Breaking the Low-Pay, No-Pay Cycle: Final Evidence from the UK Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) Demonstration

Hendra, Richard; Riccio, James; Dorsett, Richard; Greenberg, David H.; Knight, Genevieve; Phillips, Joan; Robins, Philip K.; Vegeris, Sandra; Walter, Johanna; Hill, Aaron; Ray, Kathryn; Smith, Jared G.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1943253

Cited by 36 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As described in Section 7.4.2 of Hendra et al (2011), formulas were applied to the impacts estimates, especially the estimated impact on earnings, in order to determine some of the remaining benefits and costs listed in the table-for example, ERA's effects on indirect taxes, National Insurance Contributions, and pensions.…”

Section: Box 1: Cost-benefit Analysis Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A multi-site randomised control trial of Texas ERA showed some statistically significant increases in employment and earnings, particularly for the Corpus Christi site. These effects persisted through the end of the 4 year follow-up period (Hendra et al, 2010). The Employment Retention and Advancement programme in the United Kingdom (UK ERA) represents the first European RCT of this policy strategy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Breaking the low pay, no pay cycle: the effects of the UK Employment Retention and Advancement programme

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the final economic results of the UK Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) programme. ERA's distinctive combination of post-employment advisory support and financial incentives was designed to help low-income individuals who entered work sustain employment and advance in the labour market. ERA targeted three groups. ERA produced short-term earnings gains for two lone parent target groups. However, these effects generally faded after the programme ended, largely because the control group caught up with the ERA group. For the New Deal 25 Plus target group (mostly long term unemployed men), ERA produced modest but sustained increases in employment and earnings.JEL Codes: I38, J18, C93

show abstract

Section: Box 1: Cost-benefit Analysis Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breaking the low pay, no pay cycle: the effects of the UK Employment Retention and Advancement programme

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This paper evaluates one such programme recently trialled in the UK; the UK Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) programme (Hendra at al., 2011). ERA offered temporary financial support and employment services to individuals moving from welfare into full-time work.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hendra et al (2011) provide evaluation results for all three groups. The employment impacts are summarised in Table 1.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of temporary in-work support on employment retention: Evidence from a field experiment

Dorsett

2014

Labour Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent experimental programme for unemployed welfare recipients in the UK found that temporary earnings supplements combined with post-employment services led to a sustained rise in employment. This paper examines whether this was due to increases in employment entry or to reductions in employment exit. Using a hazard rate model, we find a significant effect on initial employment entry but not on subsequent transitions. The results also show that the length of a completed unemployment spell has a negative effect on the hazard of exit from the next unemployment spell. While the direct effect of the programme is to shorten the initial unemployment spell, an indirect effect arises due to this lagged duration dependence.

show abstract

“…3 In the first follow-up year, the employment chances of both groups remained largely unaffected, while a sizeable experimental impact was found in terms of earnings, especially for the NDLP group (see Hendra et al, 2011 for the final appraisal of ERA).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with randomisation bias in a social experiment: the case of ERA

Sianesi

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:One of the most powerful critiques of the use of randomised experiments in the social sciences is the possibility that individuals might react to the randomisation itself, thereby rendering the causal inference from the experiment irrelevant for policy purposes. In this paper we set out a theoretical framework for the systematic consideration of "randomisation bias", and provide what is to our knowledge the first empirical evidence on this form of bias in an actual social experiment, the UK Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) study. Specifically, we empirically test the extent to which random assignment has affected the process of participation in the ERA study. We further propose a non-experimental way of assessing the extent to which the treatment effects stemming from the experimental sample are representative of the impacts that would have been experienced by the population who would have been exposed to the program in routine mode. We consider both the case of administrative outcome measures available for the entire relevant sample and of survey-based outcome measures. For the case of survey outcomes we extend our estimators to also account for selective non-response based on observed characteristics. Both for the case of administrative and survey data we further extend our proposed estimators to deal with the nonlinear case of binary outcomes.JEL codes: C21, J18, J38

show abstract

Breaking the Low-Pay, No-Pay Cycle: Final Evidence from the UK Employment Retention and Advancement (ERA) Demonstration

Cited by 36 publications

References 15 publications

Breaking the low pay, no pay cycle: the effects of the UK Employment Retention and Advancement programme

Breaking the low pay, no pay cycle: the effects of the UK Employment Retention and Advancement programme

The effect of temporary in-work support on employment retention: Evidence from a field experiment

Dealing with randomisation bias in a social experiment: the case of ERA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About