DOCUMENT RESUME

VD 204 614 CE 029 570

TITLE Advanced.Education and Training -- Interim Report on

the Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration.

Education and Training Approaches. Youth Knowledge

Development Report 5.3.

SPONS AGENCY Employment and Training Administration (DOL),

Washington, D.C. Office of Youth Programs.

PUB DATE May BO

NOTE 276p.: For listiig of related documents see note for

CE 029 106. Prepared by Clark, Phipps, Clark nA

Harris.

AVAILABLE FROM Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, DC 20402 ($7.00).

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC12 Plus Postage.

DESCRIPTORS Adolescents: *Demonstration Programs: *Disadvantaged

Youth: Educational Finance: Educational Research:

*Educational Vouchers: Enrollment: Federal Programs:

*Postsecondary Education: Program Effectiveness:

Program Implementation: *Student Financial Aid:

Student Recruitment: Tuition Grants

IDENTIFIERS *Comprehensive Employment and Training Act: *Youth

Employment and Demonstration Projects Act

ABSTRACT

This volume is one of the products of the "knowledge

development" effort implemented under the mandate of the Youth

Employment and Demonstration Projects Act of 1977. It describes the

Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration, which tests whether.

Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA)-eligible youth can

be effectively served by support in a college or postsecondary

setting, and whether the voucher is an effective delivery mechanism..

The report describes the demonstration and the results in recruiting

and enrolling youth, as well as their retention through the first

semester. Periodic sampling of a randomly assigned control group will

help determine whether among income-eligible youth interested in

higher education, the provision of support through CETA makes a

difference. Selection of a comparison group from CETA participants

will suggest whether employment and training programs are more or

less effective .options, as well as helping determine the numbers of

youth currently in CETA who might be reached by this option. To date,

the findings indicate that among economically disadvantaged youth

randomly assigned into experimental and control groups after

screening on the basis of interest and ability, the rate of college

attendance in the first semester is twice as high among experimental

as controls--i.e., suggesting that currently available support for

college education may not be reaching all those in need: and

assisting youth with college enrollment under CETA may prove to be an

effective option. (KC)

MI *********************************************************************4

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document.
V

II II

U S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,

EDUCATION & WELFARE

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM

THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS

4,,,,STATE0 DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE.,,

eSENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

.stEDUCATION POSITION 'OR POLICY
U.S. Department of Labor

Ray Marshall, Secretary

Employment and Training Administration

Ernest G. Green, Assistant Secretary for

Employment and Training Administration

Office of Youth Programs

Material contained in this publication is

in the public domain and may be

reproduced, fully or partially, without

permission of the Federal Government.

Source credit is requested but not

required. Permission is required only

to reproduce any copyrighted material

contained herein.

3
YOUTH KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 5.3

ADVANCED EDUCATION AND TRAINING -

INTERIM REPORT ON THE CAREER

ADVANCEMENT VOUCHER DEMONSTRATION

Clark, Phipps, Clark and Harris

May 1980

4
CETA youth prog: 11 experience or e?

into the labor

an extended dur-.

employability. Th

OVERVIEW

the most part provide short-term work

employment assistance to ease the transition

Very few youth are provided activities of

ed at significally improving future

tends to be on youth who would otherwise fail in the lab ,rket, rather than on the economically

disadvantaged who hay. .1Itivation and ability which will get them

jobs but may leave them Alort of their potential. Usually the

activities are contracted or delivered on a group basis rather than

through a voucher approach which leaves greater individual choice.

Post-secondary and co:".ege education is an allowable but seldom

utilized activity und- CETA. The economic value of the sheepskin,

particularly for minos.A.cy youth, has been well documented -- certainly better documented than the impact of employment and

training services. CETA touches the lives of 45 percent of Black

youth and a fourth of Hispanic youth before they reach their

twenties. Within this group, there are thousands who could

succmdin and benefit from a college or post secondary education,

and thousands among these who will not make it without help despite

the availability of a variety of support programs for college

students from low-income backgrounds. Many colleges and post

secondary institutions offer remedial education to help youth who

may enter with handicaps, and many are suffering from excess

capacity. In other words, there are youth reached by CETA who

might benefit from a college education, who would not otherwise

attain it, and for whom capacity is already available. CETA

services such as college preparation, part-time or summer jobs,

tuition assistance and even, in some special cases, allowances,

might be the most appropriate way to serve these youth, particularly

to prepare them for careers.

The voucher notion is one which has been much discussed relative

to CETA with the hope that it could increase freedom of choice and

reduce paperwork. The GI Bill has demonstrated the basic feasibility

of an educational voucher. It is reasonable to assume that there

might be some success under CETA as well.

The Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration tests whether CETA

eligible youth can be effectively served by support in a college

or post-secondary setting, and whether the voucher is an effective

delivery mechanism. This report describes the demonstration and

the results in recruiting and enrolling youth, as well as their

retention through the first semester. Periodic sampling of a

randomly assigned control group will help determine whether among

income eligible youth interested in higher education, the provision

of support through CETA makes a difference. Selection of a

comparison group from CETA participants will suggest whether

employment and training programs are more or less effective options,

as well as helping determine the numbers of youth currently in

CETA who might be reached by this option.

ii 5
To date, the findings indicate that among economically disadvantaged

youth randomly assigned into experimental and control groups after

screening on the basis of interest and ability, the rate of

college attendance in the first semester is twice as high among

experimental as controls--i.e., su9gesting that currently available

support for college education may not be reaching all those in

need. The first semester dropout rate of the experimentals is

quite low although they are somewhat below the norms for college

entrance according to achievement tests. In other words, assisting college enrollment under CETA may prove to be an effective

option. As yet, there is only tentative evidence, but it suggests

that youth without extra supports or services and with free choice,

fare as well as other experimentals who receive more than

financial assistance.

This volume is one of the products of the "knowledge development" effort implemented under the mandate of the Youth Employment and Demonstration Projects Act of 1977. The knowledge

development effort consists of hundreds of separate research, /

evaluation and demonstration activities which will result in

literally thousands of written products. The activities have N.

been structured from the outset so that each is self-standing

but also interrelated with a host of other activities. The

framework is presented in A Knowledge Development Plan for the

Youth Employment and Demonstration Projects Act of 1977, A Knowledge

Development Plan for the Youth Initiatives Fiscal 1979 and Completing

the Youth Agenda: A Plan for Knowledge Development, Dissemination

and Application in Fiscal 1980.

Information is available or will be coming available from the

various knowledge development activities to help resolve an

almost limitless array of issues, but answers to policy

questions will usually require integration and synthesis from a

number of separate products, which, in turn, will depend on knowledge and availability of these products. A major shortcoming of

past research, evaluation and demonstration activity has been the

failure to organize and disseminate the products adequately to

assure the full exploitation of the findings. The magnitude and

structure of the youth knowledge development effort puts a premium

on organization and dissemination of findings.

As part of its knowledge development mandate, therefore, the Office

of Youth Programs of the Department of Labor will organize, publish

and disseminate the written products of all major research, evaluation

and demonstration activities supported directly by or mounted in

conjunction with the knowledge development effort. Some of the

same products may also be published and disseminated through other

channels, but they will be included in the structured series of

Youth Knowledge Development Reports in order to facilitate access and

integration.

The Youth Knowledge Development Reports, of which this is one, are

divided into twelve broad categories:

iii

6
1. Knowledge D'evel'opment' Framework: The products in this category

are concerned with the structure of knowledge development activities,

the assessment methodologies which are employed, validation of measurement instruments, the translation of knowledge into policy, and the

strategy for disseminating findings.

2. Research on Youth Employment and_ Employability Development:

The products in this category represent analysis of existing data, presentation of findings from new data sources, special studies of dimensions

of youth labor market problems and policy analyses.

3. Program Evaluations: The products in this category include

impact, process and benefit-cost evaluations of youth programs including

the Summer Youth Employment Program, Job Corps, the Young Adult

Conservation Corps, Youth Employment and Training Programs, Youth

Community Conservation and Improvement Projects, and the Targeted Jobs

Tax Credit.

4. Service and Participant Mix: The evaluations and demonstrations

summarized in this category concern the matching of different types of

youth with different service combinations. This involves experiments

with work vs. work plus remediation as treatment options. It also

includes attempts to mix disadvantaged and more affluent partibipants,

as well as youth with older workers.

5. Education and Training Approaches: The products in this

category present the findings of structured experiments to test the

impact and effectiveness of various education and vocational training

approaches including specific education methodologies for the d4.sadvantaged, alternative education approaches and advanced career training.

6. Pre-Employment and Transition Services: The products in this

category present the findings of structured experiments to test the

impact and effectiveness of school-to-work transition activities,

vocational exploration, job-search assistance and other efforts to

better prepare youth for labor market success.

7. Youth Work Experience: The products in this category address

the organization of work activities, their output, productive roles

for youth and the impacts of various employment approaches.

8. Implementation Issues: This category includes crosscutting

analyses of the practical lessons concerning "how-to-do-it." Issues

such as learning curves, replication processes and programmatic

"batting averages" will be addressed under this category, as well as

the comparative advantages of alternative delivery agents.

9. Design and Organizational Alternatives: The products in this

category represent assessments of demonstrations of alternative

program and delivery arrangements such as consolidation, year-round

preparation for summer programming, the use of incentives and multiyear tracking of individuals.

iv
10. Special Needs Groups: The products in this category present

findings on the special problems of and adaptations needed for significant

segments including minorities, young mothers, troubled youth, Indochinese

refugees and the handicapped.

11. Innovative Approaches: The products in this category present

the findings of those activities designed to explore new approaches.

The subjects covered include the Youth Incentive Entitlement Pilot

Projects, private sector initiatives, the national youth service experiment, and energy initiatives in weatherization, low-head hydroelectric

dam restoration, mindpower and the like.

12. Institutional Linkages: The products in this category will

include studies of institutional arrangements and linkages as well as

assessments of demonstration activities to encourage such linkages

with education, volunteer groups, drug abuse agencies and the like.

In each of these knowledge development categories, there will be a

range of discrete demonstration, research and evaluation activities,

focused on different policy, program and analytical issues. For

instance, all experimental demonstration projects have both process

and impact evaluations, frequently undertaken by different evaluation

agents. Findings will be published as they become available so that

there will usually be a series of reports as evidence accumulates.

To organize these products, each publication is classified in one of

the twelve broad knowledge development categories, described in terms

of the more specific issue, activity or cluster of activities to which

it is addressed, with an identifier of the product and what it

represents relative to other products in the demonstration. Hence,

the multiple products under a knowledge development activity are

closely interrelated and the activities in each broad cluster have

significant interconnections.

This volume should be read in conjunction with The Corporate Career

Demonstration, The Upward Bound Summer Program Demonstration, and

An Evaluation of The Job Corps Advanced Career Training Program,

all of which will appear in the "education and training approaches"

category. Information on linkages with colleges and junior colleges

are available in Education - CETA Linkages, Volume III in the

'institutional linkages" category. Finally, information is provided

on college and post-secondary enrollments and the financial support

utilized by low income and minority youth in Findings of the

National Longitudinal Survey of Young Americans, 1979.

ROBERT TAGGART

Administrator

Office of Youth Programs

v
List of Tables

PART I

Chapter I

Chapter II

PART II

Chapter III

Chapter IV

Chapter V

Chapter VI

Chapter VII

Chapter VIII

APPENDICES

Table of Contents

Introduction

Background and Origins of the CAVDP

Page Numbers

1

2

Characteristics of the Five Demonstration

Sites

Implementation of the CAVDP

Overview of Lthplementation

Project Organization and Structure

Recruitment of Participants

Enrollment of Participants in College

Retention During First Semester

CAVD At the End of Its First Semester

A. Preliminary Model for the Education Entitlement Voucher

Program

B. Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project! Final

Guidelines

25

43

44

52

67

117

140

161

166

171

C. Selected Characteristics of CAVDP Experimental and Control

Group Members 212

D. Plan for Creating a CAVDP Camparison Group 233

242

E. List of Colleges Enrolling CAVDP Recruits
LIST OF TABLES

TABLE

II-1 Unemployment Rates of the Five CAVD Sites for

Four Selected Months

11-2 Changes in Population, 1970-1977

11-3 Percent Distribution of Workers, by Type of

Industry, March 1977

11-4 Changes in the Percent Distribution of Workers,

March, 1977 to September, 1977, By Type of

Industry

Sectoral Classification of Industries

Mean Turnover Rates for 12 Core and 8 Periphery

Industries, September, 1978

11-7 Proportion of Workers in Core and Periphery

Industry, March, 1977

PAGE

27

30

33

34

35

36

37

11-8 Selected Characteristics of CAVDP Demonstration 40 Sites

III-1 Completion Rates for ETS Battery and SSHA By 49

Site and Group

111-2 Number of First Wave CAVD Interviews Completed

V-1 How CAVDP Recruits First Heard About the Program

V-2 Ethnicity of CAVD Recruits

V-3 Mean Ages and Standard Deviations of CAVDP Recruits

V-4 Parents Present in the Household of CAVDP

V-5 Size of Household of CAVD Recruits

V-6 Family Income of CAVD Recruits

V-7 Designated Primary Wage Earner

V-8 Percentage of CAVDP Recruits from Families

Receiving Public Assistance by Site

V-9 Number of Previous CETA Positions Held by CAVD

Recruits

vii

10

5.0 68

78

79

81

82

82

84

85

85
TABLE

V-10 Type of Most Recent CETA Program in Which CAVD

Recruits were Enrolled

V-11 Mean GATB Scores of CAVDP Recruits

V-12 Mean STEP Reading Scores for CAVDP Recruits

V-13 Mean Study Habits and Attitudes' Scores of

CAVDP Recruits

V=14 Percentiles of Mean Study Habits and Attitudes

Scores of CAVDP Recruits

V-15 Selected Characteristics of CAVDP and Youth

Work Experience Recruits (April-June, 1976)

V-16 Ethnic Background of CAVDP Freshmen, all College

Freshmen and Freshmen Attending Predominantly

Black Colleges

Page

92

93

95

97

99

103

V-17 Age of CAVDP Freshmen, All College Freshmen 104 and Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black

Colleges

V-18 Mother's Educational Attainment for CAVDP 105

Freshmen, All College Freshmen, and Freshmen

Attending Predominantly Black Colleges

V-19 Father's Educational Attainment for CAVDP 105

Freshmen, All College Freshmen, and Freshmen

Attending Predominantly Black Colleges

V-20 Mother's Exposure to College for 106

CAVDP Freshmen, all College Freshmen Attending

Predominantly Black Colleges

V-21 Father's Exposure to College for CAVDP Freshmen,

all College Freshmen and Freshmen Attending

Predominantly Black Colleges

V-22 Percent Responding "Very Important" to Each of

the Following Reasons in Deciding to go to

College for CAVDP Freshmen, all Freshmen and

Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black Colleges

V-23 Percent Reporting that High School Prepared them

Very Well by Subject for CAVD Freshmen, all

College Freshmen and Freshmen Attending Predominantly

Black Colleges

V-24 Percent Perceiving a Need for Remedial Work by

Subject for CAVDP Freshmen, all College Freshmen,

and Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black Colleges

viii

107

109

110

110
TABLE

V-I5 Percent Who Have Had Remedial Work by Subject for

CAVDP Freshmen, All College Freshmen, & Freshmen

Attending Predominantly Black Colleges.

V-26 Random Assignment of CAVDP Recruits to Experimental 113

Control Groups

Page

111

V-27 Status of CAVD Control Group, October, 1979 114

VI-1 College Enrollment of CAVD Experimental Group 124

VI-2 College Enrollment of CAVDP Youth by Experimental 125

Group

VI-3 Diversity Indices of College Enrollment for Sites and

Experimental Groups

VI-4 Percentage of Schools within Community Distance of

Local Sites Attended by CAVDP participants

VI-5 Means and Standard Deviations of CAVDP Youth

Attending Colleges within Commuting Distance

128

131

133

VI-6 Percentage of CAVDP Recruits Attending College Inside 135

and Outside Commuting Distance

VI-7 Member of Schools, but Type of Degrees Offered

Competitive Rating of Colleges

VII-1 CAVDP Drop-Out by Month and Site

VII-2 Types of First Semester Drop-Outs for Each Site

VII-3 Percentage of Drop-Outs Among Youth Who Were to ReCeive and Not Receive Help in Becoming Integrated into

College Life

VII-4 Percentage of Drop-Outs by Age 147

VII-5 Percentage of Drop-Outs by Ethnicity 148

VII-6 Percentage of Drop-Outs by Parents in Household 148

VII-7 Percentage of Drop-Outs by Public Assistance 149

VII-8 F-Test Comparison of Total GATB Scores Among Drop-Out 151

Types

VII-9 F-Test Comparison of GATB-Verbal Scores Among Drop-Out 152

Types

136

137

141

142

146

ix

12
TABLE PAGE

F-Test Comparison of GATB-Numerical Scores Among Drop- 153

Out Types

F-Test Comparison of GATB-Spatial Scores Among DropOut Types

F-Test Comparison of SSHA Total Orientation Scores

Among Drop-Out Types

155

156

Percentage of Drop-Outs Among Students Attending 158

Competitive and Non-Competitive Schools

Percentage of Drop-Outs Among Students Attending Low 158

and High First Year Drop out Schools
PART I

INTRODUCTION

Chapter I - Background and Origins of the CAVDP

Chapter II - Characteristics of the Five Demonstration Sites

14
CHAPTSR I

BACKGROUND AND ORIGINVOF THE CAVDP

The Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project (CAVD) is

a discretionary funded youth project (under CETA, Title IV, Part

A, Subpart I - YETP) which aims to examine the feasibility and

benefits of providing disadvantaged youths with subsidized fulltime college education for up to two (2) years.

This project is designed to facilitate rigorous research for:

1. Measuring the relative efficiency, effectiveness

and impact of such education as compared to

standard CETA youth programs as a means of

fostering the employment careers of youth.

2. Determining the feasibility and effectiveness

of developing a methodology for identifying

those CETA youth participants who should be

given the opportunity for college education.

3. Assessng the relative effectiveness of alternative arproaches for providing disadvantaged

youth with college opportunity through CETA

programming.

4. Exploring the potential of utilizing non-CETA

resources (e.g. Basic Education Opportunity

Grants, etc.) for supplementing and/or substitution for CETA resources (particularly if youth

plan to further their college education beyond

the two year period of CETA participation).

The demonstration focuses on 16-21 year old YETP eligible youth

who are out-of-school and those youth currently enrolled in CETA

programs who did not exceed eight months of CETA participation

by September 1, 1979. It involves random assignment of youth to

college and standard CETA youth programs in a manner which
3

assures comparability of youth in both types of experiences.

The Department of Labor had also specified various other

research controls to be utilized to test the relative benefits

of: A) alternative screening procedures for selecting a pool

of potential project participants; B) use of a voucher for providing youth with free choice of post-secondary education; and

C) assistance in helping youth become integrated into their

respective colleges.

The CAVD project is operating in five demonstration sites:

Atlanta, Georgia; El Paso, Texas; Little Rock, Arkansas;

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C. It involves a

total of 695 youth, 490 in the experimental group, 205 in a

control group and a yet-to-be-determined number of youth in a

comparison group.

The following is a report on the activities of the Career

Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project for its first funded

year, April 1, 1979 to March 31, 1980.

BACKGROUND OF CAVDP

The Youth Employment and Demonstration Projects Act (YEDPA) of

1977 emphasizes research and experimentation for the purpose of

developing information and knowledge for the formulation of

more effective national policy dealing with structural youth

unemployment.

A major goal of YEDPA is to explore the relative effectiveness

16
4

of alternative approaches for helping disadvantaged youth enter

the world of work and achieve stable employment and job advancement. In light of this goal, it is essential that we recognize

that for education levels' below college, non -white youth unemployment rates are much higher than those for whites. Thus,

acquisition of college education tends to equalize whites and

non-whites in the labor market; in fact, college education

also reduces employment barriers for both groups.

The literature on youth employment clearly shows that lack of

educational credentials--especially a high school diploma, but

increasingly some post-secondary education--limits the entry of

youth into primary labor market jobs. This central fact sets

the goal for the proposed demonstration research project to test

whether providing selected CETA youth with an opportunity to

pursue up to two years of college education will enable these

youth to enter the primary labor market and have more positive

employment and earnings experiences as compared to similar youth

who are served through standard CETA programs for youth.

CETA programs for out-of-school youth tend to be short-term

(less than one year's duration) and focused on work experience.

The smaller portion of CETA programming for youth concentrates

on classroom instruction. However, this activity typically

is designed to provide youth with specific vocational education

courses and/or remedial education, usually not exceeding a

12-month period.

17
5

The above character of CETA youth programs stems from various

circumstances: (1) most unemployed young people applying to

CETA programs have little or no work history and need work

experience in order to develop the proper work habits and

attitudes necessary to secure the employment they seek; (2)

most CETA youth (85 percent) have not completed high school

and read 3-4 grade levels below the last grade completed;

these circumstances, it is felt, limit the intensity of classroom vocational and remedial education which can be provided

to them; and (3) historically, youth programs have been designed

and geared to minimize cost and duration of stay per youth

participant as a means of maximizing the number of youth who

could be served with the limited funds available (CLMS shows

that out-of-school youth in Title I programs were enrolled for

only an average of 18 weeks.1

It is a reasonable assumption that the nature of employment and

earnings outcomes for CETA youth participants will be related

to the character of their CETA activities. In view of this, it

is not surprising that successful CETA youth participants generally can secure jobs only in the secondary labor market.

Few CETA youth make the transition into primary labor market

jobs. Yet, one out of every six youth who apply to CETA have

'Continuous Lon itudinal Man ower Surve Resort No.6,

Washington, D.C.: Office of Policy, Education and Researc

Employment and Training Administration, United States Department

of Labor, August 1977.
graduated from high school, and one out of every twenty obtain

their GED through CETA. 2 These facts offer some perspective for

recognizing that: (1) a significant number of "successful"

CETA youth, who obtain secondary labor market jobs, are significantly underemployed in these jobs; and (2) some special CETA

efforts should be made to provide selected youth with more

intensive/longer-term programs which are designed to help

these youth enter the primary labor market.

A logical program approach for enhancing the prospects of

having CETA youth enter the primary labor market is to provide

selected youth with an opportunity for two years of full-time

college education and appropriate summer work experience. Any

CETA prime sponsor can now implement such a service strategy

but for several reasons this is rarely, if ever, done. First,

these sponsors do not know how to select those youth who can

successfully use college opportunity for their employment

development. Second, no research has been done to determine

whether the payoff in participant outcomes is worth the added

cost of two full years of services for each youth. Third, many

sponsors are not even aware that two years of full-time college

education is a legal and legitimate CETA service approach for

employability development. Fourth, CETA sponsors tend to rely

heavily on program activities which enroll groups or classes

of youth to be served in a single setting as compared to

2Tbid.
7

individual referral for individualized programming at varying

institutions; sponsors generally take actions for administrative ease and to reduce overhead cost.

In view of the above, a special youth demonstration project

which is rigorously designed and researched is valuable in

testing the viability of having selected youth provided an

opportunity through CETA for full-time college education as

a means of preparing them for primary labor market jobs.

However, in implementing such a project, one must recognize

that there are some financial resources beyond CETA which exist

in communities (e.g. Basic Education Opportunity Grants-BEOG's,

etc.) for assisting disadvantaged youth. Therefore, the demonstration project to be undertaken must attempt to utilize

these resources, particularly in the third and fourth years,

should the youth participants desire to matriculate beyond the

two-year period which can be facilitated through CETA programming.

PLANNING HISTORY OF THE PROJECT

In May of 1977, the Washington Star ran an article entitled

"GI Bill Plan for the Poor Being Considered by U.S."3 The

article outlined one of the more popular ideas to emerge from

the YEDPA knowledge development strategies. This idea was

3"1G.I. Bill' Plan for the Poor Being Considered by U.S."

Washington Star, May 24, 1977.

20
8

essentially that young people participating in CETA would

receive an opportunity to pursue post-secondary education in

exchange for their CETA service - that is, CETA participation

would carry with it an educational entitlement. In early 1978,

plans got under way to design an experimental program, which

was called "Education Entitlement Voucher Demonstration Project."

Clark, Phipps, Clark & Harris, Inc., under contract from the

National Department of Labor, presented a preliminary design

for discussion to selected officials at NDOL in July 1978.

The planning effort involved taking a close look at two prototypes which seemed most closely related to the goals of

YEDPA: (1) the G.I. Bill and (2) a demonstration project known

as "Vouchered Skill Training in WIN" which was run in Portland,

Oregon and Baltimore, Maryland.

THE G.I. BILL

The G.I. Bill utilizes the voucher concept by providing the

veteran with financial support for the type of training he

desires. Thus, active duty service in the military has carried

with it the opportunity to obtain post-service education and

training benefits. The individual veteran receives a lump sum

payment which he allocates between tuition and living cost.

Three important features characterize the G.I. Bill: (1) a

substantial monetary entitlement; (2) a long post-service time

span during which to exercise the option (10 ','ears); and (3)

a wide degree of latitude in choosing forms of training:

21
A study published by O'Neill and Ross of the Public Research

Institute4 was particularly valuable in helping shape the CETA

Education Entitlement Plan. The study directly addressed the

question of whether or not veterans use the benefits, particularly minorities and those with limited prior education, and

what is the labor market pay-off. The pertinent conclusions

are summarized by the following points:

1. Trainees- funded by the G.I. Bill increased

their earnings by about 10%.

2. This increase is about twice as great an

increase as has been estimated elsewhere for

non-voucher government programs.

3. Blacks tend to gain relatively more in earnings

from training than non-blacks.

4. Blacks participate in training at a higher

rate than similar whites.

5. Voucher funding produces a greater increase in

earnings than institutional training under the

MDTA program.

The results of this study suggested that the application of

the G.I. Bill concept to CETA youth might indeed be a fruitful

approach for enhancing future employability. The target group

seemed, at least in the context of the G.I. Bill, not only to

take advantage of the training opportunities, but also to

experience a significant pay-off in the labor market.

WIN

Examining the experiences in WIN proved to be quite useful in

4O'Neill, David O. and Ross, Sue Goetz, Voucher Funding of

Training: A Study of the G.I. Bill, Arlington, Virginia: Public

Research Institute, October 1976.

22
- 10 -

establishing the feasibility of the efforts envisioned for CETA

youth. 5 In essence, the WIN program sought to test the feasibility of the introduction of a voucher system for the purchase

of skill training by participants in the Work Incentive Program

(WIN). The overall WIN goal for skill training was permanent

and productive employment for former welfare recipients--an

exit from the secondary labor force, which is characterized by

short-term job tenure and frequent periods of extended unemployment. If feasibility could be established, the WIN voucher concept envisioned a potential for modifying the relati.mships

between public agencies and their clients by introducing purchasing power on the part of the clients. This would permit

clients to select what they needed from a range of services and

a range of vendors. The following outcomes were hypothesized

if board-scale application of the concept could be accomplished.

1. The range of services and vendors available

to clients would be broadened.

2. The possibility of adequately meeting clients'

needs would be increased.

3. Client self-esteem, sense of personal efficacy

and commitment would be increased.

4. The supplier's responsiveness to clients' needs

would be increased.

5. Services would become more effective by increasing

the competition among vendors.

The first phase of this study established the administrative

5Richardson, Ann and sharp, Laura M., The Feasibility of Vouchered Training in WIN: Report on the First Phase of a Study, Washington, D.C.; Bureau of Social Science Research, Inc.

December 1974.

23
feasibility of the program. The following points are pertinent:

1. Clients made decision on occupation and

training institutions and successfully negotiated

admission to training without agency intervention.

2. Voucher cliantdeciaians were "reasonable." In

fact they tended to opt for somewhat higher levels

of occupation, selected a broader range of

occupations, and made occupational choices

which were less sex-typed.

3. Clients and/or schools did not tend to contract

for the maximum training time and money allowable,

as was feared.

4. WIN staff were able to operate within a voucher

system.

5. The voucher system, per se, posed no particular

problems for the schools.

The first model to be developed was based on the foregoing perspectives, and is presented in Appendix A to provide an understanding of the background and origins of the Career Advancement

Voucher Demonstration Project.

REFORMULATION OF THE PROGRAM

The Department of Labor reviewed the initial design and concluded

that it was inappropriate to adapt the WIN-G.I. Bill approach to

CETA programming for three reasons: (1) CETA participation does

not involve the personal sacrifice of time and earnings which

was reflected in military service; (2) G.I. service in defending

the country was not conceptually equivalent to the community

service provided in CETA: (3) CETA programs are geared to be

relatively short-term so as to rapidly move youth into unsubsidized jobs, while veterans would utilize their educational
- 12 -

benefits for purposes which may or may not be tied to seeking

employment; and (4) CETA legislation did not permit encumbrance

of funds for anywhere near the ten year period permitted under

the G.I. Bill.

In order to conduct appropriate demonstration research which

focuses on programming to prqvide CETA youth with opportunities

for college education, a new design had to be developed. The

resulting reformulation involved viewing the college opportunity

as an additional CETA program component--a strategy of individualized employability development which could be implemented

by any CETA prime sponsor under existing CETA regulations.

This approach was developed by examining the nature of current

CETA programming in light of the stated goal which was to

facilitate youth participants' entry into the primary labor

market. These factors have already been described in the first

section of this chapter. The details of this approach are

presented in Appendix B.

Research Design

The Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project addresses

seven major questions.

1. Whether demonstration project participants who

receive an opportunity to attend college for

at least two years will be more likely to enter

the primary labor market and otherwise have

more positive post-program employment c-nd

earnings experiences than comparable CETA

participants who do not receive such an

opportunity.
- 13 -

2. Whether the "human capital" return on the DOL

investment will be greater for project participants than for the control group served through

standard CETA youth operations.

3. Whether free choice for youth in selection of

college and courses through use of a voucher

is more beneficial than having program operators

assist youth and approve such education decisions.

4. Whether demonstration project participants who

receive counseling services which focus on

assisting them with getting involved in college

life will be more likely to persist in college

and implement their career plans.

5. Whether area unemployment rate and other local

conditions interact with post-program participant outcomes.

6. Whether there are criteria which have predictive

validity for selection of participants in similar

future CETA programs.

7. Whether CETA resources can be linked to other

community resources to facilitate college

education for disadvantaged youth.

The following hypotheses will be tested:

1. CETA participants who receive an opportunity to attend

college will be more likely to enter the primary labor

market than comparable CETA participants whb do not

receive such an opportunity.

2. In high unemployment areas the differenr.'es in the rate

of entering the primary labor market between college

.attendees and regular CETA participants will be greater

than in low unemployment areas.

3. CETA participants who have free choice in selection of

college and courses (voucher) will be more likely to

enter the primary labor market than participants whose

educational decisions must be approved by CETA staff.

4. CETA participants who receive assistance with integration

into college life will be more likely to complete their

educational programs than CETA participants who do not.

Additional hypotheses to be tested by this demonstration are:

5. The greater the potential for college work as revealed

26
- 14 -

by test scores, the greater the discrepancy in labor

market attainments between those participants who

receive an opportunity to attend college and those who

do not receive such an opportunity.

6. The greater the involvement of a participant in the

normal life of the college, the more likely that participant will enter the primary labor market.

Selection Criteria

The research design for the CAVD Project is an experimental-control group design. A pccl of youth were recruited in each of

the five demonstration sites according to criteria specified

for that project site.

One of the major purposes of the demonstration project is to

develop a methodology for identifying those CETA youth participants who should be given the opportunity for college education.

Therefore participant selection procedures for creating a pool

of potential project participants was subject to research controls.

Five CETA prime sponsors are participating in the demonstration.

Two of these sponsors (El Paso and Little Rock) utilized their

own criteria for determining which youth will be offered the

college experience. Two other sponsors (Atlanta and Washington)

selected youth by criteria established by CPC&H. One CETA

prime sponsor (Pittsburgh) did not use any criteria at all in

determining which youth were offered the college experience.

The criteria for selection established by CPC&H was the General

Aptitude Test Battery G Score. Regardless of the criteria to

be used in determining which youth were offered the college
- 15 -

experience, all CETA prime sponsors were to recruit a pool of

at least 200 youth between the ages of sixteen and twenty-one

years who met YETP eligibility requirements and who desired and

were available for full-time college work. The program operators were to administer three sub-tests (Aptitude G) of the

General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB), and forward the test

booklets to CPC&H for examination.

The anticipated critical score on the sub-tests of the GATB to

be used as a cut-off for selection into the final pool for two

prime sponsors was G-90. The final pool would consist of 150

youth at each site. The cut-off score of G-90 was selected

based on the literature which reports a significant correlation

between Aptitude G scores and college success. Although G-100

is the established critical score for success in junior college,

it was felt that G-90 could be used in the Career Advancement

Voucher Demonstration Project with only a moderate risk to the

success of the program at junior colleges. This conclusion was

based on two findings. Clark and Pxotkin in a study of black

college students at integrated colleges (1963) found that the

SAT (which correlates highly with the GATB) predicted college

success less well for blacks than for whites. 6 The second reason

is that retest on the GATB (or othez similar tests) raises the

6 , CJark, Kenneth B. and Plotkin, Lawrence, The Negro Student

at Integrated Colleges, New York: National Scholarship Service

and Fund for Negro Students, 1963.

23
- 16 -

score by more than five points. It was believed that CETA

youth have less test experience than other, more privileged,

groups, with the consequence that the GATB score underestimated

their true college potential.

Anticipating that a cut-off score of G-90 might not produce the

number of trainees required for the program and control group,

the final decision concerning the actual cut-off score was made

after an initial group of 50 test scores from each site were

reviewed by CPC&H in early May. An assessment was made

regarding the use of this selection criterion vis-a-vis our

target population and the cut-off score was set at G-80. It is

recognized that this decision increased the risk to program

success.

Experimental and Control Groups

The final determination of which youth would receive the college

experience was done by CPC&H on a random basis. All selected

youth were randomly assigned to one of five groups as follows:

1. Voucher plus Assistance with Involvement in College

Life (N=25) *

2. Voucher plus No Assistance with Involvement in College

Life (N=25)

3. Non-Voucher plus Assistance with Involvement in College

Life (N=25)

4. Non-Voucher plus No Assistance with Involvement in

College Life (N=25)

5 Control Group - regular CETA program (N=50)

* Number assigned to each group in each site.
- 17 -

The one hundred youth comprising the first four groups were to

be enrolled in college. The remaining fifty youth were to be

enrolled in a regular CETA program appropriate to their needs.

The four experimental groups can be visualized as follows:

I

VOUCHER

Assist with

Involvement

N=25

II

VOUCHER

No Assist with

Involvement

N=25

III

NON-VOUCHER

Assist with

Involvement

N=25

IV

NON-VOUCHER

No Assist with

Involvement

N=25

Briefly the four groups differ from one another in the following

way:

I. Voucher (Free Choice) Assist with Involvement

Student has free choice to select college and courses.

Although the counselor shall assist the youth with being

involved in college life after enrollment, the counselor

shall make no efforts to assist the youth with college and

course selections in any way unless specifically requested

by the youth.
- 18 -

II. Voucher/No Assist With Involvement

Student has free choice to select college and courses.

The counselor shall not make any efforts to assist the

youth with being involved with college life. The counselor

shall make no efforts to assist the youth with college and

course selections in any way, unless specifically requested

by the youth.

III. Non-Voucher (No Free Choice) Assist With Involvement

Student shall select a college and courses only after

he/she has received guidance, assistance and approval

from the project counselor. In addition to the overall

academic assistance received from the counselor with

college and course selection, the counselor shall also

actively assist the student in whatever way possible to

become fully involved in college life or campus activities.

IV. Non-Voucher/No Assist With Involvement

Student shall select a college and courses only after he/she

has received guidance, assistance and approval from the

project counselor. Although the counselor shall assist the

student in any way necessary with enrollment and subsequent

course selection and career choices, the counselor shall not

make any effort to assist the youth with being involved with

college life.

This 2 X 2 factorial design implies that the CAVD programs will

be implemented with research controls on two features of college

31
- 19 -

selection and attendance. The first is the voucher (or free

choice) variable. The second is the integration into college

life variable. This, in turn, required local staff understanding of the research variables, and cooperation in the

implementation phase between research and program operators.

Voucher Variable

The Voucher/non-voucher variable is designed to test whether

free choice for youth in selection of colleges and coursework

is more beneficial than having program operators assist youth

and approve educational decisions. Do those youth with autonomy of decision-making with regard to their educational

plans make different career choices than those who do not have

free choice? Are they more likely to persist in college and

implement their career plans? In order to address these questions,

one half of the experimental group for each site will be divided

into those youths who have freedom of choice in the selection

of college and coursework (voucher). The other half of the

experimental group for each site will be those youths who will

select a college and courses only after consultation with and

approval by the project counselor (non-voucher).

Assistance with Integration into College Life Variable

One-half of the youth who were selected to attend college in

this project were assigned to receive special counseling services,

called "assistance with integration into college life." The

other half of youth selected to attend college were not to receive this assistance, but they were not to be hindered in any

effort they made to integrate themselves into college life. It

32
- 20 -

has been estimated that college attrition rates for target

populations like those served by this project is relatively

high--about fifty percent. Therefore, it is appropriate to

try to maximize youths' chances of completing school and subsequently implementing career plans.

Although there are many reasons why youths drop out of school,

studies have identified that a major characteristic of youth

who drop out is that they tend to be persons who were not

involved in the campus life of the college they attended; they

did not participate in any of the many activities which occur

on colilge campuses. The "uninvolved" student is described as

one who does not participate in any extracurricular college

activities, is seldom on campus except to attend classes, and

interacts infrequently with fellow students or. faculty. The

"uninvolved" student has a relatively poor chance of persisting

in college and implementing career plans.?

Several patterns of "involvement" have been identified--interpersonal, academic, athletic--all of which lead to increased

chances of completing college and implementing career objectives.

What seems to happen when students become involved is that they

find peers and associates who give them advice, consultation,

and often, consolation about issues of college life. "Involved"

youths are often better able to bridge the gap between the

values of their own communities and the values of the college

world, when these are different. It has been found that

7Astin, Alexander W., Four Critical Years, San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1977.
- 21 -

"involvement" does not have to be any specific type; it only

needs to be something which brings the student into regular,

stimulating contact and participation with other college students,

faculty, or staff. The decision to implement such a counseling

effort in this project has been based on the above thinking.

It is intended that this counseling effort will stimulate and

assist youths to become comfortable with college because they

are a part of college life.

Some college youth get involved in college life activities on

their own and this project does not seek to hinder any of its

youths from becoming involved. However, it is a goal of the

project to'discover by working closely with fifty youth in each

side if there are identifiable, replicative mechanisms or

practices which will help youth become involved in college life.

The counselors working with the youth who are selected to

receive assistance with integration in college life were given

three basic tasks to perform:

Step 1. "Counselors shall assess the formal and informal

social structures which exist at the colleges

which selected youth will be attending. Participant observation may be one useful method of

making this assessment. Counselors should identify

formal and informal, official or unofficial

college clubs, groups, or organizations (social,

academic, athletic, political, other....).

Counselors should get to know where youth congregate at the college and what the social life

and social fabric is like at each college.

Step 2. Counselors shall assess and evaluate the nature

of each of the fifty youths' interests, needs and

preferences for extracurricular or social activities. This requires that counselors be skilled at

establishing comfortable relationships and rapport

34
- 22 -

with youth. Counselors must also develop, with

the assistance of each youth, ideas about which

college activities would be most stimulating or

interesting to the youth.

Step 3. Counselors and youth shall develop a strategy or

plan for linking each youth with the organizations or groups which have been selected. This

plan may be formal or informal; and active,

innovative methods are encouraged as long as they

are reasonable."8

It was suggested that counselors assigned to assist the fifty

youths should be individuals who are comfortable with active,

non-traditional counseling techniques. Site directors were

encouraged to develop staffing assignments with this in mind.

Data Collection

Data collection in the CAVD project involves the establishment

of baseline measures for each youth in the program, and periodic

follow-up information on both youth who remain in the program

and those who drop out. Accordingly, data are to be collected

eight times during the life of the project and after. These

data collection periods are:

May-June, 1979

August, 1979

January, 1980

May, 1980

August, 1980

January, 1981

May, 1981

October, 1981

May-June, 1979, involved data collection through application

and intake procedures and consisted largely of background and

demographic information. The seven remaining data collection

8"Assistance with Integration into College Life, Discussion

Paper, Glen Cove CAVDP Conference, June 1979.
- 23 -

times, which correspond to the beginning and/or end of semesters,

involve face-to-face interviews conducted with each youth by a

trained CPC&H interviewer using a structured interview guide.

The interviews will allow for the collection of ongoing factual

information such as college courses taken, work experience,

living arrangements, participation in campus activities, etc.

In addition, baseline and time series measures were established

for other variables such as vocational attitudes and preferences,

educational aspirations, occupational aspirations, family roles

and relationships, social and peer group networks, and leisure

time allocations. The objective is to measure change over time

in the experimental and control groups.

In addition to these variables, which will be measured by interviewing the youth in the program, two other data sources are

being developed. One of these sources is qualitative: diaries

kept by a small number of college-enrolled youth.

The qualitative information in these diaries will be used to

shed light on:

- - perceptions of this opportunity in the minds of the

youth

-- hopes for the future

-- perceptions of social support system

- - changes occurring in perceptions of this opportunity

-- involvement in normal life of the school

-- participants' evaluation of their experiences in the

program

- - participants' attitudes toward the program

36
- 24 -

The technique used in this approach will include in-depth

interviews and the use of diaries. Some youth will be selected

and paid to keep an ongoing diary of their experiences in the

program. These diaries will be content-analyzed. With this

qualitative data, CPC&H will be seeking to identify the

structures, processes, and experiences that appear to facilitate

success in the program.

An additional source of data is program records of the project

operators. Both quantitative and qualitative data are being

collected on the program operations. at each site. Reporting

procedures have been developed for the staff that generate

on-going recording of participant information such as class

attendance, wages paid, type of summer job, number of counseling sessions, social services requested, social service provided,

etc.

Intermittently, Project operators are requested to prepare special

reports on certain program operations. For instance, a special

report on recruitment, another on enrollment, and a special

counseling report have been requested from project operators.

Process evaluations of program operations can be developed from

this type of information.
- 25 -

CHAPTER II

Characteristics of the Five Demonstration Sites

Just as there was planned variation in two variables affecting

college selection and completion, the CAVDP also planned variation among the sites in which the demonstration would be carried

out. One of the variations involved selection of a Job Corps,

rather than a CETA site. This variation, however, could not

be carried out for administrative reasons. In any multiplesite demonstration there are bound to be differences from one

site to another. Thus, the research task became one of

identifying and attempting to control a few key site variables

so that the effect of context upon the outcomes of the CAVDP

could be systematically assessed.

This chapter presents a general profile of each of the five

demonstration sites, with particular attention to the economics

of each site. Since the project is concerned with entry into

the labor market, it was reasoned that the major contextual

influences upon the variables to be studied would stem from

the economic structure of each of the cities involved in the

project.

Planned Variation in the Sites

There are two kinds of planned variation among the five sites:

(1) criteria for selection into the program; and (2) unemployment

rate.

38
- 26 -

Selection Criteria

As noted in the previous chapter, two of the five sites were to

use their own criteria in deciding who should be given the

opportunity to attend college; two other sites were to utilize

a GATB score of eighty or higher; and the remaining site was to

have no criteria at all. The reasoning involved in this variation has already been explained in Chapter I (cf. pp.I-13,1-15).

As noted in that chapter, Atlanta, Georgia, and Washington, D.C.

utilized the GATB criterion; El Paso, Texas and Little Rock,

Arkansas developed their own criteria; while Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania utilized no criteria.

Unemployment Rate

Since entry into the labor market is heavily controlled by the

number and variety of job openings, it is logical to assume that

the ease or difficulty youth have in finding employment varies

according to the unemployment rates. Accordingly, was originally planned to locate the CAVDP in at least two cities with

high unemployment rates, and at least two cities with low unemployment rates.

For purposes of the CAVDP, high unemployment was defined as a

city with an unemployment rate in October, 1978 of at least 6.8%.

Low unemployment was defined at the rate no higher than 3.6% in

October, 1978. These two cut-off points are one standard deviation from the mean unemployment rate of 5.2% for 204 selected
- 27 -

metropolitan areas in October of 1978 (see: Bureau of Labor

Statistics, "State and Metropolitan Area Unemployment: October,

1978," News, United States Labor Department, Washington, D.C.:

USDL 78-1024, December 18, 1978).

For a variety of programmatic, political and organizational

reasons, only one of the twenty-seven high unemployment areas,

according to this definition, could be included in the study.

That site is El Paso, Texas. At the same time, and for the

same set of reasons, none of the thirty low unemployment areas

could be included in the study.

Nevertheless, as Table II-1 shows, there is considerable variation

in unemployment rates among the five selected sites. This table

provides the unemployment rates for selected months for each of

the five sites.

TABLE II-1

UNEMPLOYMENT RATES OF THE FIVE CAVD SITES FOR FOUR SELECTED MONTHS

Month

5MSA

Little

Atlanta El Paso Rock Pittsburgh Washington

Octobez; i977 6.9 11.0 4.2 5.9 4.8

September, 1978 5.9 9.2 5.5 6.1 4.5

ptember, 1979 4.5 7.4 4.5 5.7 4.3

Octher, 1979 4.6 7.0 4.5 6.9 4.2

4 0
- 28

Between October, 1977 and October, 1979 there was a decreasing

unemployment rate in three of the sites; in Little Rock and

Pittsburgh the rates fluctuated, but overall increased slightly.

Despite this, the relative positions of the five sites with

respect to unemployment remained the same. A Friedman two-way

analysis of variance shows statistically significant consistency (less than .01) in the unemployment rankings of the five

sites from month to month.

We shall, for purposes of this demonstration, consider El Paso

and Pittsburgh as high unemployment sites, and the remaining

f_nree sites (Atlanta, Little Rock and Washington) as low unemployment sites. The planned variation in the five sites is

summarized in the chart below. Examination of the effects of

these contextual variables will be done through analyses of

variance and covariance.

Site

Planned Variation in Sites

Selection Criteria Unemployment

Atlanta GATB low

El Paso own high

Little Rock own low

Pittsburgh none high

Washington GATB low
- 29

A Profile of Each of the Sites

In this section we shall present a brief economic profile of

each of the project sites. The data used are for the various

Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs). It should be

pointed out that the target areas of the project sites are not

necessarily identical to the SMSAs. In Atlanta, Pittsburgh and

Washington,D.C., most of the CAVDP youth are drawn from the

center cities, while the SMSAs include large populated suburban

and other urban areas. On the other hand, the Little Rock

CAVDP target area includes two sparsely populated counties not

included in the SMSA. Further, as a border town, El Paso is

unique: although linked geographically and economically to

Cuidad Juarez, Mexico, data are included on El Paso County

only--which is coterminous with the CAVDP target area. Despite

these drawbacks, SMSA data provide the best available information.

42
- 30 -

TABLE 11-2

CHANGES IN POPULATION, 1970-1977

Estimated Population

SMSA

Atlanta El Paso

Little

Rock

Pittsburgh

Washington

July 1, 1977 1,831,500 434,700 369,200 2,294,500 3,033,100

Percent Change,

1970 to 1977 14.8 21.0 14.2 -4.5 4.2

Percent Migration

1970 to 1977 7.1 6.9 6.1 -5.6 -2.0

Table 11-2 includes some population characteristics of the five sites.

As estimated by the Census Bureau for July 1, 1977, the SMSAs range

in size from less than 400,000 in the case of Little Rock, to over

three million in the case of Washington, D.C. The areas also show

considerable variation in the growth rates: the population of El Paso

increased twenty-one percent between 1970 and 1977, while at the other

extreme the Pittsburgh area has shown a decline of nearly five percent. In both Pittsburgh and Washington, out-migration has exceeded

in-migration, although a higher birth rate in Washington has resulted

in a minimal overall increase in the population size.

One can expect that SMSAs will vary by the types of jobs available

and by the general availability of jobs. Thus, where differences

in SMSAs are found, because of the costs of geographic mobility, the

ability of CAVD and control group to enter primary labor markets will
- 31 -

TABLE I1-3

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF WORKERS, BY TYPE OF INDUSTRY

MARCH, 1977

Type of Industry

SMSA

Atlanta El Paso

Little

Rock

Pittsburgh

Washington

Agricultural

Services 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2

Mining 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.5 0.1

Contract

Construction 5.1 6.4 5.4 5.6 5.2

Manufacturing 16.4 21.0 19.0 26.6 4.2

Transportation and

Other Public

Utilities 9.1 5.9 6.1 5.0 4.1

Wholesale Trade 9.4 5.8 7.1 5.0 3.2

Retail Trade 17.4 19.7 15.9 15.5 16.0

Finance, Insurance

and Real Estate 7.1 4.4 6.3 5.1 5.9

Services 18.8 15.9 18.3 18.8 23.4

Government 16.3 20.4 21.2 16.8 37.7

Non-Classified 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Total 100.1 99.9 100.2 100.1 100.1

Total Number

of Workers 813,034 139,418 161,512 912,901 1,391,231

Ratio Workers to

Estimated

Population .444 .321 .437 .398 .459

44
-32-

be affected by the city in which they live. Several measures of

the differences in the SMSAs are included. First, Table 11-3

shows the percent distribution of workers by type of industry in

March, 1977. Data were taken from "County Business Patterns" and

from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates of the number

of governmental workers. Considerable variation can be found

between sites. Washington is particularly unique in its high proportion of workers engaged in manufacture. The presence of the

steel industry gives Pittsburgh a particularly high proportion of

workers in manufacturing. For its part, Atlanta may be viewed

as a regional center. This is reflected in the higher proportions

of workers in wholesale trade and finance, compared to the other

sites. In addition, Atlanta ranks highest in the percent of

business establishements that are the national or regional administrative or auxiliary offices of larger firms (1.8% of the

establishments in Atlanta are of this type, compared to 0.8% in

Little Rock and 1.0% in the other three sites). As a state

capital, Little Rock has a large proportion of governMental

workers, and also it has relatively large proportions engaged in

wholesale trade and finance (though less than in the case of

Atlanta). El Paso is over-represented in the construf-tion, manufacturing, retail trade and governmental categories.

Table 11-3 also presents the ratio of number of workers to the

estimated population. El Paso and Pittsburgh have considerably

lower ratios than Washington, Atlanta and Little Rock. One factor

that partly explains this is the difference in the unemployment
- 33 -

rates of the sites (Table II-1). However, it may also be suggested that part of the variation is due to the presence or

absence of jobs traditionally held by women (for example, the

abundance of clerical and other white collar jobs in the federal

government may increase the proportion of employed women in

Washington). If this is so, we must consider that a young woman

in Pittsburgh or El Paso will have greater difficulty in obtaining

employment than will her counterpart in Washington, Little Rock

or Atlanta.

There is also some concern over shifts in the economic structure

of the SMSAs over time. Using BLS estimates for September, 1979

Table 11-4 shows changes in employment over a thirty month

period. The greatest shift occurs in Pittsburgh, where there has

been a considerable decre-se in the proportion of governmental

workers. With this exception, shifts over this limited time

period appear to be minor.

A major concern of this project is to determine whether the CAVD

program improved a youth's opportunity to find employment in the

primary, as opposed to the secondary, labor market. In order to

determine whether the five sites differ in any way with respect

to the distribution of such markets, a model developed by E.M.

Beck, et.al. 1 was utilized. These authors argue that each industry can be identified as belonging either to the "core" sector

1E.M. Beck, Patric Horan and Charles M. Tolbert, II, "Stratification in a Dual Economy: A Sectoral Model of Earnings Determination," American Sociological Review 43 (October 1978)pp.704-20.

4G
TABLE 11-4

CHANGES IN THE PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF WORKERS/ MARCH, 1977 TO SEPTEMBER, 1977,

BY TYPE OF INDUSTRY

SMSA

Atlanta El Paso little Rock Pittsburgh Washington

Dalpdustry 1977 1979 1977 1979 1977 1979 1977 1979 1977 1979

Contract Construction 5.1 4.3 6.4 5.0 5.4 5.5 5.6 5,4 5.2 5,4

Manufacturing 16,4 16.0 21.1 20.1 19,1 17.7 26.7 26,9 4.2 3.6

Transportation and

.1N Other Public

Utilities 9.2 9.2 5.9 6.8 6,1 6,9 5.0 6.2 4.1 4.6

Wholesale and

Retail Trade 26.9 27,4 25.6 25,3 23.0 23.5 20,5 22.6 19.2 19.2

Finance, Insurance

and Real Estate 7.1 7.2 4,4 4.8 6.3 6.9 5,1 4.7 5.9 6.0

Services and Mining 19.0 18.4 16.2 16.7 18.7 19,3 20.3 22.0 23.6 25.6

Government 16.3 17.4 20.5 21.3 21.3 20.2 16,8 12.2 37.8 35.5

Total Number

Workers (1,000s) 809.8 867.3 139.0 155.2 160.9 178.6 911.3 947.7 1,387,2 1,478.9

t, 43
35

TABLE II 5

SECTORAL CLASSIFICATION OF INDUSTRIES

Core Sector Periphery Sector

Mining

Construction

Durable manufacturing

Stone, clay and glass products

Metal industries

Machinery, except electrical

Electrical machinery, equipment,

and supplies

Transportation equipment

Professional and photographic

equipment, and watches

Ordnance

Nondurable manufacturing

Paper and allied products

Printing, publishing and allied

industries

Chemicals and allied products

Petroleum and coal products

Rubber and miscellaneous products

Transportation

Communications

Utilities and sanitary services

Wholesale trade

Finance, insurance, and real estate

Professional and related services

Public administration

Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries

Durable manufacturing

Lumber and wood products,

except furniture

Furniture and fixtures

Miscellaneous durable manufacturing

Nondurable manufacturing

Food and kindred products

Tobacco manufactures

Textile mill products

Apparel and other fabricated

textile products

Leather and leather products

Not specified nondurable manufacturing

Retail trade

Business and repair services

Personal services

Entertainment and recreation

services

4O
-36-

TABLE 11-6

MEAN TURNOVER RATES FOR 12 CORE AND 8 PERIPHERY INDUSTRIES,

SEPTEMBER, 1978

Accession Rates Separation Rates

Type New Lay

Industry Total Hires Recalls Other Tbtal Quits Offs Other

Core 3.8 3.1 0.5 0.2 3.8 2.3 0.6 0.9

Periphery 6.8 5.6 1.0 0.2 6.8 4.6 1.0 1.2

or to the "periphery" sector of the economy and that structural

conditions are such that primary labor markets develop in core

industries and secondary markets will be found in periphery

industries (see Table 11-5 for the classification of the

industries). To test the value of the sector concept we compared the turnover rates of twelve core and eight periphery

industries during an arbitrarily-selected month (September, 1978).

According to dual labor market theory, a major difference between primary and secondary labor markets is that the former

is much more stable, with lower turnover rates among workers

when compared to the latter. If the sector model has validity,

we would expect the core industries to have, on the average,

/lower turnover rates than the periphery. As can be seen in

Table 11-6, this expected relationship does hold: both mean

separation and accession rates are 6.8 for periphery industries

and 3.8 for the core industries.
-37-

TABLE 11-7

PROPORTION OF WORKERS IN CORE AND PERIPHERY INDUSTRIES,

MARCH, 1977.

SMSA

Atlanta El Paso

Little

Pock Pittsburgh Washington

(re Industries 69.0 59.2 72.6 76.8 74.2

Periphery

Industries 30.7 40.8 27.2 23.2 25.7

Undetermined 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1

Table 11-7 compares the five sites in terms of the percentage

of jobs in the two sectors. It shows, in effect, the size of

the primary labor market of each site. Two of five jobs in

El Paso County are in peripheral industries, compared to only

about one in four in the Pittsburgh, Washington and Little Rock

SMSAs. El Paso's high periphery industry rate is due largely

to a high proportion of jobs in periphery manufacturing firms,

while Atlanta's disproportionately high periphery rate can be

attributed to a large grouping of jobs in periphery service

industries.

Monthly turnover rates in manufacturing industries only are

available for three of the five sites--Atlanta, Little Rock

and Pittsburgh. Of the five sites, Pittsburgh has the highest

proportion of manufacturing jobs in the core sector (93.0 percent) and this SMSA consistently shows tlItczO.owest separation

rate over a six-month period. However, while Little Rock has

a higher proportion of core manufacturing jobs than Atlanta

(74.3 percent vs. 69.4 percent), Little Rock's separation rate

51
- 38 -

tended to be higher than Atlanta's. On closer examination, the

industries listed by Beck, et al. as belonging to the core

sector show considerable variance in separation rates (for one

month the rates ranged from 2.3 to 6.0), suggesting that the

primary labor market may be more completely developed in some

of the industries than in others. Thus, it may be that the

core industries that are predominant in Little Rock are less

developed--in terms of its internal labor markets--than is the

case in Atlanta. Clearly, a more detailed analysis of the industrial make-up of the SMSAs is necessary to examine this issue.

One additional factor that might be considered is differences

in income. With respect to average hourly earnings of those in

manufacturing, there is considerable variation, ranging from a

low of $4.94 in El Paso to a high of $8.69 in Pittsburgh, with

Wasthington at $7.41 and Atlanta and Little Rock at about $6.00.

However, these differences must be interpreted in light of the

fact that the cost of living also varies between cities. For

example, BLS's estimate of a lower budget of a four person

family in Washington is nearly $2,000 higher than that for the

same family in Atlanta, with Pittsburgh's being intermediate

between the two. Unfortunately, no estimates are available for

El Paso or Little Rock. However, given the differences in the

cost of living for different areas, comparisons across sites

of the wages of our control and experimental group youth could

result in misleading conclusions.

This analysis of the economy of each of the five demonstration

52
- 39 -

sites is obviously not complete. Future analyses will locate

the pool of CAVDP recruits in the economy of each of the cities.

An overview of the data is presented in Table 11-8. In brief,

each of the demonstration cities may be characterized as follows:

Atlanta, Georgia - This is the most "typical" of the five demonstration sites in that it holds the median position on most

of the measures presented in Table 11-8. As a regional business center, Atlanta's economy is a diversified one, but is

concentrated in wholesale and retail trade and services. The

fact that it is a growing business center is shown in its

in-migration rate which is the highest of the five demonstration

sites. Youth in the CAVDP should have only modest difficulty

in finding a place in the primary.labor market.

El Paso, Texas - Interestingly, El Paso shows a continuing inmigration of population despite its high unemployment rate.

Although it has a diversified economy, it ranks the lowest on

those measures (ratio of workers to population, percentage of

workers in core industries, average hourly earnings, unemployment rate) which are thought to reflect the strength of the

economy. CAVDP participants in El Paso will, perhaps, have the

most difficult time in finding a place in the primary labor market.

Little Rock, Arkansas - This is the smallest of the five demonstration sites. It is much like Atlanta in that its economy

is diversified and is moderately strong compared to the other

53
TABLE 11-8

SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF CAVDP DEMONSTRATION SITES

POPULATION NOR % MIGRATION RATIO OF WORKERS

SITE JULY, ;1977 INDUSTRY 1970 - 1977 TO POPULATION

Atlanta, GA 1,831,500 diversified + 7.1 .444

El Paso, Tex 434,100 diversified + 6.9 .321

Little Pock, Ark. 369,200 diversified + 6.1 .437

Pittsburgh, PA 2,294,500 manufacturing - 5,6 .398

Washington, DC 3,033,100 government - 2.0 .459

54

AVERAGE

% WIMIRS IN HOURLY

CORE INDUS/32S EARNINGS

69,0

59.2

$6.09

$4.94 t

72,6 $5.88

76.8 $8.69

74.2 $7.41
- 41 -

demonstration sites. Although it is a state capital, government

does not seem to dominate this city, for a majority of its workers are in manufacturing, retail trade and services. Like

Atlanta, CAVDP participants should experience only modest difficulty in finding a spot in the primary labor market.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - Of the five demonstration sites, Pittsvlurgh is clearly the one whose economy is dominated by manufacturing. Given the high proportion of its jobs in the primary labor

market, Pittsburgh's high unemployment rate was unexpected. This

is due, no doubt, to the depressed state of the steel industry.

Pittsburgh's high unemployment rate may be expected to continue,

as steelworkers are still being laid off. These factors indicate

limited opportunities available in the primary labor market for

CAVDP students, especially since these' youth were not selected

for their college potential.

Washington, D.C. - Is the largest of the demonstration sites, and

least like any other city in the nation. Curiously, it is

experiencing an out-migration of population, despite its relatively high wage structure and low unemployment rate. It is

presumed that the out-migration is due to non- economic factors

of central city crime, declining services and accessibility of

the suburbs. It would seem that the primary labor market is more

available to CAVDP Participants than for the other four sites.

As stated at the end of the previous section of this chapter,

the influence of these and other variables upon the outcomes of

the CAVD project will be examined through analysis of variance

and covariance.

5'
PART II

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CAVDP

CHAPTER III - Overview of Implementation

CHAPTER IV - Project Organization and Structure

CHAPTER V - Recruitment of Participants

CHAPTER VI - Enrollment of Participants in College

CHAPTER VII - Retention During the First Semester

CHAPTER VIII - CAVD At the End of Its First Semester

57
-44-

CHAPTER III

Overview of Implementation

Representatives of the local CETA operations in the five sites

and their Federal Representatives assembled in Washington, D.C.

on April 3, 1979. Here, probably for the first time, they heard

the major details of the Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration

Project. They responded enthusiastically to the idea of adding

a liberal arts component to the CETA array of programs. Most

of the questions raised by those present at this meeting were

directed to the administrative arrangements for the additional

funds which the CAVD project would bring. The prevailing sentiment seemed to be that if these administrative procedures could

be clarified, the project could be implemented according to its

design. Although some reservations were expressed about either

some of the research requirements of the project, or the feasibility of implementing the program, the general view was that

these were problems which CETA always confronted and usually

surmounted.
Implementation Tasks

Williams and Elmore (1976) (as cited by Patton, 1978) suggest

that:

"The failure to focus on implementation has blighted

not only program administration but also policy research and analysis. In the former case, policy

ideas that seemed reasonable and compelling when

decisions were made often have become badly flawed

and ineffective programs as they drifted down the

bureaucratic process. It is not just that the

programs fall short of the early rhetoric that

described them; they often barely work at all.

Ignoring implementation has been equally disastrous

for research and analysis. Indeed, it is possible

that past analysis and research that ignored implementation issues may have asked the wrong questions,

thereby producing information of little or no use

in policy-making."1

Certainly a look at the implementation phase of the CAVD project

is imperative in a research study such as this one, the outcomes

of which can have a far reaching influence on the direction of

policy for youth employment and training programs.

The difficulties involved in making the program a reality cannot

be overstated. With colleges due to open in late August or

early September, the local CETA operatives had less than five

months to build a program from nothing.

The implementation tasks of the CAVD project included:

1. Creating a local staff to carry -out the program.

2. Recruiting at least 200 youth who met the

eligibility requirements for the project.

1Patton, Michael Quinn, Utilization-Focused Evaluation

Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1978, p.152.

59
-46-

3. Enrolling 100 of these youth in local colleges

and 50 in an appropriate CETA program.

4. Developing supportive services for the youth

enrolled in college.

5. Establishing monitoring and reporting systems

for the project.

Although the fifth task was the primary responsibility of the

central research agent, the remaining tasks were the primary

responsibility of the local CETA sponsors. Of the five tasks,

the most important, by far, were the first three. Unless

these were accomplished in a timely fashion, there would be

no CAVD project. All of these tasks, especially the first

three, were successfully accomplished.

Content of the Chapter in this Section

Although local hiring procedures delayed the hiring of some

staffs until early Fall, the local CETA programs were able to

hire some staff and reassign other staff to carry out the

crucial steps of recruitment and enrollment of youth. The way

in which the local CAVD programs are organized is described in

Chapter IV. Also discussed in this chapter are the kinds of

relationships that have evolved among the local CETA operations,

the respective regional representatives, the National Office

of the Department of Labor, and the central research agent.

60
-47-

Between April 3, 1979 and June 22, 1979 the five local

CETA sponsors recruited a total of 721 YETP eligible youth.

This involved contacting and processing over 1000 youth. This

could not have been accomplished without extensive outreach

activities, primarily on the part of the local CAVD directors.

The methods used to recruit youth, and the kinds of youth

recruited are described in Chapter V. The methods and kinds

of youth recruited raise a crucial question as to whether

the CAVD youth are typical of CETA youth in general. Chapter V

also examines this issue, and offers some new thoughts on the

kinds of youth that are recruited into CETA programs. Finally,

the chapter notes a failure to implement a crucial aspect of the

original research design. Control croup youth failed to enroll

in CETA programs. Accordingly, an adjustment was made in the

design of the project to providg, for the essential comparison

of the consequences of a college vs. a CETA experience.

Between June 22, 1979 and September 1, 1979 the local

CAVD projects enrolled a total of 440 youth in 62 post-secondary

institutions. Chapter VI describes the kind of colleges and

post-secondary institutions in which CAVD youth were enrolled.

The procedures used to enroll youth in less than three months

are examined, and note is taken of the effect of vouchers upon

enrollment, and the satisfaction of the youth with the colleges

in which they enrolled.
-48-

Thus, this part of the report examines how the CAVD project was

transformed from an idea to an operating program. Most social

policy research concerns itself only with the outcome of the

data without much consideration given to testing the presumed

courses of those outcomes. That this research project is attempting to look at the implementation process should be encouraging,

in that there will be some reference upon which to reflect when

analyzing the outcomes of the study. All too often the ability

to implement program ideas is taken for granted. Yet, as we

shall see, bringing a program into existence confronts program

staff with a number of problems and ambiguities. That these

problems and ambiguities were resolved is a testimony to the

hard work, dedication and professional competence of the local

CAVD staffs.

Data Collection

This report contains data collected and compiled in three separate

phases since the beginning of the CAVDP.2

1. Intake data collected during recruitment

(April 1979-June 1979).

2. Educational Testing Service pre-tests and the

Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (July 1979).

3. Wave I face to face interviews conducted by

CPC&H personnel with all members of the experimental and control groups.

2 Tables reflecting this data throughout the report sometimes

show slight variation in sample sizes due to missing data for

some youth on certain variables.

62
-49-

Intake Phase

During the recruitment phase of CAVDP, the Central Research Agent

compiled basic demographic and background data on all youth

recruits. This included extensive employment history as well as

family background information regarding employment and education.

The source for this was the intake form used by the local prime

sponsors and a supplementary guide supplied by CPC&H to the

local projects.

In addition the GATB test was administered to all youth during

this phase, and in El Paso the SSHA was administered.

ETS and SSHA

In July of 1979, the Central Research Agent visited each project

site and administered a battery of pre-tests and the STEP reading

test required by the Educational Testing Service. Personnel

from the local project sites were requested to assist in scheduling CAVDP participants for administration of the pre-tests.

The following set of measures were administered: Vocational

Attitude Scale (VA), Job Knowledge (JK), Job Holding Skills (JHS),

Work Relevant Attitudes Inventory (WRAI), Job Seeking Skills (JSS),

Sex Stereotypes of Adult Occupations (SSAO), and Self Esteem (SE).

The Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (SSHA) was administered

at this time in Atlanta, Little Rock, Pittsburgh and Washington,

D.C. El Paso had given the SSHA during recruitment.

Table III-1 shows the completion rates by site for the ETS

battery and the SSHA.

6°
-50

TABLE III-1

COMPLETION RATES FOR ETS BATTERY AND SSHA BY SITE AND GROUP

( % )

Site ETS SSHA

Atlanta Experimental 66.3 66.3

Control 66.7 66.7

El Paso Experimental 91.9 100.

Control 48 100

Pittsburgh Experimental 81.7 81.7

Control 55.6 19

Washington,D.C. Experimental 73.7 73.7

Control 18.4 18.4

Wave I

Wave I data collection was conducted in August and September for

members of the experimental group in all five sites. The control

group data collection for Wave I was done during September and

October. This phase consisted of a face to face interview

conducted with each youth by a trained interviewer from Clark,

Phipps, Clark & Harris, Inc. Table 111-2 shows completion rates

by site for First Wave Interviews.

64
TABLE 111-2

Number of First Wave CAL Interviews Completed

Etperimetal Groups

Control

I II 1 III IP Group Totals

Site Tested Total Tested Total Tested Total Tested Total Tested Total Tested Total

AtlantaliGal 17 21 15 21 19 23 19 24 24 34 94 123

El hoop Tex. 27 27 25 28 28 28 27 28 42 50 149 161

Little Rock, Ark. 25 26 24 26 25 26 26 26 22 47 122 1511

Pittsburgh, Penn, 23 24 17 21 23 23 19 20 17 22 99 110 "ej Washington,, D.C. 24 27 22 24 23 25 21 22 20 52 110 150

Totals 116 125 103 12() 1 118 125

Completion Rates 92.8% 85,8% I 94,4%

112 120 1 125 205 1 574 695

93.3%

I 61.0% I 824%

66
CHAPTER IV

PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STRUCTURE

The previous chapter described the variety of tasks which

had to be accomplished in order to turn the idea of a Career

Advancement Voucher Project into an actual program. In this

chapter we will describe the first of those tasks. This was

creating an organization in each of the five sites to carry

out the tasks of recruitment, enrollment, development of

services and an administrative system.

Creating an effective organization is a complex undertaking.

Individuals with the requisite skills must be assembled, their

relations with each other and clientele specified, and rela-

.tionships forged with the relevant organizations in the program's

domain of activity. This chapter is divided into two sections.

The first describes the internal structure of the local CAVDP

projects. The second describes the relationship between the

local project and the key organizations in its domain of activity.

67
- 53.

BASIC STAFFING PLAN AND ORGANIZATION

The final Guidelines briefly addressed the issue of comparability

of staffing patterns among the five demonstration project sites.

Recognizing that some variation in staffing...may be appropriate", the guidelines concluded that a staff of "...four

counselors, clerical help, and a project director would appear

necessary for each project". 1 Specific task analyses for

these positions were not outlined by the central research agent

or the National Office of the Department of Labor (NDOL) to

the project sites. The Closest indicator of expectations of

project staffs was reflected in one sentence: "Counselors

to work with youths, and a supervisor of each demonstration site

are necessary".

2 Also discussed verbally was the need for

clerical help. The basic organizational structure that was envisioned is shown in the Table of Organization on the next oage.

It was felt by the central research agent that implementation of

the research variables would be facilitated by having a single

counselor responsible for each experimental group. In order to

allow counselors to concentrate upon counseling, a records clerk

was also suggested as a way of relieving the counselors and the

Director of the burden of maintaining detailed records. It was

also felt that the creation of such a position would remind the

local projects that they were involved in a research demonstration

project.

1Final Guidelines, Appendix B, p. 37.

2Ibid.

63
Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project

Basic Organization

CAVDP

Director

..........0mommtle..ovadoft040014111000,

Secretary

MINIIIMMINIONIMmthe

Records

Clerk

111.11,106401104010111111.1111101i'14uire Aufte44.10A

or.

Counselor

(Group I)

Counselor

(Group II)

MP 10441110141101111fterontiftiomoirmesomerrema.

sualirtmlb.

Counselor

(Group III)

69
Variations in Staffing

The basic organization and staffing of the local projects seem

to be well developed. The experience of .all the local prime

sponsors in creating new programs suggests knowledge of the types

of personnel n^eded to fulfill certain tasks. As part of the CETA

system the prime sponsors were familiar with the process of translating project goals into specific activities. While nearly all

of the sites have at least the skeleton staffing pattern of four

counselors and project director, there are variations among the

cities. Pittsburgh shares clerical staff with other CETA Youth

Employment Programs. There are four counselors in Pittsburgh. One

has been designated as "Lead worker". Atlanta and Little Rock have

five counselors with one designated as a "head or chief" counselor.

The head counselors are responsible for assuring that the counselor

complete neces_ary statistical form.; or provide appropriate information to the records clerk so that it can be consolidated and sent

to the central research agent. They also assume responsibility for

the project in the absence of the project director and fill in for

counselors in their absence.

Two of the five sites--El Paso, and Little Rock have statisticians

or MIS technicians in place of the Records clerk. The functions of

these technicians is to collect and submit monthly statistical

project information and qualitacive reports to the central research

agent. This function is performed by individuals designated as

"head counselor" or "Lead worker" in Atlanta and Pittsburgh.
-56-

Although the project secretaries and MIS technicians, where

they exist, are directly supervised by the project directors;

in Little Rock, the secretary and MIS technician are directly

responsible to the office of the CETA director.

Finally, the basic secretarial tasks in Atlanta are performed

by the subcontracting agency (see next section) as part of

its overhead expenses. Thus, Atlanta does not have a project

secretary as such.

Job Descriptions

While local project directors are only bound by their own

hiring policies within their prime sponsor areas and are free

to select counselors of varying knowledge, skills and abilities,

the central research agent articulated certain general expectations

of counselors that were felt to be nece3sary for effective implementation and follow-through of the variables.

The variables (voucher/college involvement; non-voucher/college

involvement; non-voucher/no college involvement) were explained

to and discussed with the project directors and counselors at

the Glen Cove Conference--June 23, 1979 in individual site

training sessions when staff was hired, and at the Little Rock

Conference--October 18, 1979. Copies of discussion papers that

recapitulated the presentations made by CPC&H staff members were

distributed to project operators and counselors.
-57-

Counselors shall be knowledgeable of "(1) participating

colleges; (2) career objectives of participants; (3) programs

offered at each college including financial aid, student

organizations, and specific course requirements in various

career fields in order to assist their youth and implement

the variables of voucher vs. non-voucher. 3

3 Career Advancement Vou,9ar Demonstration Project, Discussion

of the Voucher/Non-Vouci.tar Variable, Glen Cove Conference,

June 22, 1979, p.2.

'12
The counselors who work with those participants who were

selected to receive assistance with integration in college

life (or college involvement vs. no college involvement

variable) have three basic tasks to perform: A) "Counselors

shall assess the formal and informal social structures which

exist at the colleges which selected youths [are] attending.

B) Counselors shall assess and evaluate the nature of each

of the [fifty] youths' interests, needs, and preferences for

extra-curricular or social activities. C) Counselors and

youths shall develop a strategy or plan for linking each youth

up with the organizations or groups which have been selected." 4

There has been no specifically expressed expectations shared

by the central research agent with the project staffs regarding

remedial and support services. Each site has developed remedial

services according to its budget and the needs of the students.

Since all participants are eligible for support services, as

they were defined in the discussion paper presented at the

Glen Cove Conference, no tasks have been outlined for the

counselors in the dmmaopent of these services other than the

documentation of each time a participant requests or is

offered support services.

These generalized expectations were not translated by the

central research agent into specific job descriptions, however. Such a translation was left to the local prime sponsors.

In general, each project transformed the basic ideas into jobs

4 Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project, Discussion

of Assistance with Integration in College Life Variable,

Glen Cove Conference, June 22, 1979, p. 3.

73
59 -

that meshed with their own local requirements. An example

of the job descriptions that were developed is given below.

Group I Counselor (Voucher Integration):

To work with a group designated as the free choice,

assist with college involvement. Students in this

group will select the college and their classes on

their own. The free choice arrangement will be

implemented through the use of a voucher. Counselor

will assist students in this group with college

involvement by providing special stimulation by

assessing the formal and informal structure at the

local college and assess the nature of the youth's

interest and affinities and extracurricular options

available at his or her college. Counselor will

develop innovative active and genuine approaches

to linking each youth up with appropriate structures

at the college. Counselor will provide supportive

services as needed. Social support services will

include assistance in health, housing, day-care,

educational, income, personal and family counseling.

Counselor will spot check and verify classroom

attendance and deliver time cards to student's worksite. Counselor will hold routine meetings with

their group and individual .7,nd assess and monitor

educational progress and -,.Loring where

necessary. Counselor will r.ertorm all tasks as

assigned by program directcyr:,

Group II Counselor (Voucher Only):

To work with a group designated the free cho:;,e,

no-assist with college ivo2v.aent. Students in

this group will select ti..5t cc.:.lege and their c3 'asses

on their own. The free c *-ce arrangement wil e

implemented through the us-. of a voucher. Ccuilor

will provide supportive services as needed 3.r-e7,10.ing

assistance in heath, housing, day-care, edu7-htioal,

thcome, personal and family counseling. Cou..sf?1:5

will provide information concerning involvement in

college life only if such information is requested

by the student. counselor will spot chrIX and verify

classroom attendance and deliver time card:: to students

worksits, Counselor will hold routine meetings with

their group and individuals and assess and monitor

educational progress and set up tutoring where necessary.

Counselor will perform all tasks as assigned by program d::.rector.

74
-60-

Group III Counselor (Integration Only):

To work with a group designated as non-voucher.

(No freedom of choice), assist with college involvement. Counselor will approve the choice of

college and all classes taken by students in this

group. Counselor will assa;t. students through the

registration process and rerAA.ution of any

educationally related issues. Counselor will

assist students in this group with college involvement

by providing special stimution by assessing the

formal and informal struct,::.:es at the local college

and assess the nature of the youth's interest and

affinities and extracurricular options available

at his or her college. Counselor will develop innovative, active and genuine approaches to linking

each student up with approriate structures at the

college. Counselor will povide supportive services

as needed including assistance in :ealth, housing,

day-care, educational, peroonal and family

counseling. Counselor will spot Olack and verify

classroom attendance and deliver 4,ime cards.to student's

worksite. Counselor wil: ho.:1 routine meetings with

their group and individualz %ssess and monitor

educational progress and set v tutoring where necessary. Counselor will perform all tasks as assigned

by program director.

Group IV Counselor (Neither Voucher nor Integration):

To work with a group de$Lgnated as non-voucher

(no freedom of choice!. Counselor will approve

the choice of college and all classes taken by

students through the registration process and

resolution of any educationally related issues.

Counselor will provide supportive services as

needed including assistance in health, housing,

day-care, educational, income, personal and family

counseling. Counselor will provide information

concerning involvement in college life only if

such information is requested by the student.

Counselor will spot check and verify classroom

attendance and deliver time cards to students worksite. Counselor will ;.old routine meetings with

pertaining group and individuals and assess and

monitor educational progress and set up tutoring

where necessary. Counselor will perform all tasks

as assigned by program director.

Background of Staff

These job descriptions imply staff who have had counseling

experience, especially at the college level. As was generally
-61-

true of the organizational aspects of the CAVDP, job

qualifications were left to the discretion of the local projects.

Most of the staff hired had extensive iounseling background

and experience. In many instances this experience had been acquired within the CETA system, but also included were high

school and college career counselors, a manpower specialist, school

teachers, and community activists. Fourteen of the persons hired

had bachelors degrees, three had advance degrees (including one

doctorate), with several working on them. What seems to characterize

the counselors as a group, is skill and experience in working with

youth.

Relationships with Other DOL Components

The fact that the basic internal organization of the local sponsors is similar does not mean that the five sites are carbon

copies of each other. Each site is unique. This uniqueness

flows out of each projects' relationship to its local CETA

organization, its regional office, and the leadership style of

the Project Director.

The geographic and organizational location of the CAVDP in the

five project sites suggest varying degrees of autonomy from CETA.

The Atlanta - CAVD program is housed in the offices of The Negro

Scholarship Service Fund for Negro Students (NSS-FNS). NSS-FNS

is a subcontractor of Atlanta CETA and consequently has more

autonomy from CETA. Three of the five sites are semi-autonomous

from CETA programs in their prime sponsors areas. 'They are

Little Rock, EL Paso, and Washington, DC. Pittsburgh's program

has been subsumed under the umbrella of youth employment and

76
- 62-

training program and is perceived of and operated as any other CETA

youth program.'

The location of Atlanta CAVD within NSS-FNS, (an agency designed

to offer supportive services to minority college students), near

the Atlanta University complex offers a convenience to the

students as well as a strong linkage to the educational

community.

El Paso-CAVD is located on the campus of the University of Texas

where a number of participants attend college. This location

psychologically removes the CAVDP from the rest of El Paso CETA

and piovides for an identification with the University community.

Little Rock-CAVD is located in a modern commercial bank office

building in downtown Little Rock, not far from the Central

Arkansas CETA programs.

Washington, D.C.-CAVD was housed in the D.C. Dept. of Labor

Office of Program Planning. Recently the D.C.-CAVD moved to

their own offices which offers them more space and a separate

identity.

Pittsburgh-CAVD had been housed in the Office of the Mayor but

it too, recently moved to be housed with the other CETA youth

programs.

From the above descriptions, it is clear that the local CAVDP's

identification varies from site to site. Some are clearly more

closely identified with CETA and others are more closely identified with the educational community and its surrounding community.

77
- 6 3 -

Each project site has regular contact with the Regional

Federal Representative assigned to that city. The "Fed Reps"

visit their respective CAVDP occassionally and provide

technical assistance where necessary. As CAVD moved into the

implementation phase, the involvement of the "Fed Reps" seemed

to increase, although some "Fed Reps" have been actively

involved since the onset of CAVD.

The variance in involvement can be based on a variety of

factors:

1) The low priority status given the CAVDP in the Federal

Regions.

2) The channels of communication between the Central

Research Agent and the Regional Offices were not

established until after the implementation phase

had begun.

3) The personal interest of the Regional Federal Representative.

It is difficult for the central research agent (see org. chart)

to address its own relationship with each of the project sites.

It is clearly in a non-objective position when doing so. Yet,

in certain respects, the central research agent takes on the

role of field representative of NDOL. Thus, it does not relate

to the sites in the "ordinary" manner of researchers and program

staff.

Each project site has a Program Liaison assigned to it by the

central research agent (CPC&H). The Program Liaison is available to assist project directors and counselors with implementing

the variables according to the research design.

'73
CENTRAL RESEARCH AGENT

Organizational Chart for CAVDP

Data _1

Processing

Consultant

Research

Assistant

Project Director

Ass't Project Director Administrative

Assistant

Research

Director

Field

Coordinator

ipiwomme

Research

Assistant

Research

Assistant

Program

Liaison

Program

Liaison

(06
-65-

That Program Liaison is also responsible for observing and

discussing any obstacles that may impede or prevent the

project directors from complying with the Final Guidelines

or subsequent policies that have evolved as the project has

progressed from design to reality.

The central research agent has not been as effective in establishing

as open and positive relationship as it desires. There are

several possible reasons for this ineffective communication between

project sites and CPC&H. Among them are:

1) The ambiguities in the nature of the relationship between

Central Research Agent and each project site.

2) Unstable and unsatisfactory communication system between

Central Research Agent and project sites.

3) A general assumption on the part of the Central Research

Agent that the nature of the research is understood by

all.

4) Lack of expeditious feedback from data collection activities.

5) The Central Research Agent's struggle to maintain its

autonomy 5nd objectivity by not becoming identified as

neither an advocate for the project sites nor a monitoring

arm of NDOL.

Numerous attempts have been made to correct this situation. More

direction from NDOL has been solicited. A meeting of the Project

Directors was held to discuss the upcoming year and on-going

activities. An information dissemination system has been installed

which feeds information to the NDOL, regional offices as well as

the local project directors/prime sponsors.

Overall, while the internal structure of the projects is quite

strong, the external relations of the project appear to need

clarification. The project is a creature of the NDOL and the

central research agent. In the process of creating it, the

81
- 66 -

Federal Representatives played virtually no role. Yet, the

project is viewed as a potential addition to CETA's array of

programs. As such, CAVDP will have to flow through the

regional offices, as do other CETA programs. This means

adjusting the program to regional procedures and regulations.

The current manner in which the local sites relate to their

respective regional offices does not particularly facilitate

learning how to fit the CAVDP into the existing CETA system.

A final word must be added about the fit between CAVDP and

CETA. This section has identified that the projects relate

to their local CETA system in different ways. In particular

there seems to be pressure within each CAVDP site to divorce

itself from the rest of CETA. Some sites have achieved this

to a considerable degree, while other sites have achieved it

not at all. Although intended to be a part of CETA, the CAVDP

is quite different than the other CETA programs. The variation

from site to site in the ties between CAVDP and CETA provides

an opportunity to develop some ideas about the structural

location within CETA that facilitates best the successful implementation and goal attainment of this new venture in DOL youth

program.
- 67 r.

CHAPTER V

RECRUITMENT OF PARTICIPANTS

The previous chapter has documented the fact that assembling

a staff was problematic for all of the local sites, except

Atlanta. Each local CETA prime sponsor was to recruit about

200 youth, of whom 150 would be selected for either the experimental or the control group. These youth had to be recruited

between April 3, 1979 and approximately June 15, 1979. Recruiting so many youth in such a short time ire likey to strain

any staff. But, as the previous chapter has documented, the

local prime sponsors, with the exception of Atlanta, were not

able to assemble their CAVD staff until well into the summer

or beyond. The Atlanta CAVD staff, ironically, as a subcontractor

to the local CETA operation was not directly respoi.sible for

recruitment. This was the responsibility of the Atlanta CETA.

Thus, all of the projects had to undertake recruitment with

either a skeleton CAVD staff or through staff loaned to them

by other CETA programs. Despite this formidable barrier, recruitment was succesfully carried out in most sites. How

this was done and its consequences is the subject of this chapter.

Sources of Recruitment

As Table V-1 shows, there were three major sources of recruitment

Most CAVDP recruits were recruited by the staff or their local

83
-68-

high school. Most of these recruiters were local high school

guidance counselors. The second major source of recruitment

was local CAVDP staff. The third major source was local CETA

staff. Much smaller proportions of youth were told about the

CAVDP by relatives (especially mothers,) friends, and the mass

media, including flyers.

The three major recruitment sources were not equally used by

the five sites. As Table V-1 shows, recruitment by high school

teachers and guidance counselors characterized the efforts of

Atlanta and El Paso. Such recruitment, however, was not prominent

in Pittsburgh or Washington. Washington, along. with Little Rock,

did most of its recruiting through the local CAVD staff; and

Pittsburgh recruited more of its participants through the

local CETA staff than did any other site.

The figures in Table V-1 mask most of the recruitment story,

however. We will now take a closer look at recruitment. We

shall see the local CAVDP staff were very active in finding youth.
-69-

TABLE V-1

How CAVDP Recruits First Heard About the Program *

Source Atlanta El Paso Rock Pittsburgh Washington All Sites

N=94 N=150 N= 123 N= 99 N= 117 N= 583

CAVDP Staff 5% 3% 28% 5% 33% 15%

CETA Staff 9 1 8 23 9 9

School Staff 72 72 46 35 21 50

Friend 2 10 9 8 9 8

Relative - 2 5 6 9 4

Mass Media 2 1 1 - 4 2

Other 10 11 3 23 15 12

* data source: CAVDP Wave I interviews

85
-70 -

Procedure Used In Recruitment

As has been implied in the foregoing, the specific recruitment

techniques utilized varied front site to site. To a large extent

each site relied upon channels of rc7rviitment that were known

and available to them, or that they felt would yield a sufficient

number of candidates in a relatively short time. This makes it

difficult to describe recruitment in general. It is also

difficult to judge whether one recruitment strategy is superior

to another, for the recruitment resources were not the same for

each site.

Although some sites were more suc,Jessful than other sites in

recruiting youth into the CAVDP, relative success seemed less

relatsd tD recruitment strategies than to CETA organizational

strengths and 'veaknesses. Rather than attempt to cull a master

recruitment plan from the activities of the five sites, we shall

describe what was done in each site. We will then comment upon

some of the successes and failures in recruitment as they appear

to the central research agent.

Atlanta

Atlanta used CETA counselors who were assigned to area high.

schools. These counselors screened and selected youth who expressed an interest in attending college under this program.

The youth were then referred to CETA for certification. Youth

recruited for the program in Atlanta were to: (1) have a high

school diploma or GED; (2) be between the ages of 16 and 21 years

old; (3) have no more than eight months CETA program participation;

(4) have a GATB test score of 80 or better, in addition to having
-71-

a desire to attend college; and (5) be YETP eligible.

El Paso

El Paso also recruited from CETA roFters and . igh schools. Also,

various media were used to inform the communi' about the project.

Public service ads were printed in the two local .%ewspapers -

The El Paso Herald Post and the El Paso Times one Cz only.

Public service announcements we rriven to all radix- !tions.

Some stations made announcements f1.1,. or six times

others only once. There were no an;c.!..ncements made ,elevision. The El Paso-CAVD project fourL direct recruitment

from high schools was the most effective method, while newspaper

ads were least effective.

In adCition to meeting YETP eligibility requirements, each

applicant was required to submit the following documents:

(1) birth certifiate of all people living in household.

(2) proof of income_

(3) utility receipts or rent stubs

(4) GED certificate, high school diploma or letter of

verification of graduation.

(5) social security card

(6) legal aliens must provide r,1,.gisi:ration card

(1) four(4) letters of recommendation

(8) high school transcript

(9) official SAT and/or ACT scores

(10) GATB test (provided by CETA)

(11) CAVD - supplementary questionnaire
- 72 -

Little Rock

The Project Director in Little Rock contacted the superintendent

of schools and requested a meating to present the program. The

superintendent of the schools rgreed to contact the high school

principals and inform them about the project. This created

entry for the Project Director, who visited each school to

speak with principals and guidance counselors. The major problem encountered by the Project Director in this phase of recruitent

was the mixed reactions of the guidance counselors. Some viewed

it as a waste of the taxpayers money. Te circumvent the resistance

for the counselors, the Project Director contacted the Youth Director.

Other methods used to recruit participants for the Little Rock

CAVD Project included public service ar%ounc, Tents over the radio,

announcements to currently CETA-funded youth agencies, announcements in churches, and announcements in youth organizations. The

most effective methods were announcements to c'hools and CETAfunded youth agencies. The least effective waz the public service

announcements.

The criteria for recruitment into the Little Rock CAVD project

were that youth must meet YETP eligibility and have at least

a "C" average in high school. Once a youth WbS determint.-4. to be

eligible, based on criteria set by the site, the Projec: Director

contacted the parents of each youth in the project a:1d explained

the nature of the project and answered any questions they might

have had about it.

88
- 73 -

Pittsburgh

The major method of recruitment for Pittsburgh was from youth

who were applying to the city for other CETA employment programs.

The two counselors charged with the responsibility of recruiting

students in Pittsburgh had to, in effect, compete with other

programs that offered more immediate gratification.

In addition to recruiting from CETA applicants, the Pittsburgh

staff contacted local community youth programs, distributed

mimeographed flyers in the downtown area, a major record store,

and several boys' clubs. Public service announcements were made

over the black-oriented radio station in Pittsburgh. The only

criteria in Pittsburgh was that the youth have either a high

school diploma or GED and that they meet the YETP eligibility

requirements. Even with these minimal criteria, Pittsburgh had

difficulty recruiting enough youth to complete the sample pool

requested by the central research agent. Many of their young

people did not see college as a worthwhile pursuit.

Washington

The Washington, D.C. project used various methods for recruiting

youth for the project. The Project Director contacted the

Employment Service in the D.C.-Department of Labor, and the

mini-employment centers in the high schools. High school principals and guidance counselots were contacted by telephone. Telephone contact was made with the Upward Bound Programs at Georgetown,

Trinity and Howard Universities. The Robert Morton Center, an

educational opportunities center that specializes in providing

assistance to black youths with application and enrollment in
- 74 -

primarily Southern black colleges, was also contacted. Contact

was made with Catholic high schools tough the Archdiocese of the

District of Columbia. Contact was also mad,... with PRIDE, Inc.- a

youth group in D.C. that promotes education of black youth. A

newspaper ad announcing the grant was published in the newspaper,

and public service announcements were made on the three "soul"

stations in D.C..

The most effective resources were the high school counselors and

the Catholic high schools. The radio announcements were also

a good resource. The least effective resource was the Upward

Bound programs. Most of the youth in the Upward Bound programs

had been accepted to college before the deadline set in the

Final Guidelines or had planned to attend college outside of

the D.C. area. The Employment Service did refer young people

to the project.

Youth who had a GATB schore of 80 or above, who had a high school

diploma or GED, and who met YETP eligib-iity requirements were

recruited for the program. Sore youth wl-o did not have a high

school diploma, but who were to graduate in June of 1979 were

also accepted into the project.

Problems & Success with Recruitment

Providing disadvantaged youth, who might otherwise go into a

short-term job training grogram or be unemployed upon completion

of high school, with an opportunity to attend college, is a positive value shared by all involved in this project. There was

varying success in bringing that value into the realm of a

functional realii..y.
Little Rock did not have any major problems with recruitment.

The nature and composition of the Consortium necessitated a great

deal of time and travel in order to inform the total target

population of the project. The great success of the recruitment

process was inherent in the approach. Initial contact with

schools was very easy. The youth organizations readily cooperated

and were very supportive. The project operation in Little Rock

feels that this approach was most effective and would repeat

the process.

Pittsburgh had difficulty finding youth interested in attending

college. Many youngsters wanted jobs. The Pittsburgh staff tried

a "hard sell" approach in an attempt to convince young people who

were applying for summer jobs or training programs that college

was a worthwhile alternative. The recruitment process was hectic

and unstructured. The CAVD recruitment was intermeshed with other

on-going responsibilities of the two youth counselors charged

with that responsibility.

Internal organization also impacted on the ability of the Pittsburgh

project to recruit participants. The staff was in the process of

moving to a new location in the midst of the recruitment process.

This created chaos which had a negative impact on the effectiveness

of the recruitment phase of the project.

Logistics wexe a significant problem in the recruitment phase

for Washington. Testing and certification of youths was done

through the Office of Employment Service of D.C. - DOL because

the Washington project is operated by the Program Planning and

Analysis Staff which is not a service delivery division in D.C. - DOL.

91
Since Atlanta's project is subcontracted to an organization

with a well-developed expertise in selecting minority youth

with potential and sending them to college, there was, not

surprisingly, an attempt to put this expertise into practice.

High school transcripts were initially used as a selection criteria and seventy three potential participants were screened out

of the sample pool. According to the research guidelines, only

GATE scores were to be used as criteria, consequently those youth

were included during the final testing phase in Atlanta.

El Paso had problems with the limited time available to plan,

organize, and advertise for the project. Another problem, was

that the students had to fill out applications, be certified,

tested, then randomly assigned to experimental groups. It was

suggested that a more efficient procedure might have been to

have the students complete the applications, be certified, be

randomly assigned to control and experimental groups, and then

tested. Testing was a very hectic and time consuming process

since it was required before random selection could occur.

Although there was a limited time for recruitment, El Paso managed

to get over 200 youth to apply for the project. More wanted to

apply after the closing date.

92
Type of Youth Recruited

One consequence of the differences in recruitment strategies may be

differences in the kind of youth recruited. The previous section

has identified many differences and some similarities in the recruitment strategies used by the five sites. It is relevant, therefore

to inquire into the differences, if any, among the pool of youth

recruited for the CAVDP by each CETA prime sponsor.

We will have to be cautious, however, in inferring that differences

in the pool of youth from one site to another are consequences of

recruitment. The cities, themselves, differ in a number of ways

(see Chapter II), so that differences in the pool of youth may

also reflect differences in the cities themselves.

More important, however, than trying to determine the causes

of differences among the recruits in the demonstration sites

is assessing whether the youth in the CAVDP are typical of the

kinds of youth recruited into CETA. If there are significant

differences in background, capabilities and motivations of the

CAVDP youth compared to the normal CETA recruit, then the subsequent accomplishments of the CAVDP youth, no matter how laudable, may have little relevance to CETA policy and programming.

We shall begin this section with an examination of the differences

in the youth recruited by each local prime sponsor. This comparison will be made along five dimensions: (1) demography; (2) household and family composition; (3) economic variables; (4) previous

experience with CETA; and (5) educational background and capabilities.

93
- 78 -

After these comparisons, we will compare the CAVDP recruits

with regular CETA participants on selcected variables. At the

same time, we will also see how the CAVDP recruits compare to a

cross-section of American college freshmen and CETA recruits.

Demographic Comparison

Examination of standard background variables revealed no differences

in sex or marital status among the recruits of the five demonstration sites; but differences in ethnicity and age.

As could be expected, nearly all of the CAVDP recruits (98%)

are single. But, as was not anticipated, nearly two-thirds (64%)

are female.

The differences in the ethnic composition of the CAVDP recruits

from site to site are shown in Table V-2. Nearly all (92%) of

the El Paso recruits are Hispanic, while nearly all of the Atlanta

and Washington recruits (97% and 94%, respectively) are Black.

Little Rock and Pitt: -burgh have a small minority of white enrollees, but they tell have a preponderance of Black participants.

Overall, about one-fourth of the CAVDP recruits are Hispanid,

mainly Chicano, while seven out of ten are Black. These differences) in the ethnic make-up of the recruits in the five sites

basically reflect the ethnic composition of the five cities.
TABLE V-2

ETHNICITY OF CAVD

(%)

RECRUITS

LITTLE

ETHNICITY' ATLANTA EL PASO ROCK'PITTSBURGH WASHINGTON ALL SITES

N= 112 N=161 N=148 N= 109 N= 143 N= 673

White 2% 4% 12% 11% - 6%

Black 97 2 88 85 94 70

Hispanic - 92 - 2 5 23

Other 1 2 - 2 1 1
-8U .-

TABLE V-3

MEAN AGES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF

CAVDP RECRUITS *

Atlanta El Paso

Little

Rock Pittsburgh Washington

N=113 N=160 N=148 N=108 N=148

Mean Age 18.1 18.7 18.5 19.0 19.0

Standard 0.62 0.84 0.81 1.27 1.25

Deviation

* data taken from local CAVDP intake records

Despite the relatively narrow (16-21) age eligibility criteria

'ior the CAVDP, Table V-3 shows that there are differences in

theages4.:of recruits in the various cities. Atlanta recruits are younger than the recruits in the other four sites,

while the Pittsburgh and Washington recruits are older. The

difference in the mean age of Atlanta recruits compared to all

of the other sites is statistically significant above the.001

level, while the differences for Pittsburgh and Washington are

significant at the...05 level or better. It appears that these

age differences reflect differences in recruitment. Atlanta,

and to a lesser extent. Little Rock, concentrated upon recruiting in high schools, while the other three cities, especially

Pittsburgh and Washington, did so to a much lesser extent.
-81-

In summary, the differences among the cities in the ethnicity

and ages of their recruits reflect both locale and recruitment strategy. The differneces in the ethnic composition of

the recruits parallel the cities in which they live. But the

differences in age appear to be a function O the channels

through which they were recruited.

Household and Family Composition

Table V -'5 shows that El Paso recruits are from larger households (P less than .01). The other differences in Table V-4

are not statistically significant. The larger households in

El Paso are directly related to family size. Not only are a -

majority of El Paso recruits from households with more than

five members, but a majority are also from households with more

than five related persons.

Differences also exist in the proportion of recruits from intact homes. Pittsburgh recruits are much more likely to come

from homes where neither bather nor mother are present, while

Washington recruits are from homes which are characterized by

the absence of the father. On the other hand, recruits from

Atlanta and El Paso are much more likely than the remaining

three sites to come from intact homes. The data are presented in Table V-4.

Again, these differences appear to reflect both the demographics

of the five sites and recruitment. El Paso's population appears

to have larger households and families than Atlanta, Little Rock,

Pittsburgh or Washington: hence, the larger households of

El Paso recruits.

9.7
The differences in the proportion of intact families, however, probably reflect the greater concentration in Pittsburgh

upon CETA sources for recruits. Since CETA attempts to serve

disadvantaged youth, it is likely to have in its programs

and on its rosters a higher than normal number of youth from

families where one or both parents are not present.

TABLE V-4

Parents Present in the Household of CAVDP

Recruits*

Little

Parent Present Atlanta El Paso Rock PittsbUrgh, Wahhington A11 Sites

N=121 N=161 N=151 N=114 N=151 N=698

Both Parents 47% 61% 40% 20% 29% 41%

Father Only 3 6 1 2 3 3

Mother Only 33 26 37 43 45 36

Neither 17 6 22 35 23 20

* data taken from local CAVDP intake records

Economic Status

Since youth had to be YETP eligible in order to participate in

the CAVDP, virtually all of the recruits (97%) are economically

disadvantaged. Some youth, however, are more disadvantaged than

others. Table V-6 shows that the recruits from Pittsburgh and

Washington are frompoorer families than the other three sites.

98
-83 -

TABLE V -5'

Size of Household of CAVD Recruits*

(%)

Number of Little

Washington All Site Atlanta El Paso Rock Pittsburgh Household Members

Five or fewer

members

More than five

members

N=111 N=161 N=149 N=111

59% 47% 53% 65%

41 53 47 35

N=145

60%

40

N=676

56%

44

* data taken from local CAVDP intake records

TABLE V-6

Family Income of CAVD Recruits*

(%)

Family Income

Little

Washington All Sites Atlanta El Paso Rock Pittsburgh

N=104 N=149 N=142 N=49 N=78 N=522

$4500 or

less 17% 37% 39%. 45%' 55% 37%

$4501 or 62 44 36 27 27 41 less

$9001 or 21 19 25 29 18 22 more

* data taken from local CAVDP intake records

99
-84-

About half of the recruits in these two cities are from families whose income :lc less that $4500 per year. On the other

hand, Atlanta rc' are slightly better off. About three

out of five rec in this city are from families whose

income is betwee, and $9000.

Further insight into economic situations of the CAVDP

participants can be gleaned from. Table V-7, which shows the

primary wage-earner t. each family. In Pittsburgh and Washington the primary wage-earner is less likely to be the father.

This undoubtedly reflects the fact that fathers of recruits in

these two cities are less likely to be present in the home (cf.

Table V-4). In Pittsburgh, the recruit, himself or herself,

is inclined to take up this slack. While in Washington, the

primary wage-earner role appears to be dispersed among several

family members. The low family income in Washington and, especially, Pittsburgh, then, appears to be the result of other family

members being unable to compensate for lost income due to. the

absence of the father.

For many low income families, public assistance provides an

economic base. Table V-8 shows a very high rate of public

assistance for Pittsburgh recruits, and a relatively low rate

for Atlanta recruits. In the light of previous information

presented in this subsection, it is surprising not to find a

higher rate of public assistance among Washington recruits.

The reason for this is unknown, and will be investigated further.
- 85 -

TABLE V-7

Designated Primary Wage Earner

CAVD Recruits *

(.%)

Primary Wage Atlanta El Paso Little Rock Pittsburgh Washington

Earner

N=103 N=155 N=143 N=107 N=144

Mother 41 23 41 48 47

Father 51 59 31 21 24

Other 7 7 14 11 15

Self 4 10 14 21 15

All Sites

N=652

39

37

11

13

*data taken form local CAVDP intake records
86e.

TABLE V-8

Percentage of CAVDP Recruits from Families Receiving Public

Assistance by Site (*)

Little

Atlanta El Paso Rock Pittsburgh Washington All Sites

17.7-1-Yr 14.7171 171-7=INI N = 1114 N - 151

Receiving

Public

Assistance 8% 37% 34% 58% 20% 30%

( * ) data taken from local CAVDP intake records

The difference in the economic status of the recruits in the

five sites appears to be a consequence of recruitment activity.

As noted earlier, Pittsburgh and Washington were less likely to

concentrate their recruitment efforts in the local high schools.

TABLE V-9

Number of Previous CETA Positions Held by CAVD Recuits (*)

(%)

Little

Number Atlanta El Paso Rock Pittsburgh Washington All Sites

Previous

CETA 171-z-rur N - 159 17-7-174 N - 108 N - 635

Positions

0 74% 36% 53% 27% 64% 50%

1 13 47 32 44 23 33

2 7 14 12 24 9 13

3 6 3 3 3 2 3

4 - - - 2 2 1

(*) data taken from loofa CAVDP intake records
There is an implicit bias in the criteria which educational personnel use to determine who is "good college material." This bias

operates in such a way that the poorest youth do not generally get

selected for college opportunities. It is likely that substantial

numbers of poor youth would be recvaited by Pittsburgh and Washington since their recruitment strategy did not involve high

school personnel to such a large extent.

Previous Contact with CETA

Information presented earlier (Table V-1) shows that one of the

sources of recruitment was other CETA programs. In this subsection, we shall examine a little more closely recruits' prior

contact with CETA.

103
-88

One may recall from Table V-1 that in Pittsburgh, local CETA

staff was the major recruitment resource for CAVDP participants.

It is not surprising, therefore, that, as Table V-9 shows,

burgh was more likely than any of the other four sites to have

recruits who had had prior experience with CETA. Nearly threefourths of the CAVDP recruits in Pittsburgh had previously held

one or more CETA positions. Surprisingly, however, the site

which also recruited a large number of previous CETA participants

was El Paso. This is surprising because El Paso concentrated

its recruitment upon the local high schools, and actually

under-recruited through the local CETA staff.

Atlanta and Washington, according to Table V-09, were least

likely to have former CETA enrolees among its CAVDP recruits.

In Atlanta, three-fourths and in Washington nearly two-thirds,

of the CAVDP recruits had not been enrolled in CETA prior to

being recruited by CAVDP.

A comparison of Tables V-1 and V-9 shows only a modest relationship between recruitment source and the proportion of prior

CETA participants in the CAVDP. Apparently, there was relatively little dipping into a pool of CETA "regulars" to find

recruits for the CAVDP. This is supported by additional data

The average length of time in CETA for those who had been

104
-89 -

previously enrolled in CETA was about six months. The length

of time was significantly higher in El Paso. (7.9 months);

and significantly shorter in Pittsburgh (3.4 months) and Little

Rock (4.4 months).

Educational Background and Capabilities

One of the eligibility requirements for the CAVDP is possession

of a high school diploma or GED certificate. Many of the youth

recruited were still in high school. But, all, with the exception of one recruit, obtained the necessary eligibility document before the end of the summer. Most, of course, obtained

it upon completion of high school in June.

For all but a very small minority (four percent), the eligibility

criteria was met by possession of a high school diploma. In

two cities, Atlanta and Pittsburgh, nine percent of the CAVDP

recruits had GEDs instead of high school diplomas; while in

the remaining sites, the percentage of recruits with GEDs was

virtually nonexistent (one or two percent). Thus, completion

of secondary education, one of the eligibility criteria for the

CAVDP, was met in the conventional way.

105
-90 -

Of great concern for any program sending youth to college is

the academic proficiency of their recruits. The academic proficiency of the CAVDP recruits was measured by the GATB The

General Aptitude Test Battery. This series of tests was developed

by the United States Employment Service and has been used since

1947 by State employment service offices. The battery measures

nine aptitudes, of which four were administered to all CAVDP

applicants shortly after they were declared YETP eligible by the

local prime sponsor. These were: Aptitude G - Intelligence:

General learning ability; the ability to "catch on" or understand instructions and underlying principles; the ability to

reason and make judgments.

Aptitude V - Verbal Aptitude: The ability to understand meaning

of words and to use them effectively; the ability to comprehend

language, to understand relationships between words and to understand meanings of whole sentences and paragraphs.

Aptitude N - Numerical aptitude: Ability to perform arithmetic

operations quickly and accurately.

Aptitude S - Spatial Aptitude: Ability to think visually of

geometric forms and to comprehend the two-dimensional representation of three-dimensional objects; the ability to recognize

the relationships resulting from the movement of objects in

space.

In two sites, Atlanta and Washington, it may be recalled,

Aptitude G was used to determine who might be able to profit

from a college education. The mean scores obtained by the

recruits on the four aptitudes, which were measured, is shown

in Table V-11. Overall, the academic proficiency of the CAVDP
-91

recruits is lower (89.6) than that deemed necessary for a

successful college experience. Table V-11 'also shows fairly

consistent differences among the sites in the scores of recruits on this test. El Paso recruits consistently attain

the highest mean score on the GATB-G and its subscales, while

Pittsburgh recruits, with the exception of the spatial component of the test, show the lowest mean score. The relative

ranking of the five sites on the GATB-G and its subscalds is

quite consistent as revealed by a Coefficient of Concordance

of .74, which is significant at the .02 level.

The differences among the five sites in academic proficiency

are related to the stringency of the eligibility requirements

used in the five sites. By design, Pittsburgh utilized no criteria, except YETP eligibility. El Paso, on the other hand,

had the highest criteria. The selection criteria of the three

remaining sites were intermediate in their stringency.

This finding is paralled by the results of the STEP reading

test. (See Table V-12). The differerice among the five sites

in reading ability are barely statistically significant at

the .05 level. Atlanta and El Paso rank highest on this test

of reading; while Pittsburgh and Little Rock rank the lowest.

The aptitudes measured by the four scales of the GATB only

partially predict success in college. Some students with

poor scholastic aptitude do very well, while others with high

aptitude do poorly. The Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes (SSHA)

107
- 92-

represents an attempt to measure another dimension of scholastic success. It consists of four badic subscales and

three derivative scales. The four basic subscales are:

o Delay Avoidance: promptness in completing academic

assignments, lack of procrastination, and freedom

from wasteful delay and distraction.

o Work Methods: use of effective study procedures,

efficiency in doing academic assignments, and howto-study skills.

o Teacher Approval: opinion of teachers and their

classroom behavior and methods.

o Education Acceptance: approval of educational objectives, practices, and requirements.

The three derived scales are:

o Study Habits: a combinationof the ',delay avoidande"

and "work methods" scales which measure academic behavior.

o Study Attitudes: a combination of the "teacher approval"

and"education acceptance" scales which measures scholastic beliefs.

o Study Orientation: a combination of the "study habits"

and "study attitudes" scales which provide an overall

measure of study habits and attitudes.

Since the validity of the SSHA scales is highly dependent

upon the frankness of student responses, the survey was

administered after youth had been randomly assigned to

experimental and control groups. (The exception to this

was in El Paso where SSHA was administered as part of

the recruitment phase. Consequently the validity of

those scores for research purposes must await results

of correlational analysis).

.108
TABLE V-11

MEAN GATB SCORES OF CAVDP RECRUITS

. Little

GATB Scores Atlanta El Paso Roc Washington All Sit

N =121 N=161 N=146 N=114 N=151 N=693

Intelligence-G 91.4 94.6 88.0 82.4 91.8 89.6

Verbal-V 92.2 94.8 92.1 87.7 91.8 91.7

Numerical 93.8 96.8 94.5 82.3 93.9 91.7

Spatial-S 94.5 102.4 91.0 92.6 99.0 95.9

Coefficient of Concordance = .74 .02 P .01

:10 9
- 94

TABLE V-12

MEAN STEP READING SCORES FOR CAVDP RECRUITS.

Site Step Score Number of Recruits

All Sites 17.3 (495)

Atlanta 17.8 ( 81)

El Paso 17.7 (126)

Little Rock 16.9 (110)

Pittsburgh 16.5 ( 96)

Washington 17.5 ( 82)

*data collected for Educational Testing Service,

July 1979

F ration =2.39

110
95-

- This was done so that recruits would not assume that their

answer affected their chance to be selected for college.

The negative side of this decision, however, was the failure of many youth, especially control group members, to

take the survey. The results that were obtained are presented in Table V-13.
TABLE V-13

MEAN STUDY HABITS.St ATTITUDESISCORES OF CAVDP RECRUITS

Scale Atlanta El Paso

Little

Rock Pittsburgh Washington All Site

N=81 N=161 N=110 N=14 N=82 N=448

Delay Avoidance 22.4 28.8 21.1 27.6 24.8 25.0

Work Methods 25.7 31.2 ,24.8 29.7 28.5 28.1

Teacher Approval 26.3 32.5 25.2 24.7 29.3 28.8

Education Acceptance 27.5 33.8 25.2 26.9 27.4 29.3

Study Habits 48.1 60.1 45.9 57.3 53.3 53.1

Study Attitudes 53.8 66.3 50.4 51.6 57.3 58.0

Study Orientation 101.9 126.2 96.3 108.9 110.6 111.2

Coefficient of Concordance =.78 P4.001
_ Research has shown that although the SSHA correlates with

academic success, it does not correlate with conventional

measures of. scholastic aptitude. Thus, one would not expect

those sites which scored high on the GATB scales to also

score high on the SSHA. With one exception, however, the

rank of the five sites on the GATB-G scale matches their rank

-",:----

on the SSHA Study Orientation scale. The one exception is

Pittsburgh which ranked fifth on the GATB, but ranks third on

the SSHA. As Table V-13 shows, however, the number of recruits

in Pittsburgh who took the SSHA is extremely low (fourteen).

As a result, the scores shown for Pittsburgh are relatively

unstable in a statistical sense, and may not at all reflect the

study skills and habits of the total Pittsburgh group.

Even with Pittsburgh included, the relative ranking of the

sites on all seven SSHA scales is quite consistent. The coefficient of concordance is .78, which is statistically significant below the .001 level. In general, El Paso recruits did

best on the SSHA, and Little Rock recruits did poorest. The

former attained the top mean score on all seven scales; while

the latter did least well on all of the scales, except teacher

approval.

Norms are available for the SSHA. These norms are based upon

scores from 3054 individuals located in nine different colleges. 1

Table V-14 shows the percentiles of the mean scores for each

site on each scale. In general, these norms show that the study

habits of the CAVDP recruits are above the median, while

'Brown, William F., and Holtzman, Wayne H., SSHA Manual: Survey

of Study Habits and Attitudes, New York: The Psychological

Corporation, 1967.
TABLE V-14

PERCENTILES OF MEAN STUDY ions& ATrrares SOOTS

OF CAVDP RECRUITS

Scale Atlanta El Paso

Little

Rock Pittsburgh Washington All Sites

Delay Avoidance 40 65 35 60 50 50

Work Methods 55 70 50 70 60 60

Teacher Approval 20 45 20 20 30 30

Education Acceptance 30 60 25 30 30 35

Study Habits 45 70 40 65 55 55

Study Attitudes 25 50 20 20 30 30

Study Orientation 35 65 25 40 45

their study attitudes are below

however, characterizes only two

Atlanta and Little Rock "average

the median. This general pattern,

sites--Pittsburgh and Washington.

out below the median on all scales,

except Work Methods; while El Paso scores above the median on all

scales, except Teacher Approval. It is worth noting that the mean

scores for all sites are at, or above, the median on Work Methods.

But all five sites score below the median on Teacher Approval. It

may be that CAVDP recruits recognize some of the shortcomings in

their elementary and secondary education and have developed habits

of efficiency and how-to-do-it skills that have enabled them to

complete high school. If so, these habits will be invaluable

they enter the college phase of their education.

as
- 99 -

Are CAVDP Recruits the Usual CETA Recruits?

A key goal of the CAVDP is to see whether or not a liberal arts

education is a feasible addition to the array of CETA programs.

Implicit in this goal is the assumption that youth in the CAVDP

are much like the normal CETA recruit. If this is not so, then

serious questions are raised about the applicability of the

CAVDP idea to CETA. In trying to make this determination, the

characteristics of non-summer Youth Work Experience enrollees

was used. This program is targeted at the same age group as

the CAVDP, and therefore seemed the most appropriate for

comparison purposes.

The comparative data are drawn from the Continuous Longitudinal

Manpower Survey (CLMS) of the Office of Policy, Evaluation and

Research of the Department of Labor. The most recent data

available pertain to fiscal year 1976. The April-June quarter

of that year was selected because these are the months in which

youth were recruited for the CAVDP. 2

Table V-15 presents a comparison of selected characteristics. In

every comparison there is a significant difference between CAVDP

recruits and April-June enrollees. Compared to Work Experience

Youth, CAVDP has:

1) more females;

2) older participants;

3) more educated youth;

4) a greater proportion of Blacks and Hispanics;

5) more economically disadvantaged participants; and

6) fewer veterans.

2 "Characteristics of New Enrollees In CETA Programs During Fiscal

year, 1976, ". Continuous Longitudinal Manpower Survey Report No.6,

Washington, D.C.: Office of Policy, Evaluation and Research,

/ 5
-100-

An examination of these differences reveals that CAVDP recruits

are not of a consistently higher caliber. Though they are

better educated, they are more likely to be economically disadvantaged. Though older, they are less likely to be veterans.

Though predominantly female, they are also predominantly members

of minority groups.

TABLE V-15

Selected Characteristics of CAVDP and Youth

Work Experience Recruits (April-June, 1976)

Characteristics CAVDP YWE

N=688 N=71,900

% Male 36 60

% under 18 3 38

% 12th grade education 75 40

% 6 40

% economically disadvantaged 97 64

% non-veterans 99 96

In all likelihood, the differences in age and amount of education

go together. Since a high school diploma or its equivalent is

required for entry into the CAVDP, the program has very few recent

high school dropouts. These drop-outs are likely to form a substantial part of the under eighteen participants in the CETA

youth Work Experience Program.

At the same time, the. difterences in minority status and economic

disadvantage probably go together. Blacks and Hispanics are more

likely to be disadvantaged than are whites. Thus, by recruiting

more minority group members, the CAVDP also recruited more economi116
- 101 -

cally disadvantaged youth. The ability of the CAVDP to recruit

more minority group members is, in turn, probably a reflection

of the ethnic composition of the five sites.

The difference between the two programs in proportion of

females and veterans has no ready explanation at this point.

It seems clear, therefore, that the CAVDP recruits are not

representative of the total group of CETA youth. Part of the

difference appears to reside in the fact that the five sites

are not representative of all CETA programs. Part of the

remaining differences appear to reflect the higher selection

standards that CAVDP had to use. The remaining differences

have no ready explanation at this point.

'117
- 102-

The final comparisons await availability of data for 1979 college freshmen. We have proceeded with 1978 data under the assumption that differences may not be that great between 1978 and

1979 college freshmen. However, the analysis which follows

will be repeated using appropriate data as soon as it is available.

HOW DO CAVDP RECRUITS DIFFER FROM THE AVERAGE COLLEGE FRESHMAN?

In order to analyze the experiences and outcomes of CAVDP youth

in college, it is important to compare them to college freshmen

in general on selected characteristics. Our data source for

these comparisons is the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) of the University of California at Los Angeles.

Established in 1966, under the sponsorship of the American

Council on Education, CIRP is a national longitudinal study of

the American higher education system. Part of this project

involves an annual survey of entering freshmen which provided

us with data for our comparisons.1

From a demographic perspective we were able to look at the following variables.

1. race/ethnicity

2. age

lAstin, Alexander W., and King, Mayo R., and Richardson, Gerald T., The American Freshman: National Norms for Fall 1978, Los Angeles, California: Cooperative Institutional Research Program, American Council on Education and University of Califor- nia at Los Angeles, 1979.
-103

3. family income

4. mother's educational level

5. father's educational level

Since data was available by type of institution, we were able to

make an .additional comparison with college freshmen norms for

predominantly black colleges and universities, in addition to

the comparison with college freshmen in general. As you shall

see thia'proVides an interesting aspect to the: analysis. While

CAVDP freshmen differ significantly from the average college

freshman, these differences are somewhat reduced when they are

compared with freshmen attending predominantly black colleges

and universities. ..

As is evident in Table V-16, CAVDP freshmen are predominantly

members of minority groups (93.7%), while most college freshmen'

are white (88.5%).

In terms of. age, CAVDP freshmen are older than the. average American college freshman (see Table V -17).. This age difference holds

even when comparisons are made with freshmen at black colleges.
- 104 -

TABLE V-16

ETHNIC BACKGROUND OF CAVDP FRESHMEN, ALL COLLEGE FRESHMEN AND

FRESHMEN ATTENDING PREDOMINANTLY BLACK COLLEGES (*)

(Percent)

Group

White

Black . American

Mexican

American

Puerto

Rican

American

Indian

Asian/

Pacific

CAVDP

Freshmen1 6.3 68.8 21.8 IMM11 .4 0.2 N = 673

Black 2

Colleges 1.2 97.3 I1 0.5 1.4 0.7 N = 8,539

All

Freshmen 88.5 8.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.1 N = 187,603

CAVDP vs Black Colleges: p 4 001

CAVDP vs All Freshmen: p. < .001

(*) Data sources for this and all subsequent tables:

CAVDP Intake Records

Cooperative Institutional Research .Program

1Percentage will sum to less than 100 due to omission of

"Other" category.

2Percentage will sum to more than 100 if any students

checked more than one category.

120
-105 -

TABLE V-17

AGE OF CAVDP FRESHMEN, ALL COLLEGE FRESHMEN AND FRESHMEN .ATTENDING

PREDOMINANTLY BLACK COLLEGES.

(Percent)

CAVDP Black All

Freshmen Colleges Freshmen

N = 677 N = 8,539 N =,,187,603

18 & younger 58.7 72.1 78.7

19 & older 41.3 27.9 21.3

CAVDP vs Black Colleges: p < .001

CAVDP vs All Freshmen: p < .001

In CAVDP freshmen come from families that are poorer

and their parents have less educational attainment. Again, these

very significant differences are somewhat reduced when CAVDP

youth are compared to freshmen at black colleges, but they do not

disappear.

In terms of family income (a good proxy for overall SES), 75.1%

of all college freshmen come from families that earn more than

$12,500 per year, while 95.2% of CAVDP freshmen come from families

that earn less than $12,000 per year. Freshmen at black colleges

have less economic advantage than college freshmen in general,

but significantly more than the CAVDP freshmen (35.3% of freshmen

attending predominantly black colleges come from families whose

income is above $12,500.)

The differences in terms of parental educational attainment are

shown in Tables V-18, V-19. The same pattern of comparisons exists.

121
TABLE V-18

Mother Educational Attainment for CAVDP Freshmen, All College

Freshmen, and Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black Colleges.

(Percent)

Educational

Level

CAVDP

Freshmen

N = 407

Black

Colleges

N =1353

All

Freshmen

N = 187,603

Grammar school or less 25.6 8.6 3.7

Some high school 23.8 23.8 9.6

High school graduate 31.4 36.7 49.0

Some college 14.5 11.5 14.2

College graduate 4.7 10.5 15.6

Some graduate school 0 1.9 2.1

Graduate degree 0 7.0 5.8

CAVDP vs. Black Colleges: P 4: .001

'CAVDP vs All Freshmen: p .001

TABLE V-19

Father's Educational Attainment for CAVDP Freshmen, All College

Freshmen, and Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black Colleges

(Percent)

Educational

Level

CAVDP

Freshmen

N = 312

Black

Colleges

N = 8 539

All

Freshmen

N = 187 603

Grammar.school or less 30.8 17.6 5.8

Some high school 26.9 24.1 11.4

High school.graduate 28,8 .30.7 32.7

Some college' 8.3 9.9 13.5

College graduate 5.1 9.1 19.8

Some graduate school 0 1.6' 2.5

Graduate degree 0 6.9 14.1

CAVDP vs Black Colleges: P .001

CAVDP vs All Freshmen: P 44 .001
- 107 -

In looking at family.background variables, parental exposure to

the higher educational system allows for an important source of

support which college students can derive from their families.

Parents or older brothers and sisters can provide a sort of

practical "how to survive in college" type of advice which

derives only_from having been through it oneself. Tables V-20

and V-21 reveal the discrepancies between CAVDP youth and other

college freshmen on this variable, particularly evident in terms

of fathers' educational attainment.

TABLE V-20

Mother's Exposure to College for CAVDP Freshmen, All College

Freshmen, and Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black Colleges

(Percent)

CAVDP

Freshmen

N = 407

Black

Colleges

N = 8,539

All

Freshmen

N = 187,603

Exposure to college

Lack of exposure to

college

19.2 30.9

80.8 69.1'

37.7

62.3

CAVDP vs Black Colleges:

CAVDP vs All Freshmen:

p < .001

p < .001

123
- 108 -

TABLE V-21

Father's Exposure to College for CAVDP Freshmen, All College

Freshmen, and Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black Colleges

(Percent)

CAVDP

Freshmen

N = 312

black

Colleges

N = 8,539

All

Freshmen

N - 187,603

Exposure to college 13.4 27.5 49.9

Lack of exposure to

college

86.6 72.5 50.1

CAVDP vs Black College: P 4 .001

CAVDP vs All Freshmen: p 4 .001

In general, CAVDP youth as college freshmen are at a disadvantage

when compared to college freshmen in general on certain characteristics. They come from families that are significantly poorer

and who have had less exposure to the higher education process.

The data suggests that some of this difference is accounted for

by minority status; in other words, minority freshmen as a group

are at a disadvantage when compared to all college freshmen.

However, CAVDP freshmen experience a disadvantage beyond that of

minority students in general.

Several items from the CIRP Freshman Survey were included in the

CAVDP,Wave f interview which allowed us to look at motivation to

attend college and perceptions of preparedness. CAVDP college

freshmen cited many more reasons as very important in their

decision to attend college than did college freshmen in general.
- 109 -

But when compared with minority college freshmen (freshmen

attending predominantly black colleges) these differences tend

to disappear (see Table V-22), suggesting that minority students'

motivation to pursue higher education is different than the

average college freshman. CAVDP students, predominantly minority,

reflect this difference.

We also looked at whether the students felt prepared academically for college. We asked them how well they felt their high

school prepared them in specific subject areas; and whether they

felt they would need remedial work in certain subjects. It is

clear from the data that CAVDP youth, more so than the average

college freshmen and other minority freshmen, perceived themselves to be unprepared for college work. While CAVDP youth,

in slightly greater proportions but consistently across subjects,

reported that their high school program prepared them very well,

they felt they would need remedial work for college in far

greater proportions than the average college freshman This is

in spite of the fact that they have had remedial work in much

greater proportions than other college freshmen (see Tables V-23,

V-24 and V-25). This suggests that CAVDP youth perceive academic

deficiencies within themselves which are unrelated to their

previous educational program, indicating poor self-esteem and a

low self-confidence with regard to academic achievement. The

average college freshman may not feel well prepared by the high

school but does not feel a need for remedial work in college (see

Tables (V-23 and V-24).
TABLE V-22

Percent Responding "Very Important" to Each of the Following Reasons

in Deciding to go to College for CAVDP Freshmen, All Freshmen, and

Freshmen Attending Predominantly Black Colleges.

Reasons

CAVDP

Freshien

N = 453

Black

Colleges

N = 8,539

411..1111IMENE. All

Freshmen

N = 187,603

My parents wanted me to go

I could not find

49.1 45.8 28.6 *** a job

17.6 14.1 * 4.4 *** I wanted to get away,from home

To be able to get

9.5 10.7 7,8 i a better job

84,3 84.5 75,4 *** To., gain general education and appreciation of H ideas 84.4 82.7

To' improve reading and 68.3 *** I-I study skills

68.0 65.6 37.3 ***

0

There was nothing better to do

To make me a

3.7 5.5 1.8 ** more cultured person,

56.9 57.2 To be able 34.0 *** to make,more money

61,5 75.0 *** 60.4 To learn about things that interest me

To meet

82.8 80.9 14.0 *** new and interesting people

52,2 57.1 * 56.6 TO prepare myself for graduate or, ,professional school 73.5 68,7 * 44.2 ***

Chi-square tests. were performed with: (a) CAVDP vs Black Colleges and (b) CAVDP vs All Freshmen,

p 4 .05; ** p 4 .01; *** p 4 401

.4 Pt t4.11
TABLE V-23

Percent Reporting that High School Prepared them Very Well by

Subject for CAVD Freshmen, All College Freshmen, and Freshmen

Attending Predominantly Black Colleges.

Subject

CAVDP

Freshmen

N = 454

Black

Colleges

N = 8,539

All

Freshmen

N.= 187,603

Mathematical skills 35.0 27.0 *** 31.3

Reading and Composition 42.1 39.0 34.5 * **

Foreign languages 14.1 16.1 16.5

Science 39.4 32.8 ** 35.0 *

History & Social Sciences 52.1 48.7 40.5 * **

Vocational skills 35.8 29.3 ** 18.5 ***

Musical & Artistic skills 28.0 29.3 23,8 *

Study habits 25.3 27.9 18.8 ***

Chi-square tests were performed with: (a) CAVDP vs. Black Colleges,

and (b) CAVDP vs. All Freshmen.

* p .05; ** p 4 .01; *** p 4 .001

TABLE V-24

Percent Perceiving a Need for Remedial Work by Subject for CAVDP

Freshmen, All College Freshmen, and Freshmen Attending Predominantly

Black Colleges

Subject

CAVDP Black All

Freshmen Colleges Freshmen

N = 435 N = 8,539 N = 187,603

English 45.3 26.3 *** 14.0 *** Reading 29.8 17.0 *** 8.1 *** Mathematics 57.9 49.3 *** 24.9 *** Social Studies 23.3 12.0 *** 4.0 *** Science 38.5 9.2 *** 12.9 *** Foreign Language 43.1 40.3 14.2 *** Chi-square tests were preformed with:(a) CAVDP vs. Black Colleges,

and (b) CAVDP vs. All Freshmen.

*** p 4 .001
- 112 -

TABLE V-25

Percent Who Have Had Remedial Work by Subject for CAVDP Freshmen,

All College Freshmen, and Freshmen Attending Predominantly. Black Colleges

CAVD Black All

Subject Freshmen Colleges Freshmen

N = 442 .N a 8,539 N = 187/603

English 37.8 23.2 *** 10.0 *** Reading 26.5 25.4 11.0 *** Mathematics 37.7 18.6 *** 10.6 *** Social Studies 10.0 25.9 *** 10.3 Science 22.8 20.9 9.1 *** Foreign Language 5.9 11.3 *** 6.7

Chi-square tests were performed with: (a) CAVDP vs. Black Colleges,

and (b) CAVDP vs. All Freshmen.

*** p 4: .001

Further analysis using correlational techniques is planned to

pursue this very important area. The results of such analyses

will have an impact on recommended programming strategies,

particularly in the area of counseling and support services.

129
- 113 -

Assignment to Experimental and

Control croups

Youth were randomly assigned to the four experimental and one

control group in late June. The distribution of the recruits

across these five groups is shown in Table V-26. According

to probability theory, these five groups should be alike on all

characteristics. This, in fact, is the case. There are no

statistically significant, differences among the five groups on

any characteristics. Some representative examples of the

results are presented in Appendix C.
- 114 -

TABLE V-26

Random Assignment of CAVDP Recruits

and Control Groups

to Experimental

Voucher + Voucher Integration

SITE Integration Only Only Neither Control Group

Atlanta 21 21 23 24 34

El Paso 27 28 28. 28 50

Little Rock 26 26 26 26 47

Pittsburgh 24 21 23 20 22

Washington 27 24 25 22 52

All Sites 125 120 125 120 205

According to the design of the project, the members of the control

group were to be enrolled in regular CETA programs, This did not

happen. The details are shown in Table V-27. Only ten percent of

the members of the control group have enrolled in CETA. Furthermore,

it is apparent that many more will not be enrolled. Nearly half

of the control group (44.4%) are attendingcollege. If it is

assumed that youth who are otherwise occupied (e.g. employed, in

other training programs, moved out of town) are also non-candidates

for CETA, a total of seventy-two persons (36.6% of the control

group is the maximum number of control grotp members that can be

enrolled in CETA). It is apparent that the control group cannot

be used to compare college attendance with CETA training because

of the small number of youth enrolled in CETA programs.

It is futile at this point to speculate why the picture for control

group members is sdidisappointing. The following. three reasons are

suggested. 1) Lessattention was given:to control group members

by CETA staff (it should be noted that services to this group were
Table V-27

Status of CAVD Control Group

October, 1979

alita El ao Little Rook Pittsburgh Washington pow Percent

Enrolled in CEPA 1 3 4 9 3

Other Training 0 0 2 1 0

bp loyed 1 4 4 2 3

Unesployed 3 4 1 0 3

tined in College 22 36 12 6 15 91 44,4

20 917

3 1,5

0 6,8 IF-41 th

11 5,4

o i 3 I 2,4

3 x3 3 25 61 29$8

.22 52 205 1"10

133
- 116 -

to be provided by local CETA, not CAVD staff), with the result

that these youth were overlooked. 2) The recruitment efforts

of local staff concentrated upon those youth who were desirous

of attending college. When these youth were randomly denied such

an opportunity, they were no longer interested in CETA. 3) The

cyclical nature of most CETA programs produces a situation in

which slots must become available before members of the control

group can be taken into CETA. While waiting, youth make other

arrangements.

The fact that so many control group youth have themselves enrolled

in college, provides an unanticipated benefit for the program.

It will be possible to compare the consequences of attending college

under (=Mama-Eileen with attending college in the absence of such

auspices.

In order to compensate for the failure to enroll sufficient numbers

of youth in CETA, it was decided to create a comparison group made

up of youth enrolled, or about to be enrolled in CETA. The details

of how this is to be done is presented in AppendixD. Essentially,

the comparison group is to be created by selecting a group of CETA

applicants matched in age, sex and ethnicity to the CAVDP group in

each of the five sites.

Overall, the CAVDP will provide information on the effects of:

1) attending college under CETA auspices; 2) attending college

without CETA auspices; and 3) participating in regular CETA programs. The analysis will try to determine which kinds of experience

are beneficial for which kinds of youth under what kinds of circumstances.

134
- 117 -

CHAPTER VI

ENROLLMENT OF PARTICIPANTS IN COLLEGE

As noted at the beginning of this part of the report, local

prime sponsors were notified on Jnne 22, 1979 which youth

had been randomly selected to attend college. This meant

that they had about two months in which to enroll nearly

five hundred youth in college. The accomplishment of this

formidable task is nothing short of miraculous. It is testimony

to the ability of the CETA prime sponsors involved in this de-. monstration to swiftly implement new and _innovative programs.

This chapter will describe how the local prime sponsors accomplished this feat, and the outcome of their efforts. The task

involved: determining the kinds of post-secondary institutions

that would be appropriate for the goals of the CAVDP; establishing'

parameters that enabled the program to be administered under

local CETA regulations; informing appropriate colleges and

universities about the CAVD program and gaining their cooperation;

and actually enrolling youth. The latter step often involved

seeing that special tests were administered, and/or waiving some

admissions procedures.

The final section of tbis chapter examines the kinds of institu-. t4 ns in which CAVDP youth were enrolled. It tries to assess

the quality and "typicalness" of the post-secondary institutions

which accepted CAVDP youth.
- 118 -

Kinds of Post - Secondary. Institutions

Deemed Appropriate for the CAVDP

The intent of the CAVD Project is to examine the effects of

college education on the eventual employment and career outcomes of disadvantaged youth. Therefore, it was imperative to

define the type of post-secondary education whidh would be

acceptable for the measurement of these effects. Youth needed

to attend schools whidh provide programs recognized as college

education. In addition, some accreditation criteria for judging

schools in terms of minimal standards of educational quality

needed to be applied in, determining which schools would be

acceptable for CAVD youth to attend. Since it was not feasible

to establish our own accrediting procedures, some widely

acceptable criterion,for appropriate post-secondary education

had to be adopted. Given the nearly universal acceptance of

the G.I. Bill program, it was decided that a college program

acceptable for CAVDP youth must be on the Veterans Administrations

list of educational institutions which are "approved for Veteran's

training." The school must be so identified by the Veterans

Administration Regional Office for the area. The school must

also provide an. Associate of Arts degree or higher. This

requirement would, assure that the youth could obtain a higher

education credential from the school he or she chose to attend.

Administrative feasibility was then added to this criterion in

determining which schools would be appropriate for 'CAVD. The

majority of the youth should be attending college programs
- 119 -

which are within commuting distance of the youth's residence

in order for the overall program management to remain feasible

and tokeepcoftsrminagmble. Thus the stipulation was added that

youth should. apply to colleges within commuting distance. A

list of schools which met all of the specified criteria was to

be developed by the project operators and made available to the

youth participants.

It was felt, however, that the project should allow for exceptions to the rule on the criteria of commuting distance so as not

to prevent any youth from pursuing a desirable educational

plan which involved a school beyond commuting distance. In

order to exercise some control on such situations, extensive

procedures for review and approval were set up, involving the

National Office of Youth Programs.

The final decision would be made on a case -by -case basis after

the following conditions were met and documented in writing to

the National Office of Youth Programs.

(1) The Youth had to be eligible for and selected as a

college-bound youth in the program;

(2) The youth had been admitted or accepted to attend

the college, but not prior to April 15, 1979;

(3) There had to be a workable plan which identified how the youth would meet non-tuition and fee expenses, such

as room, board, transportation, and personal expenses.

This plan was to include copies of confirmed written

statements of offers of grant, scholarship, or other

funds;

(4) There had to be a workable written plan, agreeable

to the respective prime sponsor, which explained

how monitoring of classroom attendance and payment

of allowances to the youth would take place; and

137
(5) The youth had to sign 2 statements acknowledging

and agreeing that neither the prime sponsors nor

the project was obliged to provide a paid work

experience during the time that classes were

regularly in session.1

Also, the project would not, under any circumstances, pay other

than tuition and fee costs for any youth who participated.

Finally, it was agreed that the high cost of tuition at any

college, university, or school would not be a basis for denying

a youth CAVDP financial support to attend the college of his

or her choice. If, however, the total cost of tuition and fees

for any youth exceeded $2,500 annually, the payment would require

National Office of Youth Programs approval.

Initial Contact with Institutions and Their Reactions

The initial contacts witTi all of the institutions participating

in the CAVD program varied from project site to project site.

Letters were written, personal contacts were made and these

contacts were followed by telephone calls to the various university and college personnel.

In Atlanta, once the preliminary list had been compiled, phone

contacts were made with a representative from each college and

a meeting was scheduled to "introduce" the CAVD program to the

representative. Atlanta CAVD staff visited each of the colleges

and presented an overview of the CAVD project. During these

visits to the campuses, the representative(s) had the opportunity

1Final Guidelines, Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project,

April 28,-1979pp. 21-22.
- 121 -

to ask questions and discuss concerns in order to get an understanding of the program in general. Each college was given a

letter summarizing the project and form to be signed indicating

institutional interest in participating and establishing a

liaison contact.

All of the colleges visited were receptive. In some instances,

representatives were familiar with NSS/FNS, the subcontractor

and its services, and this helped pave the way.

Schools with lower enrollment were eager to participate. Schools

with special requirements showed some initial hesitancy but were

receptive once an explanation'iwas given about the program and

the degree of support to be given students.

In El Paso, a letter was written to each university informing

them of the El Paso CAVD Program, and mentioning that some of

the participants were interested in attending that college or

university. The letter also explained how the Career Advancement

Voucher Demonstration Program would work. As a follow-up to

the letter, representatives from the Department of Human Development, City of El Paso visited each prospective campus to meet

with officials and discuss the CAVD project in detail. Contracts

for admission, and payment of tuition, fees and books were made

with each participating college.

All of the universities and colleges contacted were very

enthusiastic and willing to make the necessary arrangements for

participation in the CAVD program.
Written contacts followed by personal contacts with university

and college personnel was the method used in Little Rock.. Most

institutions responded to written correspondence concerning the

project. Previous relationships which the director of L.R.

CAVD and/or the counselors had established within the local

academic community greatly facilitated this phase of the

project implementation. 6

Each school in Pittsburgh was visited and introduced to the

CAVD program. The Directors of Admissions, Financial Aid, and

Student Aid were contacted.

Each school was more than willing to participate with one school

extremely 'interested in recruitingall of the participants.

Another university helpful in administering the SAT exams to

those participants who needed them. Pittsburgh did have problems

in establishing contacts, but all problems were:related to ihe

program starting late and trying to accomplish so much with an

understaffed office.

In Washington,' DC., letters were sent to eighteen colleges and

/universities introducing them:to the ,CAVDprOgram,ind asking

them for their participation. All of the-t6llegei responded' in

writing and follow -up with a telephone confirmation. One

university, specializing in educational programs for the deaf and

hard of hearing said they would be willing to participate but

they would only take a deaf or hard of hearing student.

Each partiCipating College and university identified a "contact

140
person" who would be responsible for handling the CAVD program

at the particular,:college/university.

The colleges and universities were told to use their own guidelines for accepting these youths and were instructed to treat

them just like any other student.

The colleges and universities participating in the CAVD program

were, with a few exceptions, receptive upon initial contact and

have continued to show support for the CAVD program.

Outcome of Enrollment Efforts

Of 492 experimental group members, a total of 437 were accepted

into a CAVD participating two-year or four-year college. This

represents 88.8% Of the experimental group youth. Of the 55

youth who did not enroll, in. CAVD college, 26 were admitted to

a non-CAVD participating college. The data are presented in

Table VI-1.

Naturally, all five sites were not equally successful in enrolling

youth. Little Rock's efforts were perfect in.that they enrolled

all of their youth under CAVDP auspices. Next most impressive

is El Paso which enrolled all but two of its youth, although

nine were not enrolled under CAVDP auspices. Even the sites which

did less well, however, enrolled at least three-fourths of their

eligible participants.

The reasons all youth were not enrolled reflects the circumstances

or desires of the youth themselves,-not the shortcomings of the

14i.
enrollment process. Some youth changed their minds over the

summer about attending college. They decided to either obtain

a job, or enter the Armed Forces. Other youth moved away from

the city, and could not, therefore, continue participation in

the program. A few youth, having been selected for college

participation could not be subsequently located, and are also

presumed to have left their city.

142
Table VI 1

COLLEGE ENROLLMENT OF CAVDP EXPERIMENTAL GROUP

tlanta LEE2 Little. Rock Pittsburgh yashiapton, Total

Enrolled it

Participating College 78% 90 100% 80y6 93% 88.9%

Enrolled in Nona

Participating College 11 8 0 5 2 5,3

10 2. 0 '14 5 5.9

Not Enrolled in

any College

Total Participants (88) (iii) (103) (91) (99) (492)

144
Enrolled in

participating

colleges

Enrolled in

non-participating colleges

Not

Participating

TABLE VI-2

College Enrollment of CAVDP Youth by

Experimental Group

Voucher '& Voucher Integratice

Integration Oily Only. Neither Ibtal

N % N %

82

11

7

N

111

5

%

90

4

N % N %

117 89

1

6

94

1

5

101

13

9

108

7'

89

6

437

26

29

(124) (123) (124) (121) (492)

Table VI-2 shows that the rate of enrollment in colleges was

virtually the same for all experimental groups. The one significant difference found is that those youth who were left entirely

on their own--that is, were not to receive,help'in becoming integrated into college life and were free to,choose whatever college

they desired--the voucher Only- groupi.Were:More likely to enroll

. in non-participating colleges: Whereas only about four percent-of

the members of the three other experimental groups. enrolled in

non-participating colleges, nearly eleven percent of the voucher

only group enrolled in such schools. ThiS difference is statistically

significant at the .01 level.
The thing that distinguishes the voucher only group from the

Other three groups is that contact between participant and

counselor is intended to be very minimal. It may well be

that the virtual absence of contact with someone who is discussing entering or participating in college result in reduced

motivation to participate in the program. The effect of the

voucher upon enrollment, in college is of sufficient importance

to explore it further. The WIN voucher study reported that

participants in that program who selected their own further

education selected more broadly in terms of occupational and

career choices than those who planned their education with the

aid of a counselor.1 Using CAVDP data a comparison was made

between the number of colleges in which members of each experimental group enrolled. This was done to test the hypotheses that

voucher youth would select institutions more widely, than nonvoucher youth. a Measure of spread was developed, called a

Diversity Index. It is obtained, by dividing the number of

colleges being attended by youth in the group by the number of

youth in the group. The index can range from the reciprocal of

the number of youth in the group (obtained when all youth attend

the same college) to 1.00 (obtained when each youth in the group

attends a different college)., The data are presented in Table VI-3.

The results are somewhat consistent, but not overly so. The two

voucher groups generally have lower diversity indices than nonvoucher youth, indicating less diversity of choice among them.

The differences are not statistically significant, however.

1Richardson, Ann, Vouchered Skill Training in WIN: Program Guide

lines and Selected Empirical Findings, Washington, D.C.: Bureau

of Social Science Research, Inc., Feb 1977.
-128

Thus it is safe to conclude that the results of Table V1-3 mean

that "free choice" of educational planning does not result in

more diversity of choice with regard to selection of educational

institutions. However, further analyses is planned to determine

whether there are differences between voucher youth and non-voucher

youth in terms of occupational aspirations, career planning, or

t implementation of plans.
-129"

TABLE V1-3

Diversity Indices of College Enrollment

for Sites and Experimental Groups

SITE

VOUZIER

DTLEGRATICtl

VNKEER

max

INTEGPATICN

'ONLY

Atlanta

CAVDP COLLEGS 7 6 9 11

ENROLLEES 17 14 20 18

DIVERSITY INDEX* .41 .43 .45 .61

El Paso

CAVDP COLLEGES 3 3 2

ENROLLEES 27 24 24 25

DIVERSITY INDEX .11 .08 .13 .08

Little Bock

CANON COLLEGES 7 10 11 11

ENROLLEES 26 26 26 26

DIVERSITY INDEX .27 ,.38 .42 .42

Pittsburgh

awrP 03LLEGES 4 6 8 9

ENROLLEES 21 15 19 19

DIVERSITY INDEX .19 .40 .42 .47

Washington

CAVDP COLLEGES 9 7 11 4

ENROLLEES 26 23 23 22

DIVERSITY INDEC .35 .30 .48 .18

*DIVERSITY INC CE = cAvre COLLEMS/ENROLLEES

148
130

The range of colleges which CAVD youth are attending is large.

A total of fifty-five schools have accepted CAVD youth (see

Appendix E). The number of participating colleges in each site

is shown below:

ATLANTA 12

EL PASO 3

LITTLE ROCK 17

PITTSBURGH 10

WASHINGTON 13

TOTAL 55

It should be pointed out that the number of colleges participating for each site is a function of the number of colleges

within commuting distance of the site.

As can be seen from the list in Appendix E, the types of colleges

participating in CAVD is quite votTied. They range from local

business and two-year institutions to well-known four-year

universities.

In this section we shall present some introductory information

on the colleges attended by the young people in this project.

For our purposes here, youth attending colleges are divided

into three groups: those going to school funded by the CAVD

program; those other experimental group members attending a nonparticipating college;, and members of the control group who are

attending a college. The colleges being examined were also

grouped. First, there are the colleges participating in the

CAVD program which are within commuting distance (here defined

149
as being within 30 miles of the central city in the SMSA).

Second, there are participating colleges outside the commuting

area. Further, there are colleges which have enrolled project

youth who are not being funded through CAVD. In addition to

the colleges attended by our youth, we have also sought information on colleges within commuting distance (as defined above)

which are not participating. Identification of such nonparticipating colleges does present some definitional problems,

but for our purposes, only those schools in either Barron's

Profile of American Colleges, Barron's Guide to the Two-Year

Colleges or CEEB's The College Handbook were considered. Unless

attended by one of our youth, excluded were medical. schools

(nursing, pharmacy, etc.), ministerial schools, art or musical

schools, and other "special" schools (e.g., a college for the

deaf).

Schools within Commuting Distance

The first question we shall address is the extent to which

schools within commuting distance of the sites were utilized by

CAVDP. The. data are.presented in Table. VI-4. Of a total of

seventy -seven ccllegee and universities within commuting distances of the five. CAVDP.sites,.forty-eight(62%) are attended.

by CAVDP youth. There are differences in the "saturation" of

local colleges by CAVDP youth. All three'colleges in El Paso

are attended by CAVDP youthl-while only about half of the colleges in the Pittsburgh area are attended by CAVDP youth.,

150
TABLE VI-4

Percentage of Schools within,_ Commuting Distance of

Local Sites Attended by CAVDP Participants

CCELEGES WITHIN ATTENDED BY CAVDP

SITE CC:MUTING DISTANCE PARTICIPAN'I'S PERC:ENTAGE

Atlanta 18 11 61%

EL Paso 3 3 1.00%

Little it ock 13 11 d5%

Pittsburgh 21 1 0 48%

Washington 22 13 59%

ALL SITES 77 48 62%

The differences in "saturation" from one site to another appear to

be a function of the number of colleges and universities in an area.

The more colleges, the lower the saturation.

Attention to differences in "saturation" among the sites ought not

to obscure the fact that in all areas CAVDP youth are enrolled in a

majority of the colleges. As was shown in the previous section, the

diversity of colleges being utilized by the CAVDP was achieved

with heavy counselor input.

Information is presently being collected on the reasons for nonparticipation; tentatively, however, it would not appear that the

non-particination was due to a general hesitancy or unwillingness

of the schools to participate. In Atlanta, for example, all seven

non-participating schools had expressed an interest in the project,

151
- 133

but three of the colleges have tuition exceeding the $2500

maximum, and in the case of the other four, no project youth either

chose to go to, or were accepted at, these schools.

Additional information on the dispersion of youth throughout the

colleges in their commuting area is presented in Table VI -5.

152
TABLE VI-5

Means and Standard Deviations of CAVDP Youth

Attending Colleges sathin Commuting Distance

SITE lam

STANDARD

Demar BoIN

MOM 5.7 4 . 9 EL PASO 33.3 24 . 1

LIZTIE ROCK 7.1 9.6

prrnmum 7.3 8.6

wAsimaim 7.0 8 . 8 ALL SITES 8.4 11.9

S

With the exception of El Paso where there are only three schools,

the average number of CAVDP participants in participating schools

does not exceed eight. Not only does it appear that CAVDP youth

are engaged in a variety of academic pursuits, they do not - on

most campuses - form a large blObk of students. This should

readily enable most CAVDP participants to blend in with the

general college population, and thereby avoid the potential stigma

of being part of a "special program."

It was also possible for CAVDP youth to attend college outside

the commuting area if certain criteria could be met (see the

beginning of this chapter). Thirty-one CAVDP youth attended seven

institutions outside commuting distance. Twenty-six of the youth

and six of the schools involved the Little Rock site. Little Rock

took full advantage of the clause in the nroject guidelines

153
- 135-

which allowed youth to attend college outside commuting distance.

Although it was intended that exception to the commuting

requirement would be very few, it was politically unfeasible to

attempt to withdraw these youth (who became known within DOL-CETA

circles as "the Little Rock 30") from the schools in which they

had been enrolled.

A fuller picture of college attendance can be gained by examining

all CAVDP recruits, controls as well as experimentals, who

enrolled in college. For this purpose, we shall divide the

experimental group into those who are attending college under.

CAVDP auspices, and those who are attending without such auspices.

Table VI-6 shows that almost all experimental group youth who

are attending college without CAVDP assistance attend college outside

commuting distance. The table also shows that nearly all youth

(93%) who attend college under CAVDP auspices attend within commuting distance, while about three-fourths of the control group

members attending college, attend within commuting distance. All

of these differences are statistically significant at the .001

level. It seems quite clear that most experimental group members

who decided to attend college without CAVDP assistance did so in

order to attend a college of their choice away from home. What

is less clear is why so many control group members are attending

schools away from home. It may well be that the CAVDP restrictions

on college attendance reduce the number of options that those

who are determined to attend college can exercise.

154
- 136 -

TABLE VI-6

Percentage of CAVDP Recruits Attending College Inside

and Outside Commuting Distance

CAVDP NO CAVDP CasiTROL

COLLEGES: AUSPICE. AUSPICE GROUP

INSIDE COMMUTING

AREA 93% 15% 77%

OUTSIDE COMMUTING

AREA 7 85 23

TOTAL ATTENDING

COLLEGE (437) (26) (107)

Quality of CAVDP Participating Schools

A second question concerns the quality of the schools attended

by CAVDP youth. This will be examined in two ways. First in

terms of the kinds of degrees offered by the institutions. Second

by the competitiveness of their admissions standards. In both

instances, schools with students attending schools under CAVDP

auspices can be compared with schools attended by project youth

attending college on their own, as well as local schools not

enrolling CAVDP youth.

The kinds of degrees offered by the ninety-eight colleges which

can be examined are presented in Table VI-7. The first column

of this table shows the kinds of degrees offered by schools with

CAVDP assisted students. The second column shows the kinds of

degrees offered by schools attended by control group members, or

experimental group members attending college without CAVDP

assistance. There is some overlap in those two columns, for

many of the control group members attend the same colleges as
-137 --

CAVDP - assisted youth. The third column shows the kinds of

degrees offered by colleges within commuting distance of the five

sites but with no CAVDP recruits enrolled. Among the comparisons

three are noteworthy. First, the schools attended by CAVDP

TABLE VI-7

Number of Schools, by Type of Degrees Offered

Schools With

CAVD Youth

Schools With NonCAVD Assisted

Project Youth

Area Schools

Without Project Youth

Associate Degrees Only 17 30.9 6 11.3 11 39.3

Associate and Baccularueate

Degrees 18 32.7 19 35.8 5 17.9

Baccalaureate Degrees Only 19 34.5 28 52.8 12 42.9

Unknown 1 1.8 . - -

TOTAL 55 99.9 53 99.9 28 100.

participants are leas likely than the two types of schools to offer

baccalaureate degrees only. Second, students attending schools

without CAVDP assistance are less likely to attend colleges only

offering the associate degree. Finally, local schools which did not

enroll CAVDP youth are less likely to offer both associate and baccalaureate degrees. Of these three differences, only the second is

statistically significant. Youth who shunned CAVDP schools do so,

apparently, to attend four-year institutions away from home.

Overall, it does not appear that the schools which admitted CAVDP

participants are inferior to schools which did not admit them. This

is also borne out in an examination of the competitiveness of admissions of the schools. The data are shown in

156
-138 -

Table VI -8. For the purpose of rating, the system set up in

Barron's Profiles of American Colleges has been used. This

system rates schools on a six-point scale from "most competitive"

to "non-competitive." In Table VI-8 schools which have been

rated as "most competitive", "highly competitive", "very competitive", or "competitive" by Barron's are classified as

competitive. Follwing Barron's criteria which utilize entrance

TABLE VI-8

Competitive Rating of Colleges

Schools with Schools with Area schools

CAVDP assisted non-CAVDP without CAVDP

Youth assisted Youth Youth

Perzesitage of schools 29.1

rated "cxxivetitive"

30.2 35.7

Number of schools (55) (53) (28)

requirements and proportion of applicants accepted, none of

the two-year colleges in this 7. Airly are classified as Competitive.

Table VI-8 shows that schools which did not enroll CAVDP recruits

are Slightly more likely to be rated competitive. The difference, however, is not statistically significant. Furthermore, three of

the competitive schools which did not accept CAVDP youth had

tuitions exceeding the $2500 tuition limit. If these schools

are eliminated, there is no difference at all in participating

and non-participating schools with respect to degree of admissions

competition.

157
139 -

SUMMARY

On the face of it, enrolling five hundred (500) youth in

post-secondary institutions over the summer months presented

formidable problems. Local CAVD staff surmounted these problems as if they did not exist. Every member of the CAVDP

experimental group who wanted to attend college was enrolled.

In all, over ninety percent of the experimental group began

college in September.

This achievement of the local CAVD staffs is even more laudable

when it is.recognized that: 1) the colleges which took the

CAVDP youth are solid educational institutions; 2) the number

of colleges accepting youth is large, and CAVDP participants

are widely dispersed throughout them; and 3) the colleges which

failed to enroll CAVDP youth were either rejected by the youth

themselves, or had special admissions requirements, or had

tuition and fees that exceeded NDOL guidelines.

There is some evidence which indicates that NDOL guidelines

restricted the college choice of some youth. Every program

is confronted with establishing rules and procedures which enhance the administrative direction of the program. It is not

unusual for administrative rules to restrict the free operation

of social and market forces. It appears that without the CAVDP,

some youth would have found their way into colleges scattered

across several states. CAVDP has enabled more youth (about

double) to attend college, but restricted the range of colleges

they could pick.
CHAPTER VII

Retention During the First Semester

This report is being prepared shortly after the end of the first

semester of college for CAVD youth. There is, therefore, little

information available on their academic and social experiences

after entering college. What is available, however, is informa

tion on youth who failed to complete their first semester of

study. This chapter examines first semester drop-outs.

Since a major concern of the demonstration is what kinds 'of CETA

youth outht to be offered a college experience, it is important to

know something about the youth who fail to complete college.

Such information will help us understand better those youth who do

complete their work. It is not possible at this early stage, of

course, to report definitively on the kinds of youth who succeed,

and those who do not. But, preliminary information on this topic

will provide a base for subsequent study of the issue. Preliminary

information is also warranted since dripping out of college is an

event that tends to occur early in a youth's college career. The

closer a youth comes to graduating, the less likely is' that youth

to interrupt his or her studies.

This chapter begins with the basic data on drop-out during the

first semester. We then examine the stated reasons for dropping

out. In the basis of these reasons, we shall qualify our definition

of drop-out, as used in this chapter. The chapter will then

conclude with a brief examination of the characteristics of the

drop-outs.
Rate of Drop-Outs

Of the 441 youth enrolled in college, 437 actually registered

for classes. Ninety percent of these (395 students) completed

the first semester and registered for the second semester. Thus,

in this section drop-outs are the remaining ten percent. (42 students)

who either failed to complete their first semester, or who failed

to register for the second semester. A breakdown of these students

is as follows:

completed the semester but will not return,

did not completethe Semester, 'and will not return

did not coMplete the semester, but will return

= 7

28 = 7

The number of drop -outs for each site, and the months in which

the dropped out are shown in Table VII -l. It can be seen that the

months of November and January were the heavy drop-out months. In

fact, over half (55%) of the drop-outs occurred in these two months.

It should also be noted that three participants hardly began their

studies before dropping out. Two of these simply never showed

for classes after registering, while the third became ill, and

could not start. The latter will begin studies in the second

semester.
Month

Sept., 79.

Oct., 79

Nov., 79

Dec., 79

Jan. ,80

Tams

Table VII -1

CAVDP Drop-Outs by Mouth and Site

Atlanta El Paso .

2 2

Little

Apol: Pittsburgh

b

4

1

10

2

Wash tan

1

3 4

5 1

3

8

21 7

The table also shows that the number of drop-outs varies by city.

Atlanta and El Paso had only two drop-outs, while Pittsburgh had

twenty-one. This is examined in .more detail in Table VII-2. This

table shows, for each city the three kinds of-drop-outs and the

percentage of youth who did not drop-out. In two cities, Atlanta

and El Paso, the few youth who dropped out either completed the

semester, or plan to return in the second semester. Except in

Pittsburgh, over ninety percent of the participants are not drop-outs.

In Pittsburgh, twenty-nine percent of the participants dropped out,

TOTAL

3

9

11

7

12

42

and most of theSe failed to cqmplete:the semester'.

among the cities are statigtically.tighificant_at the

As the city with no selection criteria,-it is perhaps

These differences.:

.001 leVel.

not surprising'

that Pittsburgh's drop-out rate is nearly three times as high as the

site with-.the neXthighest rate.. .-A:..laterseCtion of -this chapter,.
Did not

dropout

Did not mete

the semester,

but will return

Ccmpleted the

semester, bit

will not red=

Did not

cmplebe the

semester, and

will not return

Table VII -2

Types of First Semester Drop-Outs for Each Site

LIT= MAMA EL PASO RX:K PrITSFORGH WASHIN

97% 98% 90% 71% 92%

1 0

8 22

(69) (100) (1031 (73) (92)

CHI-SQUARE.= 54.05

Degrees of Freedom= 12 Significance under .001
- 144 -

will examine the relationship between drop-outs and academic

potential.

Studies of college drop-outs show considerable variability from one

college to another. The rate over four years varies from twelve

to eighty-two percent. The same studies also show that the dropout rate is higher in public and two-year institutions than in

private and four year ones, respectively. It has also been shown

that about half of those who drop out do so before the beginning

of the sophmore year. Overall, some sixty percent of entering

freshmen do not complete their studies within four years although an

additional twenty percent do eventually graduate.

In the light of these figures, the drop-out rate for the CAVD

participants looks exceptionally good. Data on drop-outs during

the freshman year were available for twenty-nine of the fifty-six

colleges attended by CAVDP participants. These reported a mean

first year drop-out rate of 26%. Even though this figure is for

two semester, not one, it appears that CAVDP youth are doing no

worse than the general student bodies at their respective colleges

and universities.
145 -

Reasons for Dropping Out

The National Center for Education Statistics has data on the high

school senior class of 1972 which clearly show that moat students drop

out for non-academic reasons. Their finding is paralleled by

our own data which show that only three of the forty-two students

did so for academic reasons. Our own and NCES'S data may be misleading, however, since a number of non-academic reasons may well

be rationalizations. In our own data, the most frequent reasons

given for dropping out are: (1) to seek employment or enter the

military; (2) lack of interest in further education; and (3) family

and financial problems. Each of these reasons was reported by

seven students. Pregnancy and illness were also reasons for dropping

out. Four of the students dropped-out because they moved, and it

is not known whether they will continue their studies or not.

As was noted in the previous section, several students planned to

return in the second semester. These students, who mainly dropped

out because of illness and pregnancy, expect to make up the work

that they had missed during the summer, and then complete their twoyears under CAVDP auspices with their fellow participants. If

these students do carry out their plans, they will not become dropouts. The four students who moved may also continue their college

education. Thus, of the forty-two official CAVDP first semester

drop-outs, only thirty-one report having permanently ceased their

pursuit of higher education.

We might, therefore, consider the "true" CAVDP drop-out rate

164
during the first semester as seven percent (thirty-one drop-outs

out of a total of 437 registered studnets). Eleven of our

"drop- outs" may have simply interrupted their college careers for

a short while. If this proves to be the case, these students are

more properly classified as "intermitters," rather than drop-outs.

Since we do not yet know whether these students will resume their

studies, we shall continue to classify them as drop-outs. It

should be understood, however, that the term does not mean an

irrevocable decision not to seek further post-secondary education.

Characteristics of Drop-Outs

The analysis of drop-outs is an ongoing aspect of the CAVDP research.

The data, and conclusions presented in this section, are, therefore,

highly tenative. It may be suggestive, however, of beginning

developments in the ultimate story of the project.

One of the variables thought to affect college drop-outs is whether

or not youth became a part of the college life of their institution.

To this end, CAVDP counselors were to help .some.youth become intergrated, while allowing other youth to seek such integration (if

they so desired) on their own. Table VII-3 shows that there is no

difference in the drop-out rate of the youth who were to receive

such help and those who mere not. In both groups, approximately ten

percent of the participants dropped out. Table VII-3 reports whit

was supposed to happen to the youth. We are just now processing

the data on whether youth actually became integrated into the life of

their respective colleges.

165
147 -

Table VII-3

Percentage of Drop-outs Among Youth Who were to Receive

and Not Receive Help in Becoming Integrated into College Life

Drop-Outs

Students

Youth who were to:

Receive such help Not receive such help

10% 9%

(228) (209)

Chi-Square =I 0.04 Not significant

degrees of Freedom =

When data on actual integration become available, it will be possible

to see: (1) the extent to which the efforts of the counselors were

successful; and (2) whether integration makes any difference in the

drop-out rate.

Other variables were also examined for their relationship to dropouts. These will be treated under the headirgs of demongraphic

variables, academic potential, and characteristics of the colleges.

Demographic Variables

Table `'TI -4 shows that dropping out is related to age. The younger

a participant, the less likely is the participant to drop out, except for the youngest age category. Although this finding is not

yet a secure one, it may no.. be premature ix suggest that the

166
148-

relat:Wely high drop-out rate on the part of older students

reflects the additional family and personal obligations that

youth in their twenties carry. At the same time, the upswing

in the drop-out rate of youth under eighteen probably reflects

lack of maturity and readiness for college.

Table VII -4

Percentage of Drop-outs by Age

21 or 17 or

older Rom: 19 yrs. 18 yrs. younger

Drop-outs

21%

Students (34%)

Chi-Square = 10.60 Significant at .05 level

Degrees of freedom =x; 4

14% 13% 6% 11%

(37) (108) (240) (18)

Two demographic variables, sex and ethnicity were found not to

be related to drop-outs. Ten 1.ircent of the males and nine percent of the females dropped out during the first semester. The

data on ethnicity are presented in Table y11-5. The rate for

Whites and Blacks is approximately the same, while the rate

for Hispanics (mostly Chicanos) and others is much lower.

167
r. 149

TABLE VII-5

Percentage of Drop -Outs by Ethnicity

White Black Hispanic Other

Drop-outs 12% 11% 3 %. 0%

Students (26) (304) (97) (2)

Chi Square = 6.04

degrees of freedom =

not significant

The differences however, fail to reach statistical significance.

Two other background variables were also examined. One was the

presence of parents in the households from which the youth came.

The other was whether or not the family was receiving public

assistance. Table VII-6 shows that drop outs are not related b

to the presence of parents in the household. Yet, there is a

TABLE VIII

Percentage of Drop-outs by Parents in Household

Parent(s) present:

Both Father Only Mother Only Neither

Drop-outs 6% 8% 10% 16%

Students (181) (13) (163) (80)

Chi Square = 6.84 not significant

degrees of freedom = 3

clear trend in the d6..a. Those households in which the father

is abSent (the last two columns of Table VII-5)' have a higher

drop-out rate than householdt'where the father is present.
- 150 -

When Table VII-5 is collapses to compare just father present

or absent, the result does become statistically significant

(Chi-Square = 4.03, of - 1) at the .05 level. Since the

drop-out data available are early drop-outs, and the results

are barely statistically significant, to much importance

ought not to be attributed to the finding. It does gain some

credence, however, in the light of the data in TableATII-6,

which reports drop-outs by receipt of public assistance.

TABLE VII4

Percentage of Drop-outs by Public Assistance

Receiving Public Assistance:

Yes No

Drop-outs 16% 7%

Students (135) (302)

Chi - Square = 6.99 significant at .01 level

degrees of freedom = 1

The drop-out rate for students whose families receive public

assistance is more than twice as high as the rate for families

which are not receiving assistance. Combined with the finding

that youth are a bit more likely to drop-out when their fathers

are not present in the household, it appears that economic

factors are a major cause of early school leaving. This conclusion, tentative as it is, is consistent with the results of

other drop-out studies. Yet, virtually all of the students in

this study are economically disadvantaged and are receiving

scholarship aid. Further examination is needed to uncover just

what role economic pressure plays in the drop-out rate of CAVDP

participants. It seems unlikely that the relationship is a

169
- 151-

simple and direct one.

Academic Potential

Two sets of variables which measure academic potential were

collected prior to youth entering college. One is the GATB

G-scale and its three subscales. The other is the seven scales

of the Survey of Study Skills and Habits. The latter was

administered to 319 of the participants, while the former was

administered to 434 of the participants.

The relationship between Total GATB G-score and drop-outs is

presented in Table. VII-7. The relationship between the two

is statistically significant. In particular, the differences

among the means indicate that youth who complete the first

semester, even if they decide not to begin the second semester

have higher scores, on the average, than youth who do not

complete the first semester. Since the total Gt.TB G-score is

a measure of scholastic aptitude, result is consistent

with what one would expect.

The three subscales of the GATB g,AAasurs specific scholastic ;.

aptitudes. These are verbal ab54ity? mt,erical ability and

spatial relationships. Table ,*:.ws that verbal csility

is also related to type of drop-au, ,. As is true of tat t.oal

GATB score, those youth who completed the first seme-t.er

work, 0";:,,n if they failed to register for the second semester,

received higher scores or the verbal portion of v?.'0. qATB.

The relationship between numerical ability and dro.1-out is

slightly different (see Table VII-9). The relationship is

170
TABLE VII- .8

Test Comparison of Total GATE Scores :4nong Drop-Out Types

MEAN SD N

GATB TOTAL 89:8 13.06 434

NOT A DROP OUT 90.4 l2.9 392

INCOMPRETURN 81.0 9.98 7

COMPL NO RET 87,4 lltq4 . 7

INCOMPNO RET 83.1 I.49 28

AMONG GROUPS

WITHIN GROUPS

VARIANCE

170.72

168.66

97.71

133.38

156.14

ANALYSIS OF VAV:ANCli TAUE

MEAN SQUARE DF F-TEST SIGNIFICiNt

662.91 3 3.953

167.68 430

.009
TABLE VI 1.9

F-Test Comparison of GATB-Verbal Scores Among Drop-Out Types

MEAN SD N VARIANCE

GATB VERBAL 92.0 11.57 434 133.87

NOT A DROP 92.4 11.48 392 131.88

INCOMPRETURN 84.8 7.84 7 61.55

COMPL NO RET 12.8 12.41 7 154.12

INCOMPNO RET 86.9 11.51 28 132.63

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE, TABLE

MEAN SQUARE DF F-TEST SIGNIFICANCE

AMONG GROUPS 392.58 3 2.966 .032

WITHIN GROUPS 132.37 430
TABLE VII10.

?!..-Test Comparison of GATB-Numerical Scores Among Drop-Out Types

MEAN SD N VARIANCE

GATB NUMERICAL 92.3 14.23 434 202.59

NOT A DROP 93.3 13.68 392 187.20

INCOMPRETURN 85.5 12.55 7 157.67

COMPL NO RET 85.0 11.25 7 126.57

INCOMPNO RET 81.9 17.38 28 302.31

AMONG ,GROUPS

GROUPS

.,, ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE ....,. MEAN SQUARE DF F-TEST SIGNIFICANCE

1361.99, 3 6.986 UNDER 401:--

194.97 430
statistically significant. But here the main difi ':e seems

to center on those who dropped out compared to thost who

did not. The average score of the latter group is higher

(93.3), than the latter. Within the drop-outs, those who failed

to complete the semester and are not planning to return score

slightly lower than other kinds of drop-outs. One may speculate

that numerical ability encourages some youth who are not doing

well in school to keep on trying.

The last component of the GATB is not related to dropping out.

Although the spatial scora of those who did not finish the first

semester but plan to,return in the second semester is lower than

for the other three groups, the differences are not statistically

significant. The data are presented in Table VII-10.

Overall, then, scholastic aptitude,as measured by the GATB,is

related to dropping out in the first semester. Both general

scholastic aptitude and verbal ability appear to help students

complete the work of the first semester. Numerical ability, on

the other hand, appears to be related to a student's decision

to keep trying despite the failures of the first semester. It

is worth repeating, however, that these are preliminary results.

Those youth who drop out in subsequent semesters may alter this

picture considerably.

The second measure of academic potential is the Brown - Holtzman

Survey of Study Skills and Habits. None of the seven scales

of this test battery are related to dropping out. An example

of the results obtained is presented in Table VII-11. The

174
TABLE.VII -11

F-Test Comparison of GATB-Spatial Scores Among Drop-Out Types

MEAN SD N VARIANCE

GATB SPATIAL 96.1 16.95 434 287.37

NOT A DROP 96.1 17.08 392 291.77

INCOMPRETURN 90.5 8.46 7 71.67.

COMPL NO RET 95.4 13.17 7 173.67

INCOMPNO RET 97.3 17.28 28 298.86

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

MEAN SQUARE DF F-TEST SIGNIFICANCE

AMONG GROUPS 86.20 3 0.298 OVER .500

WITHIN GROUPS 289..44 430

175
TABLE VII- 12

PrTest Comparison of SSHA Total Orientation Scores Among Drop-Out Types

MAN SD N VARIANCE

TOT. STUDY ORIENTAION 109.8 31.61 319 999.66

NOT A DROP 110.2 31.18 302 972.31

INCOMPRETURN 93.0 24.75 3 612.66

COMPL NO RET 112.5 42.45 4 1802.25

INCOMPNO RET 103.3 38.54 10 1485.61

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

MEAN SQUARE DF F -TEST SIGNIFICANCE,

AMONG GROUPS 450,64 3 0.447 OVER .500

WITHIN GROUPS 1008.07 315
- 158 -

data pertain to the survey's overall measure of study orientation.

Although those students who did not complete the first semester

have lower scores than those who did, the differences are not

statistically significant. Part of the reason for the failure

to attain statistical significance may be due to the small

number of students in the three drop-out categories. Only seventeen of the forty-two drop-outs have taken the SSHA. Most of

those who did not take the SSHA were Pittsburgh participants,

where the drop-out rate was the highest of the five sites.

CAVDP Colleges and Drop -Outs

As noted at the beginning of this chapter, the drop-out rate

varies considerably from one college to another. It is reasonable

to presume, therefore, that certain characteristics of colleges

increase or decrease their drop-out rates. Of the variety of

college variables whith could be examined, we shall report on

two. The first is the competitiveness ratings of the colleges,

the second is their first semester drop-out rate. Although we

have competitiveneas ratings for all of the CAVDP colleges, we

were able to obtain drop-out information for only thirty-two. In

three instances, the first semester drop-out rate was estimated,

through a regression analysis, from data on the percentage of

freshmen who completed their studies on time. This must be borne

in mind when examining the relationship between CAVDP drop-out

rate, and the drop-out rate for the colleges as a whole.

Table VII-12 shows that there is no relationship between the

competitiveness of a school and the drop-out rate.

177
- 159-

Table VII- 13

Percentage of Drop-Outs Among Students Attending

Competitive and Non-Competitive Schools

Students Competitive Attending: NonSchools Competitive Schools

Drop-Outs 12% 9%

Students (113) (324)

Chi-Square = 0.37 Not Significant

Degrees of freedom = 1

CAVDP participants attending both types of schools drop-out at

about the same rate. The sama thing is true (see Table VII -13)

when the actual first year drop-out rate of the CAVDP schools

is examined. Whether a school has a large or a small number

of first year drop-outs does not seem to affect whether CAVDP

youth drop-out.

Table VII- 14

Percentage of Drop-Outs Among Students Attending

Low and High First-Year Drop-Out Schools

First Year Drop-Out Rate:

Less than 25% 25% or more No information

Drop-Outs 13% 10% 7%

Students (102) (175) (160)

Chi-Square = 2.64 Not significant

Degrees of freedom = 2
SUMMARY

Whether CEIA-eligible youth, who are given an opportunity to

attend college, will complete their studis is of paramount

concern to this project. So far, the results are encouraging

The drop-out rate for CAVDP youth apears to be lower than the

drop-out rate for colleges in general, and for the particular

colleges which they attend. With the available data on the

P. first year drop-out rate for colleges attended by CAVDP participants it is possible to estimate what the first year drop-out

rate ought to be for the students in this study. This was done

by multiplying the drop-out rate of a college by the number of

CAVDP students attending that college, and summing, these products for all CAVDP colleges for which data are available.

This yields a total of 100.49 expected drop-outs. When this

total is divided by the number of CAVDP participants attending

schools for which we have drop-out data, the expected drop-out

rate is 36%. Since the actual CAVDP rate is well below this

at this point, there is good reason to be encouraged.

The data on drop-outs however, pertain to the, first semester

only. There is still a possibility of a sizeable increase in.

CAVDP drop-outs before the end of the school year. In addition,

a detailed analysis of, drop-outs remains to be done. Such an

analysis should, help future CETA college programs increase their

probability of success, and the social benefits accruing to

their participants.
- 161.

CHAPTER VIII

CAVD AT THE END OF ITS

FIRST SEMESTER

The timing of this report, occasioned by the end of CPC&H's

CAVD Contract year, is both a blessing and'a curse. It is.a

blessing in the sense that it forces one to examine,.from a

knowledge development point of view, the early deVelopments

in .the CAVDP. It is a curse in that the *effects of.CAVDp are

barely beginning to unfold, and one must resist the tendency

to overgeneralize and overanalyZe results which are just

beginning to take shape.

There are some things, however, that can be said rather

definitively even at this early date. They can be said because

the Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project has gotten

off the ground, and is actively functioning in its five sites.

The first thing to note is that it is possible for local CETA

prime sponsors to recruit a couple of hundred YETP-eligible

youth among high school senior and GED-possessors who are

interested in attending college. Our analysis of the recruitment efforts of the five prime sponsors shows that their

recruitment efforts centered on the local high schools. It

must be granted that the reception of CAVDP recruitment efforts

by the schools was not always encouraging. But, youth who

came into the program overwhelmingly reported that therfirst

heard about the CAVDP from .a highschool source. Next most
- 162 -

important in the recruitment efforts, and often done in tandem

with the high schools, were direct recruitment efforts by the

early CAVDP staff. These efforts, which involved many hours

of travel and talk each day, constituted advanced publicity

for the demonstration project. Credit must go to the early

skeleton staff which believed in, and was able to sell to

others a vision of a new opportunity for disadvantaged youth

within CETA.

It is one thing to recruit youth into a program with the promise

of a college education at government expense. It is another

thing to actually deliver on that promise. Without fail, the

local CAVD program operators delivered on that promise. All

youth who wanted to attend college were enrolled. This

achievement is even more remarkable when one realizes that

the enrollment took place over the summer months when many

colleges have already established their entering fall classes.

Part of the success in enrollment is due to the enthusiastic

reaction that most colleges had to the idea of a CAVDP. In

many instances, colleges made special arrangements to enable

CAVDP participants to enroll.

It should be pointed out that the receptivity of the colleges

was to a few youth who would become part of their regular

academic program, and not to a sizeable group of youth who

were to become part of a special program. The relatively

small number of youth (in many, many instances less than four)

seeking admission made it easier to accomodate them. At the

181
same time, however, the colleges, because of the small number,

could not expect a sizeable financial gain through participating

in the program.

CAVDP participants gained admiEaion to colleges which were

typical of their local area. They did not overwhelmingly

enroll in either the less-competitive nor more-competitive

colleges. The CAVDP guidelines did, however, substantially

restrict the colleges in which participants could enroll to

those within commuting distance. In a few instances, CAVDP

participants made arrangements for, and did enter, colleges

outside the commuting ring. In some instances, this was done

with the active help of the local CAVDP staff, which is maintaining touch with the youth. In other instances, the youth

have left the program, although they are attending college.

Assuming that all youth can be reinterviewed at the appropriate

times, it will be possible to study whether the help offered

by CAVDP in the form of tuition, fees and counseling makes a

difi:erence in completing college and gaining entry to the

primary labor market.

Nut only were youth enrolled in college, but about ninety

percent of them have remained in college through the first

semester. This appears to be considerably higher than the

normal retention rate of the colleges attended by CAVDP

participants. The major reasons for dropping out were reported to be non-academic, and hint at a family's need for

182
- 164 -

an additional breadwinner.

The major disappointment of the first contract year was in

research, not program. This was the failure to enroll control

group members in the regular CETA prograr Nearly a majority

of the control group also entereci college, 'stead of CETA.

This "failure" may well testify to the basis which youth

were recruited by the programs, and/or the kind youth

recruited into the CAVDP. II: is clear that the edv.ional

attainments of the CAVDP reert..s is higher than the

normal CETA participant. But, i Y. -0.11y other resnts t'e.

two groups are much alike. It ma:: , '11 be that e colleje-gaing

component within CETA will attract A different .kind of clientele

than its usual work experience progrevs.

In an effort to compensate for the loss of control group

comparisons, a comparison group consisting of matched youth

already enrolled in CETA, is being created, Although such

a group will not permit .s precise comparisons as a control

group, it should enable us tc. draw some conclusions about the

consequences of .QtVDP relative to regular CET? youth programs.

Among the conc.6:21as for tale coming year of the CAVDP are three.

First, that the drop-out rate r:.i,main low. The idea of the

project is to see whether at least two years of a colle

education makes a significant difference in the employability

of youth. Large numbers of drop-outs would not provide us wit'

enough information to answer that question. It ,:;could
- 165 -

pcovide us with information only on the difficult.: of obtaining

the two years of education.

Second, there is concern; also expressed by the local project

operators, that contact be maintainee with the participants

during the summer. The feeling is that without the reinforcement of their college-goi g peers and/or some academic activities,

many youth will fail to return for their sophomore year.

The final concern is for those youth who are interested in,

and appear capable of, obtaining a four-year degree. Assurances

should be worked out early in the coming year to make it possible

for such youth to continue their college education. This cannot

be done under existing CETA legislation. But having given some

youth a glimpse of a new world and a nicme productive future,

it would be tragic if the DOL cou'l not help them fulfill their

potential and their aspirations.

184
CY APPENDIX A

Preliminary Model for the Education

Entitlement Voucher Program

July, 1978
- 167 -

Preliminary Model for Education Entitlement

Voucher Program

(Presented July 1978 for -liscussion)

I. Definition of the Problem ani Objectives of the ProgEss_

A. The basic objective of the educational entitlement voucher

program is to provide an entry route into the primary labor

market by providing those youth in CETA who are motivated

toward post-secondary education the opportunity to pursue it.

The specific goals include:

1. To increase vocational technical and academic

knowledge of youth.

2. To broaden the perspectives of youth through

a. broadening their range of social contacts

b. polishing social skills

c. increase opportunities to acquire information

on occupational options

d. enchancing youth's self-esteem, sense of personal

efficacy and commitment.

B. An additional objective is to provide opportunity for

research and knowledge development which will facilitate

the Department of Labor formulation-of national policy

twoards youth employment.

II. The Target Population

1. All youth why have served one year, not necessarily continuous, in on or more CETA program shall be eligible

for two year educational entitlement voucher. (youth are

defined as persons 16 to 21 /ears of age.)

2. For those youth who lack a high lehool diploma and are unable to gain admission to th, training program of their

choicer the educational voucher can be reserved for the

period while the candidate either retrrns to high school

or prepares for and takes tha GED exam. Financial support.

will be arranged through a subsidized work program of

15-20 hours per week during this phase.

3. No criteria other than one year's service in a CETA program

shall be employed to determine eligibility for participation

in the progrem.

186
III. Content of Program

1. For one year of successful service in CETA programs,

a youth shall be entitled to two years of education.

For those without a high school dipolma, they will

also be entitled to a subsidized work-study program

while obtaining the GED or high school dip:Omar at

no charge against the basic entitlement.

2. The youth will have a seven year time span following

completion of CETA service during which to exercise

the option.

3. Support services will be built into the program only

at the initial phase when a youth chooses to excerise

the voucher option, and designed to help the youth in

making his or her own occupational and educational

choices. Each youth will have the option to privately

purchase by voucher, educational and vocational testing

services to obtain self-assessment information useful

to his or her decision-making. In addition extensive

information and resource services concerning, educational

programs and labor market information will be available

if the youth chooses to' utilize it. All support services

will be voluntary. Once the youth are enrolled in a

training program, they will have access to any and all

services provided' by the educational institutiontand

community.

IV. Resources Available to the Program

1. The educational entitlement voucher would cover

educational expenses of tuition, fees, and books. In

addition 200 per month will be provided as a living

stipend. Those youth with additional expenses such as

dependents can exercise an additional option for work

part-time,arranged either at the school or, if this is

not possible in other DOL projects (as in the G.I. Bill,

provision will be made for 250 hours at the minimum wage.

Any other work not exceeding 20 hours per week which the

youth secure is entirely independent of the DOL voucher.

2. Educational expenses which exceed $2500 per year must be

subject to review and special approval, but are not

automatically ruled out.

3. Yes it is possible for the voucher to carry a youth through

graduate and undergraduate education, if he has served

in CETA enough years to accumulate vouchers.
Estimated cost of program indirect outlay for vouchers.

1. Per youth ( Maximum)

Two years of tuition and fees

Two years of stipend (24 months)

2. Per 1,000 youth (Maximum)

Total Cost $9,800.00

3. Per Youth (Minimum)

Two years of tuition and fees

To-years of stipend

4. Per 1,000 youth (Mimimum)

Total Cost $6,400.00

188

$5,000

4,800

$W7ITOT

$1,600

4,800

owo .
V. Inter-Organizational and Monitoring Issues

1. Performance of the students should be monitored by the

educational institution. Each term an educational

institution must certify that a youth is registered, is

attending, and is in good standing.

2. Vouchers can be used only at those schools which are on

the Verterans Administration's approved list for use of

the G. I. Bill.

3. The educational entitleMent voucher of the Department of

Labor is in addition to all other financial assistance

for which a youth is qualified.'

4. There shall be no limit to the number of youth who can

participate in the educational entitlement voucher program. However, if the resources of DOl require a. limitation,

there shallibe no restrictions on eligibility, but .rather

selection for voucher recipients will be done by lottery.

,Those not .receiving the voucher can then serve as a control

goup.in the research. . 5. The educational entitlement voucher'program shall be administered out of the DepartMent of Labor Regional_Office

nearest to thwselected site for the demonstration prbject.

6. Research will consist of the following components:

a) three year longitudinal research design comparing

those youths who opt for the voucher with comparable controlgroup of CETA youth not involved in the voucher

on selected indicators such as the overall goal of

entry into the primary labor market. Ne0=efamMtat*pie

ressees4emFamefteks)

b) general data collection, descriptive in.nature will

.provide regular status reports.

c) selected case studies

d) economic and administrative feasibility of largescale implementation (cost/benefit model)

e) analysis of iMpact on the labor market (long-term

research goal)

I.
APPENDIX B

CAREER ADVANCEMENT VOUCHER DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

Final Guidelines

U.S. Department of Labor

Office of Youth Programs

April 28, 1979
- 172 -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I OVERVIEW

II BACKGROUND

III PROJECT OBJECTIVES

IV PROGRAM LOCATION/OPERATOR

V YOUTH ELIGIBILITY, OUTREACH AND

RECRUITMENT

ENROLLEE SELECTION .AND ASSIGNMENT.:

VII SELECTION OF PARTICIPATING COLLEGES

VIII PROGRAM SERVICES

A. Orientation and Preparation for

College Application

B. Educational Expenses, College

Allowances, Work Experience,

and Wages

C. Voucher,versus Operated-Assisted

Alternatives

Pace

1

3

8

11

12

16

20

25

26

27

31

D. Assistance versus Non-assistance 33

for Involvement in College. Life

E. Social Support Services 36

IX PROJECT ADMINISTRATION AND OPERATING COSTS 37

X .RESEARCH AND REPORTING;, 38
- 173 -

CAREER ADVANCEMENT VOUCHER DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

I. Overview

The Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration Project is a

discretionary funded youth project (under CETA, Title IV,

Part A, Subpart 3 - YETP) which aimes to examine the

feasibility and benefits of providing disadvantaged youth

with subsidized full-time college education for up to two

years. This special project is designed to facilitate

rigorous research for

(1) MEASURING THE RELATIVE EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS AND

IMPACT OF SUCH EDUCATION AS COMPARED TO STANDARD CETA

YOUTH PROGRAMS AS A MEANS OF FOSTERING THE EMPLOYMENT

CAREERS OF YOUTH;

(2) DETERMINING THE FEASIBILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF

DEVELOPING A METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFYING THOSE CETA

YOUTH PARTICIPANTS WHO SHOULD BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY

FOR COLLEGE EDUCATION:

(3) ASSESSING THE RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVE

APPROACHES roR PROVIDING DISADVANTAGED YOUTH WITH

COLLEGE OPPORTUNITY THROUGH CETA PROGRAMING:'AND

(4) EXPLORING THE POTENTIAL OF UTILIZING NON-CETA RESOURCES

(E.G., BASIC EDUCATION OPPORTUNITY GRANTS, ETC.) FOR

SUPPLEMENTING AND/OR SUBSTITUTION FOR CETA RESOURCES

(PARTICULARLY IF YOUTH PLAN TO FURTHER THEIR COLLEGE

EDUCATION BEYOND THE TWO YEAR PERIOD OF CETA PARTICIPATION).
The demonstration will focus on 16-21 year old YETP

eligible youth who are out-of-school and those youth

currently enrolled in CETA programs who will not have

exceeded eight months of CETA participation by

September 1, 1979. It will involve random assignment

of youth to college and standard CETA youth programs in

a manner which assures comparability of youth in both

types of experiences. The Department of Labor has

specified various other research controls to be utilized

to also test the relative benefits of (a) alternative

screening procedures for selecting a pool of potential

project participants, (b) use of a voucher for providing

youth with free choice of post-secondary education, and

(c) varying levels of support services for project

participants. In addition, the six separate demonstration

project sites around the country are to have procedures

similar enough to facilitate multi-site research comparisons.

The national office of the U.S. Department of Labor has

separately contracted for a central research agent for the

overall demonstration, Clark, Phipps, Clark & Harris, Inc.

(CPC&H), to be responsible for (1) guiding the implementation'of all research controls at the six project sites, (2)

conducting in-program and post-program participant follow-up

surveys, and (3) completing data analysis to distill research

findings for the demonstration project.

'193
II. Background

The Youth Employment and Demonstration Projects Act (YEDPA)

of 1977 emphasizes research and experimentation for the

purpose of developing information and knowledge which is

needed for the formulation of more effeCtive national

policy for dealing with structural youth unemployment..

A major goal of YEDPA is to explore the relative effectiveness

of alternative approaches for helping disadvantaged youth

enter the world of work and achieve stable employment and

job advancement. In light of this goal, it is essential

that we recognize the fact that for various educational

levels, non-white youth unemployment rates are much higher

than those for whites except those who are college educated.

Thus, acquisition of college, education tends to equalize

whites and non-whitesin the labor market; in fact, college

education also reduces employment barriers for both groups.

The literature on youth unemployment clearly shows that

lack of educational credentials--especially a high school

diploma, but increasingly some post-secondary education--

limits the entry of youth into primary labor market jobs.

This central fact sets the goal for the proposed demonstration

research project to test whether providing selected CETA

194
youth with an opportunity to pursue up to 2 years of college

education will enable these youth to enter the primary

labor market and otherwise have more positive employment

earnings experiences as compared to similar youth who are

served through standard CETA programs.

CETA programs for out-of-school youth tend to be short-term

(less than 1 year's duration) and focused on work experience.

The smaller portion of CETA programming for youth concentrates

on classroom instruction. However, this activity typically

is designed to provide youth with specific vocational

education courses and/or remedial education which usually

do not excited a 12-month period.

The above character of CETA youth programs stems from various

circumstances: (1) most unemployed young people applying

to CETA programs have little or no work history but need

work experience in order to develop proper work habits and

attitudes necessary to secure the employment they seek;

(2) most CETA youth (85 percent) have not completed high

school and read 3-4 grade levels below the last grade

completed, and these circumstances limit the intensity of

classroom vocational and remedial education which can be

provided to them; and (3) historically, youth programs

have been designed and geared to minimize cost and duration

195
of sta'' outh participant as a means of maximizing

the nt youth who could be served with the limited

funds e (CMS shows that out-of-school youth in

Title X pt is were enrolled for only an average of

18 weeks).

A reasonable assumption which can be made is that the

nature of eloyment and earnings outcomes for CETA youth

participants will be related to the character of their CETA

activities. In view of this, it is not surprising that

successful CETA youth participants generally can only secure

jobs in the secondary labor market.

Few CETA youth are transitioned into primary labor market

jobs. However, one out of every six youth who apply to

CETA has graduated from high school, and one out of every

20 other youth obtains their GED through CETA. These

facts offer some perspective for recognizing that (1) a

good number of "successful" CETA youth who obtain secondary

labor market jobs are significantly underemployed in these

jobs, and (2) some special CETA efforts should be made to

provide selected youth with more intensive/longer-term

programs which are designed to help these youth enter the

primary labor market.
- 178 -

A logical program approach for enhancing the prospects of

having CETA youth enter the primary labor market is to

provide select youth with an opportunity for two years of

full-time college education and appropriate summer work

experience. Any CETA prime sponsor can now implement such

a service strategy but it is rarely, if ever, done for

several reasons. First, these sponsors do not know how to

select those youth who can successfully use college

opporunity for their employability development. Second,

no research has been done to determine whether the pay-off

in participant outcomes is worth the added cost of two

full years of services for each youth. Third, many sponsors

are not even aware that two years of full-time college

education is a legal and legitimate CETA service approach

for employability development; many sponsors purchase

"class-size" institutional training for CETA participants

at community colleges, but this instruction generally is

limited to selected courses for specific vocational

training and do-es not permit individualized two-year

programs of full-time college education (leading to an

A.A. degree if ,the youth is at a two-year college.) Fourth,

CETA sponsors tend to rell heavily on program activities
- 179 -

which enroll groups or classes of youth to be served in a

single setting as compared to individual referral for

individualized programming at varying institutions; sponsors

generally take actions for administrative ease and to reduce

overhead cost.

In view of the above, a special youth demonstration project

which is rigorously designed and researched is needed to test

the viability of having selected CETA youth provided an

opportunity for two years of full-time college education as

a means of preparing these young people for gaining primary

labor market jobs. However, in implementing such a project

one must recognize that there are some financial resources

beyond CETA which exist in-'communities (e.g., Basic Education

Opportunity Grants-BEOG's, etc.) for assisting disadvantaged

youth. Therefore, the demonstration project to be undertaken

must attempt to utilize these resources, particularly in the

second program year and in subsequent years, should the.youth

participants desire to matriculate beyond the two-year

period to be facilitated through CETA programming.
III. Project Objectives

The overall objective of the proposed Career Advancement

Voucher Demonstration Project is to determine whether and

how CETA prime sponsors and Job Corps Centers should give

some priority to providing selected youth with an opportunity

for college education per se, as a means of facilitating

their entrance to the primary labor market.

More specficially, the project will

(1) MEASURE THE RELATIVE EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS AND

IMPACT OF SUCH EDUCATION AS COMPARED TO STANDARD CETA

YOUTH PROGRAMS AS A MEANS OF FOSTERING THE EMPLOYMENT

CAREERS OF YOUTH;

(2) DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF

DEVELOPING A METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFYING THOSE CETA

YOUTH PARTICIPANTS WHO SHOULD BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY

FOR COLLEGE EDUCATION;

(3) ASSESS THE RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF ALTERNATIVE

APPROACHES FOR PROVIDING DISADVANTAGED YOUTH WITH COLLEGE

OPPORTUNITY THROUGH CETA PROGRAMMING; AND

(4) EXPLORE THE POTENTIAL OF UTILIZING,NON-CETA RESOURCES

(E.G., BASIC EDUCATION OPPORTUNITY GRANTS, STATE TUITION

GRANTS, GRANTS THROUGH PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS ETC.) FOR

SUPPLEMENTING AND/OR SUBSTITUTION FOR CETA RESOURCES

(PARTICULARLY IF YOUTH PLAN TO FURTHER THEIR COLLEGE

EDUCATION BEYOND THE TWO YEAR PERIOD OF CETA PARTICIPATIONft

19P
To achieve the above objectives, the demonstration will be

designed to provide for experimental and control groups,

and for in-program and post-program follow-up to be conducted

by the centeral research agent to analyze the impact of the

demonstration on participating youth. In addition, research

will be conducted to assess the impact of the demonstration

on its participating institutions (e.g., CETA prime sponsors,

Job Corps Centers, participating colleges, etc.1

The Career Advancement Voucher Demonstration is designed to

address the following major questions:

1. Whether demonstration project participants who receive

an opportunity to attend college at least 2 years will be

more likely to enter the primary labor market and otherwise

have more positive post-program employment and earnings

experiences than comparable CETA participants who do not

receive such an opportunity.

2. Whether the "human capital" return on the DOL investment

will be greater for project participants than for the control

group served through standard CETA youth operations.

3. Whether free choice for youth in selection of college and

courses through use of a voucher is more beneficial than

having program operators assist youth and approve such education

decisions.

200
4. Whether greater involvement in college life and

college experiences result in more positive program-outcones

than lesser involvement in college life and experiences.

5. Whether area unemployment rate and other local conditions

interact with post-program participant outcomes.

6. Whether there are criteria which have predictive validity

for selection of participants in similar future CETA programs.

7. Whether CETA resources can be linked to other community

resources to facilitate college education for disadvantaged

youth.

8. Whether any CETA eligible youth and which CETA eligible

youth can benefit from the college approach.

The following sections address major program procedures and

research controls:

Program Location/Operator

Youth Ell4ibility, Outreach and Recruitment

Enrollee Selection. and Assignment

Selection of Participating College

Program Services

Project Administration and Operating Costs

Research and Reporting

201
- 183 -

IV. Program Location/Operator

This demonstration project is being condudted in five CETA

prime sponsor jurisdictions and a selected Job Corps Center.

The extent to which subcontractors or staff of the CETA

prime sponsor or Job Corp will operate the demonstration

project will be discussed in meetings with the prime sponsors

and Job Corps staff.

In each of the jurisdictions, the program operator must

work cooperatively with the Department of Labor's central

research agent--Clark,Phipps/ Clark and Harris, Inc. (CPC &H)

--in order to assure appropriate implementation of the

program to meet controls of the research design.

The unique characteristics of each of the demonstration

sites will be considered in analyzing the effects of the

subsidized employment experience on post-program job

transition and other outcomes.

202
V. Youth Eligibility, Outreach, and Recruitment

Each program operator's project will include positions for

one hundred separate slots for youth who will attend

college for a period of up to two years. The project will

be open to youth ages sixteen to twenty-one years who meet

YETP eligibility requirements and who desire and are

available for full-time college work.

The youths chosen to fill the slots at each demonstration

site will be selected from a pool of at least two hundred

YETP eligible young persons recruited by the project

operator. The selection of youth will be done on a

statistically random basis by the centeral research agent.

All potential participants will be recruited and selected

to facilitate their enrollment in college by September 1979.

Youths who are selected for the project but who are unable

to begin or complete college work will not be replaced by

other youth.

Youths to be considered for this project may be recruited

from two sources: (1) those youths already enrolled in

CETA Prime Sponsor programs who will not have exceeded

eight months of CETA participation by September 1, 1979

203
(this restriction will allow youths selected for this

project to stay within the federal auidelines of maximum

CETA participation); (2) those youths who are new to the

CETA program, especially those youths who will be graduating

from high school in June 1979 and who have no employment

prospects. It is stressed that all youths placed into

the pool from which participants are selected must agree

that they desire to attend college.

Youths placed into the pool from which participants are

selected shall be selected in accordance with Section

676.54(b) of the CETA regulations.

A brochure describing the project will be created by the

central research agent in consultation with the program

operators. Prime sponsors are free to use this brochure

or to develop their own to fit publicity needs of their

individual sites.

Prime sponsors will be in control of local publicity so

they may not be inlidated by youths wanting to go to

college. Every attempt will be made by the Office of

Youth Programs to inform prime sponsors of any impending

rational or regional publicity which might have local

effects.

204
186 e.

YETP eligible youths who have been admitted to college

on or before April 15, 1979 shall not be eligible to

participate in this project. The rationale for this

is that the program is intended to serve disadvantaged

youths who would not, under other circumstances, be

going to college. Although the identification of a cutoff date does not certainly identify those youths who

would be going to college anyhow, it may be the best

indicator available for making this distinction.

All youths who are admitted into the pool of eligible

youths at any project site will be required to sign the

Participant Acknowledgment form, see Attachment B at the

end of these Guidelines, before their names may be

considered for selection. It is intended that this will

educate youth participants about the benefits and risks

of the program.

Two separate procedures will be used for identifying

potential youths to participate in the project. (All

youths must be YETP eligible.)
1. Locally-Determined Recruitment Criteria

Three prime sponsors will establish recruitment criteria

suitable for their jurisdictions. Each, using its own

criteria, shall select one hundred and fifty potential

participants. The pool from which these youths are

selected must be described in writing to the central

research agent. The criteria for creating the pool and

for selecting youths from the pool must be identified in

writing and sent to the central research agent by noon,

Monday, May 7, 1979. Any changes in the criteria which

are subsequently desired by the prime sponsor shall first

be discussed with the central research agent.

2. Recruitment Criteria by the Central Reseach Agent

Two prime sponsors will have recruitment criteria

determined for them by the central research agent. These

sponsors will assemble a pool of potential project youths

in accordance with criteria identified by the central

research agent.
3. General Recruitment Criteria

Each project site will provide the central research agent

with the following for each member of the pool of youths

at the site:

1) a completed supplementary intake questionnaire

(see Attachment A at the end of these Guidelines);

2) other completed intake forms which are already

specified to the sites by the central research

agent; and

3) a completed answer sheet for a 20-minute test

(sub-parts 2,.3, 4, and 6 of the general

Aptitude Test Battery--GATB).

VI Enrollee Selection and Assianment

For each project site, the central research agent will

randomly select one hundred (100) youths to attend

college and fifty (50) youths who will serve as members

of the research control group. Only in the case of the

two prime sponsors will the central research agent use

the completed intake questionnaires and tests as a

screening device prior to random selection of project

participants and control group members for those two sites.

For the other three project sites, these data will not

be used in any way except for research analyses to

determine whether there are items which have predictive

validity for future selection of participants for similar

future programs. 20 7
The central research agent will be discussing the above

matter in greater detail with the program operators.

The above selection materials for at least fifty (50) youths

from each demonstration site musfarrive at the office

of the central research agent by noon, Wednesday, May 2,

1979. At this time, the agent will review all forms

and determine if any modifications in intake procedures

of the operators should be made. Any necessary modifications

in selection materials or procedures will be communicated

to project operators by Tuesday, May 8, 1979. Selection

materials for all the remaining youths in the pool from

each site must arrive at the office of the central research

agent by noon, Monday, June 4, 1979. Project operators

may be asked to submit selection materials in two or

three smaller batches between May 7 and June 4, 1979,

but this will be determined by the central research agent

in consultation with the project operators. (Such staggered

submissions may spread out the work tasks of'both the

project operators and the research agent.) All youths

selected to enter the college-bound program will be

identified to the project operators by noon, Monday,

June 18, 1979, at the latest. Youths will be selected by

the central research agent according to a statistically

208
random process which takes into consideration research

criteria related to the demonstration project. (The dates

referred to in this paragraph may be modified by the

central research agent.)

Those youths not selected for the college experience are

to be provided whatever other standard CETA Programs or

activities which are appropriate as determined by the

prime sponsor. Whatever happens to youth in the regular

CETA programs is what should happen to youths who are

not selected for the college experience. It is possible

for some youths to leave a CETA experience in order to

attend college; if this happens with any youths not

selected for college, it should be permitted. However,

youths not selected for college shall not be helped to

attend college by the local program operator. This project

may not in any way assist youths not selected for college

to attend college. Those youth who are selected for

college who are already in a CETA program must continue

in their then current slots. Those youths who are

selected for college but who are not now in a CETA program

must be employed as summer or other program Participants

or as a junior staff member after notification of their

selection. These actions are intended to insure as much

as possible that selected youth will have taken the steps

necessary and are available to enroll in =liege in

September.

209
To the extent that youth selected for college are involved

prior to September in activities related to their enrollment

in college (for example, orientation, application preparation,

course advisement, career counseling), their allowances

and other approved costs will be borne by the demonstration

project budget.

It is planned that selection youths will attend college

on a full-time basis, but if any of them reduces college

class work or drops out of the Program, the money budgeted

for that person may not be used to enroll another youth

as a replacement. In no case may unused money from this

demonstration project be used for program activities other

than this demonstration project.

210.
VII.. Selection of Participating Colleges

Of all the contingencies connected with this demonstration

project, perhaps none are more crucial than those related

to the selection of the participating colleges for youths

to attend. Most importantly, colleges will have to agree

to accept for admission the young people in this project

who may apply to their institutions. Secondly, efforts

will have to be made to get colleges to accommodate what

in most cases will be lateness in the application process.

Contacts, discussions, and negotiations with local fouryear or community colleges in the demonstration sites

must begin as soon as possible, but at least by April 20,

1979. Prime sponsors and Project opertors in consultation

with the central researcL agent will design a plan for

working with the colleges on this matter. The Office of

Youth Programs of the U.S. Department of Labor will also

be a resource to assist in this effort.

Since it is the intent of this project to measure the

effect of college education on the eventual career outcomes of youths, it is intended that youths attend schools

which provide recognized college programs. In order to be

attended by a youth in this program, a college must meet

the following criteria, which are the same as those for

the Veteran's Administration:
1) a college, university, or school must provide

an associate of arts degree or higher; and

2) a college, university, or school must be on the

current list of schools which are "approved for

Veteran's training" and so identified by the

Veteran's Administration Regional Office for

the area.

Also, in order to be a potential college to be attended by

youths in this project, a college, university, or school

must be within commuting distance of the youth's residence.

This means that some colleges may be within the jurisdictions of other prime sponsors. In some instances,

youths in this program may apply to a college, university,

or school which is not within commuting distance of the

youth's home. Under these circumstances, the decision for

a youth to receive financial support from this program

while attending such a college, university, or school

shall be made by the national Office of Youth Programs

on a case-by-case basis after the following conditions

have been met and documented in writing to the office:

1) the youth shall be eligible for and selected

as a college-bound youth in the program;

212
2) the youth shall have been admitted or accepted

to attend the college;01u4+.41/4"r"i is./111

3) there shall be a workable place which identifies

how the youth will meet non-tuition- and feeexpenses, such as room, board, transportation,

and personal expenses; this plan shall include

copies of confirmed written statements of offers

of grant, scholarship, or other funds;

4) there shall be identified a workable written plan,

agreeable to the respective prime sponsor, which

explains how monitoring of classroom attendance

and how payment of allowances to the youth shall

take place; and

5) there shall be a statement signed by the youth

acknowledging and agreeing that neither the prime

sponsor nor the project is obliged to provide him

or her a paid work experience duririg regular

class time during the time that classes are

regularly in session.

This project will not, under any circumstances, pay other

than tuition and fee costs for any youths who participate

in it.

213
It is stressed that the higt cost of tuition at any college,

university, or school is not a basis for denying a youth

the financial support of'this program to attend the

college of his or her choice. If, however, the total

cost of tuition and fees for any youth exceeds $2,500

annually, this matter shall be reviewed by the national

Office of Yot'th Programs for review and decision.

It will be acceptable if colleges wish to admit youths

from this project on a conditional or provisional basis

--this means formal admission is delayed until successful

completion of one or two semesters. This may result in

some colleges being more willing to accommodate youths

in this demonstration project. Colleges should know,

however, that the academic classwork and other experiences

for youths in this project should not differ from classwork

and academic experiences of any other students whicb they

serve.

In addition to identifying a contact person at each

institution who will facilitate the applications of youths

in this project, project operators should state clearly

that the tuition and fees for any youths who attend will

be Paid by the project and will not be the responsibility

of individual youths. Both voucher and letter of credit

procedures acceptable to each college must be developed

by the operator. The central research agent must be

consulted and involved as necessary in 'these matters.

214
Finally, a list of colleges which have agreed to .accept

project youths will be assembled by the project operator

for each demonstration site. This must be accomplished

at least by July 1, but preferably by June 15, 1979. It

is not until after all of the participating colleges are

identified that selected youths will be able to take

the necessary steps for them to apply and be admitted.

The list of participating colleges for each demonstration

site must be forwarded to the central research agent as

soon as it is completed by no later than July 1, 1979.

215
VIII Program Services

Youths selected to attend college will have their college

tuition and fees paid by the project, youths will'also

receive directly a special grant for books. Youths will

be Paid an allowanCe for the number of clock hours-they

spend in class per week and they will.be able to be paid

wages for a part-time work experience while they attend

classes for up to ten hours ner week, at $2.90 per hour.

Each college -bound youth will be asked to sign a waiver

giving the central research agent.and the local prime

sponsor access to his or her school recordS. The

central research agent will assign one -half of all youth

at each demonstration site to accomplish admission to

college.and selection of their classes:on their own.

This free choice arrangement will be 'implemented through . use of a voucher. The other half of the selected youth

will receive 'supervised assistance from the project

operator in accomplishing these tasks. Additionally,

the central research agent will assign one-half of all

youth at each.site to receive glecial stimulation and

help to become involved in "the college experience and

college life;,while the other half of selected youths

will not receive such special assistance or stimulation.

Thus, each demonstration site will have four experimental

grouns.
A. Orientation and Preparation for College Application

Members of each of the four experimental groups at each

prime sponsor site will participate in an orientation

session concerning the goals, requirements, and procedures

for the demonstration project. Separate orientation

sessions will be held for each of the experimental groups.

These sessions should be held by the program operator

immediately after the 100 program participants are

identified by the central research agent (these sessions

should be held not later than the week of June 25 assuming

all participants are identified by June 18). A standard

curriculum for the orientation and other specifications

will be developed by the central research agent in

consultation with the participating program operators.

Immediately after orienting all youth participating in

the project, the program operator will assist non-voucher

youth in (a) identifying a suitable vocational goal,

and related college education courses and programs, and

(b) selecting an appropriate college(s) to make application

to as a means of pursuing the selected vocational goal.

Both two and four year colleges may be chosen even

though the project will support only up to two years

of college education. The general approaches and

practices to be utilized by program operators in

2J7
- 199 -

in accomplishing orientation and individual guidance

activities will be identified by the central research

agent in consultation with the participating program

operators.

B. Educational Expenses, College Allowances, Work

Experience and Wages

The tuition costs and fees of each youth selected for this

demonstration will be paid directly to the educational

institution on behalf of the individual student. The

regular full cost of tuition and fees will be supplied

for up to a full-time course load at individual

institutions. These costs will be monitored by the

central research agent and with approval of the Department

of Labor. The amount of each youth's book allowance is

yet to be determined by the central research agent and

the Department of Labor, but this allowance will be paid

directly to youths.

All youths selected for this project will be paid $2r90

per hour for each clock hour of class time they spend.

Procedures for confirming the actual amount of class

time spent by each youth each week must be developed;

and since these may be different from site to site,

these procedures will be developed between the local

program operator and the local colleges to be attended

by youths. The objective in this regard is that there

218
be a dependable mechanic c to assure that youths are

paid only for hours actually spent in class. While such

procedures must be reliable on the one hand, they ought

not to stigmatize enrolled youth by using attendancetaking methods which cause undue identification of youths

as unusual among their peers.

Some colleges and universities take attendance in classes.

If this is the case, the local prime sponsor shall

obtain, through the college or university, verification

of each youth's attendance. If attendance is not

routinely taken, the local program operator must develop

s system which reliable informs the sponsor of attendance

and absences from class, but does not, at the same time,

stigmatize the CETA participant by calling attention to

the fact that his or her attendance is being monitored.

It is suggested that each CETA youth attending a college,

university, or school which does not take attendance

be required to certify attendance at classes. It is

also suggested that this certification process be

verified through frequent spot checks on attendance at

the class site. A plan for monitoring class attendance

at each project site shall be developed by the prime

sponsor and presented to the Office of Youth Programs

219
and the central research agent by July 31, 1979. The

plan shall be approved by the national Office of Youth

Programs before it can be implemented. If such a systei

or 'one similar to it is instituted, youths shall know

that inaccuracies on the certification form is

tantamount to falsifying a government document and can

incur serious consequences.

When classes are missed, local program operators must,

at least, deduct a pre-rata share of the youth's

allowance for classes which are missed in accordance

with CETA regulations and guidelines. Further, it is

not allowed to pay college bound youths for time that

they spend studying; this is primarily because of the

difficulty of adequate monitoring of study time.

Youths may reduce their class load from full-time, but

in no case may a youth remain in the project if he or

she registers for less than a half-time clasi load.

All youths in this project will be allowed to have a

paid work extrerience of up to ten (10) hours per week

at a rate of $2.90 per hour. Work experience slots for

youth in this project will be developed by the program

operator and should be, as much as possible, related

to youths' college experiences or interest. No youths

in this project may work more than ten (10) hours per
week during the weeks that classes are in session. Youths

also are to have opportunity to work full-time (up to 40

hours per week during the summer of 1980) and during the

weeks when classes are not in session. Youths who

reduce their academic workload from full time may not

be scheduled to work additional hours in work experience

slots. Hopefully the only reason why youths would

choose to reduce college class hours would be.to increase

the time available to them for study and for class.

preparation. Alternate solutions to health, family or

other problems of youths should be pursued before

classroom hours are reduced.

There Are various resources which currently exist in

communities which may be tapped to assist CETA eligible

participants for-this project. Although these existing

resources, such as Basic Education and Occupation Grant

(BEOG), State tuition grants, private grants through

foundations, Social Security Disability and Survival's

Insurance, and benefits from the Veterans Administration,

have, their own special eliaibility, it is quite likely

that some CETA youth eligible for the project will also

be eligible for these other resources.
Program operators are to seek out these available resources

to supplement and/or to substitute them for CETA funds in

the operation of Projects. It is recognized that for the

first program year this probably will not be feasible

due to the limited amount of time in which to have

projects gear up and become operative. However, major

efforts must be exerted to secure these financial

resources for participants during the second project

year. This is of particular importance to those

participants who may have successfully matriculated

during the two year voucher demonstration and afterwards

opt to continue in college for a third or fourth year,

but who will not longer receive financial support from

CETA. Therefore, the successful pooling or linking of

these resources becomes a goal in itself, one if not_

accomplished may further limit the chances of CETA

participants to enter the Primary rather than the

secondary labor market.

C. Enrollment in College: Voucher Versus Non-Voucher

The central research agent will assian one-half of all

youth at each demonstration site to accomplish admission

to college and selection of their classes on theii own.

These youth will be given a voucher, or free choice,
and the list of participating colleges in their area,

and they will be expected to do those tasks necessary

to begin college. These youths will be free to seek

any help they feel they need, including help from the

program operator or college guidance sources. These

youths will make all decisions related to their

applications and course selections.

The other half of selected youth will receive guidance,

assistance, and approval from the staff of the Project

operator in choosing a college, applying, and selecting

and arranging course work. The intensity of involvement

of staff with youth in this group may vary widely from

site to site and from individual to individual. Naturally,

project operators will also want to foster as much mutual

agreement as possible in working with this group of youths

so that their interest and involvement in the college

experience will be as great as. possible. Ultimately,

however, resolution of education-related issues of youths

in this group will require the approval of the staff of the

project operator.. Several guidelines for working with

youths in this category will be identified by the central

research agent after consultation with project operators.

This will allow for comparability of treatment of youths

at the sites.
D. Assistance versus Non-assistance for Involvement in

Collece Life

At the same time that youths are selected to attend

college and to be in the voucher or non - voucher categories,

they will also be assigned to one of two groups regarding

the receipt of assistance for involving them in college

y life experiences while they attend college. One-half

of all youths selected for this Project will be assigned

by the central research agent to receive assistance in

involving themselves in college life; and one-half will

be assigned not to receive assistance in involving themselves in college life.

The estimated attrition rate for a target population such

as CETA youth is about 50 percent and the lack of

student involvement in campus life has-been identified

as a factor explaining this high attrition rate. The

"uninvolved" student is described as one who does not

participate in extracurricular activities, is seldom on

campus except to attend classes, and interacts Infrequently

with faculty and fellow students. Therefore, uninvolved

students are believed to have 'relatively poor chances of

persisting in college and of implementing career plans.
-206-

Several areas of college involvement have been identified

as leading to increased

and implementing career

academic, and athletic.

chances of completing college

objectives: interpersonal,

Further, it seems that involvement per se, rather than the exact nature of the

involvement is the crucial ingredient. The college

peer group has been known to be a source of strength,

support, guidance, and acceptance for many youths. The

peer group has been known to be a transition mechanism

between a non-college oriented subculture and the

different value system which rewards study, education,

and self-stimulation as highly worthy goals.

Half of the youths will participate in a program developed

by the central research agent and the program operators

which is designed to promote involvement in the college

experience by linking youths up with relevant,meaningful

formal and informal structures which exist already in

the college environment. This will require the development

of two of the counselor positions at each site to be

filled by individuals with the type of characteristics

required to accomplish such tasks as:
1. assessing the informal and formal structures

'existing at the local colleges--participant

observation, among other means, may be used here;

2. assessing the nature of a youth's interest and

affinities for the interactional, academic,

athletic, and extracurricular options available

at his or her college; and

3. developing and successfully Implementing a

strategy for linking each youth up with the

appropriate structures at the college--this

requires innovative, active, and genuine

approaches by counselors.

This demonstration project proposes to examine whether

such an approach is feasible--that is, do youths who

participate in such a developmental strategy actually

become more involved than those who do not participate

in such a program? 'Moreover, do those youths who

become involved in the "mainstream" of college life

have more successsful educational and employment

outcomes than those who do not?
E. Social Suovort Services

Social support services are defined as any health, housing',

day care, educational, income, and personal and family

counseling assistance. Project operators Will be

staffed to provide personal and family counseling

assistance, will- be able to finance medical 'exams

required for college application and entrancei'and will,

through referrals, use community resources and programs

as a means of providing other needed social support

services.

Although previously discussed as a variable in this

project, the level or intensity of social support

services to yoUths will not be tested. Social supports,

counseling, and other help will be necesserY,

appropriate, and useful for all youths in this project.

These services shall be provided by the project

operator equally to all youths.

Generally, all youths selected for college should be

seen at least monthly by a conselor to discuss current

status and any social service or counseling needs.

Counselors should take the initiative in assisting

youths, but in no situation shall services or assistance

be forced on a youth who does not want it.
IX. Project Administration and Operating Costs

The administration and delivery of services to youths

in this program must be comparable in all six sites

because this is a demonstration project. Some variation

in staffing, however, may be appropriate depending on

preferences, abilities, and existing CETA programs

already operated by prime sponsors. Counselors to

work with youths, and .a supervisor of each demonstration site are necessary.

In any case the staffing level for each demonstration

site will be similar, and will be determined by the

Office of Youth Programs.. -Generallyt four counselors,.

clerical help ,and .a project drectpr would awear

necessary for each project. Also, the demonstration

will addresi allowable .cost levels for program

administration and operations.
- 210-,

X. Research and ReDorting

As the central research agent for the overall demonstration project, Clark Phipps, Clark and Harris

will perform the following tasks:

1. Develop procedures for use in randomly assigning

youth to experimental program services and

control groups.

2. Develop final demonstration program guidelines,

in consultation with the participating program

operators, subject to approval of the Department

of Labor.

3. Ascertain, on a continuing basis, the overall

credibility of prormm operations for providing

reliable research data which can be subjected

to rigorous analysis to meet the knowledge

development goals of the project.

4. Specify the particular data and information for

research to be obtained from program operator

records, as well as from program implementation

and operations.

5. Interview youth in the experimental and control

groups in August 1979, January/May/August 1980,

and Januari/May/October 1981.
6. Verify necessary research data recordkeeping by

program operators;

7. Computerize all research data for the demonstration

sites;

8. Prepare selected research reports for the use of

program operators to be disseminated through the

Office of Youth Programs.

9. Analyze research data in accordance with an

analysis plan prepared in advance; and

10. Develop monthly activity, quarterly progress:

and other special periodic reports on the progress

and findings of the demonstration, as well as

a final report on overall knowledge development

results and conclusions.

The majority of outcome research instruments and measures

to be utilized in the demonstration will be identical

to those being used in several other discretionarY

projects funded by the Department of Labor's Office

of Youth Programs. This will permit establishment

of a broad data base to enable cross comparisons

of projects having varying demonstration features.

Such analyses will expand the knowledge development

potential of any particular demonstration, and will

aid in addressing the elusive goal of determining what

works best for whom under which conditi'ms.
APPENDIX.0

SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF

EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP
F- TEST COMP!RISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP

Mean

on ail_

SD N

Total 18.7 1.03 677

Experimental 18.6 1,03 482

Control 18.8 1.03 195

Analysis of

Mean Square OF F-Test

Variance

1,062

1.057

1,068

Significance

Among Groups 2,471 1 2.331 .145

Within Groups 1,060 675
Male

CHI SQUARE COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND, CONTROL GROUPS ON SEX

Ex eri

mata

36.4%

Female 63.6%

Control

35.7%

64.3%

Total 486 196

Chi Square = 0.01

degrees of freedom = 1 significance over .500
CHI-SQUARE COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS

ON ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE

Economically =Ad Control

lasadvantaged mental_

Yes 96.7% 96.4%

No 3.3% 3.6%

TOTAL ( 461 )

Chi Square = 0.00

degrees of freedom la 1

(192)

significance over .500

235
CHI - SdUARE. COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS ON ETHNICITY

Ethnicity

White

Black

Hispanic

Other

Experimental

6.3%

70.5

22.6

0.6

Total ( 478 )

Chi - Square a 7.27

degrees of freedom !`- 3

significance 068
Total

Experimental

,Control

F- TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL

GROUP OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE SCORES

Mean SD N YAriaarLa

28.5 10.25 551 104.99

28.7 10.20 390 104.02

27.8 10.36 161 107.35

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

Mean Square DF F-Test

=Mailicr N104. IMMON )iiOng Groups 105.80

;Within Groups 104.99 549

1.01

Significanc0

.330
CHI- SQUARE COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL

GROUPS ON PREVIOUS CETA PARTICIPATION

CETA Experi

Participant mental

YES

NO

TOTAL

Chi- Square = 0.47

degrees of freedom = 1

Control

46.5% 46.0%

53.5%

(488)

54.0%

(198)

significance over .500

238

1:
CHI - SQUARE. COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS

ON RECEIPTS OFAFDC

AFDC Exper

mental

YES

NO

Total

13.7%

86.3%

( 490 )

Chi - Square = 0.06

degrees of freedom= 1

239

Control

12.6%

87.4%

(198)

significance over .500
tVVHV

CHI- SQUARE COMPARISON:DFAMPEklMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS

'ON WBET#ER MOTHER:LIYES.iN HOUSEHOLD :

-: Mother lives in Household Experi Control

_6.............

..;!,.:.., - '11ITECE.'

e::,-.....:

zi,,,:.:,!. YES 81.31 829%

NO 18.7%

TOTAL (466) (187)

Chi- Square = 0.13

significance over .500

degrees of freedom = 1

240
CHI- SQUARE COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS

ON WHETHER FATHER LIVES IN HOUSEHOLD

Mag- Control

Father lives in Household MOW

YES

NO

47.9% 52.8%

52.1% 47.2%

Total (436) (180)

Chi Square 111 1.01

degrees of freedom = 1

241

significance = .320
F - TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL

40MISMIMIMPumpmamMIUMM=IMINMENINIIMM011101r

GROUPS ON GATB NUMERICAL

Mean SD

Total 92.2 14.24

Experimental 92.2 14.36

Control 92.2 13.93

Analysis of Variance Table

693

491

202

Variance

202.66

206.21

194.04

Mean Square DP F-Test Significancez

Among Groups 0.40 1 0.00 over .500

Within Groups 203.25 691
P- TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL

Mean

Total 91.6

Experimental 91.8

Control 92.4

GROUPS ON GATB VERBAL

SD N Variance

11.03 693 121.62

11.52 491 132.83

9.70 202 94.06

Analysis of Variance Table

Mean Square DP P-Test Significance

Among Groups 64.33

Within Groups 121.88

1

691

243

0.53 .468
F-TEST. COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL

GROUPS ON GATB TOTAL

Mean SD N Variance

Total 90.4 12.80 693 163.92

Experimental 89.7 13.01 491 169.36

Control 90.8 12.24 202 149.88

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

Mean Square DF F-Test Significance

Among Groups 159.79 1 0.97 .32

Within Groups 164.16 691
F-TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP SALES

ON S T E P READING TEST

Mean SD N Variance

TOTAL 17,261 3,048 495 9,292

Experimental 17,235 3.052 400 9.315

I Control 17,368 3,030 95 9.180 N

N

lri ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

Mean Square DF F.-Test Significance ETA

Among Groups 1,261 1 0.135 over 4500 0.000

Within Groups 9.327 493

245
P-PEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP SALES

ON TOTAL STUDY ORIENTATION

Mean SD N Variance

TOTAL 111.071 32.199 448 1036.771 Experimental 109.496 31.755 337 1008.361 CONTROL 115.856 33,054 111 1092.593

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

Mean Square DP P -Test Significance ETA

Among Groups 3376.318 1 3.266 .072 0.007 Within Groups 1033.846 446

243

rn
F-TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP SCORES ON

VOCATIONAL ATTITUDE

Mean SD N

Total 75.342 12.492 488

Experimental 75.401 12.432 394

Control 75.096 12.736 94

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

Variance

156.044

154.554

162.213

Mean Square DP F-Test Significance ETA

Among Groups 5.866 1 0.037 Over .500 0.000

Within Groups 156.671 486

249

2'50
F-TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP SCORES

ON JOB SEEKING SKILLS

Mean SD N Variance

Total 13.648 2.118

Control 13.707 . :2.063

Experimental 13.400 2.319

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

495 4.486

400 4,257

95 5.377

Mean Square DF F-Test ganitan ETA

Among Groups 7,211 1.606

Within Groups .206 0.003 4,490 493

252

251
!IgAT411111;40F EXPERIMENTAL.AND CONTROL GROUPS ON DECHIVNESS

Mean SA

Total

Ex perimental

56.865 23,095

57.005 23,123

Control 56,277 22.970

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

N Variance

488 533.391

394 534.664

94 527.624

!MAWS 0 F-Test 2iigfian ETA

Among Groups 39,087 0.073 Over .500 0.000

Within Groups 535,503 486

254

253
F-TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP SCORES ON OPTIMISM

Mean SD N Variance

Total 327.388 50,448 492 2544.982 Experimental 327.876 51.329 397 2634.674 Control 325,347 46.530 95 2165.002

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

tliallIBE! DF F-Test Linificance ETA

Among Groups 487.699 1 0,191 Over .500 0.000 Within Groups 2554,369 490

25
P-TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP SCORES

ON SOCIALIZED ATTITUDE

Mean SD N Variance

Total 301,132 55,922 492 3127.295

Experimental 300.460 56.510 397 3193.416

Control 303.936 53,303 95 2841.232

ANAYLIS S OF VARIANCE TABLE

Mean Square DF F -Test 2ignificance ETA

Among Groups 888.696 1 0.283 Over .500 0.001

Within Groups 3138,169 490

258
F-TEST COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP SCORES

ON SELF ESTEEM

Mean SD Variance

Total 226.096 13.744 490 188.897

Experimental 226.278 13.941 396 194.340

Control 225.330 12.855 94 165.241

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

Mean S ware DF F -Test Si3nificance ETA

Among Groups 57.492 1 0.303 Over .500 0.001 Within Groups 189.531 488

25

260
- 233.-

APPENDIX D

PLAN FOR CREATING A CAVDP

COMPARISON GROUP

ZSi
PROPOSAL FORMATING A CAVD COMPARISCN GROUP

FROM CURRENT CETA ENROLLEES

The Problem

The basic purpose of the Career AdvmuzermaltVOudher

Demonstration Project (CAVDP) is to compere the effects of

at least two years of college education with the effects

of more standard CETA work experience and training. To do so

requires two groups of YETP youth. The first is a group of youth

who attend college through CETA auspices. The second is a group

of youth who go through a regular CETA experience. In order for

the comparison to be valid, the two groups must be alike on all

relevant variables; and there must be sufficient youth in each

group to provide stbbility to the findings.

In the original design of tht. CAVDP validity was to be

assured by randomly assigning one hundred youth in each site

to a college attending group, and fifty youth in each site to a

CETA experience group. This was done, but although nearly all

of the college attending group has been enrolled in college,

few of the CETA experience group have been enrolled in CETA.

The data for the control group are presented in Table 1. It is

apparent that most of the control group are also attending college. As an earlier report on this situation comrrented,

262
Table 1.

Status of. CAVD Control'Group

October, ,1979

Atlanta El" Little Rock Pittsburgh Washington Total & Percent

Enrolled in CETA 1 3 4 9 3 20 9,7

Other Training 0 0 2 1 0 3 145

Employed 1 4 4 2 3 14 6,8

Unemployed 3 4 1 0 3 11 5,4

Enrolled in' College 22 36 12 6 15 91 44,4

Other (e.g.. moved) 0 0 1 1 3 5 2.4

No information .7 3 23 3 25 61 2958

Totals 34 50 47 22 52 205
- 236 -

. . . it is a t that many will not be enrolled /111 CETA nearly half of the control

group (44.4%) are attending college. If it is assumed that youth who are otherwise occupied (e.g.

employed, in other training programs, moved out

of town) are also non-condidates for CETA, the

recruitment pool shrinks to a total of seventytwo persons (36.6%) of tne control group). It is

apparent that we will not be able to compare college attendance with CETA training because of the

small number of youth likely to enroll in CETA

program."

The present situation enables us to study what happens to youth

who attend college under CETA auspices and those who attend college without suds auspices. But, it is not likely that we will

be able to draw many conclusions about the relative effects of

CETA work experience and training vs. college attendance.

Proposal:AComparison Group

It has been suggested that it my Still be possible to study

the relative effects of college and ''ETA experiences

by creating a comparieon group. This srctip would be conposed of

YETP eligible youth currently ,7.1:olled -11 the CETA programs of

the five CAVDP sites. This comparison av tip would be matchee on

key variables to create cooMpars-)ility%-ith the CAVDP experiengrPuP- Although this stratet -Al not assure

on all relevant variables -- especially motivational c, ls

it does promise to provide a-group sufficiently similar

CAVDP experimental group to permit some detailing .2 the effects

of the two different kinds of experiences.

When the five local CAVDP sponsors were appraised of the

current situation, and inquiry made concerning the possibility

and desirability of creating a comparison gronp, all reacted
- 237 -

positively to the idea. Each promis0, help in identifying youth

who could be used for comparative plziloses.

Officials at the site also pointed out what may be difficulties in creating such a group. Some sites may have an insufficient number of youth who would met the criteria to create an

adequate comparisOn group. Als, differences in the starting point

of the various CETA programs might reduce the possibility of documenting Changes in aspiration', attitudes and motivation Drought

about by the CETA programs.

It seems hopeful, howcvcc, that these difficulties can be

overcome on a site-bY-site basin throw;I: judicious selection of

youth, programs, and the tilIng at oollection. CETA

directors contacted agreed to coopateo in so far as possible,

in efforts to surmamtbauriers.

Procedure for Selecting a 01L-7arisOn Group

It is proposed that the following six criteria be utilized

in establishing a cAVD comparison group:

1. YETP eligible

2. ii sdiool diplara or GED certificate

3. GATB G-score ,tf BO or higher (Atlanta and Washington only)

4. Sex

5. Year of birth

6. Ethnicity

All of this information, with the exception of the GATB (criterion

#3) is routinely collected upon application to CETA.

The starting point for the creation of the carparieon group
is all enrollees and applicants to CETA as of October 1, 1979.*

From this group will be selected all youth who meet the first

two criteria (viz. YET') eligible, and a high school diploma or

GED certificate) . From this list will be eliminated all youth

who are already nembers of the CAVD control group. The name,

address. rrogram assignment, year of birth, sex and ethnicity

of all youth who meet the first two criteria will be listed. The

list will be arranged by the last three criteria (viz. sex, year

of birth and ethnicity),. and grouped as shown in Table 2. This

grouping produces a total of forty different combinations of the

final three criteria, and make up the "sampling cells" for drawing

the comparison group. The number of youth to be selected from each

cell for each city have been set to match the distribution of

youth in the CANDI, experimental group of that city. The selection

of specific youth to comprise the comparison group will be done

by one of two nethods in an effort to match differences between

sites in the way in which youth were supposed to ber selected for

the CAVDP.

The first method will be used for El Paso and Little Rock.

It involves making available to the local CAVDP director as much

intake information on each of the youth in all the sampling cells

as Possible. The CAVDP directors will then select, up to to maximum number of youth shown in the sampling cells for their respective city, tha youth which they would have selected for participation in the CAVDP program: This procedure is analogous to what

*1h the light of the differences in the beginning of training

cycles, noted above, this date may bee altered for sore sites

and/or some programs.
- 239 -

Table 2

Sampling Plan for Creation of CAVD Comparison Groups

(Number of different kinds of youth to be selected)

Little

Year of Atlanta El Peso Bock

Ethnicity Birth Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls

White 56-58

59

6o

6i

62

Black 56-58

American

59

West

Indian 60 2

61 16 20

62 1 2

BispaniT 56-58

59

6o

61

62

Other 56-58

59

6o

61

62

Totals 21 29

1

1

1 1

2 2

4 14 I 1 1

8 15

1

1 1

3 1

1

1 1

1 2

3 10

10 15

Pitts- Washingburrch ton

Boys Girls Boys Girls

1

2

1

1

1 2

3

4 11

6 13

2 1

1

3 5

3 2

3 7

1

1

16 34 19 31 1i7 33 120 30

268
240 -

was done in creating the experimental - control group 1 in these

two cities.

The second method involves the random selection of comparison group members in accordance with the umbers shown in Table 2. This method will be used for Atlanta; Pittsburgh and Washinton, but in two different ways. In PittSburOva straight ramr

sam sample from each of the sampling cells will be. drawn from

all youth who are YETP eligible and have attained a high school

education or its equivalent (i.e. criteria 1 & 2). This matches

the requirement that Pittsburgh have no selection criteria. In

Atlanta and Washington, the basic selection criterion was a GATE

G-score of 80 or higher. This criterion will be applied to all

of the youth who net the first tao screening criteria, and youth

who have not attained such a score will be eliminated from the

pool. In score instances, the GATE scores will be available. In

those instances wheresuCh scores are not available, the test

will have to be administered to all youth who meet criteria 1 &

2 and who fall into the cells from which one or more individuals

for the oorparison group will be selected (e.g. 2nd oalumn, 4th.

row of Table 2; but not the 2nd column, 3rd row). Raving reduced

the pool to those with GATB scores of 80 or higher, a random

sample, as in t: e Pittsburgh case, will then be cram.

The above procedures.will produce a comparison group of.

fifty youth enrolled, or waiting to be enrolled, in a CETA program of each site.- Should there be an insufficient-nurber-of

youth in the eligibility pool to fill the quota for any one of

the sampling cells, all youth in that cell will be selected.
241 -

In some instances this will produce a oomparieon group of fewer

than fifty youth. If this happens, sampling cells wi.11 be combined, and/or other CrTA programs (e.g. YCCIP, Title IIB) will

be scoured for YETP eligible youth to increase the number of

youth in the sampling cells.

It should be emphasized that the identification of the

YETP eligible pool will be monitored closely by Clark, Phipps,

Clark & Harris; while the drawing of the sample will be.done by

Clark, Phipps, Clark & Harris.

Data Collection Plan for Comparison Group

Once the comparison group has been selected, it will be administered the ETG battery and the CAVDP initital interview guide.

The scheduling and arrangements for this will be worked out through

the local CETA programs.* Members of the comparison group will

also be administered the CAVDP interview guides of Mav, 1980,

August, 1980, January, 1981 and May, 1981; and the EPS program

completion and follow-up questionnaires at their appropriate times.

The foregoing plan seems feasible, and will provide us with

a group of youth similar enough to the CAMP experimental group

to draw plausible in§erences about the relative effects of a

college education and CETA work experience and training upon

subsequent employment.

*In ,Jme instances, youth may be too far along in their CETA

program to consider such information as "prior" information. In

cases, a shortened version of the instnryt:urill be used.
- 242 -

APPENDIX E

LIST OF COLLEGES ENROLLING CAVD RECRUITS

271
- 243 -

ATLANTA

Commuting Schools

Ex erimental Experimental Control

Group in CAVD Group not in Group

1

CAVD

Atlanta Christian College

Atlanta Junior College 4 3

Clark College 19 4

DeKalb Comm. College 2 1

Georgia Inst. of Tech. 2 2 2

Georgia State Univ. 10 5

Mercer Univ. at Atlanta 2

Morehouse College 7

Morris Brown College 5 1

Oglethorpe University 1

Southern Tech. Inst. 4 2

Spelman College 7 2

Non- Commuting Schools

Mercer University (Macon) 1

Prairie View A&M Univ. 1

Talledega College

Tennessee Tech. Univ. 3

Tuskegea Inst.

West Georgia College 6 1

West Virginia State 1

Wilberforce University 1 1

College not Specified 1

Total in College IIT

272
!- 244 -

PITTSBURGH

Experimental Experimental Control

Group in CAVD Group not in Uc)1P.

Commuting Schools

28

CAVD

Community College of Allegheny 2

County: Allegheny Campus

Community College of Allegheny 1

County: North Campus

Computer Systems Inst. 1

Duquesne University 3

/nstitute of Computer 1

Management

Pennsylvania State Univ: 1

McKeesport

Point Park College 16

Robert Morris College 7

University of Pittsburgh 13 2

Wheeler School 2

Non-Commuting Schools

California State College 2

Slippery Rock State College 1

Upper Iowa University 1

Vorhees College 1

Total in College
- 245 -

EL PASO

Experimental Experimental Control

Group in cAvn Group not in Group

Commuting Schools

CAVD

El Paso Community College 35 7

New Mexico State Univ. 3

Univ. of Texas at El Paso 52 25

Non-Commuting Schools

Angelo State University 1

Columbia University 1. Cornell University 1

Lamar University 1

Lubbock Christian College 1

New Mexico Junior College 1

University of Texas at Austin 5 3

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Total in College
Commuting Schools

- 246-

LITTLE ROCK

Experimental Experimental Control

Group in CAVD Group not in Group

CAVD

Arkansas College of Tech 3

Arkansas St. Univ.-Beebee 2

Arkansas Tech. University 2 1

Capital City Business College 3

Ouachita Baptist University 2

Philander Smith College 7

Shorter College 2

7

Univ. of Arkansas - Little Rock 35

1

Univ. of Arkansas - Pine Bluff

4

Univ. of Central Arkansas 15

Westark Community College 1

Non-Commuting College

Arkansas St. Univ.-Jonesboro 10

Devry Inst. of Technology 1

Henderson State University 2 1

Memphis State University

Southern Arkansas University

Southwest Technical Inst. 1

Southwestern Christian College 1

Univ. of Arkansas - Fayetteville 10

Univ. of Arkansas - Monticello

Total in College U 2

1

1

3

1

27z;
- 241 -

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Experimental., Experimental Control

Group in CAVD Group not in Group

CAVD

Commuting Schools

American University 27

Bowie State College 2

Catholic University 2

Georgetown University 2

George Washington Univ. 2

Howard University 9

Montgomery College 4

Prince George's Comm. College 4

Southeastern University 2

Strayer College 5

Trinity College 1

University of the District 27

of Columbia

University of Maryland 4

Non- Commuting Schools

Duquesne University

Florida A&M

Lincoln University

Morgan State

Old Dominion Univ.

Virginia Polytechnic Inst.

College not Specified 1

Total in School VT'

3

I

10

1

1

1

1

ITC