program Control Difference Percentage Site and Program Size Group Group (Impact) Change (%) Ever employed during two-year follow-up period (%) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 60.0 58.1 1.9 3.2 anysemp Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 59.6 58.1 1.4 2.5 anysemp Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 81.3 73.0 8.4 *** 11.5 anysemp Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 76.5 73.0 3.6 4.9 anysemp Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 72.1 56.2 16.0 *** 28.4 anysemp Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 65.9 46.7 19.3 *** 41.3 anysemp Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 56.1 46.7 9.4 *** 20.1 anysemp Columbus Integrated 728 70.3 62.1 8.2 ** 13.1 anysemp Columbus Traditional 723 65.1 62.1 3.0 4.8 anysemp Detroit 426 61.6 54.0 7.5 13.9 anysemp Oklahoma City 511 78.4 70.6 7.7 ** 11.0 anysemp Portland 610 75.8 65.1 10.7 *** 16.5 anysemp Employed at the end of two years (%) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 37.4 36.6 0.8 2.2 jobstlin Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 36.5 36.6 -0.2 -0.4 jobstlin Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 54.1 49.8 4.3 8.7 jobstlin Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 48.6 49.8 -1.2 -2.4 jobstlin Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 40.9 34.6 6.2 *** 18.0 jobstlin Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 34.9 26.5 8.4 *** 31.7 jobstlin Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 34.6 26.5 8.1 *** 30.5 jobstlin Columbus Integrated 728 48.6 41.1 7.5 ** 18.3 jobstlin Columbus Traditional 723 43.9 41.1 2.8 6.9 jobstlin Detroit 426 41.7 33.6 8.1 * 24.2 jobstlin Oklahoma City 511 47.6 45.5 2.1 4.5 jobstlin Portland 610 49.6 34.7 14.9 *** 42.8 jobstlin
Table 5.4 Program Impacts on Full-Time Employment in Year 2 Sample Program Control Difference Percentage Site and Program Size Group Group (Impact) Change (%) A. For All Respondents Employed full-time in all 12 months in year 2 (%) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 14.2 14.4 -0.2 -1.4 ftpayy2 Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 13.0 14.4 -1.4 -9.8 ftpayy2 Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 19.6 18.8 0.8 4.2 ftpayy2 Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 16.4 18.8 -2.5 -13.1 ftpayy2 Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 15.9 10.1 5.8 *** 57.8 ftpayy2 Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 13.2 7.6 5.6 *** 73.0 ftpayy2 Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 10.2 7.6 2.6 33.9 ftpayy2 Columbus Integrated 728 19.6 18.4 1.3 7.0 ftpayy2 Columbus Traditional 723 18.5 18.4 0.1 0.6 ftpayy2 Detroit 426 12.5 12.4 0.1 0.6 ftpayy2 Oklahoma City 511 18.1 16.7 1.4 8.2 ftpayy2 Portland 610 16.2 15.3 0.9 5.9 ftpayy2
Table 5.6 Program Impacts on Job Characteristics at the End of Two Years Sample Program Control Difference Percentage Site and Program Size Group Group (Impact) Change (%) A. For All Respondents Average weekly pay ($) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 84.37 76.08 8.29 10.9 jwklypay Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 82.01 76.08 5.92 7.8 jwklypay Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 121.75 118.77 2.97 2.5 jwklypay Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 110.76 118.77 -8.01 -6.7 jwklypay Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 94.17 73.27 20.90 *** 28.5 jwklypay Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 73.75 52.35 21.41 *** 40.9 jwklypay Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 63.38 52.35 11.03 21.1 jwklypay Columbus Integrated 728 115.47 94.59 20.88 ** 22.1 jwklypay Columbus Traditional 723 101.73 94.59 7.13 7.5 jwklypay Detroit 426 86.24 79.65 6.59 8.3 jwklypay Oklahoma City 511 97.32 94.35 2.97 3.1 jwklypay Portland 610 128.80 83.04 45.76 *** 55.1 jwklypay Average hourly pay ($) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 2.39 2.23 0.16 7.3 jhrlypay Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 2.29 2.23 0.06 2.7 jhrlypay Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 3.44 3.24 0.20 6.3 jhrlypay Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 3.08 3.24 -0.16 -5.0 jhrlypay Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 2.75 2.28 0.47 *** 20.7 jhrlypay Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 2.17 1.71 0.47 ** 27.4 jhrlypay Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 2.04 1.71 0.34 * 19.8 jhrlypay Columbus Integrated 728 3.21 2.65 0.56 ** 21.3 jhrlypay Columbus Traditional 723 2.95 2.65 0.30 11.4 jhrlypay Detroit 426 2.49 2.28 0.21 9.3 jhrlypay Oklahoma City 511 2.74 2.67 0.07 2.5 jhrlypay Portland 610 3.64 2.25 1.39 *** 61.7 jhrlypay Table 5.6 (continued) Sample Program Control Difference Percentage Site and Program Size Group Group (Impact) Change (%) A. For All Respondents Average hours worked per week Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 12.9 12.6 0.3 2.7 jwrk_hrs Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 12.9 12.6 0.4 3.0 jwrk_hrs Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 18.9 18.3 0.6 3.5 jwrk_hrs Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 17.0 18.3 -1.3 -6.8 jwrk_hrs Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 14.0 10.7 3.4 *** 31.4 jwrk_hrs Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 12.0 8.0 4.0 *** 50.1 jwrk_hrs Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 10.7 8.0 2.7 *** 34.1 jwrk_hrs Columbus Integrated 728 17.3 14.5 2.8 ** 19.4 jwrk_hrs Columbus Traditional 723 15.3 14.5 0.9 5.9 jwrk_hrs Detroit 426 14.3 11.6 2.7 23.3 jwrk_hrs Oklahoma City 511 16.4 16.2 0.2 1.2 jwrk_hrs Portland 610 17.5 12.6 4.9 *** 38.6 jwrk_hrs Employed full-time (%) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 27.5 28.4 -0.9 -3.0 jft_pay Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 28.3 28.4 -0.1 -0.3 jft_pay Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 40.4 36.5 3.8 10.5 jft_pay Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 36.1 36.5 -0.4 -1.1 jft_pay Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 28.3 19.9 8.4 *** 42.1 jft_pay Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 23.0 15.4 7.6 *** 49.4 jft_pay Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 21.2 15.4 5.9 ** 38.1 jft_pay Columbus Integrated 728 38.0 31.9 6.1 * 19.2 jft_pay Columbus Traditional 723 32.6 31.9 0.8 2.4 jft_pay Detroit 426 28.7 22.1 6.6 29.9 jft_pay Oklahoma City 511 37.0 36.9 0.1 0.2 jft_pay Portland 610 39.9 26.9 13.0 *** 48.1 jft_pay
Table 5.7 Program Impacts on Employer-Provided Health Insurance at End of Two Years Sample Program Control Difference Percentage Site and Program Size Group Group (Impact) Change (%) A. For All Respondents Covered by employer-provided health insurance (%) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 11.6 12.3 -0.7 -5.5 jcovheal Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 13.0 12.3 0.7 5.9 Jcovheal Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 23.6 23.1 0.5 2.2 Jcovheal Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 22.8 23.1 -0.3 -1.2 Jcovheal Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 14.1 9.7 4.4 *** 45.7 Jcovheal Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 10.6 5.9 4.7 *** 78.9 Jcovheal Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 8.6 5.9 2.6 44.7 Jcovheal Columbus Integrated 728 20.1 17.4 2.7 15.5 Jcovheal Columbus Traditional 723 19.4 17.4 2.0 11.4 Jcovheal Detroit 426 14.3 11.6 2.7 23.3 Jcovheal Oklahoma City 511 21.3 19.4 1.8 9.4 Jcovheal Portland 610 24.4 14.3 10.1 *** 70.3 Jcovheal Employed full-time and covered by employer-provided health insurance (%) Atlanta Labor Force Attachment 1890 10.6 11.5 -0.9 -8.0 jbsftmed Atlanta Human Capital Development 2199 11.8 11.5 0.3 2.9 jbsftmed Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment 1158 21.6 20.9 0.7 3.5 jbsftmed Grand Rapids Human Capital Development 1158 21.1 20.9 0.2 1.1 jbsftmed Riverside Labor Force Attachment 1678 13.4 8.4 5.0 *** 59.1 jbsftmed Lacked high school diploma or basic skills 1012 10.3 5.2 5.1 *** 97.5 jbsftmed Riverside Human Capital Development 1350 7.0 5.2 1.8 35.4 jbsftmed Columbus Integrated 728 19.1 16.3 2.8 17.5 jbsftmed Columbus Traditional 723 18.0 16.3 1.8 10.9 jbsftmed Detroit 426 13.8 8.8 5.0 56.1 jbsftmed Oklahoma City 511 19.2 18.7 0.5 2.8 jbsftmed Portland 610 22.4 14.1 8.3 ** 59.0 jbsftmed