Introduction
Research Questions
- Do interventions designed to improve employment outcomes for people with low incomes show evidence of effectiveness during recessions and recoveries?
- What specific types of interventions work to improve employment outcomes for people with low incomes during recessions and recoveries? Are specific types of interventions more or less effective during recessions or recoveries?
- How should providers consider altering operations in response to economic conditions?
The COVID-19 pandemic changed employment in dramatic ways worldwide and continues to have lasting impacts. In the United States, at the start of the pandemic, the unemployment rate more than tripled, increasing from 3.5 to 14.8 percent over only two months (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 2021a). Although unemployment rates have decreased from those historic highs, as of September 2021, the unemployment rate remained around 4.8 percent. Moreover, in the same month, unemployment was much higher for several groups—for example, 8 percent for Black men and 12 percent for youth. Much research suggests that even short periods of unemployment can have long-term negative effects on a person’s earnings and employment (Filomena 2021).
Program administrators and managers are considering ways to adapt their programs to the current economic reality. Evidence on programs that have effectively improved employment and earnings for people with low incomes during past recessions and recoveries can help policymakers and practitioners target their resources as they seek to improve employment in the wake of the pandemic and beyond.
To provide support for this decision making, the Pathways Clearinghouse turned to the research literature. First, we conducted a targeted literature scan for articles that considered why and how interventions might be effective during recessions and recoveries. Next, we used rigorous quantitative methods known as meta-analysis and meta-regression to look across interventions and studies reviewed for the Pathways Clearinghouse systematic review in order to provide new evidence about what works to improve employment outcomes for people with low incomes during recessions and recoveries.
Key Findings and Highlights
On average, interventions improve employment outcomes among people with low incomes during recessions and recoveries.
- This report considered 30 interventions implemented during recessions. Of these 30 individual interventions, 8 had favorable effects on outcomes including employment, earnings, education and training, and long-term public benefit receipt. When we averaged across all 30, average effects were also favorable.
- This report considered 95 interventions implemented during recoveries. Twenty-two had favorable effects. When we averaged across all 95, average effects were also favorable.
Specific types of interventions were especially effective during recessions and recoveries.
- During recessions, interventions that primarily focused on case management or other supports, employment services, and work and work-based learning had evidence of improving outcomes. Interventions focused on case management or other supports and employment services show the largest effects during recessions as compared with other types of interventions implemented during recessions.
- During recessions, case management interventions tended to have larger effects than during stable economic conditions, and education and training interventions tended to have smaller effects than during stable economic conditions.
- During recoveries, interventions that primarily focused on education and training, work and work-based learning, employment services, case management or other supports, and incentives and sanctions had evidence of improving outcomes. Interventions focused on education and training and work and work-based learning showed the largest effects during recoveries as compared with other types of interventions implemented during recoveries.
- During recoveries, case management interventions had larger average effects than case management interventions implemented during stable economic conditions.
Providers can consider changing the types of interventions or services they emphasize based on economic conditions.
- During recessions, when unemployment is rising, practitioners and policymakers should consider placing more emphasis on case management or other supports, and less emphasis on education and training.
- During recoveries, when unemployment is falling, practitioners and policymakers should consider targeting resources toward interventions focused on education and training, work and work-based learning, employment services, incentives and sanctions, and case management or other supports.
Methods
The Pathways Clearinghouse team systematically identified, categorized, and assessed studies of interventions designed to improve the labor market outcomes of individuals with low incomes. We recorded information about the study methods, intervention characteristics and populations served, and intervention impacts.
For this synthesis report, we used two approaches to address our research questions. First, we conducted a targeted scan for past research that provided theoretical or empirical insights into how or why effects of employment and training programs might differ depending on the economic context (recession, recovery, or stable economic conditions). Next, we used rigorous quantitative techniques known as meta-analysis and meta-regression to summarize the information on interventions and studies reviewed for the Pathways Clearinghouse. Meta-analysis and meta-regression involve analyzing the results of multiple prior analyses. They produce average estimates of impacts, with more weight given to more precise estimates. These techniques enabled us to identify types of interventions with the strongest favorable effects on outcomes during different economic periods.
Appendix
Appendix
This document contains four appendices to Stanczyk et al. (2021).
Appendix A. Details on the Technical Approach gives additional detail on the methods used to obtain the findings presented in the report. This section includes information about how we conducted the literature scan, calculated the effect sizes from the original studies, conducted meta-analysis, and developed meta-regression models.
Appendix B. Additional Table and Figures provides the full results for each analysis presented in the report.
Appendix C. Sensitivity Analysis presents and describes checks of the sensitivity of key findings presented in the report to key analytic decisions.
Appendix D. Citations Included in the Pathways Clearinghouse lists the citations for the studies included in the meta-analysis data set.
| File Type | File Name | File Size | Synthesis Pathways recession report appendix | 1,496.00 KB |
|---|
Citation
Stanczyk, Alexandra, Dana Rotz, Erin Welch, Andrei Streke. (2021). Synthesis Report: What Works During Economic Recessions and Recoveries? Evidence from the Pathways Clearinghouse. OPRE Report # 2021-229, Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.