About the Report

Download Report

Career pathways approaches to workforce development offer articulated education and training steps between occupations in an industry sector, combined with support services, to enable individuals to enter and exit at various levels and to advance over time to higher skills, recognized credentials, and better jobs with higher pay. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Chief Evaluation Office contracted with Abt Associates to conduct the Career Pathways Design Study, to develop evaluation design options that could address critical gaps in knowledge related to the approach, implementation, and success of career pathways strategies generally, and in early care and education (ECE) specifically. To inform thinking about evaluation design options, Abt produced reports on (1) research and evaluation relevant to career pathways approaches, (2) the implementation of existing and past career pathways initiatives, and (3) the potential for career pathways approaches in early care and education.

The report is the first of these publications and provides a high-level synthesis of career pathways research and evaluation. The primary purpose of this report is to support development of evaluation design options. With that in mind, the review focuses primarily on the type, scope, and setting of research that either has been completed or is ongoing; on which questions have been asked; and on areas for further research. Also highlighted are some major research findings, though that is not the main focus of this report. For this synthesis, researchers identified 52 studies, both complete and ongoing (as of February 2017, when the analysis was conducted), that focus on career pathways approaches for adults (including young adults, but excluding high school students) and include occupational training.

Key Takeaways

• 32 studies focused on the program level (62 percent); one on system-level change; and 19 on both (37 percent).
• 23 targeted low-income individuals or those living in poverty (44 percent), followed by 14 targeting low-skilled individuals (27 percent).
• Typical participants were high school graduates in their late 20s or 30s and more likely to be female than male. Few studies (five) included substantial percentages (more than 25 percent) of Hispanics. In 12 studies, more than 25 percent of participants were Black or African American.
• Healthcare was by far the most common sector (39 studies), followed by manufacturing (22 studies), information technology (18 studies), and business (14 studies).
• Most studies (22) included efforts that offered training in multiple sectors; of the 17 single-sector ones, 14 focused on healthcare.
• Community colleges most commonly led career pathways efforts (34 studies), followed by non- profit organizations (20 studies), workforce development boards (16 studies), and other educational institutions (16 studies).
• Most studies (40) used several different methodologies.
• More studies (20) used random assignment methodologies than used quasi-experimental or non-experimental methodologies. Almost two thirds (13) of the random assignment studies are ongoing.
• More than one quarter (14) of the studies included some examination of costs.
• Only two studies included systems change analysis, but many others included implementation studies of system-level initiatives.
• More than two thirds (37) of the studies were funded at least in part by the federal government, either directly by federal agencies or as part of required third-party evaluations of federal grants. Foundations funded 13 of the studies.
• About one third of studies (18) included research questions that either specifically mentioned career pathways in a question or included questions about an initiative that was explicitly described as a career pathways approach.
• Of the 42 studies for which researchers identified outcomes, 38 included at least one employment outcome and 29 included at least one education outcome.
• As of February 2017, impact findings have been published for four quasi-experimental and eight random assignment studies. All but one of those studies is complete.
• Most of these published impact findings have short- (~1-2 years) and medium- (3-4 years) term follow-up periods. Just two studies to date have reported impact findings for long-term outcomes (5 years or longer). The follow-up periods ranged from two semesters to five years for the random assignment studies, and one academic quarter to nine years for the quasi-experimental studies.
• Nine of these impact studies examined earnings. Three found statistically significant positive results, five found mixed results, and one found mostly negative results.
• Ten of these impact studies examined educational outcomes. Seven found statistically significant positive results, one found mixed results, and two found mostly negative results.
• Of the eight random assignment studies reporting impacts, only one included at least one site that offered multiple steps of training. Researchers chose to highlight multiple steps of training as a proxy for understanding the extent to which sites in a study focused on career advancement, arguably the most distinctive feature of career pathways.
• Looking across all of the studies examined, researchers found that implementing a model as intended often proved challenging. Sites varied considerably in the populations targeted and served, targeted sectors and occupations, and the extent to which a given model was implemented as planned.

Citation

Schwartz, D., Strawn, J., Sarna, M. (2018). Abt Associates. Career Pathways Research and Evaluation Synthesis. Chief Evaluation Office, U.S. Department of Labor.

Download Report

The Department of Labor’s (DOL) Chief Evaluation Office (CEO) sponsors independent evaluations and research, primarily conducted by external, third-party contractors in accordance with the Department of Labor Evaluation Policy and CEO’s research development process.