The Effect of CETA on the Postprogram Earnings of Participants

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. University of Wisconsin Press andThe Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Human Resources. ABSTRACTThis paper is a report of a study of efforts to use the Continuous Longitudinal Manpower Survey to estimate the effect that CETA has had on the posttraining earnings of participants. Particular attention is given to developing estimates that are free of selection bias-whether it results from nonrandom self-selection or selection by program administrators. The results indicate that CETA has had a positive and often significant effect on the earnings of participants, and that women benefit more from participation than do men. Among the various program activities that have been available under CETA, no one program is clearly more beneficial than the others.For almost a decade, the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973 (CETA) had major responsibility for the provision of federally funded training. The program was originally designed primarily to provide training for disadvantaged workers. With the recession of 1974-1975, the emphasis of the program shifted to providing employment opportunities in the public sector for the cyclically unemployed. By 1978 the program had reverted to a structural program-providing employment and training opportunities for only the most disadvantaged and hard-toemploy individuals.

Back to Work: Testing Reemployment Services for Displaced Workers

“…Perhaps most striking is the precipitous earnings decline experienced by all groups. This preprogram dip is consistent with findings from prior research (Ashenfelter 1978;Kiefer 1979;Bassi 1984;Bloom 1984b;Bloom 1987b;Bryant and Rupp 1987;Dickinson, Johnson and West 1986). The central issue posed by this phenomenon is the extent to which it represents short-term unemployment versus permanent economic displacement.…”

“…This distinction reflects major differences between the labor market ex periences of each and the fact that prior studies have consistently documented larger program impacts for women (Bassi 1984;Bloom 1987b;Bryant and Rupp 1987;Dickinson, Johnson and West 1986;andKiefer 1979). l…”

“…Given the serious labor market problems experienced by sample members, and the weak effects observed for past employment and training programs (Kiefer 1979;Bassi 1984;and Bloom 1987b), such limited program exposure (mostly assessment during intake) was extremely unlikely to affect no-shows appreciably.…”

Econometric Evaluation of the Sewa Bank in India: Applying Matching Techniques Based on the Propensity Score

“…(See for example Bassi (1984), Cochran and Rubin (1973), Rosenbaum (1995), Rubin (1974;1979)) As matching can be difficult when the set of conditioning variables is large, recent evaluation literature focuses on Rosenbaum and Rubin's (1983) approach and matches on the propensity score, leading to a simple non-parametric estimator. This method uses the propensity scorethe probability of receiving treatment -to select from the control group the most comparable sample counterpart in order to construct the counterfactual information on the treated outcomes had they not been treated.…”

Estimating the Effect of Training on Employment and Unemployment Durations: Evidence From Experimental Data

“…Such human capital increases may lead to subsequent rises in trainees' wages. Finally, for evaluations using short sampling frames, separate estimates of training's impact on employment and unemployment durations may be used to estimate the program's long-run effect.2 'Among nonexpcrimental evaluations Ashenfelter (1978) reports earnings gains for the 1964 MDTA cohorts; Bassi (1983) and Ashenfclter and Card (1985) find more modest earnings gains for CETA participants. Barnow (1986) provides a summary or evaluations of CETA.…”