1. Findings from the Project Quest Evaluation
Economic Mobility Corporation

2. Mark Elliott President, Economic Mobility Corporation
@markmobility
@econmobility
#JFFHorizons

3. Project QUEST Nonprofit in San Antonio, TX established in 1992
Helps residents access skills training needed to secure well- paying jobs while meeting employers’ need for skilled workers
QUEST services included:
Assistance with college enrollment (testing, program/course selection)
Financial: covered tuition, books, tutoring, uniforms, licensing exam fees, gas cards, referrals for food, utility assistance, and childcare
Support of a counselor: 1:1 and in required weekly group meetings
Job placement assistance
Most students in the study attended programs at one of two community colleges: St. Philips College and San Antonio College

4. The Evaluation Randomized-control trial design
The study focused on individuals seeking training in the health-care field
During the study, QUEST targeted individuals who were not attending college, including those who needed remedial math or reading instruction before enrolling and those who were ready to enroll
410 enrolled between April 2006 and October 2008; 207 assigned to treatment, 203 to control
Findings based on baseline, 2-year follow-up, and 6-year follow-up surveys
6-year follow-up survey completed with 175 treatment and 168 control group members for response rates of 83.7% overall, 84.5% for the treatment group, and 82.8% for the control group
Results presented are regression-adjusted to control for any differences in demographics between groups in the final sample

5. Consensus: Job training doesn’t work
Congress must ask itself a fundamental question: Why should we continue to spend taxpayer money on programs that don't work? Job training programs, although well-intentioned, have not proven effective in raising the long-term hourly earnings of participants.  (The Heritage Foundation 1995)

6. James Heckman, Economist
American society puts its faith in public training programs to make up for 17 years of neglect. It's nuts. The success rate is even worse for convict remediation.
And what's the difference between GEDs and high school graduates? [Well, GEDs are just as smart as HS graduates.] But they lack something. They're missing motivation, self-control and forward- lookingness. (2005)

7. Participants were nearly all women and most had dependent children
Female
89.5%
Latino
74.3%
African American
13.1%
White
9.6%
Average age
30.3
Had any children under age 18
72.0%
Married
29.5%
Had a GED
24.8%
Graduated from high school
70.6%
Had a college degree
4.7%
Attended college but did not earn a degree
46.4%
Employed at any time during the past year
84.4%
Average annual earnings during the past year
$11,387

8. Most study participants planned to become LVNs

9. QUEST made a substantial investment in participants

10. QUEST participants earned substantially more in the third through sixth years after random assignment
Significance levels: ***p<.01, **p<.05, *p<.10

11. The earnings impacts grew over the six years after random assignment
Significance levels: ***p<.01, **p<.05, *p<.10

12. QUEST participants were more consistently employed in the fourth through sixth years
Significance levels: ***p<.01, **p<.05, *p<.10

13. Among those employed at the end of the six years, QUEST participants earned nearly $2 an hour more
Difference significant at p<.01

14. QUEST participants were under less financial strain
Significance levels: ***p<.01, **p<.05, *p<.10

15. QUEST participants experienced less difficulty making their credit card payments
Significance levels: ***p<.01, **p<.05, *p<.10

16. QUEST participants were more likely to earn a certification and less likely to earn a college degree
Significance levels: ***p<.01, **p<.05, *p<.10

17. Key Questions For whom did it work?
Which occupational tracks worked best?
Which services were the most valued?
Why does it work?

18. QUEST had significantly greater impacts on the earnings of participants who had a GED and those ages 25 and older
Difference significant at p<.10
Difference significant at p<.05

19. Training completion and certification rates varied significantly by occupational track

20. All participants valued QUEST’s financial support

21. QUEST participants’ program satisfaction

22. Why is QUEST effective?
Partners with employers to identify good jobs that pay well and are hard to fill
Ensures community college training aligns with employer needs
Very strong accountability among organizers, programs staff and students
Generous, flexible support
Focus on one outcome – getting people into careers with good jobs and upward mobility

23. QUEST completers earned much higher earnings than those who dropped out
Difference significant at p<.01
Difference significant at p<.01

24. San Antonio is less costly than many cities

25. 85 percent of QUEST participants were still living in San Antonio after six years
Residential location of the QUEST participants at the time of the six-year follow-up