View definitions of terms used throughout the Pathways Clearinghouse.

A

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)

AFDC, the predecessor to TANF, was a federal assistance program in effect from 1935 to 1996 that provided financial assistance to families with children and no or low incomes. States set their own benefit levels, established (within federal limitations) standards for eligibility based on income and resources, and administered the program with federal and state funding. During the 1990s, many states received waivers of the federal requirements from the federal government to experiment with changes to the eligibility requirements and benefits.

Apprenticeships

An organized or structured form of learning on the job, typically in a skilled trade, but typically not subsidized. Apprenticeships may be an intervention's primary service.

Attrition

After individuals in a study are randomly assigned to the group receiving the intervention (the intervention group) or the group not receiving the intervention (the comparison group), they might drop out of an intervention or the study team might lose contact with them. This means information about how they fare over time is no longer available for use in the in the study. This dropping out is called attrition. The proportion of people who drop out of a study is called the attrition rate. There are two different types of attrition that matter when deciding whether a study’s findings can be considered reliable. The first is overall attrition, which captures the total number of individuals missing from the original sample. The second is differential attrition which captures the difference between the percentage of individuals missing from the intervention group and the percentage missing from the comparison group. When either the overall attrition or the differential attrition is too high, the study results might not accurately capture the effects of the intervention. We use scientific standards to determine when either of these types of attrition is too high for a study’s findings to be considered reliable.

B

Baseline equivalence

A study’s ability to demonstrate that the group receiving the intervention (the intervention group) and the group not receiving the intervention (the comparison group) are similar to each other before the intervention begins is a key factor for determining the reliability of a study’s findings. Demonstrating that the two groups are similar according to important characteristics (such as race, ethnicity, gender, and time out of work) is called demonstrating baseline equivalence. We assess studies for how well they capture these kinds of characteristics about members of each group at baseline (that is, before intervention group members received intervention services) and how well they are able to show that the groups are largely similar across these key characteristics.

C

Case management

Meeting one-on-one with an employment specialist or counselor who helps assess needs and refers clients to other available services. Case management can take place before or during employment and could focus on employment or on other topics, such as mental health or a substance use disorder. Case management may be an intervention's primary service.

Child care

Free or subsidized child care and early education services or money or vouchers to cover the cost of child care and early education services. The Pathways Clearinghouse uses this services tag for interventions that provide intensive assistance in this domain that is not in the context of a broader employment and training program. Child care may be an intervention's primary service.

Comparison group

A group with characteristics similar to those of intervention group members, except that those in the comparison group do not have an opportunity to receive the services of interest. The comparison group is intended to represent what would have happened to members of the intervention group if they had not been offered the services from the intervention of interest.

Confounding factor

A factor that might affect how well an intervention works and that applies differently to the intervention and comparison groups. Because this factor can affect one group and not the other, the presence of a confounding factor causes us to question a study’s findings. One type of confounding factor is an element external to the intervention that reaches only the members of one study group—for instance, if all members of the intervention group lived in one state and all members of the comparison group lived in another state. In this case, it would be impossible to separate the effect of the program or policy from that of local economic conditions.

D

Decrease long-term public benefit receipt

Reduction in the percentage of people receiving public benefits or the value of their benefits between 18 months and 5 years after participants are offered intervention services.

Decrease short-term public benefit receipt

Reduction in the percentage of people receiving public benefits (such as TANF, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and so on) or the value of their benefits during a period 18 months or fewer after the participant first received intervention services.

Decrease very long-term benefit receipt

Reduction in the percentage of people receiving public benefits or the value of their benefits more than 5 years after participants are offered intervention services.

Developmental intervention

Interventions that, to date, have no available research findings regarding their effectiveness, but for which research studying their effectiveness is underway. The effectiveness rating applies to the entire intervention and not to specific outcome domains.

E

Education

Services to support educational attainment, such as GED support, adult basic education, or post-secondary education. Education may be an intervention's primary service.

Effect Size

A standardized measure of the magnitude of the impact of the intervention, or the difference in outcomes between the intervention group and the comparison group. The effect size is calculated by dividing the impact shown in the study by the standard deviation for that measure, which measures the diversity of the study sample. Here is an example of this calculation from the review of the Project QUEST intervention. The study of Project QUEST found an increase in long-term earnings of $3980 for the intervention group, as compared to the comparison group, and the standard deviation of earnings was $19,414, making the effect size .21 standard deviations ($3980/$19,414). The effect size serves as a standardized unit we can compare to other, similarly standardized units. By standardizing the magnitude of Project QUEST’s impact on long-term earnings as an effect size, we can compare the .21 effect size on long-term earnings to Project QUEST’s effect size on employment or to another intervention’s effect size on long-term earnings, even if that intervention was conducted in a different setting. Effect sizes facilitate comparisons across different outcomes, settings, and interventions. This helps us make direct and meaningful comparisons so users can compare, for example, an impact of 10 percent on employment with an impact of $1200 on earnings, as well as to the average of these two effects.

Effectiveness rating

The assessment of the Pathways Clearinghouse, based on the existing evidence from impact studies, of the extent to which a given intervention improves a specific type of outcome. The effectiveness rating indicates whether the intervention is likely to produce favorable results if faithfully replicated with a similar population. After we review research on an intervention, we assign an effectiveness ratings to indicate how effective the intervention is at improving each of four types of outcomes: employment, earnings, public benefit receipt, and education and training. The ratings depend on (1) the quality of the impact study or studies conducted of the intervention and (2) the favorability (or lack thereof), statistical significance, and consistency of the study findings for that type of labor market outcome.

  • Well-supported  Well-supported. We have strong and consistent evidence that the intervention produces favorable results for a specific outcome domain, such as short-term earnings. These interventions have at least two impact studies of moderate or high quality that show evidence of favorable findings within the domain. However, because implementation challenges and successes often vary, and because no two implementations of an intervention are identical, Pathways Clearinghouse users should not view this rating as a guarantee of future success.
  • Supported  Supported. We have some evidence that the intervention improves outcomes. These ratings are domain specific, meaning that the intervention is considered supported only for the particular domains for which we have given this rating. These interventions have at least one study of moderate or high quality and show evidence of favorable findings in the domain, but the evidence is less conclusive than that for evidence-based interventions.
  • Not supported  Not supported. We have the strongest evidence that the intervention is unlikely to produce substantial favorable results in a given outcome domain. Studies of these interventions have found only a pattern of null and/or unfavorable findings. We only consider impact studies of at least moderate quality in determining this rating.
  • Mixed support  Mixed support. We have some evidence, from impact studies of moderate or high quality, that indicates the intervention improves outcomes in a given outcome domain, and some evidence that indicates it worsens outcomes in that domain. For instance, in the educational attainment domain, an intervention might have unfavorable effects on attainment of a high school diploma, but favorable effects on GED attainment.
  • Insufficient evidence  Insufficient evidence to assess support. We have some research, from impact studies of moderate or high quality, on the intervention’s effect in a given outcome domain. But we do not have a sufficient body of evidence to assign one of the other ratings.
  • No evidence  No evidence to assess support. We did not find any studies that rated moderate or high that studied the intervention’s effect on outcomes in a given outcome domain. These interventions need further study to support conclusions about their effectiveness.
Employment coaching

Intensive, collaborative assistance with identifying and addressing employment barriers and goals. Employment coaching may be an intervention's primary service.

Employment retention services

Supplementary services provided when a client already has a job. These could include ongoing case management to address barriers or to assess progress toward career goals. Employment retention services may be an intervention's primary service.

F

Financial education

Education that help individuals make informed decisions about their financial resources, such as providing information on budgeting or loans. Financial education may be an intervention's primary service.

Financial incentives

Bonuses that clients receive for engaging in a specific activity or achieving a certain goal. Financial incentives may be an intervention's primary service.

Finding

A finding summarizes the effect of an intervention on an outcome measure related to employment, earnings, public benefit receipt, education, or training. It is the smallest element we review and to which we give a study quality by finding rating. The direction of the finding might be favorable or unfavorable. We also categorize whether it is statistically significant (unlikely to have occurred by chance) and small or moderate-to-large.

  • Favorable. An impact on an outcome or an overall outcome domain in a direction that is socially desirable. For example, a favorable impact could be an increase in annual earnings or consecutive months of employment, or a reduction in months of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) eligibility.
  • Unfavorable. An impact on an outcome or an overall outcome domain in a direction that is not socially desirable. For example, an unfavorable impact could be a decrease in annual earnings or consecutive months of employment, or an increase in months of TANF eligibility.
  • Moderate-to-large. We describe findings as being moderate-to-large if the intervention produced a sufficiently large change in the outcome. The change can be in a favorable or unfavorable direction. An impact receives this designation if the standardized effect size is equal to or greater than 0.25 or equal to or less than -0.25.
  • Small. We describe findings as being small if the intervention did not produce a large change in the outcome. The change can be in a favorable or unfavorable direction. An impact receives this designation if the standardized effect size is between -0.25 and 0.25.

H

Health services

Services to support the mental or physical health of clients. Health services may be an intervention's primary service.

High

The quality of the study is high, meaning we can be fairly confident in the study findings. Strong evidence shows that the study finding is solely attributable to the intervention examined. This rating is reserved for study findings from high quality RCTs with low attrition of sample members.

Housing

Intensive services to help participants find, secure, and maintain safe housing, including rent-free, subsidized, or public housing; intensive housing search assistance; and money or vouchers to cover housing costs. The Pathways Clearinghouse uses this services tag for interventions that provide intensive assistance in this domain that is not in the context of a broader employment and training program. Housing may be an intervention's primary service.

I

Increase education and training

Attainment of a degree or credential.

Increase long-term earnings

An increase in the amount earned through paid employment between 18 months and 5 years after the participant first received intervention services.

Increase long-term employment

An increase in the rate of employment between 18 months and 5 years after the participant first received intervention services.

Increase short-term earnings

An increase in the amount earned through paid employment during a period 18 months or fewer after the participant first received intervention services.

Increase short-term employment

An increase in the rate of employment during a period 18 months or fewer after the participant first received intervention services.

Increase very long-term earnings

An increase in the amount earned through paid employment more than 5 years after the participant first received intervention services.

Increase very long-term employment

An increase in the rate of employment more than 5 years after the participant first received intervention services.

Individual Placement and Support

The Individual Placement and Support (IPS) model is a framework for providing employment services to those facing barriers to work. IPS was originally designed for individuals with serious mental illness served by community mental health centers but has gained interest as a strategy to promote employment for a range of disadvantaged populations seeking jobs. Features of the model include a focus on rapid job search, competitive employment, and client job preferences; small caseloads; benefits counseling; and coordination between employment services staff members and mental health care providers. IPS may be an intervention's primary service.

Insufficient evidence to assess support

We have some research, from impact studies of moderate or high quality, on the intervention’s effect in a given outcome domain. But we do not have a sufficient body of evidence to assign one of the other ratings.

Intervention

A specific bundle of services or policies implemented in a given context. For the Pathways Clearinghouse, interventions are defined based on the services offered to the intervention group but not offered to the comparison group. Two studies examine the same intervention only if the same services were offered in both cases. We use the following definitions for the services and policies included in the interventions we review.

  • Case management. Meeting, typically one-on-one, with an employment specialist or counselor who helps assess needs and refers clients to other available services. Case management can take place before or during employment and could focus on employment or on mental health or substance abuse.
  • Financial incentives. Bonuses that clients receive for engaging in a specific activity or achieving a certain goal.
  • Financial education. Education that help individuals make informed decisions about their financial resources, such as providing information on budgeting or loans.
  • Health services. Services to support the mental or physical health of clients.
    • Substance use disorder treatment and mental health services. Services to treat clients for substance use disorder or mental health diagnoses.
    • Physical health services. Services to address clients’ physical health concerns.
  • Employment retention services. Supplementary services provided when a client already has a job. These could include ongoing case management to address barriers or to assess progress toward career goals.
  • Pre-employment services. Services designed to help job seekers find a job that are not related to education or training. These can include initial assessments to identify employment barriers, formalized assessments to identify skills and interests, help designing a resume and cover letter, job search assistance, or help developing an individual employment plan.
    • Coaching. Intensive assistance with identifying barriers and goals and helping clients address them. Also known as life coaching.
    • Job development or job placement. Assistance getting placed in a job. Typically, a client visits a career center and meets with a counselor who works with employers to identify or create a specific opening for the client.
  • Sanctions. Reductions in payment for failing to comply with mandated services.
  • Supportive services. Money or vouchers to fund child care, transportation (such as gas cards or tokens), or other supports to help clients search for work or engage in a training program.
  • Training. Any training program.
    • Soft skills training. Training in so-called soft skills, such as punctuality, manners, professional dress, interactions with colleagues, or conflict management. Sometimes also called life skills training.
    • Occupational or sectoral training. Training that is tied to a particular occupation, such as truck driving or welding.
    • On-the-job training. An agreement between the workforce system and an employer in which the workforce system pays all or part of the wages for a client working for an approved employer in an approved occupation for a specified period. At the end of that time, the employer can hire the worker but without the wage subsidy.
    • Apprenticeships. An organized or structured form of learning on the job, typically in a skilled trade, but typically not subsidized.
  • Work experience. Paid or unpaid (such as internships) work experience.
    • Unpaid work experience. Work experience that is voluntary or unpaid, such as an unpaid internship.
    • Subsidized employment. Employment that is partially or fully paid for by an external funder (not the employer).
    • Transitional jobs. Jobs that are meant to integrate those who have been out of the workforce (for example, former prisoners) into the community. They can be paid or unpaid.

J

Job development or job placement

Assistance getting placed in a job. Typically, a client visits a career center and meets with a counselor who works with employers to identify or create a specific opening for the client. Job development or job placement may be an intervention's primary service.

Job search assistance

Assistance identifying potential jobs and preparing resumes and cover letters. Job search assistance may be an intervention's primary service.

L

Legal assistance

Free or low-cost services to help participants address legal barriers to employment, for example, criminal record expungement. The Pathways Clearinghouse uses this services tag for interventions that provide intensive assistance in this domain that is not in the context of a broader employment and training program. Legal assistance may be an intervention's primary service.

Long-term

For this review, a period lasting between 18 months and 5 years after participants are first offered services.

Low

The quality of the study is low, meaning we cannot have much confidence in the study findings. Other important factors could have influenced the study findings, and the study did not account for them. Study findings that do not meet the high or moderate ratings criteria receive the low rating.

M

Manuscript

A single piece of published or unpublished research, such as a journal article, working paper, book chapter, or research report. Studies might contain multiple manuscripts, and manuscripts might contain multiple studies. See the Protocol for the Pathways to Work Evidence Clearinghouse for more information.

Mixed support

We have some evidence, from impact studies of moderate or high quality, that indicates the intervention improves outcomes in a given outcome domain, and some evidence that indicates it worsens outcomes in that domain. For instance, in the educational attainment domain, an intervention might have unfavorable effects on attainment of a high school diploma, but favorable effects on GED attainment.

Model

A model refers to a clearly defined and recognized bundle of services and policies or framework for service delivery. A model may be adapted when implemented in a specific context. For the Pathways Clearinghouse, some interventions are specific versions of more general models.

Moderate

The quality of the study is moderate, meaning we can be somewhat confident in the study findings. However, other factors not accounted for in the study might also have contributed to the findings. This applies to findings from random assignment studies that, because of flaws in the study design or analysis (for example, high sample attrition), do not meet the criteria for the high rating but satisfy other design criteria. We also assign the moderate rating to study findings from well-executed QEDs.

N

No evidence to assess support

We did not find any studies that rated moderate or high that studied the intervention’s effect on outcomes in a given outcome domain. These interventions need further study to support conclusions about their effectiveness.

Not supported

We have the strongest evidence that the intervention is unlikely to produce substantial favorable results in a given outcome domain. Studies of these interventions have found only a pattern of null and/or unfavorable findings. We only consider impact studies of at least moderate quality in determining this rating.

O

Occupational or sectoral training

Training that is tied to a particular occupation, such as truck driving or welding, or to a sector such as health care or manufacturing. Occupational or sectoral training may be an intervention's primary service.

On-the-job training

An agreement between the workforce system and an employer in which the workforce system pays all or part of the wages for a client working for an approved employer in an approved occupation for a specified period. At the end of that time, the employer can hire the worker but without the wage subsidy. On-the-job training may be an intervention's primary service.

Outcome domain

A group of related outcomes. The Pathways Clearinghouse includes seven outcome domains: short-term earnings, long-term earnings, short-term employment, long-term employment, short-term public benefit receipt (such as TANF, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and so on), long-term public benefit receipt, and education and training (which focuses on attaining a degree or credential).

P

P-value

The probability that if there actually was no real effect of the intervention, a finding at least as large as the observed finding would have been obtained by chance. For example, a sample might show a positive average difference, suggesting that the intervention group has better outcomes than the comparison group, with a p-value of 0.05. The p-value means that there is a 5 percent chance that the positive finding for the intervention group occurred by chance and does not occur in the population.

Physical health services

Services to address clients’ physical health concerns. Physical health services may be an intervention’s primary service.

Primary service

An intervention’s primary service is the principal service of the intervention. The primary service is (1) a component that a large proportion of intervention group members received and a large proportion of comparison group members did not and (2) the component that was described by the study authors as most integral to the theory of change tested by the study. Interventions may provide multiple services, but only one service is designated as primary.

Q

Quasi-experimental design (QED)

A design in which the intervention and comparison groups are created through a process that is not random. For a QED to be rigorous, the intervention and comparison groups must have been comparable on predetermined characteristics at the start of the study. At best, strong QEDs will receive a moderate rating in the Pathways Clearinghouse.

R

Race and ethnicity

The Pathways Clearinghouse follows federal standards for classifying data on race and ethnicity. Reflecting evolving public conceptions of race and ethnicity, federal standards for classifying data on race and ethnicity changed broadly around 2000. Major changes included measuring ethnicity separately from race and revising definitions of some categories. If a study reports race and ethnicity using definitions that differ from the federal standards, we choose the Pathways Clearinghouse classification that best matches the study classification.

  • American Indian or Alaska Native (not Hispanic). A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North or South America (including Central America), and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment. When possible, this classification refers to people who do not identify with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. However, Pathways Clearinghouse might include people who also identify as Hispanic or Latino within this classification in profiles of some older research.
  • Asian (not Hispanic). A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent, including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. When possible, this classification refers to people who do not identify with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. However, Pathways Clearinghouse might include people who also identify as Hispanic or Latino within this classification in profiles of some older research.
  • Black or African American (not Hispanic). A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. When possible, this classification refers to people who do not identify with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. However, Pathways Clearinghouse might include people who also identify as Hispanic or Latino within this classification in profiles of some older research.
  • Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (not Hispanic). A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. This classification is not associated with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity.
  • Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. This term was replaced in the revised guidance for federal classification of race and ethnicity in 2000, but it is included in Pathways Clearinghouse because it was used in some older studies. Pathways might include people who also identify as Hispanic or Latino within this classification.
  • White, not Hispanic. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. This classification is not associated with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity.
  • White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. This term was replaced in the revised guidance for federal classification of race and ethnicity in 2000, but it is included in Pathways Clearinghouse because it was used in some older studies. Pathways might include people who also identify as Hispanic or Latino within this classification.
  • More than one race (not Hispanic). A person who indicated more than one race category. This classification is not associated with a Hispanic or Latino ethnicity. However, Pathways Clearinghouse might include people who also identify as Hispanic or Latino within this classification in profiles of some older research.
  • Unknown or not reported. A person whose race is not known either because they skipped questions related to race or ethnicity during study data collection or because the study author did not collect or did not report on race and ethnicity for some or all of the study sample. Authors sometimes make the decision not to report race or ethnicity because of confidentiality concerns in cases where only a few members of a study sample identify as members of a particular category. For some older studies, Pathways Clearinghouse aggregates this category with the “another race” category.
  • Another race. A person who indicated a race category other than those reported by the Pathways Clearinghouse. In some cases, a study’s data collection might have included an “other” category. In other cases, study authors might have reported on a race category that did not fall into one of the Pathways Clearinghouse categories. Both scenarios would place persons into this category for race. For some older studies, Pathways Clearinghouse aggregates this category with the “unknown or not reported” category.
  • Hispanic or Latino of any race. A person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
Randomized controlled trial (RCT)

A design in which researchers randomly assign study participants to a group that receives the intervention services or a group that does not. RCTs are considered to produce the strongest possible evidence of effectiveness because random assignment ensures that no systematic differences existed between the study groups before the intervention.

Rural only

Pathways describes studies as having been conducted in rural only settings if the study authors reported that the study was conducted in a rural location or in multiple locations, all of which were rural. This typically means that they were conducted in communities with low population density, such as small towns, that typically include large tracts of undeveloped land. Interventions are listed as having been tested in rural only settings if at least one study of the intervention was in a rural only setting.

S

Sanctions

Reductions in payment for failing to comply with mandated services. Sanctions may be an intervention's primary service.

Short-term

For this review, a period lasting 18 months or fewer after participants are first offered services.

Soft skills training

Training in so-called soft skills, such as punctuality, manners, professional dress, interactions with colleagues, or conflict management. Sometimes also called life skills training. Soft skills training may be an intervention's primary service.

Standardized effect size
Standardized effect size is a standardized measure of the magnitude of the impact of the intervention, or the difference in outcomes between the intervention group and the comparison group. The effect size is calculated by dividing the impact shown in the study by the standard deviation for that measure, which measures the diversity of the study sample. Because they are standardized, the effect sizes can be directly compared across outcomes and across interventions. An effect size greater than 0.25 or less than -0.25 is considered moderate to large, meaning that the intervention produced a big change in the outcome. A standardized effect size of 0.25 is equivalent to an increase in annual earnings of $5,229, and increase in the percent employed of 10.3 percentage points, and increase of $688 in annual public benefit payments, or an increase on 12.5 percentage points in the number of people with a degree or credential. We consider a decrease in public benefit receipt to be favorable.
Statistical significance

Pathways considers statistical significance to be support for the existence of an effect of an intervention. Pathways considers an effect estimate statistically significant if the p-value of a two-sided hypothesis test of whether the effect is equal to zero is less than 0.05.  A p-value is the probability of observing an effect estimate as large or larger than the one observed, if there were no actual effect.

Study

An analysis of a distinct implementation of an intervention.

Study quality ratings

Studies vary in terms of their quality, or rigor. This variability in quality can result either from the way a study was designed or the way it was executed. Study quality affects the confidence we can have in the study’s findings. Three possible ratings—high, moderate, and low—describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the intervention. We assign the study quality rating based on our assessment of its quality. For studies that include multiple findings, we might assess study quality for each finding. The study quality rating is the highest rating assigned to any of the findings. In the Pathways Clearinghouse, study quality ratings only apply to randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental design studies.

  • HighHigh. The quality of the study is high, meaning we can be fairly confident in the study findings. Strong evidence shows that the study finding is solely attributable to the intervention examined. This rating is reserved for study findings from high quality RCTs with low attrition of sample members.
  • ModerateModerate. The quality of the study is moderate, meaning we can be somewhat confident in the study findings. However, other factors not accounted for in the study might also have contributed to the findings. This applies to findings from random assignment studies that, because of flaws in the study design or analysis (for example, high sample attrition), do not meet the criteria for the high rating but satisfy other design criteria. We also assign the moderate rating to study findings from well-executed QEDs.
  • LowLow. The quality of the study is low, meaning we cannot have much confidence in the study findings. Other important factors could have influenced the study findings, and the study did not account for them. Study findings that do not meet the high or moderate ratings criteria receive the low rating.

Overall, a study receives the highest study quality rating of any finding in that study. More information about study quality ratings is available in the Protocol for the Pathways to Work Evidence Clearinghouse.

Subgroup

A subset of individuals examined in a study who share a particular characteristic (for example, single parents or women).

Subsidized employment

Employment that is partially or fully paid for by an external funder (not the employer). Subsidized employment may be an intervention's primary service.

Substance use disorder treatment and mental health services

Services to treat clients for substance use disorder or mental health diagnoses. Substance use disorder treatment and mental health services may be an intervention's primary service.

Suburban only

Pathways describes studies as having been conducted in suburban only settings if the study authors reported that the study was conducted in a suburban location or in multiple locations, all of which were suburban. This typically means that they were conducted in communities with moderate population density, such as large towns or neighborhoods outside of cities, where residential areas are typically separate from commercial areas. Interventions are listed as having been tested in suburban only settings if at least one study of the intervention was in a suburban only setting.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)

SNAP, the largest of the domestic nutrition assistance programs administered by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), provides food assistance to individuals and households in need. The assistance is provided through electronic benefit cards participants can use to purchase food. Most individuals whose income and resources fall below certain federally-determined thresholds, are eligible for SNAP.

Supported

We have some evidence that the intervention improves outcomes. These ratings are domain specific, meaning that the intervention is considered supported only for the particular domains for which we have given this rating. These interventions have at least one study of moderate or high quality and show evidence of favorable findings in the domain, but the evidence is less conclusive than that for well-supported interventions.

Supportive services

Money or vouchers to fund child care, transportation (such as gas cards or tokens), or other supports to help clients search for work or engage in a training program. Supportive services may be an intervention's primary service.

T

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

TANF provides federal grant funds to states to provide families with children (including pregnant women) or individual children whose incomes falls below a certain threshold with time-limited financial assistance and related supports, such as childcare assistance and job preparation services. Each state determines the type and amount of assistance, other supports, and eligibility requirements. TANF replaced Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) in 1996. Unlike AFDC, TANF requires adults who are able to work to participate in work or training activities and limits families with adult recipients to no more than five years of benefits.

Tested in multiple settings

Pathways describes studies as having been conducted in multiple settings if the study authors do not describe the study as having been conducted in communities that were exclusively rural, exclusively suburban, or exclusively urban. In other words, when study authors do not specify the study as having been implemented in a specific type of setting, then Pathways classifies the study as tested in multiple settings. For example, an intervention may be tested across multiple counties or an entire state, which include different types of communities. Interventions are listed as having been tested in multiple settings if at least one study of the intervention is characterized that way.

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)

WIC provides federal grants to states for supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women, and to infants and children up to age five determined to be at "nutritional risk" by a health professional. To be eligible, applicants' gross income must fall at or below 185 percent of the U.S. Poverty Income Guidelines, though states may set lower income eligibility limits.

Training

Any training program. Training may be an intervention's primary service.

Transitional jobs

Jobs that are meant to integrate those who have been out of the workforce (for example, people who were formerly incarcerated) into the community. They can be paid or unpaid. Transitional jobs may be an intervention's primary service.

U

Unpaid work experience

Work that is voluntary or unpaid, such as an unpaid internship. Unpaid work experience may be an intervention's primary service.

Urban only

Pathways describes studies as having been conducted in urban only settings if the study authors reported that the study was conducted in an urban location or in multiple locations, all of which were urban. This typically means that they were conducted in cities or adjacent areas with high population density and where residential and commercial buildings are adjacent to one another. Interventions are listed as having been tested in urban only settings if at least one study of the intervention was in an urban only setting.

V

Very long-term

For this review, a period lasting five years or more after participants are first offered services.

W

Well-supported

We have strong and consistent evidence that the intervention produces favorable results for a specific outcome domain, such as short-term earnings. These interventions have at least two impact studies of moderate or high quality that show evidence of favorable findings within the domain. However, because implementation challenges and successes often vary, and because no two implementations of an intervention are identical, Pathways Clearinghouse users should not view this rating as a guarantee of future success.

Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC)
Please see "The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)."
Work experience

Work that is paid or unpaid, such as internships or community service jobs. Work experience may be an intervention's primary service.

Work experience and work-based learning

Any paid or unpaid work or learning experiences that occur in a work setting. Work experience and work-based learning may be an intervention's primary service.

Work readiness activities

Services designed to help job seekers find a job that are not related to education or training. These can include initial assessments to identify employment barriers, formalized assessments to identify skills and interests, help designing a resume and cover letter, job search assistance, or help developing an individual employment plan. Work readiness activities may be an intervention's primary service.