!"


	!!
	"

		


# $  

#%&'

(
#
)*+&

,*'-.$' 

 %$/%!	0

	1


0 .!)

23

 44/

#%&'&

 !"


'$/
!#0

#%11

0 .!)

-* 56

7  56


2)

#
 

- *8 **'%'	
	


(
#
)*

+&
-/8  9* '  '     *   *  (
#


)*+&

	
	


	 
 
 	     	 










  	  
 
 
  	 	 




 




		


       
  
	
	
 
   
  

!"
 #
  $
 % %   & %
 " 

'
&("

)%&*
 #
&$

+,	&
&%-$
.	&

"
 *
  %
!
  	 
 / &

0&	



 















 1"(  +& # #
  "
  

 



	





	


  
 " '-
&-(/ 
 




)
'-
&)'-&).






""-	2





		
'%


&  , .& ( (& )2 )
&  # $ 




 




&






    %&)'-/3'     

&)
"&
	$
%%	

,
  	   
    	!  
& 



	
 
	









 
  




%
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING


	

            	

  

   

 

 	





 

 

 



 


 

 

!

 "#$%&''(#&)#*
+%,)$-+)' .

/ "0-"*%#%&1%#)#*'

 "*"%00),*%# /

 
2

/


 

	

            	

 3

 


3

 

4 

 5"+$*+-,*-+) 

/ )6-+)$%-#')0#(,**)'7

 11+%"0%8
+%(+"&9%,)'/.

 

/4 /.

 5"+$*+-,*-+) /

/ )6-+)$%-#')0#( /

 11+%"0%8
+%(+"&9%,)'/

 

4	//

 5"+$*+-,*-+) //

/ )6-+)$%-#')0#(,**)'//

 11+%"0%8
+%(+"&9%,)'//

 


//

 "1'//

/ (9:"();(9:)&"#$,,-1"*%#'*'/

 -'*%&)+')&1*)$8+%&*9)1)+&)#*/

 /3

  /

 
< /!

 



.

 

<+"##( /

 #
))$%8+"##( /

/ "#(*9)=00'"#$>-"08,"*%#'*%%&10)*)+"##(

 %&10)*%#%8,,-1"*%#"0%-#')0#("#$'')''&)#* 

 *9)+#*)#'):)+,))6-+)&)#*'3
  

  

	

            	

?	
@

 




 3

 

	

7

 

 .

 <

 

 +"##(
+%$)+' 

/ +"##(
+%(+"&' 

 
 

A  

 !

 








3.

 3

 88),*%#-'*%&)+9%,) 3

/ 
+%$)+)'1%#')*%*9)5"+$*+-,*-+) 3/

 

3/

 9%,)%8,,-1"*%#3

/ 
+%(+"&)')"+,933

 %&1"+'%#'%8+"##(1*%#'3 

 )"'B0*C%8
+%(+"&%&10)*%#37

3 %-#')0#(#$)+11+%",9.

 





 D


 


 

	

            	

  3

A. PARTICIPATION IN THE ITA EXPERIMENT................................................... 66 

#*)(+*C%8"#$%&''(#&)#*........................................................ 68 

/
"+*,1"#*)#-+)#*9)1)+&)#* ......................................... 69 

B. PARTICIPATION IN ITA COUNSELING SERVICES ......................................... 69 

)+,)#*"*%#8*)+"#$%&''(#&)#*...................................... 70 

/),)1*%8%-#')0#( ................................................................. 73 

C. 





.............................................................. 77 

D. TRAINING EXPENDITURES .......................................................................... 81 


+,)'%8)0),*)$
+%(+"&'................................................................ 81 

/5"+$'........................................................................................ 83 

)+"()%'*'..................................................................................... 84 

E. TRAINING SELECTIONS ............................................................................... 85 

9%,)%8,,-1"*%# ........................................................................ 85 

/
+%$)+)0),*%#'............................................................................. 87 


+%(+"&-+"*%# .............................................................................. 88 

   !

 




!

 11+%",9"'
%*&10)&)#*)$"'
0"##)$ !

/ "E%+9"#()'#%-#')0#(
+",*,)'"#$***-$)'%-0$)

)6-+)$*%&10)&)#*11+%",9!

 11+%",9/"'&10)&)#*)$"'
0"##)$!

 11+%",9"')#)+"00C&10)&)#*)$"'
0"##)$!

3 
+%(+"&)')"+,9"')5)$"')018-0!

 #)F)%)'
%**00#%-#')0#(;B-*"0%+#(*%-'*%&)+'D


))$''9"00)#(#(!
  

  

	

            	

?	
@

 


 !3

 9)#%-#')0#('%0-#*"+C;-'*%&)+'"+)0C)6-)'**!3

/ %-#')0#()6-+)&)#*'',%-+"():-#$)$+"##( !3

 "*)'%8:-#$)$+"##()+)&0"+#$)+11+%",9)'

"#$/ !

 *)1)#$*-+)'%#+"##()+)(9)'*#$)+11+%",9

"#$%5)'*#$)+11+%",9/ !

3 %&)&"0088)+)#,)',,-++)$#+"##(
+%(+"&9%,)'

,+%''11+%",9)'! 

 

>
! 

 
 !!

 


	4


 

 


	4
< 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING


	
 


  	






  

  


	
  

  


		
	
  

  
	


  

 		

  

 	
	
	

	
 

 	



  

  
		
	
	
  

! 
	



 

 



"  

 	
	

	


	
"
 !

 	
#
 !

 	





$  

 	
""



 

  
	




  

  
	





  
%&&

 

	
  


  

	







"

  

   
	

	  !

 ! '
'




  

  		

 (

  			
)	




'  (

 ( 	

	

	
 ( 

  		
	
	
	
  (


	

 



 	



 

 





	 

 	






		


  

  




  !!

! 	

	
	




 !"

 
		



#


  

 	
	


		#




  "

  	
	
$
		#




  %

! 	
	
	
$
#




 

& 
	

#		  

" 

		#




  %
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 

 	
 

 	  
  
 


  




  

 	
 
  
 	
  



   


   
 

  
 
   
		





   	
 	 
 
	 	!  


 "	 



  

    
  
	
    
  

	
 	 
# 	
$

   
   
	



 %
 
 &
	 	
' 


  	

 


 
 (


	

		 


  
	  
  

 )  
"   





 
	
*	






 
 


  
   
 	
 

 % 
 
 
+	
 




  	 
   
 
 

    

 





 

	

	



	 "





+	
"	

)
%


    	    


 
  	

	
$ 
  	 

  
 
  "	 




  
  
  	
$ 

    

 

  
 




    

 
    


  

 	 	



  	
 

 
 	
$   
 

 










 
	





THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
  	 




	








  
	   


 !"		


	!




	 
		




  
  #  
#    !  
 



	
$ 

!!%
	##			


   

 
#  $

  # 

  


 

 

	  
		 &         '

#(	"	#)	
		



' !&

• 	



!


 !	

   *	  %   



#+


 ,
	#

   - !   

%.#/// 

•   

 
   !   	  

		


*	  #    	      

*	  + '  
     ' 	 


    *   
% !  .)#///  

 

•   


 !  	  


    *  	   	   

  !
0 1 2
32,34

5	6# 456#1	5	62


6 
%

	

	 	

" *  
% !#

"	      (#       

'	
 

! ! %   %	   %	   



 

 #  

#      



#	#
 			

%	$$#
 

 !  

    		       

	#!%		






 !  #%


 





! 

					#

789#*8*	#:*	8:**# 		8

;		#<	85%#- 	5%#%

	   
  		 
     * 


		
		%	

 
      2  %'   2 (// 

< (//=#  #/// 
   		   %  

 

!   	 	 
      !





    # 	   	#

#'% 				


	#		#'	


 #   
#  		   	 
    

 



	

!

"			
	


!#			#		

	 ,%
	
!

	
			 

 !!"!# ""!#

*"#		

	  	#	

# 
	

$# 	

 !		#
		 

	  "

	


	 
  %%

	 	 	

	

*	  	        
 
 
 

 <#					

 		    1#  	 	   '


  			 	 !# 	


				
    	


" <#	
	
	



		-
	#
	 

		
  		 	


				 	
				

" 
	   	# 	    
 		

		 		#		

     '   
 %	#

!	

$			 0

	##		$

 4#		


			

 

$ !!"!# ""!#

,(				 ,


#(	
%		

    	 
	  
	 	   ! 	   



	
>		



% 

%&!"! ' !!"!# ""!#


%#			"


)> # 

 	     	 

" 1 	   " 	   

       !    ?#  	 

	 

9
   )#   	     

 
 		  	 	       1

#  		  	#       

  	    )   ! 	 	  

	


'	


 

(!!)!*!#! +, 

!	

		

"
% !
	

-
!$		 
%%

	

	 	

		#				

			
	 !		


@ 
A$$     
 " 


,$1*

 9

 
 %# 	  	  
 %' 

"#
		 	#

%#	

 (  	#    
	    	  		 #  


		 

"! 	)-! .!  )   )" ,"! )"(/ 0, ) )"(  ,!1 !!# 

 !"()"(

2%#	"		

     # 	 
 ' 
    1

  	  # 	  	 	   


	 
  # " 		    		 
  	 

    	        %  # 


%'		
	' 

B
%##	


   	  		   B 
  )  # 


    #  	  	 
  	 

	 
     ?# 	  	 "  

		+
	#
 #

" B
	

		 


.
		

!!%

	




       	 

 
  

     #  %   
     

 # 	 '   	#  

##		'% ,		


			 

!","! )"( ,"'/,!! '!2,!


 	  	   )# 	  		  


" !"		
		

 ,		#	

)"

	!< #CD


    D  
  (    

	 
  %%

	 	 	

	

Figure 1. Participation in ITA Counseling Beyond Orientation 

*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .01 confidence level. 

,"! )"(!2,)!!".),(!3,"#!#)")"(

*   )  
	  		    ! 

( !

!

 E  &   CD  
 		     )

!#D
(<( 



 
%!#



	   

  	 "     !




		
		 

4 
  

         ( 

  
  	 
  "  !

   ,	 CE  
  (    ! #

  E=  
  )      !
#   

'	
		"


( 

!+3,"#!#)")"(!!	)) "#!!"#$

!!		

(>		#D
!#

D(<( !

!

	 	>C
 !#

CE
( !



		+
 

65***

58

4***

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent who attended counseling beyond ITA 

orientation

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
%%

	

	 	

Figure 2. Participation in ITA-Funded Training by Approach 

*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .01 confidence level. 

! 	 
   	   	 
 

   !

( <#

		 
!	



	#

 	 
  !1# # 	 	 "

       
     


!,


	






		 !	
	

'  	 	 		    #    		 

#		#
#% 

	)!4!"#),!")")"(!!)(!"#!"#*!"#!

$

!		

 ! 
%	%() 

! %       	  	 

	$ 

*	

		%# 1

%E/

( ! 	    
  	 

 
	
 	

 (  !	    4	#  
 !$
   	

 

59 58

65***

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent who received ITA program approval

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
  %%

	 	 	

	

Table 1. Average Cost of ITA Approaches to Local Sites 

 Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

Average Price of Selected Programs $4,764*** $3,430 $3,133 

Average ITA Expenditures per Trainee $4,731*** $2,849 $2,857 

Training Rate (Percentage) 59.0 57.6 65.1*** 

Average Training Cost per ITA 

Customer $2,791*** $1,641 $1,853*** 

*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .01 confidence level. 

1 %       )   

)( !

	 



 !) 



!!	 

!

!!		

  
 	         

B

		
!#	

	 # 		  	 
  ' $$ 	   !

	
			
	 

	!	 .)++!!"!,!#)")")"()!!


 %  

      	 

&     
    # (   
 

#)
 

		




 


!	

	   ?#         		 	

			$				$

 2	'
#)		

	$$# 	 

#	

( 

     )    		     

  	 		   	 		     

	
$		 :		






( 

!"



  >  	     
   
%%

	

	 	

() !




	 


&5		

!  %  	 
      !

%  

        6

	#			

 	  	   #    (  ) 

			 
#	!

  	 
	 '  
 	  

		
!?#	

' 


 	 	 +   	  	   



!
!$
 !

(
	 ,

#  	 "     
   


	
 #

				 
	
 

		#   
  	  		 

    	

 <		#!		

$ 

! %	"#		  
   
 !  

	
	#		0 #		#

	      
 	  #    	  



% !

	#


	#					



! 
  	 

	 

	


	

	



	





	

	













 
 	  
 
 
 	 
 
 
  


!




	
 

 
  
 
 ""

 


 
 	"

   	
 
 


 

 ""

 


  



#

  
 	"



	



	
  " 
 	 

$
" 
"
  %
# "
 
 & 


%


 
 & %# 

' 

 
 
 
" 
 

 

 



	"

 
"" 

 "  		  

 " 	 	(
  ""  



       
 
	
 

 
" 	   


"


"










(

#
		


"










"  



 


 	"

  

 

 (

#


		

#
" 

	("



#









""
#"
"


	
 
!


  (

""

"	"
#

#"
"

"



 
 	

  
 

"$		 

  "		

 
 












#"		


"

  	



""
"



' "#
"





   
" 
 	
   

  	("   
  


  
"	""
)*+


	,
""
"-

%

.
#-%."




#*%.

"+	



.



/

	
	
 




0

	
 



'" "


 
!

   " 
 	
 
!
 

 
 
 





"






	
	

"

  

" "  
 
 	 
 
 
 



 
 

'  	



 

   
 
 	
 

 

 
 
 
$






 
 "  

 
 
 
1
 

' 
 






$
"



    (

   (

 " 
 (
  
 "		




		


#


		#"


"
#"		




 

 "		

 

 # 
 " 
 
# "




	
 (

(



$$

#	





  
		
"


"


"
"






 

  ""  
 

# 
   (

 
  
 


		
			
   
"#
(
		
	 "		





		
 



 


"



	"

	
 

 
 
" " 
  	 
 

 
   
"

	

	


	

"	

"
#

"


""
"

"

*
" 
*
* *#"	$

 
 "
" 2
 	

 
" 
  
 "
"2


	


"


"


	






		

 	






"




	
 




	

  
 

 	 
 
 " 

 		
  3$*


4


		"
"

""



"	



  


# 

 

 	" 	

   (

# 



1
5

#
"



"		


(
	

(

"


 
   
 

" 
 
 
" 
  *"# 
 ( 


(
 	 
 

 
		# 

# "  
"
 
 
 

  


"

		
	



	
"



5#




	

	



 

"



#"





#

	

#

	 
# "  	

 

  


  

 

 	



	











	

  

6
7"








	



		
"

""


"

"	
$	""


	



"




"4

#




""
	
	!	


	

		"



* 











	

 














2$
	
  8

  	
	



""

#"


#

'
"


	



#"


	


 


"

(
	

 (


	


 *
  " 	

 
 *
 9  
 
 
"  
 	 
 




 *
 4#  
 	

 	
 
 
 *
 +# " 


	

"*
:
"

"



	







 	
		
	

	

 (

#


	 "

	


"

"
"

  	
 
 

   5
 (#   8$
 
"#+' 
 

/;; 	" 

 
  	 
 
 " 
" "  	
 (  	




"

"

"""
	


"	
5



#	

	

"
(


	




-

#	

(

"






	
5
(#


.4<	

"
<	



" 
   
 
" 

 
 
 
 8#;;; "
" :




 

  
  
 

  = 
 (
 



	




"
0	
"
#
"
"



	







"$0





"
"

"
 & %  
"# 
 
"  
 
 " " "
" 

 








" 	"

	
"
"



  
 "  
 " 
 

 # 
 

 	





"


"
"


 	


"





(
#

"

"

"




"
 
	
#  	
 
 

 
 		 
" "


+'"*0/;;>

,  

 (

" 
 
 

 "
 & % 	

"" 

 

 " 	
 

  
 
 
!
"  "



"



"	
"#


9


" 

 	"

 
 	  
 

 
"

 " 
 "


& % "
 

"  
 "     
" 
"
#


" 
 # 
"" 
 "   


 



# " 

"
 ' 



 
1
  


'

 ,

"





"

	
9
" 


"	






"# 

 
 
 



  

 # " 

  







"


-	

	




"
"
"


 "

,"





9
" 


""	



	





"

		










"
	




	

>

	
	
 

   (


 

" "
9
 " 

 
"


""
 
:
" 
4





- "





"4





"   6
 
#7 
   
 
  

 "

""



"
#

#""
	




4

" "
 



 


 



#

	








5




#
 0 	
 
 
 " 
 

' 
 	
 










"$;#

	


	






	
	
"

#
)*+


	,
+3,
"


4

-

4-+






 	
	
"



	
"
"




 4-+


"
"

	
2
?8 
%%
*

"






 
 

# 
 
 "" " 

" 
 

 	
 

 	 

 "
" 

 
   4

 "  

 





# 
 
   
!
" 

 
 


  
 "


 



 " ,  	


# 	 

 " 








#
"

"!






 

 


  3
# 
 "   "" 
" 




"""
	"
9
" 








"
 & % 


4-+


""









1



"$


""





	"

"
		

 	






	

	


	
"






 

' " 	
 

 " "


 "  
  
 	


	





 (

5

#0"









 #	







  *"#  
" 
 

 	 

# 
# " 




"
 

	
"
#
(
"



	


  
"
 
  
 	
 

' 
  
"# 

 "



"	(


#" 

 
  

 
"  " 
 	 
 "" 
  "
"



 " "
  
 "
 
 
 "
"










""






@

  	 
  
 
"" 
   
 " 


 " " 1 
 " 
 
   


 	$
 " 	

 
 

 
 

 	 
 




 


 	
   *
		$
" 
 
!
 



#



  2

  	
	


/ 
 	 
 " # 
# "
 	

 "" 
 # " 

$

 

 









"



8 
	"


"

"



)"
 
 

" 
 



  
"# 

 
 






"


"
"




!


"

	
+3,

" " 
 

 
 	 

 



>8/
	

#"

 !

 
!

#

""
 
!

 	

3			
5"
.

/;;;

 

""

 

   	    
"" 
 

	
 
 "
 	 

 
 


  

 
  

 

 
"
  )"
 # 
" 	

 
   
	
  ""  
 
 " 	 



	

"
#



 









#
 

0"
"







	

	

"


	  
	
#

"




"		(



"




	 "

""   " " "

 
 
" 
 

  


	





"


#



"



 






 "

	

 

 	"5
(#



	""	






1










"


	







*

"




"



	

#"""





"


"

4

'











""


""


': 
%
"
: %
 ""

#




 "  
	
 
 
 

	 
 

  
 
  	


	


*

 "  
 
  
 	
 
 

 
 

 



  
 

"  $!
 	

    

 

		
 

 "# 	

  
"
 
	
 " 

 
"






 	
 (# 

 
 " "

  "  



4
.

*
4.*


  



	 	"



"
#




 (


 	   	
 	"

 5
 (# $
$1

#


0" 

 
""   
# 
 

 
""   
0


""

	







	""

 
A

	
	
 

 	

  (

""



		
	

"





  

   
 "


 	        







"		






Table I.1. Approaches Tested in the ITA Experiment 

 Approach 1: 

Structured Customer 

Choice 

Approach 2: 

Guided Customer 

Choice 

Approach 3: 

Maximum Customer 

Choice 

Award amount Customized Fixed Fixed 

Counseling 

Mandatory, 

most intensive 

Mandatory, 

moderate intensity Voluntary 

Can counselors 

reject customers’ 

program choices? Yes No No 

 

@

• 			 

"

	




 
  4 
"" "
 
 
  
 "

"

  4
 
 (
"
 

 




 







	
	

#"

1




"
	




3




	


"#





0" 
	





• 	    	   
  
 
 







"
"




4

"

#



"

4




1


'	




$
": %
4




	(" 
"

• 	  	   
 
 



" 	


 
  4

  

  
  
 
 



!
"





4

 
 	("  
"#

!


""

/#"


: %




 

"
"
"
4

#

1




""

"
  ?

  	
	


4



"


 
""



"


"

"
 $

"



"

"		




.
 
		  

" 
 

 	 
 
 " 
""












	
(



 


	


    (

  ""
 

 		
 	


 "		

  


"
	
5

0

	





 "" 
 " 	 
 
  4   
 	
 


 
 









"
 (



4
(
 	

 

  		
 
 

 	 
   
# 



	

#"
	
"


	5


  	

"











!B

!

	
"

"	


B


 
 	 

 

 " 

 
B 
 
 	 

 	" 	




B




	


"



"
"



" 

 "
 



B 
 
' 



   




" " (
B " 
  



 	 
 


 	



 

"
"
	4



Figure I.1. Conceptual Framework: ITA Evaluation 

4
(


5



 








"


3


:



 




!



 	



(



5"	
$ 





 

"




4






4







4




*



"





/=""





8-(





C5

3


4



.
	

.
	



3


 




4
	




	




*








 
%
"


%




%



4


	


:
"




.
	)	


.
	




 



4



	
	
 

  "		

   
 
  
 		
 

 
"
@ 

# 



	
"

#"


"
4	



	

 
0 
 

"
 
 	
  	 
 
"
  



"



"@

• 	 !4
!





"



#"

/#""

8 


(
 
 (

 
  
  

 
 
" 




/


!
"#




8





• 	 
 
(

(



 


		




	

 


 	""

    .


  

  " ""
 


!

  "
 	
 
  

 


  

""
#
	
!

"

8




 
 
 

  ) 
 
 "
# 
 
  

(
 		
 	
 
  

 


 	""





 

• "		 	   
  (
 

 "  



		
"


'	



 	
)"



 # 

 
 "

" 
 

  
 
 




  )"
 
 /# 
 
 " 
  





	



"
""


  
 
   "  D
#    



!
""#
""#
"

"







)"
 
 8# 

 "  
  
!



""
"
	

!
"




 	
 "		

 
  
 "		

 
#
 


  		
 

' 
   
" "		

  




• 	 
# 



		
"




!

"


 
"	("



0")"

#


$


	










		
#


"

"


$


 

  )"
 
 / " 8# 

 
 
"  

	("   
  4

 "
 
 8 " 
  " 



  	 

   
  (
  
 


		
"
	





• !   
  , 	  "
 
 8  "



 
 
 
 

  	 

" 	
  

  	
	





 
 


 

  "" 


 

 




 (

 )
 
 "
#
 
 (





"		


		
"
"	




  
		


	
"



5
    
  (
 
   
  
#

"

	


"


"9		



"	




"

	



#



"		


	

""
#


"



 

 		
" " 
 

 
  
 
 "		

   




 	
	





"C	

	



5
 
"

'
	





"



	
  "

	1





	



"


	

)"
	




  
 
 	  " 

 
""  
 
	
 "







 	

#
 
' 1
   
0" 

 
"



!
@

   

 	 $ !%  
 
 

 
 

  	E  
  
  		

 
 
 


E  + 
  	 
 
' 

 "" 


(
 	

  
 
 	

 

 " 


"





E

/ &   	   	 

 	%  D " 
 


		



"

"
	


CE  D " 
 
 "		
 	
 "		

 
 	 

E  + 



""
(
	

E

8 '( )		%








	
("

"

ED"


	
	


	
	








	"

"

E

 
	
	


  



 
" 

 !
#


   



"

"$$"   	 
 
" 
   

 (

 "   



 "

"  	
 

 
 
 


 
 "
 
 
"'

  5

	



""#%
0$&
/;;;
;

	
	
 




"

""
	


(




 



"
	
#

"




"





 	
"





"






  
  



#  
    

#  
" "		
 





"





"
"		

 



"
	





+3,

"(






(

 




"



	





"

#=
B

9
"

# 4

B 4


# F

 4
B F

 4 4
# B

&# 5
"B " %(# 
0   
 	  
	
 




<%( " -
 4
 " 

 . 4 " F




=
<

"1



:

	 
"




+
/;;

4"
/;;/9
"

:


"	


#

"   
  -
 /;;>   

# 
 #;;; 

 
 
"  


(

 



#
#"


"


 

/

"F

44





#
"/8

	



 

#  F


 =
 
"  
 / 

 	  




  
 $

" 	 
 

 
 " 
  	 
 






Table I.2. Distribution of Study Sample Across Sites 

Site Number of Customers Percent of Total Sample 

Phoenix, AZ 646 8.2 

Maricopa County, AZ 673 8.5 

Bridgeport, CT 1,033 13.0 

Jacksonville, FL 779 9.8 

Atlanta, GA 1,408 17.8 

Northeast Region, GA 171 2.2 

North Cook County, IL 1,809 22.8 

Charlotte, NC 1,403 17.7 

Total 7,922 100.0 

  !"#$%"&$"




"

" 	
$	""

"


"


 
" 
 	
" 
 
 (

 " " 
 


  
 
"

4


"
"
 	
 

	$	""


  

  	
	



 " 

  
	
# 
 	 

  
	" 
 


  


(




"!	"	





9	

""#


"



	
@

%


 

 

 
" 
 
 	
" 
 
 
" " 



B/9	

5



"
"	






B"84

 	

5

"


#	
#




	
	$



-%. 
		"
"
 
"

"


>
	


	"





" 	

"
 






	
"
#	"



@

	"

 	


"



" 	




""#/



 "  
 	
 
" 
  # " 8  






"




"

' ()&# *"#

  
 	 
   (

 
 
# 
# " 


$$



  : 	
 
 


 


 	





"

"	

		

"	
"

 

#	 !)   
   

  1
@   ""





	B/
"!

	


		
	



  

# 
	
 

 
		# " 

 
"
B "

8!


$
"		



	
 


4

C	






	"	




	!) 
""



 


	


 

	


""



	

 




 	
"
	



	

"



"





	
"		

 
<





"


 	
"



 






	



"

"



	

4

C

**
!)	

	
"		


 
 



   
# 
 "
 "







$		


	 	"  


$$






 	




	
"



"

$

"
 










#    "
    
  5
 (#  





"

	






 



"





/

	
	
 

+ #))"%# 

 
""

"	
	

@

 +,.

"
"


"	$"






@



	





	
"
/;;/#


/;;8# " 
/;;>+
 
" 	
#

"

"



 	

	



"# 
1

#

"  
+

 " 
" 	 
#  

"


 




"

(
+





"
"	
#

"


"


		


	
(




	"
"


/ ) 
	- ) 
,   * *#  
0" 


	

 
# "" 	

   (

) 
 	




" 
 "
 	"  
 * *#  
		 
 " 
 







	

#


 
#

 

#



("

#"




8 .!!(*/ ),   
" 
"  	 >#;;   
"




 
  

" 
(
 2 
 	

 
"




 	$

!


"



'

 (
#
	

#






" 

 
# 
 " 
# " 

 	 


 

"
/;;2

> /!) 
	 0,   
 	

 

"




* *"	$
#






"


 

	)	
")$
"
" 	
 
"




 "

"	

	
"	
&


/;;;

+
/;;>

  


 

 	" 	

  	 "
 
" "

 
 


"	

* *

 
	,	


 



0"(

4

"



 


"
4

"


"

(
 	



		





 " 
 	 
   
  4

 C 
 

 
 	"

	

 
  
 "


 	


   
4

C

  "
"

 
"


D
#









"

	"

(

9"





"	




"



"#
"
">#;;




  8

  	
	




  	 
 
 	 
 

 
  

' 


 

 " 

  "
 	
 
 * *   "  4

 C 
 


	
	"
"
""	

!



THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
  		

    	 


 	
	 
 
 

 
	  
   


	

		







	

 


 
  


 

	 

 	 


 


	
   

 


 

	 
 

 	
   ! 

 




	


	
	





"
	


	



 #! 
 
 
	 
  
 
$
	 
	 %! 
 
  




&






 

 	

 
 	
  

  

 

 


 
	  





	




	'

(	














	

!)



	















*
!)

	






	












	
	

	

*
+'
	,!









	

	



	










 
 



 
$
	 


 

	  		
 
 )


	


*
-

 
	








	&




	










	


 


 .


	
 


 


 



 
 


	








	
)+

	








	

	


	








	






 


 
 
 
	 
 	

  
 
  


	

		





	
	







  

 	
 

 	

	   ! 
 

  	  
 


  
 '/

	

 0 0 

 111!2 #! 
    ) 

 


 



0


 
	

!2 
	%! 
3
4*'

0
"
2 +

/

	2

5
/


2/


/
2
	6





)
 7

		
	
 

 
	  
 


 
 #!  
 
 
 
	  
 
 




	 
 


 

	 


 

  
 	

 
	 







 !


	
 

 

	


 


 


	 

 
	 

	
  
 
  


	

 
 %!  
   
 
  
 
 
 

	 
 


  8	

 
 
 	 	
	

 
 
 


	















	


 
	 &

  

 
 

 


  
 
  









	
)



	

	

	


	 



	
	
	

	+

	

 111!
	



	

	
,


	
	



 
 

  



 


 
	 
  
	 



  




 
	 
 


 



	 

  	

 
 	
 
 	
	



 
 
  



 

	 
 
  

 




















	










	


	
"


	

	



)



		



	





















		

9


	





)
	







)

	



	







	








 
 	 

 	


  
: 
 
 
	 

 
	



 
  ,


  
 

 

 
	 
 
 





	





	


 


 






 
	
	


 


	








	



 


 	
 
 ;4
<
 
=





	 



 
 
 
: 

 


 

  









 
"







	








 	

8	

 




	



	









	





	



	




  "
	  
$

	 
 
   
 
  
 
 










	





0

!

3
 
 
	 
	 
 

 
  
  ;
<  

	 	



   
 
 
	 

 
  
 

	  
 




	
 
 

	 
 


  9

 
	
 
 
 
 









	




 



  >

  		
	


Table II.1. Summary of the Individual Training Account Approaches 

Approach 1: 

Structured Customer Choice 

Approach 2: 

Guided Customer Choice 

Approach 3: 

Maximum Customer Choice

Approach Philosophy 

Maximize return on local WIA 

training investments 

Balance customer choice and 

counselor guidance 

Maximize customer choice 

and flexibility over training 

decisions 

ITA Structure

ITA amounts are “customized” to 

the individual subject to an upper 

limit, or “cap.” 

Customers receive a fixed ITA 

amount that is much lower than 

the Approach 1 cap. 

Same as Approach 2 

Only counselors are aware of the 

cap on ITA expenditures. 

Both customers and counselors 

are aware of the fixed ITA 

amount before choosing a 

training provider. 

Same as Approach 2 

ITAs cover direct training costs 

and other training-related 

expenses. 

Same as Approach 1 Same as Approach 1 

Required Counseling Activities

After ITA orientation, customers 

must participate in weekly 

counseling sessions covering: 

- High-return training 

- High-wage occupations in 

demand 

- Training options in 

customer’s selected 

occupation 

- Returns-to-training for 

prospective programs 

- Feasibility of customer’s 

training selection 

After ITA orientation, customers 

must participate in weekly 

counseling sessions covering: 

- Training options in 

customer’s selected 

occupation 

- Feasibility of customer’s 

training selection 

After ITA orientation, 

customers are not required 

to participate in any 

additional activities, but 

counseling is available if 

requested. 

Counselor’s Role in Program Approval

Direct customers to training 

selections on the ETP list that 

maximize return on investment 

Guide customers to 

appropriate training strategies 

Available as a resource to 

customers as they 

formulate a program 

selection 

Approve only recommended 

programs after customers 

complete the required counseling 

activities 

Approve customer’s choice if: 

- Customer has completed 

the required counseling 

activities 

- Selection is on the ETP 

list 

- Selection appears 

feasible with ITA and 

other available resources 

Approve customer’s 

choice if: 

- Selection is on the 

ETP list 
 ?

		
	
 





=
	



	


#
	%=


 
  
  
 

  

 


 4 
 
 









	
	
/






	






 


	 
 		

  
'





	  	

  
 
  









		
"
	

	



	




 






#
	%


 




	 
	

 







+





	 
&

:
	

 



 





		






	


&













		

	




	 
 
$
	 


  
    

 
 	  







  

4


	 

	 
 	 

 

!  

	

  !"#$ "% &  #


 




 	


	 
 
   
 

	   
 
	


 
 
 
 
 

 
$
		
 

 










	
	"



	







	



	


	

		





	


4


	

	





 
 	  
	  
 
 
  
	  	


	  
 








 
	







	



  
 
	 
$

  
 
4


	 
 

  







 	

	 

 
 
	 
	
 4







	


	


















 



 " !"
 


 
	 

	 
	 
	 
 

	






	

	

	












	




		
	
			



 





	
		













	 

 

 



 
 '


 
 



	





$ "%  %'(" 
) !"  
 
	 
  
 




	









	







		









	




 

/





$

	




	
	0

"4@


	+
#AA !
  1

  		
	





 
 
  
	 



   	
 

 4



/0B	
	

	




    	

 
   
	
	 ! 	





4

	









:



"


	


	



  
 
 	
 
: 

  
   

	



  
 	
 

'




 

	  

 
 
  
	
   	
 
 
 
	  




	




#   	

 	
     
  


 
 
  

 
	 

 	

	   	

	  



 


  
 


 
	 /0B 

 	


	    
 






	









	

:




	












	









/0B 	


	 
3

B


)

 

  




 

   8
  
 

 
  
	
 

  




	
	 
 



 
	
  
	 



 

	
	



 

 
2
 	

	 
 
 
 
 
2



	
 
 	 	
 
  
 
2 
 


 
	 

2



	
2
	







!%* #' 
 
 
 


	 
 

 
 4

 



	


-0







	





 
 
  .  

 	


	  
 
 
 	 






	

"




	




  
 
    

 
 	

	  
 






 















	

	




# 



	

	







:
















 

	










% 
    !  

 
 	

	 


 
 


 
 
  
  

 
 
 



 



	 
	

	 





	
	

 !










 #! 
 
 

 
 
 	 

  


 



	%!









#A

		
	
 

C 
 " !   

 
 	

	  



	



	


	







	





	







 
 
 



 
  
 



	


	








'



	






		
	







 



!%* # + $ ,  
 
 
 


	 
 
 
	 
 



	
	
 


 
 
	 	





 
 
	 




  
 

  

 
 
  

 
 
 
	 




	



  #"$!


	

	






 
 	 
 

   


 
	 
 	

	





	


# 
 
!


	

	



	




	:






	44






 
 

 


 
 	 	

 
 
	
	


 
 
 

 
  
 

  

 


  






- ))!&$!.!%*'! #

8$

  
 	 
&

 

  










 





	



	 !



	

	
	

	

	
	



	
	

#!


	







	

%!



	

	

-0




!'
	




	
&


:


		









 	 /

 
 	


	
 

	 
	


 


 
 
	 
  	


    	
 
  
 



	






 
/	
	


#
	

	
	

















	
)B



 
# 
	




 
$

 
	 
 
  
 
  
 
 
: 


'


	

	

#




		





	

 


 
$
	
 	

'





	

	


	





  # 

  		
	


 	


	




 
	#


#






;
	<

	
	



	
	



	




	








	





	

	



	
#



	



	



	 

 

 

 
 
 
 
  



	

		

	
	













 
	 

	




	




	
	



	
	



  !"#$ "%

'


 	

	

#
	






 


 
 
  

 
	 
	! 
	 


 
 









!'



$
	





	

 
 
 	
 
   
  
 
 
 
 
 #



5

 

#

	















	
	

• B



	

0
B


.

• -





'.

• 
 
 
 
 
	 


 
 
	 




 

	
	 
 
 
	 -

 )

 
	 


+	
)

!

8

 


#
		




	


4

2	

4

4	

	
2





 
 
 
	
 



 


 
	













$
!
		







 0
 -	

 )

  
  
 # 
 
	 



 3 '
 )

  )
 
 0
 -	

 )




$
	






	 








3'
)

	
	
4
	
	$
	

	















- ))!&$!.!%*'! #

'



	 


# 
 

 

	  



 !


	

-0
	#!


	





	 
 
 # 
 
$

  )
 
 	 





  	
 	
4 
 
 
 
 
 

	 
 #



	







	


	

##

		
	
 


: 

 
 	 
 
   

 
	  

 





$

	



4

	



 
-0	
	


%
	

	






	
	







	


 	


 % 
 


	
 

 
	  

	 

 # 



	 	 
 
  

	  
 
 
  
 -0   
 %




	






	












		

	
	





	






 
	

 	


 



  

 



	


	

  !"#$ "% &  #

'


	


	

	

	

%








	











	
	





 

 
$
	 
  
	
# 
! 
	


 

	 
0

 
 
 

 
	 









- ))!&$!.!%*'! #


  	  

  
 % 
: 
 

 




 !


	

	
	

	



	#!






 -0   9

 
 % 
 	  
	 

 

  











 	

	/

	


 
 


  

 

 

 	

  
 
 
  9

  







 



 


	  

 













 
	

#
	%

3


	
		


4

4	

	

	

	


 
 	 
 


	 
 


 




		




	

$
	










	
	










 	)#










	

		


#
	%
	




"
	
	

 
  #%

  		
	


)# # .! ' 1) *"  +

 
 


 
 
 

	 









 

	

 #!







	D%AAA+	
D?1AA

@




=0


E

F


	E''=




 
 

	
 
 
 0
 
	 
 
  





	

 
	


 

E

F


	

E''
	







	






		





Table II.2. ITA Caps Before and During the Experiment 

 ITA Experiment Caps 

Site Pre-Experiment Cap Approach 1 Approaches 2 and 3 

Phoenix, AZ $3,000 for programs less 

than 6 months 

$4,000 for programs longer 

than 6 months $8,000 $3,000 

Maricopa County, 

AZ $3,500 $8,000 $3,000 

Bridgeport, CT $3,000 $7,000 $3,000 

Jacksonville, FL Tiered according to entrylevel wages for occupation 

selected: 

$4,600 if wages less than 

$8.78 per hour 

$5,800 if wages $8.79 to 

$14.44 per hour 

$8,900 if wages more than 

$14.44 per hour $6,000 $3,000 

Atlanta, GA $5,000 first year 

$3,000 second year (if 

needed) 

Total possible funding: 

$8,000 $8,000 $5,000 

Northeast Region, 

GA 

$3,000 first year 

$2,000 second year (if 

needed) 

Total possible funding: 

$5,000 $8,000 $4,000 

North Cook 

County, IL 

$3,000 per year (for up to two 

years) 

Total possible funding: 

$6,000 $8,000 $3,000 

Charlotte, NC $4,000 $8,000 $4,000 
#C

		
	
 

3 
 
=@

=
	 
 
  
 
  
 
  





		

 	

 
	
	

 


 



	

	



	



	
4



 










DC7AA

4








D?>?
DG?AA






D?>1
	D CCC

	D?1AA







D CCC


) .!))!'#"--


 /0B	


	
 
	




#
	%



&



	

	
















	










	

?A


)
	


 

 
 


 



	  
 


  
 
 
 

 ) 



*
77> GA!

	&











	



	





/





#
	%D%AAA









DGAAA!E

F

DCAAA!
	'

DCAAA! @








 	





	
	


 





	




4






))!'  )  )
 
 
 
  
  
  
  


	  
 


	


	




#H%







 




D?AAA2+	

	@


	



.



@














	





@



 












	







 %'(2%3%'(*"
) !"
 ##

-
 
 	


	 
 94)

 94,

	 3
 5=
  










	

	
	

	







8 
 
 

 
 
 
 
	  /0B 	

 






	
	


	











. 




 	
	 
  	

	
 
	 

 D A 
 

*




		







	

	

- #!*#1*).!*'1) *"

'



	




	






 


  . 
 


 
	 4 	  
 	  4
4&


"
	


*
	






	

 
  


  

 
	 E

 F

 


 
 

 


	



	






	)4	
	




*








	




	






	



 A






	GA



E



F


  			


 
  	
  	


	





	
	


		






	



	


 











 


 
 


 


 	  
 

  

		!


	
	

"



		



	
	





	

	

 

 
	 
 

  	


  
 

 

 #

 $    	!




 

 	

 	
	


 
 


 
 
 	




 #

 %$  
 
 	
 
 

" 

&  

	 
  
	

 !	



 
 #

 $ 

	 

  
	

 




 	  
	



#

 '$   

 

 
	 	  	 #

 ($   

	!







)	






	


	

    !



  * 
	

 
    
 	
 	
 




+ *
	

!




	

#

,$
	
	





	#

$

	
	




	#

-$ 







	

	

	
	







	





	

&

• 

	

#	



$

•  
  

 
 	!
 	 
 
	




	
	

	
#

'$

• 

	
	

#

($

• !




	

		#

+$

• 		



	



	

	





	#

-$


./

			

 

Table III.1. Key Differences Across Study Sites in PY 2001 

Site 

Emphasis on 

Training 

Extent of 

Occupational 

Counseling 

Before 

Random 

Assignment 

ITA Policies 

Used Before 

the Experiment 

Local 

Availability of 

Training 

Programs 

Funding Stream 

Covering ITA 

Study Customers 

Phoenix, AZ Low Frequently 

provided 

Approximately 

Approach 2 

Wide range Majority 

dislocated 

workers 

Maricopa 

County, AZ 

Low Frequently 

provided 

Approximately 

Approach 2 

Wide range Majority 

dislocated 

workers 

Bridgeport, CT Medium Sometimes 

provided 

Between 

Approaches 2 

and 3 

Wide range Majority adults 

Jacksonville, FL High Rarely 

provided 

Between 

Approaches 1 

and 2 

Wide range Majority 

dislocated 

workers 

Atlanta, GA High Rarely 

provided 

Approximately 

Approach 2 

Wide range Majority 

dislocated 

workers 

Northeast 

Region, GA 

High Rarely 

provided 

Approximately 

Approach 2 

Limited Majority adults 

North Cook 

County, IL 

High Rarely 

provided 

Between 

Approaches 2 

and 3 

Wide range Large majority 

dislocated 

workers 

Charlotte, NC Medium Sometimes 

provided 

Approximately 

Approach 2 

Wide range Majority 

dislocated 

workers 

  0 	
1 
 
	  	 	
  

 
	


	
	

 

 		


 	
 	 
 
 	



 
 
  	

     .222 '3


	4
		
	





	



	




	!





	





552

	
  06
 	
    	
7 
 	
1   
 +	
7


   	

 
		
!

 	 
		


!

 	 
  	

	4

 
	
 
  
	

 	



		

	

			
!

	!	

	



	



 



	

	

 





	&

0  	

	


(
	

'
!




 , 	!
 '	

 
 
 

  8
   #
 
 
 

	



9	

	
1$ 			!	
.:

  			



 	  
0 ;

  	
!

 	 


	 	!
 
 
	  	! 
 
  



		
	



	

	!
 

.  

 	 

   	
 
 
 *		 '!


'
!

 
,	!
'	

 9	

 9	



 
 		 8
  
 9	
 
 

		
!

	
	



8
 


	! 
 0 : 

   9	
 
 
 	!
 



	





!)
 

;  	    	
 
 
 

	 


"

*		'!
%		*	 
	!




622222
.2





)
	

 


	!
 
 
	 
 %	
	
  
 


 
	 



	
 

<  
	 
   	
 *		=)
	
 
 *		

'!
   
 
 *		 '!
 %	 	 >
 ? 

  		 !
 	 	! 0 . 

  
 




& '!  %	 
  - 8
  @   	!
 	

	!
 
 ! 	!
 
 
	  
 


 
 

	
	!


		
'!
A

		

	
%	
 -8


 




	


'!@

 

5  


	
	




>


=



>
*		%	 


	





	




	

 

 @	

 +	
   
 	! 
 0 ; 

  


! 

 
 	 

&  	 
 ' +




,	)

> 	!
		!


		!




	 	 





	+




'

 

/  
 
   	
 
 
 @	

 +	
 >


'!

	=@	

+	
*		%	  


 




7

 	! 
 <22222  
 0. 

 
 
 		 	



+	
   	!
 	 	!
 
  	!
 
 
	 



	*	!


	




	
	 

:  	 	

*		'!
 


 	! 
 0 2 

  
 
 	
	 	
  
 
 



		  
	!
 	!


 	!


	

#
	

,


(!
$


	

8	

>
 

	

	!

		 

6  
	  

   	
 
 
 	

9	

*		'!
%	 
	!
:22222
	



9	
  
 	
 	 	!


	& 

.6

			

 

%!	 - 3
 #	
  +
 
	
$ B
 - 3



		

(
-3

		


-3

	 



!	
	

1#)
	 0$ 



	
1		


	
 



 	  
  

		#


 
 


	
!$

*
8		C	#8C$.220 8
	!	
0222


	A9	

 	!	;222
	  
	


@	

+	
	


	!
;22
	 


	
	
	
!
	
		


!

		 
!

 	      
 

 	 	
1 	 
 


		 !
 
 )	  
8
 

  	







		9


	

 9

		




!
 	 	 !	  	 
	

 	!
 	 
! 	 	 	

	




	

 -!
	



		D	
E 	


	


	
0FF5 

 
	


!	 	
	

 
 0FF0   @	
  
  

	


 -8

	  
	
 
	

 02 	 	 
   * 	
 

 

!	
	

		


	
0F66 

Figure III.1. Number of Adults and Dislocated Workers Who Exited WIA in PY 2001 

Source: Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data for PY 2001. 

1,183

2,710

763 691

361

213

386

264

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport,

CT

Jacksonville,

FL

Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte, NC
.F

  			



 
			



!	
	
	
	


# .$ 


 
 

 

 

 	

 	 
 

	 

   
	








 	    
	 
 

7-!
  @	

 +	
7
 



	

  
	

 	   8!	
 	
 	 	    < 	
 


@	


05	

@	

+	
0/	

8


 !	 	
 	  

!
 	 	 G
 !	 H;2222 
 @	



+	

 !	 H/2222 
 %	
	
   @
 		

 
!
 	 	 	


		
!

	!	
!	




	




!	

  )	 
%	
	
 

 


 	

  !	
 	






		!	
!	





%	
	
 

	








	
.2207








   

  

   	
 
 

!




	00
			



 

	
		



	



	


 

Table III.2. Community Characteristics of Sites 

 Unemployment Rate 

Site 

Metropolitan 

Status Jan 2002 Jan 2003 Jan 2004 

Poverty 

Rate 

Average 

Earnings 

Phoenix, AZ MSA 6.4% 5.6% 4.8% 16% $36,294 

Maricopa 

County, AZ 

MSA 5.3% 4.6% 4.0% 9% $39,597 

Bridgeport, CT MSA 4.7% 5.1% 4.9% 7% $64,302 

Jacksonville, 

FL 

MSA: 4 

counties 

Non MSA: 2 

counties 

5.6% 5.5% 4.9% 11% $35,208 

Atlanta, GA MSA 4.2% 4.4% 3.9% 6% $40,178 

Northeast 

Region, GA 

MSA: 5 

counties 

Non MSA: 7 

counties 

4.7% 4.3% 4.0% 15% $32,043 

North Cook 

County, IL 

MSA 6.2% 6.0% 5.6% 4% $51,792 

Charlotte, NC MSA 5.6% 5.6% 5.5% 9% $44,438 

National 6.3% 6.5% 6.3% 12 % $37,200 

Source: Data are for the local workforce investment areas in the site. Poverty rates and 

earnings are from Census 2000. Seasonally adjusted unemployment rates for persons 

16 and older from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics. 

MSA = Metropolitan Statistical Area. 
;2

			

 


 
 	
 	
 
	 
 
  

 	
 
 

	

   	 
 @	

 +	
 

 

 
 
 



	
	


 	

 


	


  	 * 	!
 	
 
 	
  
  	

   )	 

	

	
8
<:
	
1
8



8C .220 	 8C .22. 

 </222 !    
 
  	

	
	

	




 

3	

	





	






	


		


	

	
	


	


	




	
	
 






	





	


G	
		!
G





		


	
 

 	
	
	


3		
!

		

	!	






	

#'"
.22.$ 	!

	D	
	
E	
*

	!
7	



	
		



	



	



 
   
	 	 	 
	 
 	
! 
	

 	!
   

!	




			
	 






 
	
	 



"

	

	

	

 

9
 
 
   
 

 
 	 
  	

 
1 
	

 

 
 	
 	

  	 	

 	4
	



 




	





	






 





 


	

	

* 	
!




	


!


!	




	

#8C.220$

<:	
#)
	 .$ 
	
8
9	

	!

	






	

	
	  
	




	



	

 

8
9	

		
	
	


	!

	




 	

!  		

 * 	

	
  	
 
 

 


 	 	
 
 
 
	 
 
	
 
	 
	

 
 	  )	

 
 9	
 
  
	 
 	



 
  	
! 
 




!	!
			!
	
	

 

	8



 	
! 
  
	 

   

	 
 
	



	G





 



	








!




 
;0

  			



Figure III.2. Percent of Adult and Dislocated Workers Who Exited WIA in PY 2001 Who 

Received Occupational Training 

Source: Workforce Investment Act Standardized Record Data for PY 2001.




	
		

7

@	

+	
@	



-!
7	!

	

 	!
 

 

 	 * 	

	
 	
!


	

 	!
 
 8C .220   (
 	 
 -!
 

  


! 	!


	!


!


!






	





	!
 

(!
-!
	!

	


	

*	

	

8C.220



 	
 

   	 
	
 

   
 	  	  


! 	!
 


	
	
!
G		











!	!
	
	!	
	

 ,!	G
	

	



	

	


-!
	
!

	!	





!



 	!


	

 	

		

	





	

 

	

 %	
	
  

 
	 *
 	
 *

	

	
 	
!

	



 


!


!	#)
	  .$


		
!
	

	
	
	
	


!	!





 

31

13

64

91

97

91 89

77

47

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport,

CT

Jacksonville,

FL

Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte,

NC

All U.S.
;.

			

 

 	
	

			
			
	





!	


	4
	
	
	

	
D

	


	

E	
 
		
	






	
	




	


 

	




	 

* 	4
	 

 
	 
 	 
 	

	
 	 
 	 	! 	


	

&

0  %
	
D

	

E

.  ,!

4







	



;  ,!	
!

	


!	!


<  %






	
	

	
		

8	




   		 
!

 	 	 	
 	 
	

 


	

	
 

 	

     	  	4
	 

 
	 
 





#	




!	!
$	
	

	

 

*








	4
	
	
	

	!


	
	






 
	







 

 
 
 
 

 
  
 

 
	 	



     
 		! 
 
	 	 	 
 
 

 




	

		
!

!


		

 










 
	 	 

 
	

 
	  
	 
  #  8

	


	$	!

	
	

 
















G
				!

	


	

  ;	
1
	4
	
	

	


	


	

	






 *

	4
	

	



 

 	
 

9




D

	

E






	




  	 
  

 	
 #

 62 
 F2 	
$  
 

	
! 	 


   %	
	
 !	   
 	 

 	


	"DE

	







A
	



	 	 
	  
 	 !  
 
  

 
 	
!  

8


			
	
	


1
	
!
	

 
			

 

Table III.3. Criteria for Determining Eligibility for Training in PY 2001 

Phoenix, AZ 

Maricopa 

County, AZ Bridgeport, CT Jacksonville, FL Atlanta, GA 

Northeast 

Region, GA 

North Cook 

County, IL 

Charlotte, NC 

Definition of Need for Training 

Unable to find employment offering selfsufficiency wages or 89 percent of predislocated wages 

Unable to find employment offering selfsufficiency wages or 89 percent of predislocated wages 

Scored high on assessment forma—depends on 

education and occupational skills deficits 

Unable to find employment offering selfsufficiency wages or 80 percent of predislocated wages 

Unable to find employment offering selfsufficiency wages or “reasonable” proportion of predislocated wages 

Unable to find employment offering selfsufficiency wages or “reasonable” proportion of predislocated wages 

Unable to find employment offering selfsufficiency wages or 89 percent of predislocated wages 

Unable to find employment offering selfsufficiency wages 

Assessments 

Basic skills Interest/aptitude assessments at counselor’s discretion 

Basic skills Interest/aptitude assessments required of all customers 

Basic skills Interest/aptitudes if deemed necessary, but rarely used 

Basic skills Interest/aptitudes assessment used before experiment but ceased during experiment 

Basic skills Interest/aptitudes assessment if deemed necessary, but rarely used 

Basic skills Interest/aptitudes assessment if deemed necessary, but rarely used 

Basic skills Interest/aptitudes assessment if deemed necessary, but rarely used 

Basic skills Interest/aptitudes assessment if deemed necessary 

Occupational Counseling 

Frequently provided Frequently provided Sometimes 

provided 

Rarely provided Rarely provided Rarely provided Rarely provided Sometimes 

provided 

Required Attendance at Workshops 

Resume workshop Job readiness workshop 

Vocational/career counseling 

Career exploratory workshops 

None None None None None, but must 

receive two intensive services 

Documented Job Service/Job Club 

None Participation in Job 

Club 

None Review of recent 

job search activities or two- to four-week supervised job search 

None None Review of recent 

job search activities 

Review of recent job search activities 

aThe required score varied with the availability of training funds. When funds were plentiful, the requirement was dropped. Source: Exploratory site visits and communications with the study sites; Decker and Perez-Johnson (2004). 




	







 	




	

 	
 
 
   	 
    	 
 	


	




 !"#


$
#
%
&
'$
 	
% 




	
%$#
	
&

#


$&	&


'

 

	


( 	 )

 
 *
 +
% 
  , ,	#)

	&

 	 &  

 

  &% 
  	-





',	



%






 $
 $ 	 
 ./ '  ( 
 	  	 

 	&





  

 

$ 
' ($ *
 	




# 
% % 
 	&

 	 % 
 
&#
 0%


.!0&,
	
&$


'

&#&
#	

	&




&


%%'(&	
	#	%

%


$ 
	$&$ 	 
1,
&
2 


1,
  
#'2  ( 
  & 	
 & 
  
 	&



 	  &% 	
  % % $ 
 	 	

 1,	 ,
 3
2 $ 
 

  
#
 
 


	&


'

&,

&%



		&

	

 

 

'      
 % % 
 &% #


&#
 0% 
  
 
 *$ (	 $ 

# 	 


	


	&



&	
%
	'

	 
	 
 &#   4	 	
  %  % 


%  5(!	 
 	
 

# 
% % 
  







&#
0%*$	'

3 
 
&
 ,	# 
 	 
     
 %

	&

		&%	




#





	&
'(3

0((%#
56#

$	&	


$$	$

#$',	
&	



 

  	&
  

 
 &7 
 
  ./ 

$'  ,	
$  
&&% 
 	#  
 	&




	$

$	
-
	
&	


'  0

#  
&
 ,	#  

 

 
 	
 $


4	  	 
 %
#  

  

	 
 
&	 
 '

.	&

	





$
#&
#&%

$



&&%	

'
8

  
	







 
 
!
"#


"	  &
 	 ( )3 
&
 ,	# & 


,
)4	 	
  % 
 
  % %  


   
'  3 
&
 ,	# 
 & 

	
  7 
  
 &
# $&  
 


#',
4		

%%$%%'
&


,	#4	&
&

+,	94	
%$7


'

$ %&  $
''$ ()*
+$"
*(,$"&&%%"$


"	  &
  # ( & %
 
 
&&
:  ; 

		(
$
<	%4	
($
	


   
 	 	  
&&%  
 '  (   $

	&
(

	





	


%
##
&&

 (((''=
&
&$ 




'

	
 
 
 
 
     # 
 

5( $
  %&  

 #
 
	 
 &

 

	&&	
'5&


	



&

  ,>0'  
 ,>0 
 
 &

 &

	 

 
	 &

 
 	
 
 '  ?$%



  &

  	 
 
 $
  
%

  

,>0  
# '   ,>0  & $
 	 	 
 

&
'

• 	
 
 
  	   3  $
 	# %& 


&


'&&

3

$

#

,>0'

• 	

	$

&#
	


('4	


&$$#
9

4	

&$	#
'3		!#


9 
&
 ,	#   	 $!#
 '  ?$% 
 



&&
	

'

• 

(
($	%	



4		&&'(+
%#	
	

%	


'
			

 

   Table III.4. ITA Policies Affecting Customers Under All Approachesa Phoenix, AZ Maricopa County, AZ Bridgeport, CT Jacksonville, FL Atlanta, GA Northeast Region, GA North Cook County, IL Charlotte, NC Implementation of the Consumer Report System (CRS) Operational Available to customers online Program information Placeholders for performance information Operational Available to customers online Program information Placeholders for performance information Under construction Not available to customers Operational, but still being fine-tuned Available to customers online Program information Placeholders for performance information Operational Available to customers online Program information Placeholders for performance information Operational Available to customers online Program information Placeholders for performance information Operational, but still being fine-tuned Available to customers online Program information Placeholders for performance information Operational Available to customers online Program information, but missing for some providers Placeholders for performance information Implementation of the ETP List Fully developed and operational Available online Links to CRS Fully developed and operational Available online Links to CRS Fully developed and operational Available online Links to CRS Hard copy Web-based system under construction Fully developed and operational Available online Links to CRS Fully developed and operational Available online Links to CRS Fully developed and operational Available online Links to CRS Fully developed and operational Available online Links to CRS Duration of ITAs Will not fund four- year degrees Will not fund two- year degrees None Training must be completed within four years. Training funds must be spent within two years. Training must be completed within two years. None Training must be completed within two years. Allowable Uses of ITAs Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies Uniforms Certifications Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies Tuition and fees Books and other required supplies 
TABLE III.4 (continued) 



 			


  Phoenix, AZ Maricopa County, AZ Bridgeport, CT Jacksonville, FL Atlanta, GA Northeast Region, GA North Cook County, IL Charlotte, NC Support Services Limited Child care, transportation, and support payments on a needs basis Limited Child care, transportation, and support payments on a needs basis Limited Child care, transportation, on a needs basis Child care transportation, on a needs basis Limited Child care, transportation, on a needs basis Limited Child care, transportation, on a needs basis None Limited Transportation, on a needs basis Monitoring and Followup Counselors follow up about every two weeks. Provider submits periodic attendance/grade reports. Counselors follow up every month. Provider submits periodic attendance/grade reports. Customers asked to meet periodically with counselors. Provider submits periodic attendance/grade reports. Customers required to submit monthly attendance sheets and grade reports in person. Customers required to maintain monthly contact with counselor and submit attendance and grade reports. Providers required to submit periodic attendance and grade reports. Customers required to maintain monthly contact with counselor and submit attendance and grade reports. Counselors follow up with customers periodically to discuss their progress in training. Payment System Customers receive paper voucher to take to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. Customers receive paper voucher to take to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. Customers receive paper voucher to take to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. Grantee issues a list of approved trainees to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. Customers receive paper voucher to take to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. Customers receive paper voucher to take to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. Customers receive paper voucher to take to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. Counselors submit paper voucher to providers or customers receive paper voucher to take to provider. Provider invoices grantee directly. 

aAt the beginning of the experiment. 

Source: Exploratory site visits and communications with the study sites; Decker and Perez-Johnson (2004).


			

 

• 	
	
		

	

	

		  	 		    		  		

 	    	
 		 	    	 


 	
!	
		
		
"#		

"						

 
		$ 	
	 

 		

	  %& 
		   	 	 '  () %&&*+	

,	 -.* 
		 			 		/  !	 -0* 
		 			

		/

• 


			
	,	
	

	
 	 
					  

	
					
				"		

		

	

• 1							

			
	
			

		"	


	
  	 
	 	 	  	 		 "

			


 	


	

 		 1"				
		
" 		

	

			
		2		

	3		

	"		

	 	
		  
 "		   	 	 		   	 	 


			

	

4		 	 	
		
  	 	  

   			 "			



 *  

  -1"	 5/  4	
     	



	 	  

 6 	 	  	 1 
 	7	 

	
   	 	7		  
 

  !	2 



"			 	
		  	 

 *6  		 1 	 	
		

	  
 	7	 		 	
  
	 	  	 




1				

	

%


		

"		

	"				

1	 1   	  		 	    	
 	    " 	

	 	 
  1	 1  		 "	
	  
  

!	
					
							
				

			

 8		'			9#	:	8
.

  			



Table III.5. ITA Approaches Used Before the Experiment 

Site ITA Award Required Counseling 

Requirements for 

Program Approval 

Phoenix, AZ Varied by whether 

program lasts six 

months or longer 

Occupational counseling 

Labor market research 

Research and comparison of 

training programs 

Evaluation of training 

feasibility 

Completed counseling 

Demand occupation 

Feasible selection 

Choice on ETP list 

Maricopa 

County, AZ 

Fixed Occupational counseling 

Labor market research 

Research and comparison of 

training programs 

Evaluation of training 

feasibility 

Completed counseling 

Demand occupation 

Choice on ETP list 

Bridgeport, CT Fixed Occupational counseling 

Research and comparison of 

training programs 

Completed counseling 

Choice on ETP list 

Jacksonville, FL Tiered according to 

expected wage 

Occupational counseling 

Labor market research 

Research and comparison of 

training programs 

Evaluation of training 

feasibility 

Completed counseling 

Demand occupation 

Feasible selection 

Choice on ETP list 

Atlanta, GA Varied by whether 

training occurred for 

one or two years 

Occupational counseling 

Labor market research 

Research and comparison of 

training programs 

Completed counseling 

Demand occupation 

Feasible selection 

Choice on ETP list 

Northeast 

Region, GA 

Varied by whether 

training occurred for 

one or two years 

Occupational counseling 

Labor market research 

Research and comparison of 

training programs 

Completed counseling 

Feasible selection 

Choice on ETP list 

North Cook 

County, IL 

Varied by whether 

training occurred for 

one or two years 

Research and comparison of 

training programs

Evaluation of training 

feasibility 

Completed counseling 

Choice on ETP list 

Charlotte, NC Fixed Occupational counseling 

Labor market research 

(exploratory interviews with 

potential employers) 

Research and comparison of 

training programs 

Completed counseling 

Demand occupation 

Feasible selection 

Choice on ETP list 
;&

			

 

						"	
		7			

		1		6

• 
 
   " 	 	 	  


1		
				2		

• 
<	 	 	7		 			"

	 	 
	 		 	 	7		 	

		
		
	

•   
  

   	 	 	

	  		  
  1 
 	  	

			
	 1(

• !	
 




<		7		

					"			

4		 	 	
		
  	 	 	7	 	  
		 	 	

	7		"		1	+4	
+

			7			
	"		 1(1		

	  	7	  "	  	"	 	 	 
			

=		"	
>	?"	
		

	 		
	   >	? 
   " 	   

		
	
			"	"					@		


	,	
							


     	  "  A -  	

	 	
	

			/  	 	  	 
  	  	 

			


			
		


	
			"	
		
			

 	

	'	 				 		 	" 1 

 	+(	
 B
 
 4	

  	+  	

 		 " 1     	  
  	 " 1


    			C	    
	 
	   #	


"			49		,		

	 @	
 $ (
  -@$( / 
    

,	 		  1 
	 
  

	 D
&&&  	    
 


"	,	1		
			"

'		,	
 				 

'			

1	 	 "C1 	 !	

8	 	
		
 " %& 
		   		 	 "	

	E		&
		1C		"	

	 	
		
	 	  <  		 	  		  

"			9	
	"	**
%&&*
	
;*

  			



 	

1	 1 	
		  		  	 	 		  		 

	 

 	2 	  
1			
   	 	

"	
	
					 1("	

 1 	  	 	 	  	 	
		  1	 "	  
	 


	
		
		

"	

  !"#

1	"	
		 1(		"" 	1"	 F

	"	
						C

	 1(

				
		

(	=B
"	

	*&&

	
	
	,	
	

 	 1( 6  	 1	 		  	 3	  ,	  @		


					
		
		



"	"		

	
			

(	   	 	 
	 C
 
  		
 	 


	 		
  
 C  C"	 #
   	

3" G		  1	 1(    	 	  "  		 
	


   !	
 		
 
"   	 		 		

		"		
	
1		
		

			


	'			<

"		 	  	  ' 
		 -4  H %&&E 4			

(	%&&/

$ %#

1	"	
"				
 

%&  	 ,	  	  %
&&&     @		
 	



 	 	  "	  	 	1"	 F 	 "  



 
 "	 	 	 	 	
		6 -*/ 
	"- "/


-%/B		9	 		
-/	"
-;/	

		 
			B		9	 		 	 "=

		"		,	$			
		

	"		

1	 
	  
   	"
 "    	  <

	
	
			
	
"			D*
&5	D5
0&

(	=B
 -1"	 F/  9		   	
   <



			"		"				9	


"			
	
		"	"		
		

  		
	A		"		
		
			



 Table III.6. Training Options on ETP Lists, April 2004 Numbers of Vendors with Programs in: Range of Prices for: b Local Areaa Total Number of Vendors Total Number of Programs Phlebotomy Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer Medical Billing/ Coding Commercial Vehicle Operator Phlebotomy Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer Medical Billing/ Coding Commercial Vehicle Operator Phoenix and Maricopa County, AZ 109 805 1 11 5 4 $2,515 $1,938- 11,045 $1,050- 9,670 $1,035- 5,730 Bridgeport, CT 52 352 2 3 6 2 $599-2,390 $8,750- 12,999c $1,897- 3,855 $2,989- 6,687 Jacksonville, FLd 33 NA 1 4 2 8 $1,230 $6,495- $9,800 $4,005- $9,475 $995- $5,995 Atlanta, GA 68 1,128 2 5 2 5 $1,292 $4,370- 6,875 $1,650- 4,500 $1,385- 4,170 Northeast Region, GA 2 280 1 0 0 1 $535 NA NA $1840 North Cook County, IL 140 2,031 9 98 35 11 $654-1,399 $2,950- $7,600 $784-3,635 $2,985- 4,395 Charlotte, NCd 67 441 3 7 1 2 $345-810 $1,040- 8,000 $3,695 $2,500- 2,745 Source: State ETP lists, April 2004. NA = not available. a In most sites, this is defined as the local workforce investment area. In Arizona, we combined Phoenix and Maricopa County. The Atlanta local area is defined as the counties in the Atlanta Regional Workforce Area and three other local workforce investment areas in metropolitan Atlanta. The Illinois local area is defined as within a 20-mile radius of the local workforce investment area headquarters. b Price listed is total program cost, including tuition, fees, books, supplies and any other costs listed in the program description. c One provider did not list its prices. d This combines the state ETP list and the local workforce investment board ETP list. 
  

  			



 	
 



 
  


  	  

	 










	











	







	









  

 
 
  
  
 
 
 



 





	!	

 	



	





 





"
#
 



 



 		
$%& 

 
 	

	  


 	 










	'




		


  	
 
 (
 
 

 
 
 
 %		 



	(
	



	






%&




	





 %& 
	 
 
 
 
 
 	

  

  
 	



	
)

		

	
	
%


 
*+()
,
-
	

	 .*
		


   
/ 	
& 
  
 

 	  
/ 	
 	

 

 	  
	
 	
 0		  
 (
 
1 





	
	



	




	


)
 
	
 		(
	
2



	



	

%&(











	


	

(


	



	 
 
 (

  02  
 
 
	 3
 
 
 (

1

	

 


  

  
 
 



 %%% 





(






	



	
	

	
	


	

&
4550	

	


	1	






	
%&
	

	

(



	




	

(

%
(
2


6







	
(










  
 (

 	
 	  
 (

/
 
	








 

		



,

 

 7
 ,

 
 	
 	  
 




 	 	

 %& (

 	
 
 

   %%%8

 
 



  

  


	  
 %& (

  



 


	 
 - %

 
 3
 


 	




	
		

	




 %&(


 
 



$


9
9:	

	:9;



			

 

Figure III.3. Number of Counselors Who Worked with ITA Study Customers 

Source: Communications with sites. 

Note: The intake period varied by site: Phoenix (6/02 to 11/03), Maricopa County (5/02 to 12/03), 

Bridgeport (8/02 to 3/04), Jacksonville (5/02 to 12/03), Atlanta (5/02 to 6/03), Northeast Region, 

Georgia (5/02 to 4/03), Northern Cook County (12/01 to 9/03), and Charlotte (5/02 to 11/03). 

%&
	



	








	










(<


(



$%&


	


+=4559
<<
	
$



	


	

94
	


	
94


	
&







	
	
	
)



 	  
 
 
	 	>  
  

 


	7
	94

	
	




9<



	

	


$
0?@

1		 





3

		94



	
	
		<



 



37



	

	054

1>9

	


95






3

7
 
*+( 	 )
 ,
* 
   
  

	  %& 

  -
	

 . &

 	 ,


 





>-
	








%2


6
	2

,,

%&




  A

$

%

&

	
	!	;
	A

+=4559

0

10

20

30

40

Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport,

CT

Jacksonville,

FL

Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte, NC

Beginning of Intake Period Second Half of the Intake Period Total Throughout the Experiment 
  <

  			



Table III.7. Characteristics of ITA Study Participants, by Site 

Characteristic 

All

Sites

Phoenix,

AZ 

Maricopa

County,

AZ 

Bridgeport,

CT 

Jacksonville,

FL 

Atlanta,

GA 

Northeast

Region,

GA 

North

Cook

County,

IL 

Charlotte,

NC 

Gender 

Female 54 52 48 66 59 58 36 43 56 

Male 46 49 52 34 41 42 64 57 44 

Race: One race 

White 48 55 80 31 56 35 49 67 28 

Black or African American 39 27 9 49 35 58 50 12 65 

American Indian or Alaskan Native 1 4 2 2 1 1 0 0 1 

Asian or Pacific Islander 6 5 5 1 2 4 1 15 3 

Other 5 8 3 15 5 2 0 5 2 

Two or More Races 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 

Hispanic or Latino 10 30 17 22 6 3 1 7 3 

Age 

18 to 40 52 45 33 68 57 55 59 42 57 

41 to 60 46 52 64 31 41 43 40 55 42 

61 or older 2 3 3 1 2 2 2 3 1 

Average 41 42 45 36 39 40 39 43 40 

Years of Regular Schooling 

Less than 12 10 21 5 28 10 5 22 4 3 

12 38 38 35 46 50 33 45 26 44 

13 to 15 27 30 36 19 26 33 21 23 30 

16 16 7 14 5 11 20 8 27 18 

More than 16 9 4 10 3 3 9 4 21 5 

Employment Status at Enrollment 

Unemployed 91 93 98 75 80 92 99 99 90 

Employed 9 7 2 25 20 8 1 1 10 

Had never worked 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Last Workeda

Within the past month 12 16 9 7 22 11 28 9 11 

More than one month ago but 

within past year 74 67 77 68 70 78 59 78 74 

1 or 2 years ago 12 14 11 21 7 9 8 12 13 

3 or 4 years ago 1 2 1 3 1 1 4 1 1 

5 or more years ago 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 

Reason Left Last Jobb 

Discharged or fired 12 7 8 15 14 9 23 10 18 

Laid off/business closed 69 63 77 49 64 75 50 79 62 

Other reason 8 13 7 8 13 6 11 7 7 

Quit 5 9 4 13 6 4 11 2 5 

Temporary/seasonal job ended 7 8 4 15 4 6 5 3 8 

Years Worked at Current/Most 

Recent Job 

Less than 1 year 34 39 26 53 33 28 37 28 36 

1 to 5 years 45 35 43 35 43 52 49 48 47 

6 to 9 years 8 8 15 5 8 8 6 10 6 

10 or more years 13 17 17 7 16 13 8 14 11 

Average 4 5 6 3 5 4 3 5 4 
?

			

 

Table III.7 (continued)

Characteristic 

All

Sites

Phoenix,

AZ 

Maricopa

County,

AZ 

Bridgeport,

CT 

Jacksonville,

FL 

Atlanta,

GA 

Northeast

Region,

GA 

North

Cook

County,

IL 

Charlotte,

NC 

Received Public Assistance at 

Enrollment 20 31 10 45 20 18 15 7 23 

Sample Size 7,922 646 673 1,033 779 1,408 171 1,809 1,403 

Source: Study Tracking System for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

a

For those not working at enrollment. 

b

For unemployed at enrollment.

 

  
 
 	 

  %& 

 

	 
 





 	




 
 % 
 
*-
	



&

2


6
 	,


*
  

 
 %& 

 


&
 &
   &
! 	 -
	

 
    


 

BCD
 

  2

 , ,
  
  
 
  






09<

1
%&


&

,

 	
	 



 
	


	

	
	



 	 

0
 %%%1&	,

 %E

	









		
	

 
 

7


Figure III.4. Percentage of ITA Study Participants Who Are Dislocated Workers 

Source: Study Tracking System for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04) 

0

20

40

60

80

100

Phoenix, AZ

Maricopa County, AZ

Bridgeport, CT

Jacksonville, FL

Atlanta, GA

Northeast Region, GA

North Cook County, IL

Charlotte, NC

All Study Sites

Dislocated Workers Adults
  8

  			







	  %& 
	 


 
 	
	 

     



 


 
  
 '
	 

    
  < 

  



 
 
 

 	 (
 $%&  += 4559 
 	
	



0
	

$

%

&

	
	!	;
	A
1



	
	





$




?@

%&


	
	



:<



%&

2

,,

	
	%




*-
	



	 2


 6
*	
	 

 
   

    


9

   %& 

  ;
 
 	
 
 %& 

 

-
	

0



2


6
1


	




	




2

,,



	
	  
 
 
 

  2

 , ,
 	 
 
  





THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
  	


	 
	
 	 

  	  
 
	    	     


  	  

   
   		

					

	  	 	        	 	 

 	 	 	       	 	 

		 			  

 		   !	 " 	 	      		


			

				

 	 		  # 	$

		  		% 		 &

	 	      %  	  

	   	 	 '  

	     	      	

		 	     ' 		    	  

%			%	#	

	  
    
	 	 	  	   

		 	  $ 	       

 #(     	    
	(

	

							

 	 	 	   	  
	 )"	 *  

				(


				'		)"	+

 	 ,*  
 	   	   '   	 

	
	)"	-*

-
./

	
	
	 

 	
	


		

	
	


	 		    		 	 	  		  

	
						

	  0 	     	  	 		 

	

+  
	  	       	 


		 		 	!		 

						

			
		123

	  		     	   - 		 	  

	 			)24 5			+#//%*

			
	

		

		
				

 
	' 	 		+	 
		 6 	 2	

									

			"	")""*

  	 		 	  	  123    	

	 	  	 	3 )	*

		         	 	 	

		"		123	

		 

			
			

         	 		 

 	  
	 	    	 	   

,	     		 	    	 

 	 	 	 	+ 	 

	

				

&						

					-


	7

• 		%			

• 1							

$			

• 1	4					$

• 	 	  	   		  	 +	

&
  .%

  	
	
	

!				%

 	

!	 	 	   

					8	%	

						4


						


		   	  # 	 $   
 
   

		%

  !"

-				

		%		'

   	    
 
    	

6	 	#	$		

    
	 	   	  # 	 $  	  

'   		 	  
	 

					4

  	        	 



"	    	     	

 	  	   	# 	$ 	

 	 %
	

			
	

  	 	    	      

'	6% 

      		   
  

			#	$%

				


				

 	  
 	  	 	  	  	  

2    	    	4 		 	

		

"	%			

			#	$	

 	   	  	  	 	  	


			


			

%-	
			
.#

	
	
	 

%			2			

			 		 
	

			

%		4		

 	  	  # 	 $     

					
			"	

  	    	  # 	 $     

	 
  	 		       	 	

+      		   	   

9$///  	  # 	 $   + 
   	

				



#  $"% &!	'( %  

+
		!	 "		

							
-	

  	  	     (

  ( 
	  		  		

   	  # 	 $  " ( 

				( 	  

					
	



	 	 
 	 	      

%			(

2	
 1 	 0  	 	 (   	

	   		   :  	  	  

      
	     	  	

		
	

		 	&
 	

		

 
	


  
   	  		    	

 % 	   		 	 	 	  		 	

		$"			

#				%

  						

+									

    	  	  	   	

			
				
  .$

  	
	
	

0
   				% 	#&

	4 	 	 	 		7)%*   	 

	)#*)$*					);*

			&			
			

	$

 !"&("

			8	

 % 	  	      	 	 	

	#		 	

		'	$	

			

! 	 	 	  	  	    	

	 	 	  	       '

							

 	 	 	   	  		 	

			
				

			

 
	   	   %    	

	       	    6 


	 	   %      		

									

 	 	    	   % 	  	 	

5	(	
	

%
%	 			 

 		

&& ""   )"*  	   	  	 	

	 	 	6				

	  	 		    
 	 	 

<  	  1	      	

  	   	      		   	

	 	
	 		

			

	

"							

 			

	    	   	   	 		  &

	!$%	

				#=

	 	 	 -		  	 	

					(5		0>	0
.;

	
	
	 

 	(      	    	 

    	 		 	

!	 "	 		  	 		  	

		

     	   ' 	  

		 	     	

	  	 	 	   	  	

 		  : 	   	  

	 	   		   	 	  	 

		

)(   " "$  -	 	   	   

									

	 		&		

		

6					

	   	   	 	  		   	

	      	   		    

     !	 " 	  
	 	 	  )5	* 

	   	   	 	     	

	  	 	   	  !	 "

					

"	 	 	   &
 	   	

		'	

              

		

 	      		  	 	 	

		 	  	 ' 	   6 
  

		 	     	 	   	   

				

6		
	
		4

)  			*  	  	 	

	  		 	  	  <  ' 	

	 


 	 	
		

	  	 	 	 	 		  " 	   	

	   		      

	  	       	 	 	

		 	 	 	 	 		     

	

"*!+(*, "*!+(% &(" "  5	   	  

  	         
		
  ..

  	
	
	

5		4 				



	6(2	
+		(

 	  	 	  	          

%		
		(1

	0		0>(

!  &("() ( ! )  !     

	  % 	 #  	   	 		   !

				

				6
7

• 	




 		  	        

 	  % 	   		 	  
	 

 	  	      

		

• 
	

			(2	
1		5	

 $"""%(&("!"&	

  	  ' 	       	 

   	 	   	   	 

	'<			6
5	

		 				

		 		

		

		

6 
 	 	 2	
 	 1 	    

						

" 	   	 	   '  

	  6 
     	    		

	

#  * (( !

	 	     	 		   


	  :	 	   	 		  
	' 

		%	#	

			


	"				

 		    	 '   	 

					

			
.?

	
	
	 

8	  % 	 #         

)
@%*6#

A
%
	

	%	#


  	   	  -2   	 
 	  	

				

Table IV.1. Program Research Requirement 

 Number of Programs That Customers 

Must Generally Consider 

Approach 1 Approach 2 

Phoenix, AZ 3 3 

Maricopa County, AZ 3 3 

Bridgeport, CT 3 3 

Jacksonville, FL 2-3 

(varies by counselor) 

2-3 

(varies by counselor) 

Atlanta, GA 3 2 

Northeast Region, GA 2 2 

North Cook County, IL 3 3 

Charlotte, NC 3 2 

"			

(5	 0  	 	 ( 	 	

		 	

 	 	   	 		 	  	   '

	 	 	  	  	 		    		

 	 	        	  

	  
	       	  	

		

"   	  
	        	

   	 	   ' 		    

 
		   	    	 	   

	     	    	 	 	 

		)+*	%	#

			

5  	   !	 " 	 	 	 	 	

	      	    		  	  

			7

% 
 
  8	         

							

		"		
  .B

  	
	
	

				  		

	)				*

# 
"		

	   		  	 
 '  

"      	 	  


				

					

$ 
1	!	 "	

				

				

+		

				

		


				

(0 > 0  	 	 (  

   #/ 	  
   	 	    

		

- &( " (""*&"

	

		

&& (!   8	  % 	     		  	

+	& 	 	 		 	    	 

						

			


     		  	 	   
	   			  


	  	 	  	 	  	   

	C		D6


  	  		    	  

			

 	  	  	  	  	 	   

	   	 	  				     	 	

 	  	 	   	       	

		  				    	   % 	

: 	  
    		 		 	 	 

				   	  
	   	   

				

	 	%				

	 		7
.E

	
	
	 

•  	4			

  	

• !  	   	   	  	

'			

• "
#2		

'		

• "  ,  		      	  

						

'	

• 
 #   	    	   	

		

	
			

								+	

&  6 	  		 	 	 	 	 

  
				

   	 
   		  	 	  	 	

				

1 	  				   	 	 		 

		"		 

					

	    	  		  	 +	 & 

 	   
  
	   	  	 			

		

		

    	 	  	  %

   	 		 	     ' 	  	

		1			%

&& (! #  	  	 	    		  	 +	

& #		


	     	  		 !	 	 6 

  	 	 	    	   

	4			

. /("0")"1 * (&)"

8	  % 	 #      	 

      	       	


				
  .=

  	
	
	

    	  	   
 	 
	

			  		 		 % 	 #

		6

			
		-
	&	

									

+&  		     

 	 "	 , 	 	 	 % 	 # 	

%					

 	 	  
	   	  	   

' 		 	  		   	  
	   	

				
		
	

  		  				   	  



&
	
 			

							"

	    	  	  	    

	 	 		 	   	   	 		 	

			 
	'  	

'	

		4				

  		 + & 	 
	 	 -
	 &  

 	  % 	 #   " 	  

1		

 
   
	'   	 	

 	     	  	   

		 	 	    		  < 
	 

									

 C&	   	 		 	   	 

		D

!	   	   	    	  	

       	  	 	

  	 		  	  	   			  		

	   		   " 	       	

			


		
		




		
		

	 	 		 		   
	 	 -
	 & 

	

	       
    ' 		


%'				
?/

	
	
	 

	 	     ) 	 	*   	

 					

      	  
	  	   

				

     C  D  C
  		 

D				

2 )"*% && (!-

   $ 		 	        

				


&  
	 	     	  

  !	  		 	 	  	  

	  		 $  	    	

	   	 	 	 	 	    	

	$	%	#

"	  				

 $    	   6 
 	 	 

2	
 	 1 	(   	 		(

	     $  	 	  		

	"			

  	   		   !	   	 	

	 		$  	   	 

				

!        	   	 		

  6 
 	 + 2	
 	 1 	  

					

'		
	

		1	

	 	    		 	 	  	  

	

		    	$		

		$	
		

		"")@*

	  		   	  		 	 

		 							

  	      	    	  $

		

			@		


  ?%

  	
	
	

 /	



<		%	#	$	

 '  		%  		#

	 $   % ' 	  	     	

)%*	 				)#*

				)$*	-2


	   	   	      %

'		 		  	

	' 	3	

	
		

										

			'				

  
	 	      	 	     	

	%	

			

			'			

  	 	  	 	  	 

	  	 	 	  	 	   

 	 	 	     	 

	      	      

							

 	   '  	   

 	 	  	  	 

   	    	   	 	  

	%	#	

 	3/

!
	'#		

				%
		

	%		!	

 	    	  	 	 	 		 	

 $   #    	  	   

				7)%*		 	)#*	 

			



	

1				 			


   2    	 	4  		 

						

'				
	

   
	 ) 
@#*  0	        

?#

	
	
	 

	  	   
	'   1     	


	:2	
	+	

			
	

<	
	

				

 	  
	       	      6


 0  	 	  2 3 6    

	
		'	6


						+6	

	  	 	 	  8 		 	+	

&  		 	     	  	   

 			

Table IV.2. Approach Adopted After the Experiment in June 2004 

Site 

Approach Adopted After 

Experiment 

Major Modifications to 

Approach Used Before 

Experiment 

Phoenix, AZ Between Approaches 1 and 2 Training Costs and Benefits 

Worksheet used for 

information only 

Modified occupational 

research form 

Maricopa County, AZ Between Approaches 1 and 2 Training Costs and Benefits 

Worksheet used for 

information only 

Modified occupational 

research form 

Bridgeport, CT Between Approaches 1 and 2 Requirement to research two 

providers 

Can use Approach 1 if best for 

the customer 

Jacksonville, FL Between Approaches 1 and 2 Modified Training Costs and 

Benefits Worksheet 

Extensive counseling provided 

Atlanta, GA Approach 2 None 

Northeast Region, GA Approach 2 Counselors can use forms at 

their discretion for some 

customers. 

North Cook County, IL Approach 2 Mandatory program research, 

including use of Program 

Research Form 

Charlotte, NC Approach 2 Counselors can use forms at 

their discretion for some 

customers. 
  ?$

  	
	
	

1   	   
	) 
@$*

1 	 + 	 0 > 0  	 	

	
	
	

	
	 #	$	


	5			 


			
	

  #	$A  

      %  !	 2	
      
	  


	    	    	  	  

	    			 		 	   

						

Table IV.3. Caps Used by Sites Before, During, and After the Experiment 

Site Pre-Experiment Caps 

Caps Under 

Experiment Postexperiment Caps 

Phoenix, AZ $3,000-$4,000 

(depending on length) 

$3,000 (A2 and A3) 

$8,000 (A1) 

$6,000 

Maricopa County, AZ $3,500 $3,000 (A2 and A3) 

$8,000 (A1) 

$3,500 

Bridgeport, CT $3,000 $3,000 (A2 and A3) 

$7,000 (A1) 

$3,000 

Jacksonville, FL Tiered: $4,600-$8,900 $3,000 (A2 and A3) 

$6,000 (A1) 

Tiered: $3,000-

$6,000 

Atlanta, GA $5,000 (first year) $5,000 (A2 and A3) 

$8,000 (A1) 

$5,000 (first year) 

Northeast Region, GA $3,000 (first year) $4,000 (A2 and A3) 

$8,000 (A1) 

$3,000 (first year) 

North Cook County, IL $3,000 (first year) $3,000 (A2 and A3) 

$8,000 (A1) 

$3,000 (first year) 

Charlotte, NC $4,000 $4,000 (A2 and A3) 

$8,000 (A1) 

$4,000 

A1 = Approach 1; A2 = Approach 2; A3 = Approach 3.
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
  	 


 

 
 


 

 	

 
  
 

  
	



  
 
  
 	
 	
 	  

	 	


   !!!"  # $  	


	

	


%		


	
		
	
%


	


$

	




& 
 	 
	
 
  
  

 
 	

  	

$

	
 	 
	
 
   
$  
  	


 	



	%$

	%



		


'
	



		
	$



$
	




	

%	





	$
	



 	 
  	
     	
 
 


	
&

	
	
	

()"
%	



 
 



$  " 	   	


 
%	
$ *" 

 
 




$ 
+"

 
	

& 
 
	
 
 

 




 	
 	

 
	
$ 
	


	



$ 
 
 


$ 
 	
 

	
$   
 
 

%
(



 %
	 



 	 



 
	
 
 	

 
 	
 	
  	  ,

 


  	 * 



	
-
	) 	


	
		




$




.
	


.



		

(

	




%	





	*	






	
 - 
	  % 
 










$%
	(

	%	

(
	



,

 


  	 )   
 - 
 	  	

 

	 
 


 	 	 ) 	



	%

",




		


	
$	)


//

	




	

 
	  

% 
 
 	%   
 


	


	
 
*$-

	
	
  




  & 
 
 
 

	
 
	
 
 	

(  
 %


	

	$		

	
	


0 


 
 	
%    
(
 1 	-
 1


11"

	

$23%



	
'04		




	

 
 


		
	
  
	




	

	


	%



&	
		

  


2)+$ !!+$











5
$
 
 	

  
 

 

 


	
	%



	
-	



%

0 
	


 	

 
 % 
	
 
 	
  	   




 	
  2 
		$  	 	
  	

 


 

	
 ) 
 *  	
  	

 


  	   & 
	

	 
6
	7	$

	
	

	


  
 

 % 8
$ 
	$ - 	
8 



	
	$
	






%
		





%.$





0

	






	
9)"




- 
 
 	
: " 

  

	

 
	

 
 

:
*"	
 	
 %

	

 

$ 
 
 %
    

	 
 	
  


	

	
,

;"

&	
	






 
 


 

$ 

 
	

 
 % 

	

	
	

 







1 

   %
    
  


  '
 


(
 
-  '	 !!)  # !!+"$ <$**) 	

 











	
,








 


- 	

	






	






	


	


=$> 	



 

&  	 
 	
  
 
 . 	 
 	  



	
    
	
 
  
   
 

  
   



  



  




$

%	
	






$	





2	,



?
@	


"-	
9)"



   
%	
  
 



$ 
 " 	

 


0


	
	



	





  /=

 	




 
(
 	
 
 
 
 %
 
 	

   




  ? ,- ,
$ 	 
   
   
 
   




$		

)$<!/
	

$ *	



 
  ;)"  A

 
  

 
 

 
 
 
 

	



$)<
"B%$


	



	






	
	


	




%





,"

,



 
 

$ 	)< 	
 % 
 
5

		

 )* 	
  
 
?
@
 

 
 
$

 
 )=+ 
 	

$    	
   
 
  



	




	

	


$








%






Table V.1. Participation in the ITA Experiment (Percentages) 

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

Total Enrollment 100.0 33.4 33.4 33.2 

Enrollment, by Study Site 

Phoenix, AZ 8.2 33.1 33.9 33.0 

Maricopa County, AZ 8.5 33.3 33.0 32.7 

Bridgeport, CT 13.0 33.3 33.4 33.3 

Jacksonville, FL 9.8 33.8 33.4 32.9 

Atlanta, GA 17.8 33.6 33.3 33.1 

Northeast Region, GA 2.2 33.3 31.8 31.9 

North Cook County, IL 22.8 33.4 32.7 33.3 

Charlotte, NC 17.7 33.3 33.4 33.4 

Enrollment, by Customer Type 

Dislocated Workers 68.9 32.4*** 34.3 33.3 

Adults 31.1 35.6*** 31.5 32.9 

Sample Sizes 7,922 2,646 2,649 2,627 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

Notes: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 
/<

	




 
 










.%



&	


%
	
1		





 
(
 
 



 	
  
  
	
 
 %

	
  
	


 

  
	



	
$-



		

#$
	


% 
  	



 	) 
	  



		)


	
%	 5




	
 
 	
  	$ $  
  



  








		




0 


  11  


  

   
(
 






	


		




	
9

) 	
	
		 	 


;) 

$
	

	

 
 



 
 


  	    	
  0
  

	

  
 
 


  	 	   $




    
 

	 
  
 





	





  		



	

	    	    
 
	
 


	




	
 
	

.


%	


	-



-




	 )$ 67  	

  -  





 
 	;)"

  1$ 	

 


 

	
  
 


 
 	 

 		
	
$ 


 
 
 	
  3%  	  	

$ 	






	)
-




5)"

@
 

 
   
 
- 
 
 



 	


  
  
 

$  
 
 %
	  	 
 

 






 	
  
		 	

   	

  	

 %  


	


	
%		$




$ 
		




	



-





	

	


%

	



$

  A%






$

	
			
	

	



		

	
		

	








%
			
	

$
%


	-
"
	

		
	
$  % 


C
 

   - 	
 
$ 

  


%	

	




"





	
	



	

  />

 	




	




-
	

	



	


%		
%	
 	

		


	



&
%
	


	



	
	
%	




	


$

 	 
 
 
  	 

   	

%
  	


  

%


! "#$%
&#

11	
$> 	

	





 


 
 
     ; "  	

  
 

$ 

%
  
	




)+
?%

$

  
	
 
 % 	
 
  
 
$ 
 	
 







-

	


$

?
@$ 
?,-,
  
 %


 )/


)=
:

5 "$











-




	

$5$









$  
 	

8


 
 %A%
 

 




$

	

%	


$

	  	


 .

$ 
	  %$ 
 
 
 



B%$

	

	




"
%


  	  
 	

  # 
 

$   
 
 





	
	

	


' 




()
*	



    
$ 	


 
   
 

  
-  	

	
 	

 . 
%
  	


 	%

11

&

  
 
	
 
 	 

 	


 

	

	



 



	

(


%	








		




 ?,-,
 
  


  
  
"
'	 !!):


-

 
 

1 !!*
 
?
@ 
  


2

 !! :
-





 !!*

 !!*$
	%

 
5$
-   
 
 
 !! # !!+

11	
2 !!+"$
	












=!

	




Table V.2. Participant Tenure in the ITA Experiment (Percentages Unless Otherwise 

Noted) 

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

Distribution, by Months in the ITA 

Experiment 

Less than 1 month 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 

1 to less than 2 months 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

2 to less than 3 months 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 

3 to less than 4 months 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 

4 to less than 6 months 5.2 5.4 5.1 5.2 

6 months or more 91.9 91.8 92.1 92.0 

Average Tenure in ITA 

Experiment (Months) 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 

Sample Size 7,922 2,646 2,649 2,627 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

Notes: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

 +"
 

	









$	
%





	

			



	%


$ 	

 


  	 * 
   
  	
		



 
 	

$ 	

 


	
 ) 
   
 





  
 	 

.
 	


 .

$   


%

.

  	 ) 
  	   
 
	
 
 
 



  6
7  	

   	  6C 7  
 		

 



	%

	

%	








0 

 

  

.
 	


 .

 

	 	

(

	



-


,




	*$	


	


.

$

	
-
	






	
 )    
  
%	
  
 



8 






8
  	 	%  
  

   =+ 	
 

	 * 	

 
  	
		  


$ 	 

/<
 /= 	
  	 ) 
 	  	

$ 
	% # ;)"



3	   
 
	 
 	
  
 * 
  

 

	


 .

$ 

	 	

 


   	
 	%  


 

A

% 




			











%



		 	


/>	
$	


	%  	)=!	
"


	

%  

	*=/	
:


"1$


C


-
		

	



	-
 		
	
   
 	

  	  

	 .%
 





	 
 	
 ) 
  
  

	 

	
 
	  
%
 	
 






	
	
 
*


"
  =)

 	




2%$
	




-
	



	
 %
  
  


 

	
 
	



 
  
(
 	
 
$ 	 	

   

 

	     
 
 	  
 



  B
	$ 
 






$
	



.$	







2
$	
)
 8	
	


.




	

8 	 
  

 

	 /< 
 /= 	
$


	%"  B%$	 ) 
  


% 	


 .

 


	

 
  	  
 % 	


    % 	

(



 
	

   	 

 

	 
  	
 ) 
 



 

  	%
    %	 " 

%

	)	

	
%	
$






% 	


 .

 
 	
	 	

 
%
 




	





	

-
	
	

)
$	

-
%






	


%

-%
	



%



		

Figure V.1. ITA Service Initiation by Approach After Random Assignment, Overall and by 

Study Site 

Source: Appendix Table B.4. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 

77

67

61

87

82 84 82

45*

61*

76*

68

77

68

71***

88

59

68

78

76

39

47**

66**

72

93***

76***

89***

74***

0

20

40

60

80

100

Overall Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport, CT Jacksonville, FL Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte, NC

Percent who attended ITA orientation

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
= 

	




&




%	


	










$	*




	#;)"

B%$  
	 
 

	 
  	
  
 * 
 
 

	



	
 
 	-

%$ 
$ 
 ?
 @  ,  	 

	

 
  
 

$ 	 ) 	

 
 2	 ,
$ ? ,-

,
$
,

	




	
$	

)	


	-

%

	




	)	


 
 	  	 % 	
  
 
 %
  0 

 	



	 
	
 
 	


  
 



$ 
	
 
  	%



 
%	
	



"$

	



	
	 	


 	

  
 

     
 	-

% 	 	

	
 


  
(
 	  
	
 


	 ) 

%

$
		






	


	-

%

		)






  
 
	
 
 
   
%	 

  
 


0%

%	

	
	
"
<>	



5++	

,;*"



	,$


/!	

	



%	









	





$

	

 
 

   
%	 

 
  
 
	

  

  



	
%


%	






;*"


%
	


-


















-

	 

	

(


1	-
1

 


	





3

















'



*D

?
@

%) 

2	,

5*"

&  ,(
  %    
%	 

   	 $

%   
 

$ 
- 
  
 
 
 



 		

%  
,(
& 	
  	

 B
	$   
  

	

  
 
 
 
  
     	 

	




%	




%


  	

      
%	 


 
  
 
 
	

-

5+"

 

3	$



$	



$
		



	

	)	


		




	


E	


	
 
	
	

	)	

		








  =*

 	




Table V.3. Overall Rates of ITA Service Initiation and Timing of ITA Orientations, by Study 

Site 

Study Site 

Overall Rate of ITA Orientation 

Attendance, for All 

Approaches Combined 

(Percent) 

Weekdays Elapsed from 

Determination of Training 

Eligibility to Receipt of 

ITA Random Assignment 

Phoenix, AZ 80.7 8.3 

Maricopa County, AZ 69.1 14.1 

Bridgeport, CT 89.1 13.4 

Jacksonville, FL 80.4 10.7 

Atlanta, GA 78.9 11.0 

Northeast Region, GA 69.6 4.9 

North Cook County, IL 62.2 5.6 

Charlotte, NC 43.7 8.5 

Source: Appendix Tables B.3 and B.5. 

	

  
 

 	
$  


 
   	

 


 D
*D	
"





	




%

#;)"1
%


	



     
 



 	
 	   	






4



(A

8


$%


%

%8
	

% 
  	 
 	

( 	


  

 
 
  B%$

	 
	%	

 
 
 





	

	-

%$	


  	 ) 	

  
 

 	
   

		

.

	

$



! "#
$ ,

5
	
		


$	


	%




	
9  )" 
 
 

$  " 
	
 
 	
 



$ 
*"

 	
	 
  


 		  	 )

	

.	

	%
	 	




	
	%

	

	

* 	

  %
 		

   
%	
   
 .  	 
 


&
 	 
 	

  	%
$ 
(
 	


 .

 



-


	

	

	






	


	)	

	
		%

	




"$	 	

	
	*	



	




"
=+

	





 
 
	
$  
	

  


 
 	
 
  	




	%
5




$






0 


 	 
 
  	
 	
 
 . 
%
 

	%
   
 11 %  
  	
(
 
  
	
$ 	

	


  


%
 	
  	 .

	%
  & 	


  
 

	   	
 
 %


	%
$   
 % 
 
 
  

 
 

 

	

 %  
 
 
 "  
%$ 	


  % %


	

 	  	
 
 	% 
 	
 	 	% 11 

%$ %
   	% 
 
 	% 
   
 	 
 


(
	
	

11  
 

	
 
	

 	

 	


  	$

	)	

	

	%


	




  
%	
$ 	 ) 	

 	 
 %  
%
 	




	%

	


"$	 %	%
 	 	





  	 * 	

  ;+"  5	
  
 
 	% 
 


	 
  %
 



$  % 
  	


 




  	





 
 


%
	 	
	) 	





%	

$
%$ D	







$	

   




 	  	

 
)) 




 	* 	



;+"'
	
	

	

	


2
$	*	



%

%	
0
+	


  	

 


  	 * 	 
 
 	


 




$ 	  D< 	
  	  	

 
 /D 	
 

	)	

;+"&
	
%
	


$

	% 	 * 	

  
 -  	 
  
	

?%

$  

 

$
%
 		$ 	

 





	  
 	 
 	


    
	  

 		
 


%



	


,;$
%

%


%

	

	



	

 

  
 	 	


  % %  	


 

	*	


	%

	
11A%

-




	


$%

	

	



	


	%
	
 

	 

	

	


-

%
11	
	
			
  =D

 	




Table V.4. Participation in ITA Counseling (Percentages Unless Otherwise Noted) 

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

No Counseling After Random 

Assignment 30.4 31.6 33.4 26.3*** 

Attended Approach-Specific 

ITA Orientation 69.4 68.2 66.5 73.6*** 

Attended Counseling Beyond 

ITA Orientation 42.5 65.2*** 58.2 3.8*** 

Guide to high-return training 22.8 64.8*** 2.6 0.9** 

Review high-wage, highdemand occupations 22.5 64.2*** 2.2 1.0 

Program research 39.9 59.7** 57.3 2.4*** 

Training cost form(s) 38.0 57.5 55.6 0.6*** 

Training options comparison 21.8 9.2*** 55.5 0.4*** 

Training costs and benefits 20.4 56.5*** 4.3 0.2*** 

Income and expenses 37.9 57.2 55.9 0.5*** 

Training budget 37.4 56.4 55.1 0.3*** 

Average Number of Activities 

Completed 

All ITA study participants 3.1 4.9*** 3.5 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA 

services 4.5 7.2*** 5.3 1.1*** 

Average Number of Counseling 

Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.3 1.7*** 1.5 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA 

services 1.9 2.5*** 2.2 1.1*** 

Sample Size 7,922 2,646 2,649 2,627 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

Notes: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 

&
%










	-


#	


$11
	)	

	




	

 	


	%
#; "






 	


 




 
 	  	

 
  5+"$ 

	*	

	


	%#; "
=/

	




Figure V.2. Participation in ITA Counseling Activities by Approach, Overall and by Study 

Site 

Source: Appendix Table B.4. 

Note: Figures are for ITA study participants who initiated ITA services. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 

 



	


 		

	


 







	

%6-
7





	




%  
 




	

 
, "  
 	 	

(

	


	1$
	

%
	%

	









	
	


	%	



# 11 


 
 
 	
	   

  	 * 	



	%   	


  '
  %

$ 	


 	 *

	

 
 
   
	

    


  





	

	




	

* 	

   
 
  

 %
 
$


11








	

%  
 


 	
  	 * 	

 
	  

%$







$
	) 	

0


%$	*	


	%
	

-







$	 
%
-
 	 	


-


5 5

6

5

4

6 6

8*** 8***

6***

8***

7***

9***

8*** 7*** 7***

6 6

1*** 1*** 1*** 1*** 1*** 1*** 1*** 1*** 1***

0

2

4

6

8

10

Overall Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport, CT Jacksonville,

FL

Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte, NC

Number of counseling activities attended

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
  ==

 	




	)	

;D"&
%


	







5*"B
	$





	

	

	



  
 
 

   	

 		
   	 



$

	-	

	

	

	




Table V.5. Average Number of Weeks Elapsed Between Key ITA Experiment Events 

(Percentages) 

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

All Study Sites 

Determination of WIA Training 

Eligibility to Receipt of Random 

Assignment 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 

Determination of WIA training 

eligibility to STS data entry 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 

STS data entry to transmittal to 

MPR 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt 

of random assignment 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 

Determination of WIA Training 

Eligibility to ITA Program 

Approval 8.9 10.0*** 8.8 8.0*** 

Receipt of random assignment 

to ITA program approval 7.0 8.1*** 7.0 6.0*** 

Source: Appendix Table B.3. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 

 






*



$	*	










	




		





	



.



(
A

	
	
$

	

%
	

	
	


&	

  &

	


%











%$

11
0




	


		
(






%
%	



11F$



















11


	


 

$

%-








	





-



(11







	

23  





5*"1
"
-%

		



%


11

	








	

"
=<

	




	 * 	

  %  
   	
 
 
 



	
   	(
 %  
   %  , 

	*$		
)
 %
	








	$








	





(
A
$	





	
		




.

G
	)$	




%	


 .

$


	


	 		

 
		 




 
 C	

		
  5	
  
 
$  	  
   	



	





	)

 11  
	 * 	

  

	
  
  

 %  
 # ;* 

$ /D 	
  	 * 	

 	%

%     
 
 

$ 	  D< 	
 

	 	




%
$

	*	






  	

 


	 $ 	 E* 
	




	

	






$2	,
$

5$
,"






$%
	(
	

%
$

	


,;"
	
	

	*	

	


	
	-	






	




	




2
$ 	 ) 
  	

  	 
   

%
#;*

$D>	
	)	

	%

%$ 	 
 

	 .%
     

 %  	






	 8D<	

 

	



	

 





	)	



& 
  
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
  
 



	 -
 
  5D"  B%$ 
 2	 ,
 
 ,$

	)	



	

%
	 

	

#;*"


    
 


	)


 	

 
 2	 ,
 
 , 	 % 
  
 

	



	)%	






 

A

% 
%		


 









%%	 	


/!	
$	




	.%
%	)/!	
"


	

%

	*/=	
:


"3



-
		

	

	-


		
	
   
 	

  	   

	 

	
 
	  
%


	



%
	
 
*


"

 
-	%



	*$	

 

 		
	
 	  
 * 	

  
	  %  




B%$	




	
$


	

	

	



		
	
	 
*	

	%

	*	





-%

	
C


5)!"
  =>

 	




Figure V.3. Participation in ITA-Funded Training by Approach, Overall and by Study Site 

Source: Appendix Table B.4. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 

3	  2	 ,
 
 ,  
     
 

 



	
  
   
%	 

 	 ) %	 $

	
	






	)	



 
	



 
	

 
 

$% 

	

 
  
 

8
 
 ,8
   
  

%$

	



$%	




 
 

 
 # ;*"   +! 	
   	

 
 
 


++	
   	

 
 , 	%   %$ 	 

%

//
==	











5D"  
 ,$  

   	 	

(  - 

	





3	,





  
%	

 




" 

$ % 



  	% 


%
 





,"





	



-	


	%$	







 $ 5"  	 
 
 	%
   %


$$
	






5*"




$  	-

% 
  
 
 
   
	 


	

	)	

		



$


59

68

72

58

62

56

72

77

39

68 69

39

82

43

71 71

37

62

45*

67** 68 65***

80***

75***

48***

72

79***

0

20

40

60

80

100

Overall Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport, CT Jacksonville, FL Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte, NC

Percent who received ITA program approval

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
<!

	




		

$  % 
 

 
 
 
 
   




$%
	)	)	


	-

%


  % =  	
"
	  	

  
 


==	
"$
	







	

	
#;*"





  
%	
$ 
	
	
	

(-

	%
  
  

  
  5 	
  
  

%	

%	

		






	
$  
   	 ) 
 	  	

   	



<=	
	



%





$	<<	
	*	

#;+"
?


@$?,-,
$
,$%$	




)!!	
$	


	

	









-
$
	
	



	%


	






	

11





	








	%

 %
 	

	


  
$
 

 

-		



Figure V.4. Probability of Participation in ITA-Funded Training, Given Service Initiation 

After Random Assignment 

Source: Figures V.1 and V.2. 

83

94

50

89

98

86

98 100

87

100 100

49

95

78

94

81

116

83 81

87

100

100

116

89

101

53

107

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Overall Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport,

CT

Jacksonville,

FL

Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte,

NC

Percent of orientation attendees who received ITA program approval

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
  <)

 	





 

*

(

  	
  

 
   	
 
 

 	 






		G
	)$



	


(	%
%

		
G
	
 
*$

   
  

  
 
	
 
	


 
	
 	



	

	

	
$
$




 " ," 

& 	 	

 


  	
  
 *  
	 
 	


$ %

 	

   
   & 	

	)	

$
%$
	

%

	 


* 	

 	
   
	
     	
$ 	




  11  
	  
 * 	

 
	 
 


	
 $ 
 %$       
  
 	 
 
$

	




	 	*	%
$	

	  	 
  

  
 
	

 
 , $ 
 
 

 





%H*$!!!:
	

,


?
@$	

H+$!!!$

$	


HD$!!!


;/

$%	






H*$+*!$
	




	
 
* 
	



% 	  H*$))/ 
 H*$)**$ 
	%   	 
	   



	  	  
 	 * 	

 
 
 

	 

	
"  




%




;/"

Table V.6. Average Price of Selected Training Programs (Dollars) 

Study Site 

Approach 1 

Cap 

Approach 1 

Price 

Fixed ITA 

Cap 

Approach 2 

Price 

Approach 3 

Price 

Phoenix, AZ 8,000 4,791*** 3,000 2,489 2,518 

Maricopa County, AZ 8,000 5,659*** 3,000 3,204 3,089 

Bridgeport, CT 7,000 3,810*** 3,000 2,784 3,034 

Jacksonville, FL 6,000 4,834*** 3,000 3,388 3,300 

Atlanta, GA 8,000 4,429 5,000 4,210 4,220 

Northeast Region, GA 8,000 3,931 4,000 3,556 3,547 

North Cook County, IL 8,000 5,210*** 3,000 2,536 2,578 

Charlotte, NC 8,000 5,055*** 4,000 3,245 3,229 

Overall 7,626 4,764*** 3,430 3,116 3,133 

Source: Appendix Table B.6. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 
< 

	




?%

$    
     

 	


  


	 
	*	

	




	
$



 	




	
 
* 
	

	



 
$  	$    
  ;="   
  

 


$ 
 	

    
 
	
  
  
	 	-

	



Table V.7. Comparison of Price of Approach 2/3 Program Selections to Fixed ITA Awards 

(Percentages) 

 Overall Approach 2 Approach 3 

All Study Sites 

Distribution by Program Price as a 

Percent of the Approach 2/3 Fixed ITA 

Cap: 

Less than 50 percent 9.1 9.5 8.7 

50 to 79 percent 11.4 11.2 11.5 

80 to 99 percent 14.1 13.3 14.8 

100 to 119 percent 50.0 50.5 49.5 

120 to 149 percent 10.9 10.6 11.1 

150 percent or more 4.3 4.5 4.2 

Sample Size 2,902 1,343 1,559 

Source: Appendix Table B.7. 

Notes: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 




		 
*
	

%



%





$
C




$

H*$!!!" 
	 
*	



5="


	
%	
	

(
	






	


%		





   
$   
 
 
 
 5    %



$

+/
D)	
	 
*	




	



  	 
 . $  	
$    
  
 	

$ 

 
  	  
 * 	

 
  

 
 

8



/!	


>>	

?
@8	





	
.	


	 ) 	

$ 
 %$ 
	 
   

	
 



%


		




	
 
*


;/ 

$	) 	

 
	 
 
 % 	 H+$=/+ 


	

$	 
	*	

 
	
%	

  <*

 	




H*$))/ 
 H*$)**$ 
	%  B
	$ 	

   
 

 	
$ 	 )

	

 
	
$
%$D!	


%



	

	 
*	







%	)
	


%






;/"



	-

5/"




?
 @$ 	 ) 	

 
 
	 
  $ 


%$  

% 
 
 	

  	  
 * 	

$  


	



	

	
;/"


%


	 
*	



! 
- 

G
	
 
*$


	

	

 	
  

  
      
  G
 	 )$

%$ 

	
	
(
 

	

%



$



	

	


	B
	$	

%

	
	

	








%	
	


3	
   	   
 
	  	 ) 	

$

	)%

$$




G
 	 )$ 

   H+$=*)"  

	
  
 


	
   * H $<+> 
 H $<D=$ 
	%:  ;<"   
	 






	)
	
 
*




 
	 
 %  	
 	
  
 	 )$  

 


	$%



	
 


*>)	
%	

 	 
-	%



	)$	



		
	
	)	

	%	







	

		
	
	 	


	%









	)	

	%
-

$$ 
 

5)!" 


-  	%


?#  


-
- 	%
67	



	$	 	

	G



 # 	 )$  
	 
  % 	  
	 
 H+$=/+" 
 





	
	
	)	


	
	





(	

	)

<+

	




Table V.8. Average Cost of ITA Approaches to Local Sites (Dollars Unless Otherwise 

Noted) 

 Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

Average Price of Selected Programs 4,764*** 3,430 3,133 

Average Expenditures per ITA Trainee 4,731*** 2,849 2,857 

Training Rate (Percentage) 59.0 57.6 65.1*** 

Average Training Cost per ITA 

Customer 2,791*** 1,641 1,853*** 

Source: Appendix Tables B.4 and B.6. 

Notes: Cost estimates do not include WIA administrative costs or the costs of ITA-related 

counseling. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 

. +  

 0 


 


  	 )    
 	
   



1
	 	 ) 	

 	
  

% 
 
  C
 
 - 


	 	

	%



$

	

) 	
  

	
  
 
 	   -
 
 		



	




	$


	
%	




	)H $=>)"$		 H)$/+)"	*H)$<D*:

;<"


 

 
  	
  	 ) 
 
 
 
 



@%
 

 	 )$ 	 
	 ) 	

  






	




	

	


  

 
 
 	 ) 	

     


	

 %  B
	$  	 	 )  	
 

   



 


 

$ 
  	
 

$ 
	
  
 * 
 		$

%$


	


0


11




	
%	

	*

	
H)$<D*"	%	

	 	
H)$/+): 


;<"  
 
 	
$  	  
 * 	

 	
 
  


	
$

 
 

	
  
	 * &
 	




	

   
 

$ 
	 
 	

 	

 	 * %

	  
 -   
      	
 


	


 	  	

$	  	
 

  
-
 		


B%$ %
  % 
 
	 
  
   	


 







	 
	*	

)D
!<




$ 
	%$ 

  <D

 	




;+"$ 		 * 
 % 

	
  % 	

  

	
 %
  -
 	


 	

 
 		

  & 
   	



	

	


%
(



 

*)


5	
  

 
  

$  	   	
  



	
 
 	

(

 
	

  # $
  
 	



	
	
 
*	

		 	



	%  	 	


$  	 * 	

 	 -  
	



.
	2
$	







 

 
 
 

 
 	 )$ 	

 


  


	 	 % 
	 
 		

 
   
  %



	
 
 
 
  


% 

 
" 	 

	   * 	

  

 
	
$  
 
	
  	 




 		
   
 
 	

  
	  % 


	%




 %"""$#

 ;> 


 

 
  	
  
 

  	

		
 		
  	    

   ! 		
 	


	

 	

   	
 
 
 

 
 
$ 
 )! 
 



  
 

  		
 
	

  	 
 
 






 	
	
  
   
 	

 %

$ 
  
 

		

 	 


	

	

	
	



	
	



%





	

		
	




		
$%$%	



#
$	


	


		


	

	

	

	

	

		

	



	;>"

	



	


	




	
	%
		



 
	





	




	




-%
		)	



-
	


 
 		

 
  -  
	 
 		



,	 	

$	




	)

-

	
   
 		

 
	 
 	 


 $ 

%





$




E
-	

		




	 
 	 
-
 
 

	
$ 	
	
E	

$

$




$
%








	)	






- 
	

  


$		 




 
	 	
 	


 
 	 	


 
 
 
	
</

	




Table V.9. Occupational Choices by ITA Approach (Percentages) 

Occupation 

Employment 

Growtha

Earnings b

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

Top 20 Occupational Choices: 

1. Computer networking and 

information technology M-H VH 14.8 16.3 14.2 13.9 

2. Commercial Driver’s License H H 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.1 

3. Medical assistant/secretary H M 5.3 6.1 4.9 5.1 

4. Administrative assistant H M 5.3 4.0* 5.4 6.4 

5. Certified Nurse Aide H M 4.9 3.3** 5.2 6.0 

6. Medical coding/billing M M 4.6 4.5 4.2 5.1 

7. Computer programmer M VH 4.0 3.9 3.8 4.4 

8. Licensed practical nurse or 

registered nurse H H-VH 3.8 4.3 3.6 3.5 

9. Database administration M-H VH 3.5 3.9 3.5 3.2 

10. Web design H H 3.3 3.2 3.5 3.2 

11. Accounting/ 

bookkeeping H H 3.0 2.4** 3.8 2.8* 

12. Health technician/technologist M H 2.4 3.0** 1.7 2.5 

13. Heating, ventilation, and air 

conditioning M H 2.1 1.7 2.5 2.0 

14. Dental assistant H M 2.0 2.4*** 2.0 1.7 

15. Paralegal M H 1.7 3.0 1.3 0.9 

16. Teaching M-H VH 1.4 1.8 1.3 1.2 

17. Business/project 

administration H VH 1.4 1.2 1.5 1.4 

18. Computer installation, repair, 

and support M-H H-VH 1.3 1.4 1.1 1.4 

19. Computer-aided design and 

drafting L H 1.2 1.6 1.1 0.9 

20. Data entry/processing L-M M 1.1 1.0 1.3 1.0 

Other Occupations: 

Barbering and hairstyling M L 0.9 0.7 0.8 1.2 

Child care H L 0.3 0 0.3 0.7** 

Cosmetology/manicurist L L 0.8 1.1 0.6 0.8 

Graphic design M H 0.9 0.6** 1.3 0.9 

Massage therapy M H 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 

Medical records M M 1.1 1.2 0.7 1.3* 

Other health assistant/aide M H 0.9 0.5*** 1.4 0.8** 

Real estate M H 0.9 0.1*** 1.1 1.4 

Small business management/ 

entrepreneurship -- -- 0.4 0.7*** 0.1 0.3 

Webmaster H H 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.4* 

ITA Vouchers with Occupation 

Information 4,759 1,525 1,505 1,729 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). Employment growth and earnings 

rankings based on information from Bureau of Labor Statistics (2004a and 2004b). 

a

L=Low, M=Moderate, H=High. 

b

L=Low (up to annual earnings of $19,710), M=Moderate (annual earnings of $19,710 to $27,380), H=High (annual 

earnings of $27,380 to $41,819), VH=Very high (annual earnings of $41,819 and over). 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level.
  <=

 	





	

 	 	  
(
 & 
	  
 


  	



 

	

 
$ 
 
$  
%
   	

 
-

 		 

 		
B%$ 
 

  	




% 

	  	


  
 
 	

8 $ 
  


	

		


 		
		
	*	



	 

	

3%	 	

$		




	*



 -  
	 

  		

E--
$ &
$ 
  





E 		

 
 - 
	

  		

 
	 
 	

	
		






$	*	





- 
 	 )   	

  
	 

  		

  	 


% 
  
	

$ 
	 
 

$ 	
$  
E



;>"

! +," 

#;D



%	





	
$

    

 % 
 	   
   	

$



  	$ 	
 % 
	
 


 


 	





 
 
   	

  
 

 
 
 





	$ %%

$% 
	
- 




E
 
    	 

  
 

 

	



	

 
 

	 	-

% 
 	-

%$	


	

A
$D<	
 
	

	
	
	






1 

	

	
		
		

%
	

	*	

 

	
-	


	


	
		



-
%
	

%




	) 	






%
	-







%



$
%
	




	*	

 
		
	
		



 

	
 
 
 	-

% 
  5<"  
 


 $ 
 


	

  	

$ 	


  % 
	
 


 $  



 	 ) 
 	  	

  
$ % 
	
  


%



  





%
	


	



%

,
<<

	




Figure V.5. Training Providers Selected, by Approach 

Source: Appendix Table B.8. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 

	)	


-
	 	

	


   
%
$  
	 	

  
 

 	

 




	

	

		


	
%
	



"%	)	

	



	
%






. 
$

& 
 

	
 
	
 
  
    
	

 

	,



 
 
 	





 




$
	

	

$
%$-




	

	



B%$	)	





	



8	
	


%


 
 
" 
   	
 
  	 ) 	



	


%
<)
$	 
*	



	
 
  	 
 

	
  

  =! 
 
 =*


$
	%#;/"






	)

	


%


 
 

$	

?
@$
 




	-

5>"

64

26

8

2

63

28

6

2 0 2 1*

61*

32***

5**

1*

0

20

40

60

80

Private schools Community/technical colleges State/private universities Nonprofit CBOs/FBOs Other

Percent of ITA vouchers issued

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
  <>

 	




Figure V.6. Average Duration of ITA Training by Approach, Overall and by Study Site 

Source: Appendix Table B.9. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence 

level. 




	

%
 

 
$

	-	
	


%
%	


		

  # $ 	

   	
 	
$ % 

 
 


	-

% 
 
 )  
$  
 5  
   
 + 



5>",





	
$
	-

%$D<	



 	

  	%  
  

 	
 	
  	
	

	
$


-



	

.





5<"
5$%$


/<	
"	
%


	
$	-


E





7

5

6

8

4

4

6

7

4

8*** 8***

5**

13**

6***

11*

8

6

8

11

10

7

 6

9*

12

4

7

10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Overall Phoenix, AZ Maricopa

County, AZ

Bridgeport,

CT

Jacksonville,

FL

Atlanta, GA Northeast

Region, GA

North Cook

County, IL

Charlotte, NC

Months

Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
  	


 




  


  	

  
 
 
 
	 
	

   


 
	 
 	   


 
	 
	
 	 





	
 
  

 
  
 
 
  	 


	



 	 
  
 	
 



 
 
  	 





	
	

	
		
	


	

	

	











	

 
	 	
  	 

 
 
 
  



  












	

	
 
	




   


  	  
  	 	 






!"

#






		





	



	



	!"

$#
	






	

%


	!"

&#

 






	
	
%

	

		


	
	





'("
&
	








	

  
!"#!#$ #%"$$#%

&
		

	)	%
	
			



	






	 
     
	

  

 
  

 

 	 
 



		

	"

*

• 	

		
	
+
		


 



	
 	
 

'("


&
	     
	

 	
	 

 
 	

	


	)
	

	


	


	
	
	



		

	,		


-.

	


 

• 		
	

			
		
		(	

&	

	
	

	


	

		



			%
	
	






	
	






 
	 



	

		



	
					


		










	
	

• 	 	 
	 	 
	 	 	 
  &	

		
	
	)
	,
	


 	)


	
	






  	


	

	


	
	


		

	





	"

	 		



  		  

	 
 

	 


	

 	


	 
	 

   	
 
 
	 	 

 


		

• 				
				
			



  
  

   	 ) 
 
	 


	



	
	%
	
	
	

	



&
	 

  
 
 
	

  	

 

 

 


		


	



	


	





	

	%
	








	








'	



			



	

			/
	




  
	 
 
  	  	 

 
	  &	 
 


'("
&
		


	&	



	
	



	
	
	

	









	
	%
	






"	




	





	,


 

	
  
 
 
 

 	

 
	, 
 
	 




 

 
 
	  
 
	

  
 
  +		


 
 

 
		 
 
 	 

 

  





	



	


	
	

	



		



	
	


	


	


	

 
 
	
  
%
 /	  	 






	




	
	


	%










		
	
	
	






	

/	
 
 	 
 


 %

 
  
	 	
 

	
 
	

  
  

 	 
 

 
 
	





	
		




	


	
	
	
  -0

  	





 
	 	 
	 
  

  
   
	

 


+		  	 	 
	
  %



 
 




	



	
	

 	 )  
 

   
 	

 
 
 	



 
 
   
 	) 

 
  	





	)
	

	


	.
	


		



		)
		



	%
	
 
	 


 
 




  	 

 

	

		


	)	.
	


 	
 
 
  
 	

 
  	 


 


	%
	


 	
	

& 
' $(# )$ *$#")$(  )# $%  ) *%# *"% +# #,*)#% 


!"#!#$ 

  		 


 	 

  
 
 
 	 ) 

	  
  



 



  	 
	

 

  1 


2
 	 
 		 


 	  
 

 
  


	

 
	 
 (	
	 
	

 	 
 	

 	 	 



	

  




	

 

 

 	


 

 	





		



	





 	 )   	%
	  
  



	
	


			
/	

	,(

	%
	
	



	

	,


 

	
  
   	%
	 
	 
	

  
 	  

	

		


	%








	




		)!

	



#




	%
	
!2
#



	




((






		
	









	


		


	



((





(
(


	

	

	


	
	
	

	



(	
	



+		


(



	




	

 

 

	

 			


	









		






	



- &
!"#!#$ #%"$$#%

'	


	.




'



			.


	
	






  
  	 
 
 	
 


    
  
-3

	


 




		
	



4

	




	




	
	
	



. -#$#""/
!"#!#$ #%"$$#%

5

  
	 

 	 
  

 

 	 
 


	%
	
  	 04
 	 
  
	 
 
 	
 

 

 
 
	 	%
 

  " 	 
 	
  	%



 
 	



 	  
 
	  
 
  

	  	

	


	
	



"

 


	
	   		 	

 
	



	 
 


 	 
 	 	 0     
 	



	

	



,






		


	   	 

 	 0 

 


	
	   
 





		







	




0 (!##	)#1#%#"2*"







		
	


	

		

	
	

	
	

							

	
	

	
	$
	

	
	

		





	

 	

, 		 		 	%
	
 	


 
	
 




		
	

				
!


		

		 
	

 
  
	

 

 	
 	# 	 	
  




 
 
 	 )  . 
	    
 
 	 
	 (


	  	

 
  

   
 	


  
	





	

3 $#)4## ) "")$*$#")$(56* )")$( * !#7##%


""#$()$(

6	

	

			%
	












	 
 
  
 	 		  
	, 

   "






	
	  	 	 

   
 
  




 	

 	  
	 	%
	
  
	 
    
  	

	  
 
 	  
 
	  
	 
 	

  	 




  
 	

,
 
	
 
	


 	

	


	

	


7


	


	

&
$

5	



		
 









	

1
	
	


	



	
	



 
 
	   
  1
 	 	 0 
 

 



	 	 
 
 
 
  
 
	 	  
 





		

	

	


	%
	
	%
		
  -8

  	






9

	







 	%
	



	
1
		)


	






	



+ 



7
	  		 


	
	 

  	 
 
 


	





	
	
		









 



   	 
	

 




	
 



 


	
 

 	



 
 

  
 	   

	

 
 





	



	



	

 #$*$#")$(
	"*$ /5* !##"/#,*# 
 

5 
  
	 	 	 0    		

 


		%




%
		


		



		

'			
	0
		%





		



	
:8	
	

) 
	  8; 	
  	 . 
	 	



 
  












	



	


	0
	

	


	

 
 
	

 
	 	



 


  


 
  



 	  	
	 
 
 
 '("
 &
	   

 	%
	 


 	 	 

 
 
	
 




 	 
	

  








	




& *$#")$(#,*)#!#$ )*(#
8*$%#%)$)$(

&
	 	 	 0 	 



 	 
 
 	
   



			.


	
	




 < 	
 

*  
 :8 	
   
	 
 
 	 0

	
   	 

 8; 	
  
	 
 
 	 .  


		
			



	

 

	

 
 
 
	 
 
 	%
	
 	 	  


	


	



		

+  
 
	 
 
	

 	
   

	

 
 	 . 
	

	
 
 
 	 
	
 

	 	 	%
	
 
 

	



  ' :< 	
  	 . 
	 

 
  	





	 

 <3 	
  	 0 
	  		 

 
 
 
	,

 







	
2"	


	

!6	
)--<#
-:

	


 

  
 


 
 	%
	
  	 	



 




	
	

		.

5


 
  
	

 

  
 
  
 


	
	

	



	






	.
	


	
	








'

	



	%
	
  
	  	 . 
	 	 	
 
	

 






 




		0
	




	

	







	
	
5
	





	

	







		


-  #2
8*$%#%)$)$(##)!)"$%##$%&

	


		
		

			)

.4	
8-	

		
		)	



 8; 	
 	 	 .   	
  





   	
 	 



	4:;	
	)
	

	



	



:< 	
  	 . 
	   

	 	  	 
 
 



		

9	





 
	

 
	   	
 
 
   
	 
 
 


	

	
		)./
	
	




	

	 

 


 	  	  			) 
 

	 
	 
  	    " 	 
 


 


	%
	
		)
	
	 		








	  


    '	 
 
 

  


 
  
 	




 	 

 

 
 
 


 
   


 


	


	,



	
	

	








   
 	

  	 		
 	 	


	



	



. ) # 9#$%) *# $ )$)$( ## )(#  $%#   $% 1# 

$%#&

		












	

		 





	
	.0

1

	 	 	 ) 	 
  


  	 
	

 
	 


(

	




	




	
	
	

&		




	


		"



	

 
	

 	 
	 	 
 <= 	
 	 	 	 ) 
 	

	 .    	
	
  
 	 	
  		 
 

	)
	



	

		
		


 	 . 
	  >
  ( 
	

 	 

	 	 
 


	
  -<

  	




"

 

	  
	

 	 
	 	 
 )0 	
 	 	

	0
		.
	


		


	

 
			0

 
	



		



		.
	0



	

	



 

 	 	
   	



  





	



	
	






	

	
	




	


 


 

	  
	

 	 	 )  0 
 

	 


5

	


	

	
		








	
	

!		).#


0 !# !"" )22##$# *#% )$ )$)$( (! )# 

#

5


	

	

		
		
	



*!)#


	

	


!.#


	



	
	!0#			

5
		




*

• 

   

 
	  	  	 	

		 

	  	  
 
 

 	 )


		 



 (






	

(
6

	,	


	 	 	 0 	 
 	 
 
  (	
	



   
	 	 
  	


 





	


			).

• 
	!	0
			


	






 	

  


 
	

 


	

	 	(	?









	




	
	
			).

• 	"	 ) 
	  		

  	

	

  

 
4 
 	 
 
 	 	

 

		
			.0 
	








		
		
	)
	

 





 		
 
 
	 	 	 
 

	

 
  '	







 	

	







	



	




	

		

5  

 9
  
 	 	 

  	 


		
		



	"

*
-;

	


 

• 6
	



	

		@

• 6


@

• 6


9



@

• 5



		







		


'("
&
	


	


@





		
	
	





	


 


	
	


	

 










	

	

"

				



	

	(	
	
	

		

	
%



	
	
	





		






	










 

 
  
 
  
  
	

 
 


 
 	

 	
 

	
	
5

			

	

	



	
		

	

	
		


		



	

	







	



	



 	
  
 
     


  




!  "  #
   #$
 %
 
	
&'  
 


%(%(!)$$

	
*
+	$&,--.

	

+	
 /
0	1



+23


$


	$	


1

 


'
4!14



52 $&




6777

$&3$

3


!8

  3

 1
 '  )
 $ 
  "$
 !

$&3$

2,--.

		  52 


  	
 
	 	 
		  ,--9:-; 




4!14

52		52


<

,--9

		  52 


  	
 
 	 

!==2$=

42,--92

4>)$

	$

4$

'"$
!

$3$&)
$,--,

4> )$
 
 +& $?   $	
  
 

	$ 

	
= $2$  3
 4

!  #$ )
'  "$


!$3$&)
,--9

4>)$
42	?	
?

$2


*
  
$<
&  
 )
!  )
  $&



 
 5$ 3 
  $

'  
 4!

14

52 $&




#2	&

,--6

4 3	$   3?:+ 
 $
     +2 


 4

!  $

 )
'  3
 %+!

<

3$&)<&677@
6--


	

4 3	$  
  3?:+  

	$  	
 $2$

3
5

	)
&
'
		
	

 	  
 ">5& )2
 

 
 
 




$?<!1A

	
 $&
),--9

"  
 #
$ )
 %
$  
 )
 




 

 
! #$ )	$' #
$ )
 B;  6;B 

97,79:979B9
4"#)		
66,---

3?:+  
 + $$

   

	$  	


 /
!*3
	<	$'3
%+!<

3$&

)$,--6

3?:+53	$4<$$)2
"$+C	$&

3 
 )$
 4> 
 +& $?   $	
  




	$  	
 /
! 4 )
'  
 4!

<

3$&)
2,---

3	2$ 3$& 
  4$

  3 )
! #
  


 <
 	
 4

' 
 4!  1

4

52 $&




6777
APPENDIX A 

FORMS AND WORKSHEETS 

FOR ITA APPROACHES 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
EXHIBIT A.1

GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
DRAFT A.5 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

THE GUIDE

TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING: 

A RECIPE FOR SUCCESS 

FOR INDIVIDUAL TRAINING

ACCOUNT CUSTOMERS
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
This guide was developed by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. with support from the U.S. Department of Labor. It was 1

developed specifically for the Individual Training Account experiment.

DRAFT A.7 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

FOREWORD

Congratulations! You qualify for our training services! Our staff recognizes that training can

be a big help to you. Training can greatly improve your chances to find work, earn good pay, and

improve your career. Now you must decide on the best training for you.

Training decisions are complicated and important. Here are some reasons. Training may be

expensive. The fact that we will help pay for training presents a terrific opportunity for you.

Although you may still need to use other resources, the support our one-stop center will provide will

surely help you. Training also represents an investment of more than just dollars. To succeed in

training, you must also invest time and effort. You should consider your training decisions very

carefully, to be sure that you get the best possible benefits from this effort.

Other factors are also important to consider before you choose a training course. How do you

feel about returning to school? What is your learning style? What are your personal circumstances,

needs, and pressures? Choosing the right program can mean the difference between successfully

completing training or missing out on an opportunity to help realize your dreams of a better career

and a better life.

We want you to succeed in training! That’s why we developed this booklet. “The Guide to High

Return Training” should help you succeed in training and get started in a rewarding career. As its

1

title suggests, the guide is designed to help you identify “high return” training, which simply means

training that will give you the best possible benefits from this important investment.

“The Guide to High-Return Training” was written to help you make good training decisions.

It will help you to identify the benefits of training. It will also help you decide which training options

are the most likely to meet your needs, and fit your lifestyle. The guide also explains the results of

studies about the benefits of training. The findings from these studies may help you make good

decisions. 
DRAFT A.8 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

A ROAD MAP

FOR THE GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

The “Guide to High-Return Training” outlines five steps that you can follow to make your

training decisions:

Step 1: Select an occupation. First, you must decide what job to train for. Some

customers train for a whole new occupation, while others build up the skills they already

have to access better jobs.

Step 2: Identify your training options. Once you choose an occupation, you must decide

how to get the best training. Often there are many ways to find the type of training you

want. The guide will help you identify the training programs that are most likely to meet

your needs.

Step 3: Evaluate your training options. Next, it is important to gather information that

will let you to compare your training options. The guide outlines a process that you can use

to compare the costs to the benefits of training for each program. This should help you

decide which option is best for you.

Step 4: Choose a program. The guide outlines a process you and your counselor can

follow to put all the pieces together—benefits, limitations, and preferences—in order to

make a confident choice.

Step 5: Plan ahead. Once you have selected a program, you must make sure that you can

afford to pay for the training. Before you set out for training, it will be important to plan

for upcoming household expenses and develop a workable household budget.

The rest of the guide follows this five-step roadmap. Clearly, not everyone who is thinking about

training completes these steps as they are presented here. In fact, you may already have a good idea

of the occupation for which you would like to train or the program you wish to attend. Regardless

ofwhere you are in the process of making your training decisions, the information this guide provides

can help you be more confident in the choices you make.
DRAFT A.9 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

STEP 1: SELECT AN OCCUPATION

With thousands of occupations available today, it may be hard to decide on the best career path

for you. Following are steps you can follow to identify occupations that may be good for you:

1. Match your interests and background with occupations. To start, you should consider

your interests, skills, education, and work experience. If you have worked before, you

may want to explore occupations that are similar to or that build upon that type of work.

After all, you know the work and know that it is something you can do. However,

training can also represent a terrific opportunity to consider something new. You may

want to explore a different line of work! If you are not sure about the type of work you

would like to do or are ready for a change, your counselor can help you identify options.

2. Explore high-wage demand occupations. As you consider possible occupations, keep

in mind differences in how much you could earn at different jobs. Also, consider the

availability of jobs in each occupation. Both considerations are important. Unless you

are willing and able to move to a different area, your best bet may be training for an

occupation with good pay and jobs available in your local area. Your counselor can help

you identify occupations that offer high wages and are in demand locally.

3. Consider possible career paths. Consider how much you are likely to get paid

immediately after completing training and also how your pay is likely to increase over

time. Also consider the types of jobs you could advance to in your career, both with or

without additional training.

4. Research your career options fully. Unless you have worked in the field before, you

will probably want to find out important information about the occupations you are

considering. Knowing about starting pay, career paths, and the availability of jobs locally

is a good start, but is not enough to make a truly informed decision. Often there are

aspects of the work you may not have thought of, such as daily activities, stress on the

job, or how you will travel to work. Also consider benefits beyond pay, such as vacation

and health insurance, that may sway your decisions. Your counselor can provide tools

and point you to one-stop resources that can help you research occupations.

5. Commit yourself to the occupation. The success of your training experience is based

on your commitment to the occupation you choose. Before you decide to train for an

occupation, you should make sure that you would be comfortable doing this type of

work for some time. This is not to say that you will never change careers in the future,

but unless you complete training, find a job, and stay there for a while, you may not get

the full benefits from your investment in training.
When reviewing research studies, keep in mind that it may not be appropriate to apply some findings to your personal

2

circumstances. Many studies refer only to specific groups of people or areas of the country. Furthermore, the evidence from studies

on the effects of training is limited, and some studies may be inconclusive. Therefore, this research should be viewed only as foodfor-thought as you make decisions about training.

DRAFT A.10 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

STEP 2: IDENTIFY YOUR TRAINING OPTIONS

Once you have chosen an occupation, you will need to find out the ways in which you can get

training. You are likely to have several training options that may differ in many ways. For example,

you may only need to take a few courses to enter the occupation. Then again, it may be easier to find

a job if you complete a program that grants a degree. Differences in location, cost, and time needed

in training will be fairly easy to figure out. However, other differences between your training choices

may be less obvious.

Before trying to choose a program, you should “narrow the field” by finding two or three options

that meet your most important needs. Here are some good steps to take:

1. Match Your Needs with Training Programs. Before looking at any training programs,

think about what is important to you in training. This may include things about both the

occupation and your personal life. For instance, will you need to get a particular degree

to work in the career you want? Do you need to stay in the local area or can you train

and find work elsewhere? Can you train full-time or do you need a more flexible

schedule, such as attending evening or weekend classes? What is the longest amount of

time that you can stay in training? If getting ahead in the career you choose is likely to

require more training, will you be able to transfer the credits from the training program

that you complete to another program? Your counselor can help you sort out your basic

training needs.

2. Select Programs to Explore Further. Once you have found your most important

training needs, choose two or three training options to review in detail. Your counselor

can then help you decide which of these options would be best for you.

Making sure that your training plans fit well with your life style is clearly important. These

concerns, however, must be considered along with the benefits that you expect from training. As

noted, training is an investment, and investments usually require some sacrifice. Therefore, before

you dismiss whole categories of training programs based only on personal preferences or limitations,

you may want to consider the following research findings:

2

 Each additional year of college increases earnings. Furthermore, persons who

complete programs that confer a degree or other widely recognized credential often

earn higher wages than those who complete the same amount of courses without

receiving a degree (Kane and Rouse 1995).

 Individuals who complete technically oriented and/or scientific courses benefit more

from training than those who complete less technical courses (Jacobson et al. 2000).
DRAFT A.11 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

STEP 3: EVALUATE YOUR TRAINING OPTIONS

Once you have identified several programs that seem to meet your most important training needs,

you should take a closer look at these options. You will want to gather information about these

programs so that you can compare them. You will want to know details about program

requirements, the cost and length of the program, and financial aid options. Your counselor can

provide tools and guide you to one-stop resources that can help you learn more about the programs

you are considering.

Then, it will be important to look at the total investment each program would require and the

benefits that you could expect to get from each. Your counselor can help you put these two pieces

of information together—investments and benefits—to help you identify the training option (or

options) that would benefit you the most. 

Estimating Investments in Training. Investments in training include much more than a

program’s cost. You must consider the time and effort that you must invest in order to succeed in

training. You will need to take into account your expenses related to training, such as transportation

or child care. To figure out the investments that you would have to make, your counselor can help

you evaluate the following for each of your training options:

 Direct Costs. These include costs that are directly related to the program you are

considering. They include tuition, fees, and materials required to complete the program,

such as books, tools, and other supplies.

 Indirect Costs. Indirect costs are expenses that are not related directly to the program

you are considering but that you would have to pay in order to attend. For instance, you

may have to pay for transportation to get to school or pay for child care in order to go

to classes or spend time studying.

Estimating Wage Gains From Training. Your counselor can also help you estimate how much

more you could earn once you complete training. You must compare the types of jobs you would

be able to get if you did not attend training and those you could get after completing training.

Completing training may also allow you to increase your work hours. Your counselor can help you

understand how this will affect your earnings.

Evaluating the Net Benefits of Training. Your training options may require very different

investments. To compare them, you should look at each program’s benefits together with the

investments. This way, you will be able to determine which programs would allow you to get back

your investments and, more importantly, which would give you the biggest benefits. 
DRAFT A.12 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

STEP 4: CHOOSE A PROGRAM

Having figured out the benefits that you can expect from your different training options, you will

be in a better position to select a program. Clearly, you will want to choose a program that gives you

a high return on investment—that is, a program for which benefits are high compared to your

investment in training.

When considering training options that seem to offer similar benefits, look at other program

characteristics. For instance, one program’s schedule or location may be more convenient for you.

You may like the teaching style at one program better than the others. A program that costs slightly

more may be more attractive because you would be able to complete it quicker, before your

Unemployment Insurance benefits or severance payments run out. All of these things are important,

since they could influence your chances of completing training.
DRAFT A.13 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

STEP 5: PLAN AHEAD

After you have thought about all of these things and selected a program, you will want to make

sure that you will be able to complete training and get the expected benefits. First, it will be

important to figure out a way to cover your full costs of training. Second, you will want to make sure

that you will be able to support yourself and your family while you go to training. Your counselor

can help you develop a plan to pay for training and a workable household budget while you are in

training.

 Determine How to Pay for Training. Your counselor can help you determine the total

amount of money you will need to pay for training. The Individual Training Account, or

ITA, should help you cover these costs. However, you may need additional help. Your

counselor can help you apply for Pell grants, state grants, scholarships, or other

programs for which you may qualify. If all these sources combined are still not enough

to cover your total training costs, your counselor can help you decide if it would make

sense to pay some training costs out of your own pocket, get student or personal loans,

or consider other training programs.

 Develop a Household Budget. Before you begin training, it will be important to plan

out your household expenses while you attend training. Your counselor will help you

examine your household’s income and financial responsibilities for the period while you

would be attending training in order to develop a smart household budget. The more

you plan, the better prepared you and everyone in your family will be for upcoming

challenges and unexpected events, and the more likely you will be to work out these

challenges successfully.
DRAFT A.14 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

A FINAL NOTE

We hope that this “Guide to High-Return Training” will help you not only select the training that

is right for you, but also increase your chances of succeeding in training and getting a rewarding

career. Your counselor is ready to help you with any questions you may have about training and your

career plans. Good luck!
DRAFT A.15 EXHIBIT A.1: GUIDE TO HIGH-RETURN TRAINING

REFERENCES

Jacobson, Louis, et al. Participation in Community Schooling and Its Effects on Displaced Workers’

Earnings and Employment Prospects: A Study of Displaced Workers from Washington State.

Rockville, MD: Westat, May 2000.

Kane, Thomas, and Cecilia Elena Rouse. “Labor-Market Returns to Two- and Four-Year College.”

The American Economic Review, vol. 85, no. 3, 1995, pp. 600-614.
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
EXHIBIT A.2

LIST OF HIGH-WAGE OCCUPATIONS IN DEMAND

FOR SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
DRAFT A.19 Exhibit A.2: LIST OF HIGH-WAGE OCCUPATIONS IN DEMAND

IN SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT

HIGH-WAGE OCCUPATIONS IN DEMAND

FOR SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT

The following list includes several occupations expected to have large numbers of job openings currently and to continue to grow over the

coming years. In addition, the occupations listed tend to pay well for the level of training/education required. For this reason, they have beeclassified as “best bet” occupations by the Connecticut Department of Labor. Training for one of these occupations may give you the best possiblebenefits from training. Occupations are listed according to their educational and work experience requirements.

Rate ($) Wages ($) Annual ($) ($) Openings Growth

Entry Wages Midrange Average Hourly Annual Annual

Average

Bachelor’s Degree Plus Experience

Computer Software Engineer, Systems Software 19.36 22.03 – 35.42 60,216 28.95Computer Programmer 18.20 22.79 – 37.20 60,299 28.99 418Computer Specialist 18.65 23.42 – 44.27 67,022 32.22Network & Computer Systems Administrator 23.59 25.76 – 39.05 67,564 32.48

Associate’s Degree or Vocational Training

Aircraft Mechanic & Service Technician 13.72 14.89 – 22.51 37,346 17.96Architectural & Civil Drafter 13.12 13.85 – 19.81 35,950 17.28Business Operations Specialist 8.14 8.84 – 27.54 37,721 18.13Computer Operator 10.45 11.77 – 16.90 30,772 14.79Computer Support Specialist 17.20 19.53 – 29.49 51,898 24.95 495 68.65%Design Worker 9.02 10.08 – 23.81 36,106 17.35Drafters 10.23 11.78 – 19.32 33,949 16.32Electrician 15.83 17.77 – 22.95 41,916 20.16Electro-Mechanical Technician 12.21 14.30 – 19.34 34,293 16.49Graphic Designers 10.65 11.85 – 19.75 34,845 16.75Installation, Maintenance & Repair Central

Office/PBX Installer/Repair StationInstaller/Repair, Telephone 10.71 11.95 – 19.93 32,849 15.80 36 14.97%

Installation, Maintenance, & Repair Workers,

Other 10.71 11.95 – 19.93 32,849 15.80 14.97%
HIGH-WAGE OCCUPATIONS IN DEMAND FOR SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT (continued)

Rate ($) Wages ($) Annual ($) ($) Openings Growth

Entry Wages Midrange Average Hourly Annual Annual

Average

DRAFT A.20 Exhibit A.2: LIST OF HIGH-WAGE OCCUPATIONS IN DEMAND

IN SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT

Interior Designer 18.05 19.19 – 27.44 48,719 23.42Mechanical Drafter 15.35 16.40 – 26.13 44,831 21.58Medical Records Technician 11.09 11.58 – 15.00 28,080 13.50 33.42%Medical Secretary 11.83 13.04 – 16.64 30,855 14.83Paralegals & Legal Assistants 15.38 – 20.82 37,420 17.99 42.65%Registered Nurse 19.06 20.79 – 27.34 50,741 24.39 15.09%Surgical Technologist 14.37 15.08 – 19.62 36,252 17.43 35.06%Travel Agent 9.40 10.76 – 14.75 27,851 13.39 63

Long-Term On-the-Job Training

Auto Body & Related Repair 15.61 16.58 – 21.11 40,296 19.37Auto Mechanic/Service Technician 8.55 9.21 – 19.90 32,153 15.45Construction and Building Inspector 12.93 17.61 – 26.29 46,398 22.31Construction Manager 19.74 21.08 – 34.74 64,237 30.88Executive Secretary 12.61 13.89 – 19.43 34,853 16.75First-line Supervisor/Manager of Construction 20.72 22.12 – 30.38 55,656 26.76Hazardous Material Removal Worker 9.98 14.05 – 17.54 31,343 15.07Heating, Air Conditioner, and RefrigerationMechanics & Installer 13.63 15.51 – 20.75 37,440 18.00Machinist 11.82 13.51 – 20.87 32,469 15.61Plumber, Pipefitter, & Steamfitter 12.15 12.06 – 23.07 39,164 18.83Welder, Cutter, Solderer, Blazer 11.28 12.08 – 18.81 32,757 15.75

Moderate Term On-the-Job Training

Bookkeeping, Accounting Clerk 10.67 12.00 – 17.40 30,761 14.79Customer Service Representative 9.25 10.42 – 15.72 27,442 13.19Medical Assistant 12.37 12.13 – 14.74 28,544 13.72 48.99%Records, Scheduling, Disp/Dist. 11.10 12.10 – 17.38 31,899 15.33
HIGH-WAGE OCCUPATIONS IN DEMAND FOR SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT (continued)

Rate ($) Wages ($) Annual ($) ($) Openings Growth

Entry Wages Midrange Average Hourly Annual Annual

Average

DRAFT A.21 Exhibit A.2: LIST OF HIGH-WAGE OCCUPATIONS IN DEMAND

IN SOUTHWESTERN CONNECTICUT

Sales & Related Workers, Communications 10.37 11.90 – 28.25 43,012 20.68Social and Human Services Assistant 11.43 13.22 – 17.25 36,221 15.42 49.71%Upholsterer 10.46 11.84 – 20.60 34,168 16.43

Short-Term On-the-Job Training

Cooks, Institution & Cafeteria 10.36 11.73 – 15.56 28,191 13.56Industrial Truck and Tractor Operator 10.59 11.58 – 17.88 30,351 14.59Truck Driver, Heavy & Tractor-Trailer 12.34 14.33 – 20.22 35,307 16.97 461
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
A.23 Exhibit A.3: OCCUPATIONAL RESEARCH TOOLS

EXHIBIT A.3

OCCUPATIONAL RESEARCH

Participant: Date:

Occupation of Interest:

INSTRUCTIONS: This guide is designed to help you gather information on careers of interest to you. The information you collect for

the form can provide a foundation for discussing potential career choices with your ITA counselor. Try to use as many resources as

possible as you fill in the form. Available resources include, but are not limited to: (1) occupational brochures and “biographies,” internetbased resources like Connecticut’s Job & Career ConneCTion, and “harcopy” or internet-based labor market information, such as

“Connecticut Career Paths” from the Connecticut Career Resource Network; (2) interviews with individuals who currently work in your

occupation of interest; (3) interviews with prospective employers in the profession; and (4) local newspaper job listings. [NOTE: The

Occupational Research Interview Guide suggests questions you can use to conduct interviews with professionals in the field. You can

also refer to the form called General Interviewing Tips for some basic guidelines on conducting these kinds of interviews.]

1. What do people in this profession do? (Describe a normal work day, typical duties, responsibilities,

pressure, risk, travel, or supervision requirements.)

2. What skills, education, and/or training are required to enter this occupation?

3. What degrees, special courses, or certifications are required?

4. What experience is necessary to enter this occupation?
EXHIBIT A.3 (continued)

A.24 Exhibit A.3: OCCUPATIONAL RESEARCH TOOLS

5. What local training programs help prepare people for this occupation?

6. Are local jobs available in this occupation? If so, at what type of companies?

7. What is the range of starting/entry-level wages in this occupation?

$ to $ (CIRCLE ONE: per hour, per week, per month, per year)

8. What are typical starting/entry-level benefits in this occupation?

9. What are the typical work hours and schedule (hours per week, weekends, full-time/part-time)?

10. What is the potential for career growth in this occupation?

11. Other relevant information:
A.25 Exhibit A.4. APPROACH 2 ACTIVITIES: PROMOTING INFORMED 

CUSTOMER CHOICE

EXHIBIT A.4

PROGRAM RESEARCH

Participant: MPR_ID: Date:

Counselor: Counselor ID:

INSTRUCTIONS: This worksheet will help you gather information about the programs that provide training for the occupation you have

chosen. To help you decide which program is best for you, be sure to complete a separate form for each of the programs that you are

considering. Try to use as many resources as possible when completing this form. Available resources include: (1) resource materials

in the one-stop center, (2) visits to the prospective programs, and (3) interviews with current students, graduates, instructors, or

administrators.

Vendor: 

Program: 

1. How long has the vendor been providing this type of training?

2. When does the next set of classes begins?

3. What is the application deadline?__________________________________________________________

4. What are the program’s entry requirements?

5. What is the program’s typical class size?

6. What percentage of applicants are typically accepted?

7. What is the program’s duration? (How long does it take to complete?)

8. How is the program structured (for example, number of terms, classes per term, hours per week, timing of

classes—day/evening/weekend)?

9. How much does it cost to attend this program? (What are tuition and fees per term? How have program costs

changed over recent years?)
A.26 Exhibit A.4. APPROACH 2 ACTIVITIES: PROMOTING INFORMED 

CUSTOMER CHOICE

EXHIBIT A.4 (continued)

10. What other expenses are typically required (such as books, basic supplies, tools, uniforms, etc.)?

11. What financial aid options are available?

12. What are the program’s completion requirements? 

13. What degrees or certificates do students receive upon program completion?

14. What percentage of students actually graduate (overall and within the past year)?

15. What types of jobs do graduates typically get? What types of businesses tend to employ them?

16. What are the average starting wages of graduates?

17. What are the average starting benefits of graduates?

18. What types of employment placement assistance is provided to graduates?

19. What do students tend to like and dislike about the program?

20. Am I likely to need to change my current child care arrangements if I attend this program? (If yes, describe.)

21. How far is the program from my home? Will I have reliable transportation to and from school? Will I need

to room near the program? (If yes, describe.) 

22. Other important considerations: ___________________________________________________________
A.27 Exhibit A.5. APPROACH 2 ACTIVITIES: 

PROMOTING INFORMED CUSTOMER CHOICE

EXHIBIT A.5

TRAINING COSTS

Participant: MPR_ID: Date:

Counselor: Counselor ID:

INSTRUCTIONS: This worksheet will help assess how the costs of each training program you are considering compare to the resources

you have available to pay for training. In the first column, enter the costs and resources for each term/session. Based on the number of

terms/sessions that it will take you to complete the program, in the second column, estimate the total costs of the program and total

resources you will have available.

Vendor:

Program:

Duration (in terms or sessions): 

Amount 

Per Term

A. DIRECT TRAINING COSTS

Tuition and Fees 

Books 

Supplies 

Tools 

Uniforms Number

Other: + of Terms Subtotal

Subtotal for Direct Costs x = 

B. INDIRECT TRAINING COSTS

Transportation 

Room and Board 

Child Care 

Other: Number

Other: + of Terms Subtotal

Subtotal for Indirect Costs x = 

C. ESTIMATED NON-ITA TRAINING RESOURCES

Pell Grants 

State Grants 

Scholarships Number

Other: of Terms Subtotal

Subtotal for Non-ITA Resources x = 

D. UNSUBSIDIZED TRAINING COSTS

 A + B - C =

(Direct Costs + Indirect Costs - Non-ITA Resources): 

 TOTAL
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
A.29 Exhibit A.6. APPROACH 2 ACTIVITIES: 

PROMOTING INFORMED CUSTOMER CHOICE

EXHIBIT A.6

TRAINING OPTIONS COMPARISON

Participant: MPR_ID: Date:

Counselor: Counselor ID:

INSTRUCTIONS: In order to choose the program that is right for you, you will need to evaluate the merits of each potential program. Presented below are several questions

to help you and your counselor discuss your training options. When you talk with your counselor, be sure to bring the Program Research worksheet that you completed for each

program.

OCCUPATION ______________ ______________ ______________

PROGRAM ______________ ______________ ______________

1. Does the program provide training for the occupation that you want to pursue?

- Do graduates of program tend to find jobs that interest you?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

- Does the program and occupation closely match your interests?

- Do graduates of the program have success finding good jobs that pay well?

2. Will you be able to pay for the full cost of training at this program?

- Will the program costs be fully covered by your ITA?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

- If not, can you access other sources of financial aid, use your personal savings, or take out

personal loans to help pay for training?

3. Do you have a reasonable chance of completing this program?

- Are you confident that you have the skills needed to complete the program?

- Can you support yourself and/or your family while you attend training?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

- Does the program seem compatible with your lifestyle and family circumstances? (For

instance, will you be able to attend all your classes, do homework, and study for tests? Do

you have friends or family who can help with some of your other responsibilities?)

4. Are there reasons, other than cost, that make this program seem more appealing than  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

other programs that you are considering? Explain: Explain: Explain:

- Can you complete the program before your UI or severance payments run out?

- Is the program much shorter than the others?

- Is the location of the program more convenient for you?

- Is the course schedule more appealing (part-time vs. full-time, weekend or evening classes)?

- Will you receive a degree or credential after completing the program?

- Does the teaching style seem more appropriate for you?

RANK THESE PROGRAMS IN THE ORDER OF YOUR PREFERENCE:

(Mark the program you like the best as number 1)
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
EXHIBIT A.7

TRAINING COSTS AND BENEFITS

— FOR COUNSELOR USE ONLY — 

A.31 Exhibit A.7. APPROACH ACTIVITIES: SELECTING HIGHRETURN TRAINING

Participant: MPR_ID: Date: 

Counselor: Counselor ID: 

1 2 3

OCCUPATION 

PROGRAM 

I. INVESTMENT IN TRAINING

Program Costs

A. Direct Training Costs (from Training Costs worksheet).......... $ $ 

B. Indirect Training Costs (from Training Costs worksheet)......... $ $ 

C. TOTAL PROGRAM COSTS (A + B)..................................

Foregone Earnings During Training

D. Weekly Earnings if Customer Did Not Attend Training $ per week $ per week

E. Weekly Earnings While Customer Attends Training $ per week $ per week

F. Decrease in Weekly Earnings During Training (D - E) $ per week $ per week

G. Program Duration in Weeks weeks weeks

H. TOTAL FOREGONE EARNINGS (F *G) $ 

I. TOTAL INVESTMENT IN TRAINING (C + H) $ 

$ 

 $ 

 $ 

 

$ $ 

$ per week

$ per week

$ per week

 weeks

$ 

 

$ 

$ 

 

$ 

II. GAINS FROM TRAINING

J. Weekly Earnings After Completing Training $ per week $ per week $ per week

K. Increase in Weekly Earnings After Training (J - D) $ per week $ per week $ per week

L Weeks Worked Per Year weeks per year weeks per year weeks per year

M. Yearly Earnings Increase Due to Training (K * L) $ $ $ 

N. PRESENT VALUE OF EARNINGS GAINS (4 * M) $ $ $ 

III. ESTIMATED NET BENEFITS FROM TRAINING (N - I) $ $ $ 
EXHIBIT A.7 (continued) PROGRAM ENDORSEMENT

— FOR COUNSELOR USE ONLY —

A.32 Exhibit A.7. APPROACH ACTIVITIES: SELECTING HIGHRETURN TRAINING

(Refer to previous page for program descriptions) 1 2 3

1. Are the benefits from this program acceptable?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

- Is the program expected to result in positive (+) net benefits?

- Would completing training increase the customer’s earnings to the appropriate self-sufficiency or

wage replacement level?

2. Does the program seem appropriate for the customer?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

- Do the customer’s skills and interests match the occupation/program?

3. Does the customer have a reasonable chance of completing training?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

- Do program attendance requirements seem compatible with the customer’s circumstances?

4. Does the customer have a reasonable chance of finding employment in this occupation if s/he  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

completes the program? 

- Is this a high-wage occupation in demand in the local area?

- Do program graduates have a reasonable record of success finding employment?

- Is the customer planning or willing to relocate to another area?

- Does the customer already have employment lined up?

5. Relative to the other programs being considered, does this program offer the highest  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

estimated net benefit (Item III)?

NOTE: Programs within $500 of the highest net benefit should ALL be marked YES.

6. Are there other factors leading you to endorse this program?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

NOTE: If marked yes, counselor MUST provide an explanation. Explain: Explain: Explain:

- Does this program include features that significantly improve the customer’s chances of

completing training (e.g., individualized or integrated basic skills instruction)?

- Does the vendor have a particularly strong track record which could lead to better employment

outcomes for the customer (e.g., higher wages at placement which mean a higher wage

replacement rate if the customer is a dislocated worker)?

- If the customer is considering different occupations, would this program provide access to jobs

that are more appealing for important non-wage reasons (e.g., they match the customer’s interests

more closely, offer benefits, or give access to a career ladder)? [If so, recommend the program

with the highest estimated net benefit among programs being considered of this type.]

- Are there other reasons why this program seems particularly appropriate for this customer (e.g.,

the customer could transfer credits or complete before UI benefits run out)?

COUNSELOR’S ENDORSEMENT: Is this program recommended?  Yes  No  Yes  No  Yes  No

NOTE: To recommend a program the following conditions must apply:

(a) Questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 must ALL be checked YES

 AND

(b) Either question 5 OR question 6 must ALSO be checked YES.

Remember that supervisory approval is required to endorse any program that does not offer the

highest return, or within $500 of it. Workplace manager’s signature:________________________
A.33 Exhibit A.8. APPROACH 2 ACTIVITIES: 

PROMOTING INFORMED CUSTOMER CHOICE

EXHIBIT A.8

INCOME AND EXPENSES

Participant: MPR_ID: Date: 

Counselor: Counselor ID:

For training in [Program/Vendor]: 

Projected training period: From: To: 

INSTRUCTIONS: As you make your final training choice, you can use this worksheet to examine whether you will have enough income

to cover your living expenses while you attend training. When completing the form, think about the income and expenses that you have

daily and monthly as well as those that occur less frequently, say once or twice a year. You should also consider special circumstances.

For instance, if you will need to make a large payment (such as auto insurance) shortly after the training program ends, you should include

the amount you will need to save for that payment while you are in training.

TOTAL INCOME AND EXPENSES WHILE IN TRAINING1

ALL INCOME SOURCES ALL EXPENSES

Monthly Income Sources Monthly Expenses

Household wages - source 1 Mortgage/Rent

Household wages - source 2 Property taxes

Household wages - source 3 Other taxes

TANF (Cash assistance) Food

GA (General assistance) Utilities (gas, water, cable, etc.)

Food stamps Telephone

SSI (Supplemental Security Income) Bus/Train/Subway

Worker’s compensation Gasoline

Child support/Alimony Vehicle repairs

SSA or Survivor’s Benefits Vehicle insurance

Pension/Annuities Child care

Armed Services Elderly care

Other: Insurance (health, dental, life)

A. Monthly Income:

B. Months in Training:

C. Subtotal: (A times B):

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

$ $ 

x x 

$ $ 

Medication

Doctor visit co-pays

Credit card payments

Auto payments

Loans (student, bank, etc.)

Household items

Clothing

Child support

Entertainment

Other:

A. Monthly expenses:

B. Months in training:

C. Subtotal: (A times B):

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

Other non-monthly income while Other non-monthly expenses 

in training: while in training (explain):

Unemployment benefits

Other:

D. Total non-monthly income: $ D. Total non-monthly expenses:

$ 

$ $ 

$ 

TOTAL INCOME WHILE IN TOTAL EXPENSES WHILE

TRAINING (C+D) $ IN TRAINING (C+D) $ 

NET CASH FLOW WHILE IN TRAINING (+/-):

Total Income Minus Total Expenses: $ 

All income sources should be reported after taxes. 1
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
A.35 Exhibit A.9. APPROACH 2 ACTIVITIES: 

PROMOTING INFORMED CUSTOMER CHOICE

EXHIBIT A.9

TRAINING BUDGET

Participant: MPR_ID: Date:

Counselor: Counselor ID:

For training in [Program/Vendor]: 

INSTRUCTIONS: As a final step in confirming your training choice, consider whether it is financing feasible for you to complete the

training program you have chosen. The calculations in Part I of this worksheet will help clarify how the out-of-pocket portion of training

costs will affect your household’s cash flow. You should use the Training Costs worksheet and the Income and Expenses worksheet to

complete Part I. Once you have finished the calculations, you can use the questions in Part II of this form to discuss any cash flow issues

with your ITA counselor.

I. CALCULATION OF NET CASH FLOW MINUS THE COST OF TRAINING

A. Unsubsidized Training Costs (see Training Costs worksheet) $

B. Estimated ITA award (from counselor) $

C. Out-of-Pocket Training Costs (A - B) $

D. Net Cash Flow While in Training (see Income and Expenses worksheet) $

E. Net Cash Flow Minus the Out-of-Pocket Training Costs (D - C) $

II. QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION WITH YOUR ITA COUNSELOR

If your net cash flow minus the out-of-pocket training costs (item E above) is expected to be negative (-):

 Are there other sources of income that you forgot to include in your calculations?

 Are there any monthly obligations that will end while you are in training?

 Is it possible to reduce any of your household’s monthly expenses?

 If you do not already plan to do so, is it possible to work part-time while you attend training?

If your net cash flow minus the out-of-pocket training costs (item E above) is positive (+): 

 Are any of your income sources potentially unstable (for example, will your Unemployment Insurance

benefits run out while you are still in training)?

 Have you included all expenses that spike up during the training period (e.g., insurance payments,

property taxes, etc.)?

 Do the monthly expenses that you calculated realistically reflect your lifestyle and your family’s

lifestyle?
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
APPENDIX B 

STS DATA ANALYSIS TABLES 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 B.3 

Appendix Table B.1. Characteristics of ITA Study Participants, by Approach (Percentages Unless 

Otherwise Noted) 

Characteristic All Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

Gender 

Female 54 54 53 53 

Race 

One race 

White 48 48 48 48 

Black or African American 39 38 39 38 

American Indian or Alaskan Native 1 1 1 1 

Asian or Pacific Islander 6 6 6 6 

Other 5 4 5 6 

Two or more races 1 1 1 1 

Hispanic or Latino 10 10 10 11 

Average Age at Enrollment (Years) 40 41 41 40 

Years of Regular Schooling 

Less than 12 10 9 10 10 

12 38 38 37 38 

13 to 15 27 27 28 27 

16 16 17 16 17 

More than 16 9 9 10 9 

Employment Status at Enrollment 

Unemployed 91 90 92 90 

Employed 9 10** 8 10 

Had never worked 0 0 0 0 

When Did Last Job Enda

 

Within the last month 12 11 12 11 

More than 1 month ago but within last 

year 74 74 73 75 

1 or 2 years ago 12 13 12 11 

3 or 4 years ago 1 1 1 2 

5 or more years ago 1 1 1 1 

Reason Why Left Last Jobb 

Discharged or fired 12 13 12 11 

Laid off/business closed 68 67 69 70 

Other reason 8 8 8 8 

Quit 5 5 5 5 

Temporary/seasonal job ended 6 7 6 7 

Years Worked at Current/Most Recent 

Job 

Less than 1 year 34 34 34 34 

1 to 5 years 45 44 44 46 

6 to 9 years 8 8 9 8 

10 or more years 13 14 13 13 

Average 4 4 4 4 
APPENDIX TABLE B.1 (continued) 

B.4

Characteristic All Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

Received Public Assistance at Enrollment 20 20 21 20 

Sample Size 7,922 2,646 2,649 2,627 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

a

For those not working at enrollment. 

b

For those unemployed at enrollment. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
 B.5 

Appendix Table B.2. Participant Tenure in the ITA Experiment, by Study Site and Customer Type 

(Months) 

Tenure in ITA Experiment Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

All Sites 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 

By Study Site 

Phoenix, AZ 13.0 12.9 13.0 13.0 

Maricopa County, AZ 12.4 12.4 12.5 12.5 

Bridgeport, CT 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 

Jacksonville, FL 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.4 

Atlanta, GA 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5 

Northeast Region, GA 17.0 16.9 17.0 17.0 

North Cook County, IL 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.5 

Charlotte, NC 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 

By Customer Type 

Dislocated workers 14.6 14.6 14.6 14.7 

Adults 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 

Sample Sizes 7,922 2,646 2,649 2,627 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

*/**/*** = Difference in participant distribution by approach is significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 B.7 

Appendix Table B.3. Average Number of Weekdays Elapsed Between Key ITA Events 

Overall

Approach 

1 

Approach 

2 

Approach 

3 

All Study Sites 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 9.5 9.4 9.4 9.7 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 8.0 8.0 7.9 8.2 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.3 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 44.3 49.9*** 43.9 39.8*** 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 34.9 40.7*** 34.8 30.0*** 

By Study Site: Phoenix, AZ 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 8.3 8.2 7.8 9.0 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 6.8 6.7 6.2 7.5 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1* 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.4 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 41.6 50.4** 40.0 36.1 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 33.7 43.3*** 33.1 26.7* 

By Study Site: Maricopa County, AZ 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 14.1 13.7 15.4 13.2 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 12.2 11.9 13.5 11.3 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.1* 0.2 0.1* 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 42.3 48.4* 40.6 38.2 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 30.3 36.1** 27.9 26.9 

By Study Site: Bridgeport, CT 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 13.4 13.8 13.0 13.3 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 11.7 12.2 11.3 11.6 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.5 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 56.4 62.7 58.7 49.0*** 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 44.0 50.2 47.3 35.9*** 
APPENDIX TABLE B.3 (continued) 

B.8

Overall

Approach 

1 

Approach 

2 

Approach 

3 

By Study Site: Jacksonville, FL 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 10.7 10.4 10.5 11.2 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 9.5 9.2 9.4 10.0 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 30.3 33.8 31.9 25.7** 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 19.3 23.3 21.1 14.2*** 

By Study Site: Atlanta, GA 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 11.0 11.2 11.1 10.7 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.5 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 54.8 64.9*** 51.3 49.0 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 44.1 53.7*** 40.4 39.0 

By Study Site: Northeast Region, GA 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 4.9 3.5 3.3 7.8 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 3.5 2.0 2.0 6.4 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.3 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 20.6 19.3 19.1 23.2 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 15.2 15.8 16.1 13.8 

By Study Site: North Cook County, IL 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.5 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 4.1 4.1 4.1 4.1 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.3* 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 32.5 34.4 33.5 30.1 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 27.0 29.1 27.9 24.7 
APPENDIX TABLE B.3 (continued) 

B.9

Overall

Approach 

1 

Approach 

2 

Approach 

3 

By Study Site: Charlotte, NC 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 8.5 8.2 7.9 9.4 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 7.0 6.7 6.3 7.8 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 55.6 60.7 53.4 52.6 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 47.8 53.6 46.2 43.7 

By Customer Type: Dislocated Worker 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 8.8 8.7 8.9 8.8 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.4 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3* 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 43.3 49.4*** 43.0 38.8** 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 34.4 40.4*** 33.8 30.0** 

By Customer Type: Adult 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to receipt of 

random assignment 11.1 10.9 10.7 11.6 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to STS data 

entry 9.5 9.4 9.1 10.0 

STS data entry to transmittal to MPR 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 

Transmittal to MPR to receipt of random assignment 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 

Determination of WIA training eligibility to ITA program 

approval 46.2 50.9* 45.9 42.0 

Receipt of random assignment to ITA program 

approval 35.9 41.2* 36.8 30.0*** 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 B.11 

Appendix Table B.4. Participation in ITA Counseling, by Study Site and Customer Type 

(Percentages Unless Otherwise Indicated) 

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

By Study Site: Phoenix, AZ 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 19.3 23.4 23.7 10.8*** 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 80.7 76.6 76.3 89.2*** 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 48.3 75.2* 68.9 0.0*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 3.5 5.6*** 4.1 0.9*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.4 7.3*** 5.3 1.0*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.5* 1.9*** 1.8 0.9*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 1.9* 2.5*** 2.3 1.0*** 

Sample Size 646 214 219 213 

By Study Site: Maricopa County, AZ 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 30.9 29.0** 39.3 24.1*** 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 69.1 71.0** 60.7 75.9*** 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 44.7 70.1*** 56.8 6.4*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 3.6 6.1*** 3.9 0.9*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 5.3 8.6*** 6.4 1.2*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.5 2.0*** 1.5 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 2.1 2.8*** 2.5 1.1*** 

Sample Size 673 224 229 220 

By Study Site: Bridgeport, CT 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 10.6 11.9 13.3 6.7*** 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 89.1 87.5 86.7 93.0*** 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 58.9 83.1 80.6 12.8*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 4.0 6.2*** 4.7 1.1*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.5 7.0*** 5.4 1.2*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 2.0 2.6** 2.4 1.1*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 2.2 2.9** 2.7 1.2*** 

Sample Size 1,033 344 345 344 

By Study Site: Jacksonville, FL 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 19.5 24.3* 17.7 16.4 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 80.4 75.7* 81.9 83.6 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 51.9 74.9 76.9 2.7*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 3.8 5.9*** 4.7 0.9*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.8 7.8*** 5.7 1.0*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.4 1.7*** 1.7 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 1.8 2.3*** 2.1 1.0*** 

Sample Size 779 263 260 256 
APPENDIX TABLE B.4(continued) 

B.12

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

By Study Site: Atlanta, GA 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 20.7 22.4 21.5 18.2 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 78.9 77.0 78.0 81.8 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 40.1 66.8*** 48.8 4.1*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 2.8 4.3*** 3.1 0.9*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 3.5 5.5*** 3.9 1.1*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.2 1.4*** 1.3 0.9*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 1.5 1.9*** 1.7 1.1*** 

Sample Size 1,408 473 469 466 

By Study Site: Northeast Region, GA 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 30.4 31.6 32.1 27.6 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 69.6 68.4 67.9 72.4 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 45.0 68.4 67.9 0.0*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 3.4 5.5*** 4.0 0.7*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.9 8.0*** 5.9 1.0*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.0 1.2 1.1 0.7*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.0*** 

Sample Size 171 57 56 58 

By Study Site: North Cook County, IL 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 37.7 38.7* 40.6 33.7** 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 62.2 61.1* 59.4 66.3** 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 38.7 59.3* 55.2 1.5*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 2.9 4.6*** 3.3 0.7*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.6 7.6*** 5.6 1.1*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.2 1.5*** 1.3 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 1.9 2.4*** 2.2 1.3*** 

Sample Size 1,809 604 603 602 

By Study Site: Charlotte, NC 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 56.2 55.0* 61.1 52.4*** 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 43.7 45.0* 38.9 47.2** 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 28.4 45.0** 38.9 1.5*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 2.2 3.6*** 2.4 0.5*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.9 8.0*** 6.1 1.0*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.0 1.5*** 1.1 0.5*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 2.3 3.2*** 2.9 1.0*** 

Sample Size 1,403 467 468 468 
APPENDIX TABLE B.4(continued) 

B.13

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

By Participant Type: Dislocated Worker 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 31.4 32.7 34.3 27.1*** 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 68.5 67.2 65.5 72.8*** 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 41.4 63.9*** 56.6 3.7*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 3.0 4.8*** 3.5 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.4 7.2*** 5.3 1.1*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.3 1.7*** 1.5 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 1.9 2.5*** 2.2 1.1*** 

Sample Size 5,460 1,769 1,874 1,817 

By Participant Type: Adult 

No Counseling After Random Assignment 28.3 29.3 31.1 24.4*** 

Attended Approach-Specific ITA Orientation 71.6 70.4 68.9 75.6*** 

Attended Counseling Beyond ITA Orientation 45.0 67.6*** 62.1 4.1*** 

Average Number of Activities Completed 

All ITA study participants 3.3 5.1*** 3.7 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 4.6 7.3*** 5.4 1.1*** 

Average Number of Counseling Sessions 

All ITA study participants 1.4 1.8*** 1.6 0.8*** 

Participants who initiated ITA services 2.0 2.6*** 2.3 1.1*** 

Sample Size 2,462 877 775 810 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 B.15 

Appendix Table B.5. Participation in ITA Training, by Study Site and Customer Type (Percentages) 

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

All Study Sites 60.6 59.0 57.6 65.1*** 

By Study Site 

Phoenix, AZ 67.5 62.1 61.6 78.9*** 

Maricopa County, AZ 65.8 67.0** 56.3 74.5*** 

Bridgeport, CT 73.4 68.3 71.9 79.9** 

Jacksonville, FL 77.2 72.2 77.3 82.0 

Atlanta, GA 39.8 37.4 38.6 43.3 

Northeast Region, GA 69.6 68.4 67.9 72.4 

North Cook County, IL 70.1 70.9 68.7 70.8 

Charlotte, NC 43.7 44.8* 38.7 47.6*** 

By Customer Type 

Dislocated worker 60.3 58.8 57.2 65.1*** 

Adults 61.0 59.3 58.8 65.1** 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 B.17 

Appendix Table B.6. ITA Awards, Price of Selected Programs, and Projected Local Expenditures: 

Overall, by Study Site, and by Customer Type (Averages in Dollars Unless 

Otherwise Noted) 

Overall 

Approach 

1 

Approach 

2 

Approach 

3 

All Study Sites 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,645 4,764*** 3,116 3,133 

ITA Award 3,842 4,731*** 3,433 3,428 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,423 4,731*** 2,849 2,857 

Sample Size 4,248 1,346 1,343 1,559 

By Study Site: Phoenix, AZ 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,185 4,791*** 2,489 2,518 

ITA Award 3,470 4,580*** 3,000 3,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,083 4,580*** 2,466 2,435 

Sample Size 437 130 137 170 

By Study Site: Maricopa County, AZ 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,993 5,659*** 3,204 3,089 

ITA Award 3,814 5,405*** 3,000 3,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,685 5,405*** 2,799 2,808 

Sample Size 443 150 129 164 

By Study Site: Bridgeport, CT 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,189 3,810*** 2,784 3,034 

ITA Award 3,138 3,451*** 3,000 3,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 2,816 3,451*** 2,540 2,532 

Sample Size 751 230 246 275 

By Study Site: Jacksonville, FL 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,813 4,834*** 3,388 3,300 

ITA Award 3,554 4,757*** 3,000 3,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,475 4,757*** 2,862 2,907 

Sample Size 593 187 198 208 

By Study Site: Atlanta, GA 

Price of Selected Program(s) 4,283 4,429 4,210 4,220 

ITA Award 4,851 4,530*** 5,000 5,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 4,279 4,530*** 4,155 4,170 

Sample Size 559 177 181 201 

By Study Site: Northeast Region, GA 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,675 3,931 3,556 3,547 

ITA Award 4,042 4,127 4,000 4,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,365 4,127*** 3,000 2,988 

Sample Size 119 39 38 42 

By Study Site: North Cook County, IL 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,369 5,210*** 2,536 2,578 

ITA Award 3,858 5,806*** 3,000 3,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,408 5,806*** 2,522 2,604 

Sample Size 733 224 233 276 
APPENDIX TABLE B.6 (continued) 

 B.18

Overall 

Approach 

1 

Approach 

2 

Approach 

3 

By Study Site: Charlotte, NC 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,856 5,055*** 3,245 3,229 

ITA Award 4,293 4,860*** 4,000 4,000 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,414 4,860*** 2,661 2,670 

Sample Size 613 209 181 223 

By Customer Type: Dislocated Worker 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,768 5,062*** 3,212 3,198 

ITA Award 3,981 5,074*** 3,510 3,500 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,558 5,074*** 2,943 2,939 

Sample Size 2,814 854 908 1,052 

By Customer Type: Adult 

Price of Selected Program(s) 3,402 4,247*** 2,917 2,998 

ITA Award 3,571 4,136*** 3,271 3,278 

Projected ITA Expenditures 3,157 4,136*** 2,652 2,686 

Sample Size 1,434 492 435 507 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
 B.19 

Appendix Table B.7. Comparison of Price of Approach 2 and Approach 3 Program Selections to 

Fixed ITA Awards (Percentages) 

 Overall Approach 2 Approach 3 

All Study Sites

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Price information missing 0.2 0.3 0.2 

Less than 50 percent 9.1 9.5 8.7 

50 to 79 percent 11.4 11.2 11.5 

80 to 99 percent 14.1 13.3 14.8 

100 to 119 percent 50.0 50.5 49.5 

120 to 149 percent 10.9 10.6 11.1 

150 percent or more 4.3 4.5 4.2 

Sample Size 2,902 1,343 1,559 

By Study Site: Phoenix, AZ

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Price information missing 1.6 1.5 1.8 

Less than 50 percent 15.6 16.1 15.3 

50 to 79 percent 9.8 10.9 8.8 

80 to 99 percent 15.0 15.3 14.7 

100 to 119 percent 55.7 55.5 55.9 

120 to 149 percent 0.3 0 0.6 

150 percent or more 2.0 0.7 2.9 

Sample Size 307 137 170 

By Study Site: Maricopa County, AZ

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Less than 50 percent 4.4 3.9 4.9 

50 to 79 percent 6.5 7.8 5.5 

80 to 99 percent 9.9 9.3 10.4 

100 to 119 percent 66.2 62.8 68.9 

120 to 149 percent 3.4 5.4 1.8* 

150 percent or more 9.6 10.9 8.5 

Sample Size 293 129 164 

By Study Site: Bridgeport, CT

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Less than 50 percent 10.7 11.0 10.5 

50 to 79 percent 16.9 16.3 17.5 

80 to 99 percent 21.1 19.1 22.9 

100 to 119 percent 41.1 45.1 37.5* 

120 to 149 percent 3.6 3.3 4.0 

150 percent or more 6.5 5.3 7.6 

Sample Size 521 246 275 

By Study Site: Jacksonville, FL

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Less than 50 percent 3.0 4.0 1.9 

50 to 79 percent 3.9 3.5 4.3 

80 to 99 percent 6.9 7.6 6.3 

100 to 119 percent 68.2 65.7 70.7 

120 to 149 percent 5.7 5.6 5.8 

150 percent or more 12.3 13.6 11.1 

Sample Size 406 198 208 
APPENDIX TABLE B.7 (continued) 

 B.20

 Overall Approach 2 Approach 3 

By Study Site: Atlanta, GA

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Price information missing 0.3 0.6 0.0 

Less than 50 percent 11.0 12.2 10.0 

50 to 79 percent 20.9 19.3 22.4 

80 to 99 percent 22.0 18.8 24.9 

100 to 119 percent 44.8 48.1 41.8 

150 percent or more 1.0 1.1 1.0 

Sample Size 382 181 201 

By Study Site: Northeast Region, GA

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

80 to 99 percent 1.3 0.0 2.4 

100 to 119 percent 51.3 55.3 47.6 

120 to 149 percent 47.5 44.7 50.0 

Sample Size 80 38 42 

By Study Site: North Cook County, IL

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Price information missing 0.2 0.4 0.0 

Less than 50 percent 15.3 15.5 15.2 

50 to 79 percent 5.3 6.0 4.7 

80 to 99 percent 10.4 11.2 9.8 

100 to 119 percent 67.8 66.1 69.2 

120 to 149 percent 0.8 0.4 1.1 

150 percent or more 0.2 0.4 0.0 

Sample Size 509 233 276 

By Study Site: Charlotte, NC

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Less than 50 percent 3.7 4.4 3.1 

50 to 79 percent 17.6 16.6 18.4 

80 to 99 percent 14.4 13.3 15.2 

100 to 119 percent 9.2 9.9 8.5 

120 to 149 percent 54.7 54.7 54.7 

150 percent or more 0.5 1.1 0.0 

Sample Size 404 181 223 

By Customer Type: Dislocated Worker

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Price information missing 0.2 0.3 0.1 

Less than 50 percent 8.8 9.1 8.5 

50 to 79 percent 9.6 9.4 9.9 

80 to 99 percent 13.4 12.9 13.9 

100 to 119 percent 51.7 52.2 51.2 

120 to 149 percent 12.1 11.5 12.6 

150 percent or more 4.2 4.6 3.8 

Sample Size 1,960 908 1,052 
APPENDIX TABLE B.7 (continued) 

 B.21

 Overall Approach 2 Approach 3 

By Customer Type: Adult

Program Price as Percent of Fixed ITA Cap 

Price information missing 0.3 0.2 0.4 

Less than 50 percent 9.8 10.3 9.3 

50 to 79 percent 15.1 15.2 15.0 

80 to 99 percent 15.5 14.3 16.6 

100 to 119 percent 46.4 46.9 46.0 

120 to 149 percent 8.4 9.0 7.9 

150 percent or more 4.6 4.1 4.9 

Sample Size 942 435 507 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 B.23 

Appendix Table B.8. Training Providers Selected, Overall, by Study Site, and by Customer Type 

(Percentages) 

Overall 

Approach 

1 

Approach 

2 

Approach 

3 

All Study Sites 

Community or Public Technical College 29.0 26.2 28.0 32.2*** 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 62.7 63.5 63.4 61.3 

Nonprofit, Including CBOs and FBOs 1.9 2.0 2.2 1.5 

State or Private (Four Year) University 6.1 7.6 6.3 4.5** 

Other 0.4 0.6* 0.1 0.6* 

Number of Vouchers with Training Provider 

Information 4,756 1,517 1,520 1,719 

By Study Site: Phoenix, AZ 

Community or Public Technical College 33.5 26.1 32.9 39.5 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 56.1 63.8* 52.7 53.2 

Nonprofit, Including CBOs and FBOs 10.3 10.1 14.4 7.4** 

By Study Site: Maricopa County, AZ 

Community or Public Technical College 23.0 21.9 22.0 25.0 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 72.8 71.0 75.9 72.0 

Nonprofit, Including CBOs and FBOs 3.7 5.8* 2.1 3.0 

State or Private (Four Year) University 0.4 1.3* 0 0 

By Study Site: Bridgeport, CT 

Community or Public Technical College 15.3 11.4 14.7 19.1 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 68.1 66.5 70.5 67.5 

Nonprofit, Including CBOs and FBOs 2.4 2.5 3.2 1.8 

State or Private (Four Year) University 12.0 16.7** 10.9 9.0 

Other 2.1 2.8* 0.7 2.7* 

By Study Site: Jacksonville, FL 

Community or Public Technical College 57.6 58.7 52.5 61.3* 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 35.7 32.3* 40.6 34.3 

Four Year College or University 6.7 9.0 6.8 4.3 

By Study Site: Atlanta, GA 

Community or Public Technical College 17.8 15.9 15.7 21.3 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 67.4 72.5* 64.5 66.0 

State or Private (Four Year) University 14.8 11.6** 19.8 12.7** 

By Study Site: Northeast Region, GA 

Community or Public Technical College 12.3 10.0 15.0 11.9 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 86.1 85.0 85.0 88.1 

State or Private (Four Year) University 1.6 5.0* 0.0 0.0 

By Study Site: North Cook County, IL 

Community or Public Technical College 30.9 26.7* 31.8 34.0 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 66.5 68.2 66.9 64.4 

Nonprofit, Including CBOs and FBOs 0.1 0.2 0 0 

State or Private (Four Year) University 2.4 4.7*** 1.3 1.4 

Other 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.2 
APPENDIX TABLE B.8 (continued) 

 B.24

Overall 

Approach 

1 

Approach 

2 

Approach 

3 

By Customer Type: Dislocated Worker 

Community or Public Technical College 29.4 26.2 27.9 33.4*** 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 62.7 64.3 63.3 60.9 

Nonprofit, Including CBOs and FBOs 1.0 0.6* 1.4 0.9 

State or Private (Four Year) University 6.5 8.2 7.2 4.4*** 

Other 0.4 0.7* 0.2 0.4 

By Customer Type: Adult 

Community or Public Technical College 28.1 26.4 28.4 29.6 

Private, For-Profit (Proprietary) School 62.6 62.1 63.7 62.1 

Nonprofit, Including CBOs and FBOs 3.7 4.7 3.9 2.6 

State or Private (Four Year) University 5.2 6.5* 4.1 4.8 

Other 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.9** 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

Notes: Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. Table excludes Charlotte, NC, due to 

missing training provider information. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 

CBO = community-based organization; FBO = faith-based organization. 
 B.25 

Appendix Table B.9. Average Duration of Training Overall, by Study Site, and by Customer Type 

(Months) 

 Overall Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 

All Study Sites 7.5 8.2*** 7.0 7.3 

By Study Site 

Phoenix, AZ 6.6 8.1*** 6.1 5.9 

Maricopa County, AZ 8.3 8.3 7.7 8.9 

Bridgeport, CT 4.4 4.9** 3.9 4.5 

Jacksonville, FL 11.8 13.1** 10.9 11.6 

Atlanta, GA 7.7 7.4 8.2 7.4 

Northeast Region, GA 5.3 5.0 5.5 5.5 

North Cook County, IL 4.8 5.6*** 4.5 4.4 

Charlotte, NC 10.5 11.4* 9.6 10.2 

By Customer Type 

Dislocated worker 8.0 8.8*** 7.5 7.8 

Adult 6.6 7.0* 6.1 6.4 

Sample Size 4,179 1,324 1,329 1,526 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level. 
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED COPYING
 B.27 

Appendix Table B.10. Characteristics of Selected ITA Training Participants (Percentages Unless 

Otherwise Noted) 

Characteristic 

Approach 1 

Customers Who 

Received ITAs 

Larger than 

Fixed Awards 

Approach 2 

Customers 

Who Received 

ITA Program 

Approval 

Approach 3 

Customers 

Who Received 

ITA Program 

Approval 

Gender 

Male 55*** 49 47 

Race 

One race 

White 58*** 49 50 

Black or African American 30*** 37 36 

American Indian or Alaskan Native 2 1 1 

Asian or Pacific Islander 6 5 5 

Other 4*** 7 7 

Two or more races 1 1 1 

Hispanic or Latino 10 12 12 

Average Age 41 41 40 

Years of Regular Schooling 

Less than 12 10** 12 12 

12 35 37 39 

13 to 15 29 27 27 

16 18* 15 15 

More than 16 9 8 8 

Employment Status at Enrollment 

Unemployed 89 90 89 

Employed 11 10 11 

Had never worked 0 0 0 

Last Workeda

 

Within the last month 12 14 13 

More than 1 month ago but within last year 72 71 74 

1 or 2 years ago 13 12 10 

3 or 4 years ago 2 2 1 

5 or more years ago 1 1 1 

Reason Why Left Last Jobb 

Discharged or fired 13 13 9*** 

Laid off/business closed 69 68 70 

Other reason 9 8 8 

Quit 4 5 6 

Temporary/seasonal job ended 6 7 6 

Years Worked at Current/Most Recent Job 

Less than 1 year 34 36 35 

1 to 5 years 45 43 44 

6 to 9 years 8 10 8* 

10 or more years 14 12 13 
APPENDIX TABLE B.10 (continued) 

B.28

Characteristic 

Approach 1 

Customers Who 

Received ITAs 

Larger than 

Fixed Awards 

Approach 2 

Customers 

Who Received 

ITA Program 

Approval 

Approach 3 

Customers 

Who Received 

ITA Program 

Approval 

Average Tenure at Current/Most Recent Job 

(Years) 4 4 4 

Received Public Assistance at Enrollment 15*** 21 21 

Customer Type 

 Dislocated Worker 67 67 68 

Sample Size 840 1,329 1,545 

Source: Study tracking system for the ITA experiment (data extract as of 5/17/04). 

a

For those not working at enrollment. 

b

For those unemployed at enrollment. 

*/**/*** = Difference relative to Approach 2 is statistically significant at the .10/.05/.01 confidence level.