IN FO R M A TIO N TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1 .T h e sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from (eft to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority o f users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE N O TE : received. Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zoeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 I I 75-14,699 BENSON, Edward, 1930EMPLOYMENT & EARNING ANALYSIS OF THE MICHIGAN MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING ACT OF 1962 INDIVIDUAL REFERRAL PROGRAM. Michigan S ta te U n iv e r s ity , P h .D ., 1974 Education, a d m in is tra tio n Xerox University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan 4 8 t0 6 EMPLOYMENT & EARNING ANALYSIS OF THE MICHIGAN MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING ACT OF 1962 INDIVIDUAL REFERRAL PROGRAM By Edward Benson A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan S tate U n iv e rs ity in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the requirements fo r the degree o f DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department o f A dm in istratio n and Higher Education 1974 ABSTRACT EMPLOYMENT & EARNING ANALYSIS OF THE MICHIGAN MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING ACT OF 1962 INDIVIDUAL REFERRAL PROGRAM By Edward Benson The national in t e r e s t in manpower t r a in in g programs during the 1962-1972 decade came about as a r e s u lt o f automation. The federal man­ power l e g is la t io n which was enacted in 1962 was designed to t r a i n the la rg e numbers o f unemployed and underemployed persons. I t also pro­ vided access to the lab o r fo rce fo r those who would be en terin g fo r the f i r s t time. The t r a in in g programs were e i t h e r i n s t i t u t i o n a l ( in c lu d ­ ing the in d ivid u al r e f e r r a l o r le s s -th a n -c la s s s iz e ) o r o n -th e -jo b . While a number o f em pirical studies have undertaken an ev alu atio n o f group t r a in in g i n s t it u t io n a l programs funded by the l e g i s l a t i o n , no e f f e c t i v e evaluation has been made o f the in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l program. This study is based on a random sample o f in d iv id u a ls selected from the cen tral o f f i c e f i l e s o f the Michigan Employment S e c u rity Com­ mission (MESC) fo r the period 1968-1972. The method o f analysis is a computerized system c a lle d Automatic In te r a c tio n Dector (A ID ). The system, u n like most lease squares a n a ly t ic a l programs is very f l e x i b l e and allows more e a s ily than a conventional regression program the determination o f in te r a c tio n e f f e c t s , e . g . , in te r a c tio n between depend­ ent and explanatory v a ria b le s . Edward Benson The f i r s t t e s t was to determine the s ig n ific a n c e o f the average number o f weeks unemployed immediately p r i o r to enrollm ent (dependent v a r ia b le ) against the fo llo w in g explanatory v a ria b le s : age, lev el o f education, race and sex. mine the s ig n ific a n c e o f the average wage immediately p r i o r to t r a i n ­ ing (dependent v a r ia b le ) le s . The second t e s t was to d e te r­ ag ain st the same group o f explanatory v a r ia - The t h ir d t e s t was to determine the s ig n ific a n c e o f the average wage a f t e r tr a in in g against age, le v e l o f education, ra ce , sex, number of class clock hours, w e lfa re status and completion o f t r a in i n g . These tests were based on analyses o f variance. Using the n u ll hypothesis t h a t there is no d iffe re n c e between the average wage before and a f t e r t r a in i n g , t - t e s t s were run to d e te r­ mine (a ) the s ig n ific a n c e o f the d iffe re n c e between wages before and a f t e r t r a in in g ; (b) the s ig n ific a n c e o f the re al ( d e f la t e d ) income a f t e r t r a in i n g . The re s u lts o f the study in d ic a te the fo llo w in g : 1. That the average a f t e r t r a in in g wage average before t r a in in g wage, is higher than the and the d iffe re n c e is s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01 l e v e l . 2. That the d e fla te d value o f the a f t e r t r a in in g wage does not a l t e r the hypothesis regarding the s ig n ific a n c e (.0 1 l e v e l ) o f the d iffe re n c e between the b e fo re - and a f t e r t r a in in g wage. Moreover, th a t there is a s i g n i f i c a n t increase in wage a t t r i b u t a b l e to comple­ tio n o f t r a in in g . 3. That the t r a in in g per t r a in e e c o n trib u ted to an program which cost an average o f $3,117.36 increase in worker e m p lo y a b ility , and Edward Benson th a t a la rg e percentage (81%) was employed in t r a i n i n g - r e l a t e d jobs a f t e r t r a in i n g . 4. That the v a r ia b le most s i g n i f i c a n t in determining the average wage p r io r to t r a in in g was sex: wage than females. males received a higher average On the c o n tra ry , the v a r ia b le most s i g n i f i c a n t in determining average wage a f t e r t r a in in g was completion o f t r a in i n g . 5. That w h ile the t r a in in g program improved the e m p lo y a b ility of the p a r t ic ip a n ts , th ere was a tendency f o r t r a d i t i o n a l in s titu tio n a l biases in the lab o r market to su b ject blacks and females to less than p a r it y wage with t h e i r counterparts who completed the t r a in i n g pro­ gram. The f a c t th a t an e v a lu a tio n o f the In d iv id u a l R e fe rra l program had not been p revio u sly undertaken might be in d ic a tiv e o f the exten t to which the r o le o f the program had been minimized. I m p l i c i t in the pro­ gram's high success is i t s propensity to provide an a d d itio n a l pool o f s k i l l e d manpower f o r the se rv ic e in d u s try . The success o f th is progrm might c o n s titu te a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r i t s continuation under the new Concentrated Employment and T rain in g Act o f 1973 (CETA). CETA might than be evaluated as to i t s e f f e c t i v e ­ ness in improving tra in e e e m p lo y a b ility and income. To accomplish th is however, th ere is urgent need f o r improvement in c l i e n t follow -u p data a t MESC. A l i m i t a t i o n o f t h is research has been the paucity o f follow -u p data on c l i e n t s who had e n ro lle d in the program, and t h e r e ­ fo re the re s u lts o f t h is study may be incon clu sive. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author is indebted to Dr. Daniel H. Kruger, Professor o f Labor and In d u s tria l R e la tio n s , his d is s e r ta tio n d ir e c t o r and member o f the guidance committee f o r his constant guidance and understanding in the preparation o f the d is s e r ta tio n proposal and the manuscript. G rateful acknowledgement is also due o th e r members o f my committee rep ­ resenting the College o f Education: Dr. Mel Buschman, Committee Chairman, Dr. Fred Ig n a to v itc h and Dr. James Nelson f o r t h e i r c r i t i c a l reading o f the manuscript and h elp fu l suggestions. Thanks are also due the S t a t i s t i c a l Evaluation D iv is io n o f the Michigan Department o f Social Services who suggested the s t a t i s t i c a l method and was instrumental in computerizing the ta b u la tio n s . Special thanks are due my f r ie n d Gundy Rao whose mathematical s k i l l s were extremely h e lp fu l and to the research s t a f f a t Michigan Employment S ecu rity Commission who made the data ac ce ss ib le. Special re co g n itio n is due the a u th o r's mother whose e a r ly and continued in s p ir a tio n has been a beacon throughout the ye ars. F i n a l l y , acknowledgment is due the Government and people o f the United States who provided the o p p o rtu n itie s f o r the author to work f u l l time w h ile pursuing th is academic endeavor. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF T A B L E S ................................................................................................. LIST OF FIGURES v ................................................................................................. v i i i LIST OF APPENDICES.......................................................................................... ix Chapter I. .................................................................................... 1 P r o b le m ..................................................................................... D e f in it io n o f Terms ........................................................... 4 7 GENERAL SURVEY OF LITERATURE ................................................... 10 INTRODUCTION A. B. II. A. III. L e g is la tiv e H is to ry o f Adult Education . . . Vocational Education Acts .............................................. Impact on Other L e g is la tio n ....... ..................................... B. Manpower T rain in g and R etraining Programs . 1. Economic B enefits o f Manpower R etraining P r o g r a m s ........................................................................ 2. Economic E ffectiven ess o f Manpower R e tra in ­ ing P ro g ra m s................................................................. 3. Evaluation o f Manpower Programs--Conceptual Issues and P r o b l e m s .............................................. C. Theory and A p p lica tio n o f C o s t-B e n e fit Analyais and Investment in Human C apital .................................. 1. Human C a p i t a l ............................................................ 2. Investment in Human C apital .................................. 3. The Economics o f Investment in Human R e s o u rc e s ........................................................................ 4. Public Resource Development .................................. D. S p e c ific A p p lic a tio n o f B e n e fit-C so t Analysis . B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f Occupational T rain in g P r o g r a m s .............................................................................. Summary o f L it e r a t u r e Review .............................................. 46 48 RESEARCH D E S I G N ............................................................................. 54 A. The S a m p le ............................................................................... iii 10 13 15 19 20 32 34 38 38 41 43 44 45 55 Chapter Page B. C. IV. Data C o l l e c t i o n ................................................................. S t a t i s t i c a l Method ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK A. Measuring Changes in P ric e --N o te on Consumer Price I n d e x ........................................................................ Measurement o f Real Income--Real Purchasing P o w e r ..................................................................................... General C h a ra c te ris tic s o f the 140Trainees . . A g e ........................................................................................... S e x ........................................................................................... E d u c a t i o n .............................................................................. R a c e ........................................................................................... Public Assistance . . . . . . . . . . T r a i n i n g ............................................................................... Type o f T r a i n i n g ................................................................. Completion o f T rain in g .................................................... Employment S t a t u s ........................................................... Wages P r io r to andA fte r T r a i n i n g ............................. Labor Force Status ............................................................. Hours Worked A f t e r T rain in g ....................................... Class C o s t ............................................................................... Class Clock Hours ............................................................. Analysis o f V a r i a n c e ..................................................... S ig n ific a n c e o f Wage D i f f e r e n t i a l ........................... B. C. 0. E. F. G. H. 1. J. V. ................................................................. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION ANDRECOMMENDATIONS APPENDICES 56 60 60 61 63 63 64 64 66 71 71 72 75 75 79 86 86 87 90 91 98 ............................. 102 Recommendations ........................................................................ L im ita tio n o f the S t u d y ........................................................... 107 108 . BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ iv 135 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Page I n s t it u t io n a l Train in g by Occupational Category o f T ra in in g , Fiscal Year 1967 ........................................................... 17 Sample o f Age Grouping o f IR Trainees in the Michigan MDTA P r o g r a m .................................................................................... 63 3. IR Enrollment by S e x ....................................................................... 64 4. IR Trainees According to Percentage o f Education Level C o m p l e t e d .............................................................................. 66 5. IR Trainees by R a c e ........................................................................ 66 6. Level o f Education, White Females ....................................... 67 7. Age, Level o f Education, Black Females ................................. 68 8. Age, Level o f Education, Other Females ................................. 68 9. Age, Level o f Education, White Males ................................. 69 10. Age, Level o f Education, Black Males ................................. 70 11. Age, Level o f Education, Other Males ................................. 70 12. Public Assistance Recipients Enrolled in IR Programs 13. IR T raining Enrollment by Years o f Enrollment . 14. Type o f T rain in g by IR by Frequency and Percentage 1968-72 73 15. Level o f Education, Type o f T r a i n i n g ................................ 74 16. Number and Percentage o f IR Trainees Completing Train in g in the S a m p l e ................................................................. 75 2. . . . 71 72 17a. Employment Status Before T rain in g ...................................... 76 17b. Employment Status A f te r T rain in g ............................................. 77 v Table Page 18a. Employment Status Before and A f t e r T ra in in g — Completed T rain in g . 77 18b. Employment Status Before and A f t e r T ra in in g — Did not Complete T ra in in g ............................................................................... 78 19. Number o f Percentage o f S k i l l Related Employment . . 78 20. Average Monthly Wage in Last F u ll-T im e Job Held . . . 79 21. Monthly Wage in F u ll-tim e Job Held A f te r T rain in g . . 82 22. Percentage Increase o f W elfare R e c ip ie n ts ' Wages Based on Average Monthly Wage and Occupation o f those Before and A f t e r T r a i n i n g ....................................... 83 Percentage Increase o f Non-Welfare R e c ip ie n ts ' Wages Based on Average Monthly Wage and Occupation o f those Employed Before and A f t e r T ra in in g ........................................ 84 Percentage Increase o f W elfare and Non-Welfare Recip­ ie n t s ' Wages Based on Average Monthly Wage A f t e r T rain in g and Type o f T rain in g o f Those Employed a f t e r T r a i n i n g .................................................................................................. 85 25. Weeks Unemployed P r io r to E n ro llin g in Classes 86 26. Average Number o f Hours Worked Per Week A f t e r T r a in ­ ......................................................................................................... ing 87 27. T rain in g Allowance ........................................................................ 88 28. Costs o f C l a s s ..................................................................................... 89 29. Class Clock Hours .............................................................................. 90 30. Analysis o f Variance o f Average Number o f Weeks Unem­ ployed .................................................................................................. 91 Mean and Standard D eviation o f S p e c ific Variab les Used in Analysis o f Number o f Weeks Unemployed P r io r to T r a i n i n g .................................................................................................. 92 Mean and Standard D eviation w ith S p e c ific Variab les Used in Analysis o f the Average Wage in F u ll- t im e Job P r io r to T r a i n i n g ............................................................................... 94 23. 24. 31. 32. vi . . . « Table 33. Page Analysis o f Variance o f Average Wage P rio r to T r a in ­ .................................................................................................. ing 95 Mean and Standard D eviation o f S p e c ific V ariab les Used in Analysis o f Monthly Wage in F u ll-t im e Job Held A f t e r T r a i n i n g .............................................. ...... 96 35. Analysis o f Variance o f Average Wage A f t e r T rain in g 98 35. Average Monthly Wage Before and A f t e r T rain in g 99 37. Real Income D is tr ib u t io n 34. v ii . ..................................................... 100 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Manpower L e g is la tio n 1787-1974 2. Manpower Programs and Funding Patterns ................................ 3. Age D is t r ib u t io n o f T r a i n e e s ........................................... 4. Income D is tr ib u tio n Before and A f t e r T rain in g . . . 81 5. Average Number o f Weeks Unemployed Before T rain in g . . 113 6. Average Wage in F u ll-t im e Job H e l d .............................. 7. Average Monthly Wage A f t e r T ra in in g ....................................... vi i i 5 24 65 114 115 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. In s tru c tio n s f o r Reading A I D ....................................................... 8. M A - 1 0 1 ..................................................... 116 C. M A - 1 0 2 ................................................................................................... 119 D. H A - 1 0 3 ................................................................................................... 121 E. ComputerP rin t-O u t 123 f o r Figures 5 , 6, 7 ................................... ix Ill CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The h is to r y o f manpower programs over the past decade (19621972) has been in la rg e measure, a record o f e f f o r t s to develop and carry out programs which would have e f f e c t i v e l y tra in e d the unemployed and underemployed, r a c ia l and eth n ic m in o r itie s , young workers, o ld e r workers and women. As a provision in the Manpower Development and Train in g Act o f 1962 and i t s subsequent amendments, manpower develop­ ment t r a in in g programs were developed to a l l e v i a t e manpower shortages, lower the high unemployment r a t e and increase the income and employ­ a b i l i t y o f tr a in e e s , most o f whom were a ffe c te d by automation. The general scope and function o f the t r a in in g program has been to enhance and increase the s k i l l le v e l o f the p a r tic ip a n ts through t r a in in g in various types o f occupations f o r which they were most s u ite d . Accordingly, t r a in in g took place e it h e r on the jo b , in a v o c a tio n a l/te c h n ic a l i n s t i t u t i o n or community c o lle g e . O n-the-job tr a in in g took place on the job w ith the fed eral government subsidizing the employer as an in c e n tiv e to p a r t i c ip a t e in the t r a in in g program. I n s t i t u t i o n a l t r a in in g by comparison occurred in a v o c a tio n a l/te c h n ic a l i n s t i t u t i o n or community c o lle g e under c o n tra c t w ith the S tate Depart­ ment o f Education. In t h is connection, the c o n tra c t provided th a t the i n s t i t u t i o n would provide a combination classroom /laboratory t r a in in g 1 2 to e n ro lle e s who were re fe r re d to the program by the s ta te employment se rv ic e . The tra in e e s were allowed a stipend to cover tra n s p o rta tio n and l i v i n g expenses. The l a t t e r was based on fam ily size and w i l l be re fe r re d to l a t e r in the study. I n s t it u t io n a l t r a in in g which was re fe rre d to e a r l i e r , is fu r t h e r re fin e d to consist o f re g u la r classes and less than class s i z e . The l a t t e r type o f t r a in in g was sometimes re fe rre d to as in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l . These two w i l l be used synonymously here. The basic d iffe re n c e s between re g u lar classes and less than class s iz e t r a in in g are as fo llo w s : A) The method o f r e f e r r a l . The method used in less than class s ize t r a in in g was a very s e le c tiv e and in d iv id u a liz e d procedure c a rrie d out by the s ta te employment services. The selected in d iv id u a l was d ire c te d to a community c o lle g e academic r a th e r than vocational program. B) H eterogeneity. R eferral is to a f a c i l i t y where an academically heterogeneous group was already e n ro lle d and taking courses re la te d to t h e i r resp ective educational o b je c tiv e s . A less than class r e f e r r a l presupposed th a t the educational le v e l and achievement o f the t r a in e e p r i o r to enrollm ent was adequate to meet the rigorous academic demands o f the i n s t i t u t i o n . C) Size o f the c la s s . The number o f in d iv id u a ls re fe r re d to less than class s iz e programs was lim it e d to ten tra in e es fo r each occupation. period. D) Length o f tr a in in g Less than class s iz e t r a in in g programs ran up to s ix months longer than re g u la r classes because the enrol lees were required by the i n s t i t u t i o n to also e n ro ll in courses s p e c i f i c a l l y unrelated to the enrol le e s ' occupational o b je c tiv e s . This meant th a t 16-18 months may 3 have been required f o r completion o f the t r a in in g under the less than class s ize system and approximately ten months f o r re g u la r c la s s e s . Even though manpower programs have been in existence f o r almost a decade, the less than class s iz e program o r in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l sys­ tem was not developed u n t i l 1968 as a supplemental e f f o r t in t r a in in g in d iv id u a ls to compete more e f f e c t i v e l y in the la b o r market. No research studies have undertaken the task o f determining the success o f the programs in terms o f increasing the income and e m p lo y a b ility o f the ( i n d iv i d u a l l y r e fe r r e d ) tra in e e s . T herefo re, the focus o f th is study w i l l be d ire c te d toward an examination in Michigan, o f the i n d i ­ vidual r e f e r r a l system o f vocational t r a in in g under the Manpower Devel­ opment and T rain in g Act (MDTA) to determine (1 ) whether tr a in e e incomes were increased as a r e s u lt o f the program; (2 ) c h a r a c te r is tic s o f tra in e e s who gained the most from t r a in i n g . The population was chosen from the f i l e s o f the Michigan Employment S ecu rity Commission (MESC). In the absence, to d a t e j o f any l i t e r a t u r e on the in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l system, a review o f other re le v a n t em pirical studies (Borus, 1964; Borus and Hardin, 1969; Main, 1968; N ila n d , 1972; S c o tt, 1970; S o lie , 1968; Somers and Gibbard, 1968; Weisbrod, 1969) dealing w ith the group method of vocational t r a in in g under MDTA is considered germane to th is study and w i l l be undertaken in Chapter I I . The l i t e r a t u r e w i l l be researched fu r t h e r in connection w ith the more global context o f manpower t r a in in g resources. The researcher ^While th is study was in process, an e v a lu a tio n o f the MDTA I n s t i t u t i o n a l R e ferral Program was completed by Olympus Research Corpora­ t io n , S a lt Lake C i t y , Utah, f o r U. S. Department o f Labor, June, 1972. 4 intends to review studies r e la t in g to (a ) the l e g i s l a t i v e h is to ry o f a d u lt education in the United States as i t evolved from the SmithHughes Act o f 1914 to the Adult Education Act o f 1966; (b) the important but re c e n tly broadened concept o f human c a p ita l (Becker, 1964; Wood and Campbell, 1970; S c h u ltz, 1971) and the b e n e fits and costs o f t r a i n ­ ing to both so ciety and the tra in e e s (Garms, 1971; C h r i s t o f f e l , 1973; Borus, Brennan and Rosen, 1970; Barsby, 1972). P rio r to a review o f the l i t e r a t u r e , the next few pages w i l l be devoted to a b r i e f discussion o f the problem and d e f i n i t i o n o f terms which w i l l be used throughout the study. A. Problem The United States has always been concerned w ith i t s manpower resources dating as f a r back as the Northwest Ordinance o f 1787 (See Figure 1) to the Nixon a d m in is tra tio n 's Manpower Special Revenue Shar­ ing proposal to Congress. Manpower researchers would be remiss i f they f a i l e d to make special mention o f the more recent (1 9 6 0 's ) r e in c a r ­ n a tio n , a renaissance, o f n atio n al manpower t h r u s t , the progenitors o f which were the la s t Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. President Johnson's dreams o f a Great Society were the imagination o f a great president whose people liv e d in a paradox o f poverty and a f f l u ­ ence, unemployment, underemployment and high le v e ls o f in d u s tr ia l p r o d u c tiv ity , c i v i l disorders w ith in the nation and walking on the t r a n ­ q u i l i t y o f the moon. I t is out o f th is paradox th a t a se rie s o f Great Society l e g is l a t i o n was born. PHASE I (1737-191*0 Northwest Ordinance 1787________ M o r rill Land Grant Act 1862 PHASE I I (1915-19^3) PHASE I I I Smlth-Hughes Act 1917_____ (1 9 U -1 96 0) PHASE IV (1961-1969) National Defense Education Act 1958 Vocational Education Act 1963 PHASE V (1970-197*0 Adm inistration Vocational R e h a b iIita tio r Act o f 1968_______ George Reed Act 1929 O'Hara BUI Adult Basic Education Homestead Act 1862 _ _ _ _ _ L2i6_ _ _ _ _ _ Vocational R e h a b ilita tio n Act 1920 Elementary & Secondary Education Act ________ l^Btj__________ National Apprenticeship Act 1937 George Barden Act 19^6 National Defense Act 1916 Wagner-Peyser Act ^933 Comprehensive Employment Train in g Act o f 1971* Manpower Development and T raining Act Area Redevelopment Act _________ L2£J__________ Public Works & Eco. Dev. _______ Act 1961_________ Works Projects A dm inistration ( « c ) 19V* Hawkins 196fr Economic Opportunity Act I96A Model C itie s 1966 M ilit a r y Services Act 1966 Social Security Act o f 1935 Figure 1 .—Manpower Legislation 1787 - 1974. SOCIAL SECURITY AMENDMENTS - 1 967 iel son BUI Prouty _______ 1362_______ C iv il Rights Act DEVELOPMENT OF ite ig e r Emergency Employment Act 1971 6 Great Society l e g i s l a t i o n o f the 1960's and t h e i r ad m in is tra­ t i v e g uidelin es were conceptualized and o p e ra tio n a liz e d in s w if t reactio n to the human resources exigencies o f the period but w ith ou t the mechanism f o r determining program e ffe c tiv e n e s s . Consequently, s c i e n t i f i c ev alu atio n o f manpower program poses serious t h r e a t to the v a l i d i t y o f research re s u lts and raises several questions as to whether determ ination o f program e ffe c tiv e n e s s can a t a l l be obtained e x p e r i­ m e n ta lly . This s itu a tio n notw ithstanding, attempts w i l l be made in t h is study to discover v a lid evidence o f less than class size e ffe c tiv e n e s s . The re s u lts could be useful to fed eral and s ta te decision makers in t h e i r search f o r ways to improve the d e liv e r y o f manpower services. The problem is "How successful is the Less Than Class Size program in Michigan in terms o f increasing the income and e m p lo y a b ility o f the trainees?" I m p l i c i t in th is question are those fa c to rs r e l a t i v e to the impact o f the t r a in in g on the a b i l i t y o f the in d iv id u a l to obtain a t r a in in g re la te d jo b , the r e s u lta n t change in income commensurate w ith increased, salesable vocational s k i l l s , and the e ffe c ts o f demographic c h a r a c t e r is t ic s . ra tio of Success of the program w i l l be determined by (a ) the completions to dropouts, (b) the number and/or percentage o f graduates who are employed in t r a i n i n g - r e l a t e d jo b s , and (c ) the s i g n i f i ­ cance o f any wage changes as a r e s u l t o f graduation. The data used in t h is study spans a period o f th ree ye ars, 1969 through 1972. The u t i l i z a t i o n o f manpower data over t h is length o f time when national and f i s c a l monetary p o lic ie s flu c tu a te d could pose a 7 serious l im it a t io n on th is study. However, the e f f e c t o f t h is c o n s tra in t is negated through the use o f the consumer p ric e index (CPT) f o r the period to determine the real income o f the p a r t ic ip a n t s . Borus and Tash (1970) in addressing th is subject in d ica te d t h a t a d d itio n a l research is needed in th is a rea , and in d ic a te d also th a t "presumably government f i s ­ cal and monetary p o lic y are designed to achieve f u l l employment regard­ less o f whether a p a r t i c u l a r manpower program is implemented." In th is connection, th e r e f o r e , the answer to the question o f time r e s t r ic t io n s is addressed in Table 37. A more re le v a n t question in connection w ith time is the oppor­ t u n i t y costs incurred by the e n ro lle e s . T ra in in g programs are o ffe re d based on the expectation o f placement upon completion. The researcher contends th a t except f o r the General Motors s t r i k e o f 1970 which had a c r ip p lin g e f f e c t on employment (and revenues) time has a n e g lig ib le e f f e c t on the placement o f less than class s ize tra in e e s in view o f the length o f the less than class s iz e t r a in in g (up to 18 months versus maximum 10 weeks fo r re g u la r c la s s ) . In the immediate section which fo llo w s , is undertaken. a d e f i n i t i o n o f terms Chapter I I deals w ith a general survey o f re le v a n t l i t e r a t u r e , follow ed by the research design and methodology in Chap­ te r I I I . te r Chapter IV is devoted to an an alysis o f the data and Chap­ V presents the research fin d in g s , conclusion and recommendations. B. D e fin itio n s o f Terms Manpower programs are fed eral programs intended to in flu e n c e the q u a lit y and composition o f the work fo rce by increasing the s k i l l s and 8 employment o p p o rtu n itie s o f in d iv id u a ls in the work f o r c e , or those who d es ire to be in i t but who are v o c a tio n a lly unprepared o r face o ther b a r r ie r s to employment. T h e re fo re , programs purporting to a l l e v i a t e employment b a rr ie rs must provide s k i l l t r a i n i n g , t r a n s i t i o n a l employ­ ment experience, job placement a s s is ta n c e , r e la te d c h ild c a re , and so cial and h ea lth s e rv ic e s . e ra lly : Toward th a t end, manpower programs gen­ (1 ) operate outside the normal educational processes, (2) give supportive services fo r periods o f less than one y e a r , (3 ) pro­ vide s k i l l t r a in in g and job o p p o rtu n itie s f o r non-professional jo b s , and (4 ) t a r g e t on the disadvantaged sector o f the population. The fo llo w in g is a l i s t o f terminology which w i l l be used throughout the research: Employabil i t.y is the c a p a c ity to be employed as a r e s u lt o f re c e iv in g t r a in i n g . Employment r e fe r s to a co n trac tu a l r e la t io n s h ip in which a person provides a s e rv ic e f o r which he receives wages. T ra in in g r e la te d job is employment o f a tr a in e e in a jo b f o r which he was s p e c i f i c a l l y prepared during the t r a in i n g program. Trainee re fe rs to an in d iv id u a l who is engaged in MDTA t r a in in g programs a t some p o in t in time f o r purposes o f improving e m p lo y a b ility . T ra in in g is tr a in e e enrollm ent in Vocational Education s k i l l preparation class f o r which he b e n e fits through increased e m p lo y a b ility and employment. In d iv id u a l R e fe rra l re fe rra l (IR ). A s ta te employment se rv ic e system o f to t r a in in g in which an in d iv id u a l is s e le c te d , counseled, 9 tested and tra in e d based upon the in d iv id u a l's background, p r i o r educa­ t i o n , work experience and m o tiva tio n . Less Than C la s s /In d iv id u a l R e fe rra l ( I R ) . Occasions e x i s t when i t is not p r a c tic a l to organize a Manpower Development and T rain in g (MDT) class p ro je c t f o r a s p e c ific occupation, but circumstances are appropriate f o r the inclu sio n o f one MDT t r a in e e , or a few, in to an e x is tin g program. In these instances, where demand in an occupation is sc atte re d and i n s u f f i c i e n t to e s ta b lis h a c la s s , tra in e e s may be re fe r re d on a le s s -th a n -c la s s basis. Underemployment. The term re fe rs to a person who is working p a rt-tim e but seeking f u l l - t i m e work or who is working f u l l - t i m e but re ce ivin g wages below poverty l e v e l . C o s t-E ffe c tiv e n e s s . The le v e l o f e ffe c tiv e n e s s achieved and cost by a program as compared to the cost and achievement o f a competing program. B e n e fit-C o s t A n a ly s is . A fin a n c ia l a n a ly sis o f b e n e fits and costs o f a program, o ften expressed as a r a t i o . Opportunity Costs. Those ta n g ib le and in ta n g ib le costs incurred by a worker as a r e s u l t o f a decision to e n ro ll in gram ra th e r than to an educational pro­ be g a i n f u l ly employed. Consumer Price Index (C P I). A measure o f changes in r e l a t i v e p rice le v e ls o f commodities normally consumed by urban wage earners. The index is c a lc u la te d r e l a t i v e to a base period in which the p ric e o f consumer goods and services maintained a steady le v e l w ithout wide f l u c t u a t io n . CHAPTER I I GENERAL SURVEY OF LITERATURE A. L e g is la tiv e H is to ry o f Adult Education In Michigan, there has been a growing concern f o r the q u a lit y o f education in the s ta te since e a r ly 1970. This emerging concern prompted the S ta te Board o f Education to appoint an advisory task force composed o f Michigan educators, students, and la y c i t i z e n s . The primary purpose o f the task fo rce was to i d e n t i f y what was considered the common goals o f an educational system capable o f meeting the grow­ ing and changing needs o f contemporary s o c ie ty. Although i t is recognized th a t the schools are p res en tly meet­ ing the needs o f many people, i t became in c re a s in g ly important to the task force th a t an e f f o r t be made to focus i t s a tt e n t io n on the needs o f a l l c i t i z e n s , on the demands o f present day s o c ie ty , and on the resources a t hand. S p e c u la tiv e ly , i t is w ith in t h is general c o n te x t, and w ith in the context o f the manpower l e g i s l a t i o n o f the 1960's th a t the educational resources o f the s t a te provided the co o rd in a tiv e th ru s t f n r achieving the common educational goals o f MDTA and the s t a t e 's task fo rce . The task fo rce grouped i t s ideas in to th ree p r in c ip a l goal areas which should guide e f f o r t s to p e rfe c t the educational system. These areas are: (1) democracy and equal opportunity--concerned w ith 10 11 conditions necessary f o r a successful process o f school o p e ra tio n , (2) student le a rn in g — sp ecifying desired outcomes f o r each person who is a product o f the educational system, and (3 ) educational improvement— id e n t if y in g actions t h a t are e s s e n tia l to continued upgrading o f the system. I t might be in t e r e s t in g to note t h a t Hennighen (1970) in d ica te s th a t dropout statewide f o r elementary and secondary schools was approxi­ mately 50,000. With reference to the task f o r c e 's p o s itio n on E q u a lity and Equal O pportunity, i t was f e l t th a t Michigan education must support the p rin c ip le s o f democracy by recognizing the worth o f every human being and by c re a tin g an educational environment to develop mature and respon­ s ib le c i t i z e n s . Toward th a t end, th is researcher b elieves th a t the tremendous growth and expansion in th is s ta te o f community colleges over the l a s t decade or so was designed to f a c i l i t a t e the ap p ro priate mil l ie u fo r achieving in d iv id u a l and s o c ie ta l educational o b je c tiv e s . While in the p a s t, and to a la rg e degree today, general education was considered the bulwark o f democracy, our democratic in s t it u t io n s are being threatened by the e f f e c t s on in d iv id u a ls o f automation and cyber­ nation which are demanding a more s p e c ia liz e d education. The r i o t s and c i v i l disturbances o f the 1960's according to the 2 Kerner Commission Report was a d i r e c t m a n ife s ta tio n o f high unemploy­ ment and in e q u a lit y o f educational and employment o p p o rtu n itie s . There can be no doubt t h a t the r i o t s posed a serious t h r e a t to the fu tu re o f 2 Report o f the National Advisory Commission on C i v i l Disorders, Governor Otto Kerner, Chairman. Dutton Publishing Company, New York, New York, 1968, p. 609. 12 democratic i n s t i t u t i o n s , a s it u a t io n reversed only by the sagacity o f high q u a li t y American leadership and the enactment o f Great Society l e g i s l a t i o n , in c lu d in g educational o p p o rtu n itie s f o r a d u lts . While general education is im portant f o r s e l f - e d i f i c a t i o n and personal g r a t i f i c a t i o n , a d u lt education must be given considerable a tte n tio n in t h is study because the th ru s t o f the manpower programs addresses a d u lt educational needs. T herefo re, th is aspect o f th is study is d ire c te d a t a review o f the h is to r y and impact o f a d u lt educa­ tio n l e g i s l a t i o n on basic education. Darland (1969) c ite s th a t the h is to ry o f a d u lt education in the United States cannot be a c c u ra te ly addressed w ith o u t r e f e r r i n g to major l e g i s l a t i v e developments which have exerted in flu e n c e on the a d u lt edu­ cation movement. Accordingly the c u lt u r a l extension and home economics programs were the main th ru s t o f a d u lt education a t the time o f World War 1 and were made possible by the Smith-Hughes Act o f 1917 and the Smith-Bankhead Act o f 1920. During the depression o f the 1930's much o f a d u lt education action was sponsored by such fed eral programs as the C i v i l i a n Conser­ vation Corps, the National Youth A d m in is tra tio n , and the Work P ro je c t A d m in is tra tio n . The th ree organ izatio n s were created as a r e s u lt o f an ti-depression l e g i s l a t i o n . Federal aid to education in the United States became more pro­ nounced in the l a t e 1 9 5 0 's and e a r ly 1960's and p ub lic school a d u lt education programs were among the re c ip ie n ts o f fed eral support. b r i e f d e s c rip tio n o f fed eral involvement appears below. A 13 Vocational Education Acts Since 1917 the l o c a l - s t a t e - f e d e r a l programs o f vocational and technical education have been developed on the basis o f g r a n t s - i n - a i d to the states to encourage and support vocational t r a i n i n g (Dariand, 1969). The o r i g i n a l l e g i s l a t i o n , the Smith-Hughes Act ( 1 9 1 4 ) , s p e c i f ie d a g r i c u l t u r e , home economics, trades and i n d u s t r i e s as the occupational categories f o r which s t a t e and local t r a i n i n g costs and other expenses would be e l i g i b l e f o r p a r t i a l reimbursements by fed er al funds. This patter n continued by designing other occupational categories in which t r a i n i n g could be supported by federal funds. The George-Dean Act o f 1937 was a f u r t h e r c o n t rib u t io n in t h i s d irection. This act was concerned w it h the d i s t r i b u t i v e occupations. Succeeding i t was the George-Barden Act o f 1946 which provided f o r a major expansion in vocational education. Amendments in t h is ac t pro­ vided t r a i n i n g f o r p r a c t i c a l nursing and preparatio n in o th e r health occupations including a u t h o r iz a t io n f o r t r a i n i n g in the f i s h e r y trades and i n d u s t r i e s . L ater the National Defense Education Act o f 1958 was enacted au th oriz in g t r a i n i n g o f technicians in occupations necessary to national defense. The Vocational Act o f 1963 set a few patterns f o r federal support o f vocational and technical education. I t continued the p re ­ vious a u th o r iz a tio n f o r t r a i n i n g in s p e c i f i c occupational categories and added the o f f i c e occupations. I t f u r t h e r permitted sta tes to t r a n s f e r Federal funds from one category to another. More im p ortan tly , the Act brought a fresh meaning to vocational education in t h a t 14 educational o p p o r tu n itie s become a v a i l a b l e to ad ults in need o f t r a i n ­ ing, but who were no longer in the educational system. The 1963 Act was amended in 1968 to provide more "people oriented" se rv ices . The 1968 l e g i s l a t i o n provided a d d it i o n a l funding to promote a c t i v i t i e s such as cooperative programs, t r a i n i n g f o r the disadvantaged as well as the handicapped o f a l l ages. I t also provided f o r consumer and homemaking education and other a c t i v i t i e s . The primary and legal basis f o r vocational educational programs were the Vocational Education Act o f 1963, the Smith-Hughes (1914) and George-Barden Acts ( 1 9 4 6 ). Using these l e g i s l a t i v e acts as a basis f o r . o r g a n iz a t io n , the Vocational Education program was designed (1) to serve adults who needed t r a i n i n g or r e t r a i n i n g in order to achieve s t a b le employment or advancement, and (2) to provide special training for persons with academic or sociometric handicaps t h a t may prevent them from succeeding in the r e g u l a r vocational programs. As c i t e d by Dari and the Vocational Education Act o f 1963 was not considered an a d u lt education b i l l , ad u lts . although i t s purpose included I t s purpose is c i t e d in the f o ll o w i n g paragraph: I t is the purpose o f t h is ac t to a u th o r ize fe d eral grants to s ta te s in a s s is t in g them to m a in ta in , extend, and improve e x i s t i n g programs o f vocational education, to develop new programs o f vocational education, and to provide p a r t - t i m e employment f o r youths who need the earnings from such employ­ ment to continue t h e i r vocational t r a i n i n g on a f u l l - t i m e bas is, so t h a t persons o f a l l ages in a l l communities o f the s t a t e - - t h o s e in high school, those who have already entered the l a b o r market but need to upgrade t h e i r s k i l l s or lea rn new ones, and those with special educational h a n d ic a p s - - w ill have ready access to vocational t r a i n i n g or r e t r a i n i n g which is o f high q u a l i t y , which is r e a l i s t i c in the l i g h t o f actual or a n t i c i p a t e d o pp ortun itie s f o r g ainfu l employment, and which is su ited to t h e i r needs, i n t e r e s t s , and a b i l i t y to b e n e f i t from such t r a i n i n g (D ariand, 19 67 ). 15 On November 3, 1966, Congress passed the Adult Education Act o f 1966 as T i t l e I I I o f the Elementary and Secondary Education Amend­ ments o f 1966. I t was important f o r a number o f reasons: (1) i t was considered the i n i t i a l l e g i s l a t i o n enacted s p e c i f i c a l l y r e f e r r e d to as an Adult Education Act, and (2) i t moved a d u lt education into the mainstream o f education in t h i s country regardless o f student age. While a series o f a d u lt education l e g i s l a t i o n had been useful in pro­ viding educational services f o r a d u lt s , other federal l e g i s l a t i o n , e . g . , MDTA has been useful in serving a complimentary purpose as i n d i ­ cated in the next se ction. Impact on Other L e g is l a t i o n According to the Manpower Report o f the President ( 1 9 7 2 ), the primary o b j e c t iv e o f the federal manpower t r a i n i n g programs was to develop job s k i l l s in helping the unemployed, underemployed, w elfare r e c i p i e n t s , and other disadvantaged persons. The passage o f the Manpower Development and T ra in in g Act in 1962--with much broader provisions f o r i n s t i t u t i o n a l t r a i n i n g — represent a worthwhile innov ation. and o n -th e -jo b The 1961 recession had brought a new r i s e in a c h r o n i c a l l y high unemployment r a t e . Rapid technological change created f e a r o f widespread unemployment due to automation. Fryer (1956) notes t h a t , although there is a rapid pace o f technological change, "no machine w i l l e n t i r e l y replace the human bein g --n o t only w i l l reshaping." new s k i l l s be required but the old ones w i l l need In a d d i t i o n , and perhaps more important, t h ere are i n d i c a ­ tions t h a t as manufacturing becomes h e a v i ly automated and as unions 16 bargain f o r a shorter work week and e a r l i e r r e t ir e m e n t , the r e s u l t a n t increase in l e i s u r e time w i l l generate ex p o n e n tia lly higher demands f o r service i n d u s t r i e s , including government services . Following the passage o f MDTA, fears o f widespread tec hnologi­ cal unemployment lessened as a r e s u l t o f the strong economic expansion and a growing b e l i e f t h a t technological advance does not n eces sarily imply an o ve ra ll increase in unemployment. In itia l experience with the manpower t r a i n i n g programs c a l le d a t t e n t i o n to groups in the population not o r i g i n a l l y designated f o r special h e l p - - t h e poorly education, members o f m in o rit y groups; men and women with low incomes. The MDTA was amended in 1963 and 1968 in an e f f o r t to make i t a more f l e x i b l e method f o r meeting the t r a i n i n g needs o f disadvantaged groups, those a f f e c t e d by automation and new entrants i n t o the labor force. I n s t r u c t i o n in basic education under MDTA is u su ally provided through local schools. I t may be conducted under co ntrac t by business, ind us try , trade asso cia tio ns, labor unions, or p r i v a t e education and training in s titu tio n s . Sixty-tw o thousand tra in e e s have been en ro lle d in basic education since 1962. Table 1 shows i n s t i t u t i o n a l tra inees by occupational category f o r the f i s c a l year 1967 as reported by the Handbook o f Adult Education (1970 ). The cumulative enrollment n a t i o n a l l y o f the MDTA program since 3 i t s inception in 1962 exceeded three m i l l i o n as o f November, 1972. Those t r a in e d in the i n s t i t u t i o n a l phase o f the MDTA program numbered The estimated number o f tra in e e s as o f Nobember, 1972, was 3,098,9 00. Manpower Report o f the Pre sid en t, March, 1973, p. 53. 17 TABLE 1 . — I n s t i t u t i o n a l Train in g by Occupational Category o f T r a i n ­ in g , Fiscal Year 1967 (Tenn. 1970). Occupational Category Percent o f Trainees Machine Trades C l e r i c a l and Sales S tru ctu ra l Work Service Occupations Miscellaneous 21 20 18 17 23 317,800 w hile o n-th e-jo b phase handled 2,7 81,100 t r a i n e e s . The Depart­ ment of H e a lth , Education and Welfare in conjunction w ith s t a t e educa­ t io n departments arranges the i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r i v a t e educational agencies. t r a i n i n g through public and Improvement in co ordination and coopera­ tio n among these agencies has been accomplished through the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System (CAMPS), to the ex ten t t h a t CAMPS has been able to achieve t h i s . Darland (1967) notes t h a t the g rea tes t expansion o f a d u lt edu­ cation programs in recent years has not been under the s t r i c t c l a s s i f i ­ cation o f "education" but instead under "manpower." Previous vocational education acts were not p r i m a r i l y aimed a t the a d u lt and was t i g h t l y targeted on school programs, whereas, the new acts did j u s t the opposite in view o f increasing s k i l l obsolescence occasioned by automation and increasing entra nts i n t o the labor force. Adult education became a more s p e c i f i c p a rt of federal educa­ t io n l e g i s l a t i o n with the enactment o f the Manpower Development and Training Act o f 1962. education. The b i l l marked the use o f the t e r m - - a d u l t basic 18 Other provisions o f the MDTA made i t possible to o f f e r occupa­ tion al t r a i n i n g programs to persons age 16 and o ld e r . I t is noted t h a t although most o f the occupational t r a i n i n g aspects o f t h is b i l l came under the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the Department o f Labor and were admin­ i s t e re d through the branch o f f i c e s o f the Employment S e rv ic e , the educational portions o f the t r a i n i n g - - a d u l t basic education--was often conducted by a d u lt education departments o f local public school systems. The Economic Opportunity a c t o f 1964 (EOA) is another l e g i s l a ­ t i v e source o f funds f o r a d u lt education programs. This ac t focuses i t s a t t e n t i o n on the needs o f the poor, low income f a m i l i e s and i n d i ­ vid u a ls . While MDTA and Vocational Education Acts recognized th at ad u lt basic education was a necessary p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r meaningful job tra in in g , neither b i l l recognized a d u l t education to the extent t h a t i t was a central p a rt o f i t or was i t included as a separate t i t l e leg islation . in the The most important emergence f o r a d u lt education came as a r e s u l t o f the Economic Opportunity Act o f 1964. Resulting from th is action the O f f i c e o f Equal Opportunity was created l a t e r the same year as a federal agency to administer the various a n t i - p o v e r t y programs. Considerable a t t e n t i o n seemed to be focused on T i t l e B o f the a c t - - A d u l t Basic Education Programs--which stated t h a t : I t is the basic purpose o f t h i s p a rt to i n i t i a t e programs o f in s t r u c t i o n f o r in d iv id u a ls who have a t t a in e d age eighteen and whose i n a b i l i t y to read and w r i t e the English language co n s titu te s a sub stantial impairment o f t h e i r a b i l i t y to get or r e t a i n employment commensurate with t h e i r real a b i l i t y , so as to help e lim in a te such i n a b i l i t y and r a i s e the level o f education of such in d iv id u a ls with a view to making them less l i k e l y to become dependent on o th ers , improving t h e i r a b i l i t y to b e n e f i t productive and p r o f i t a b l e employment, and making them b e t t e r able to meet t h e i r a d u lt r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s {Darland, 1967). 19 T i t l e I o f the Demonstration C i t i e s and Metropolitan Develop­ ment Act o f 1966 which gave b i r t h to the Model C i t i e s program c o n s titu te s an ad d itio n a l source o f fed er al l e g i s l a t i o n f o r a d u lt education programs. An o b je c t iv e o f the education component o f t h i s Act seeks to achieve, a t the local l e v e l , "marked progress in reducing educational disadvantages and to provide educational services necessary to serve the poor and d i s ­ advantaged in the areas . . . and to bring the educational performance o f disadvantaged c h ild re n up to le v e ls p r e v a i l i n g in the community or metro politan area and which w i l l provide s u b s t a n t i a l l y a l l Model Neigh­ borhood c h ild re n and adults with adequate work s k i l l s and/or academic t r a i n i n g commensurate with t h e i r a b i l i t y and expressed desires" (Darland, 1967). Toward t h a t end, the Lansing Model C i t i e s Agency f o r example has colla borated with the local school d i s t r i c t in providing funds and i n c i t i n g in t e r e s t s in the d e l i v e r y o f broader, fundamental educational services to Model Neighborhood resid en ts. During FY 1974, the Lansing Model C i t i e s Agency contributed $250,000 to the Lansing School D i s t r i c t on a p i l o t basis f o r developing a career education p r o je c t designed to prepare residents f o r vocations co nsistent with t h e i r i n d iv id u a l in te r­ es ts, needs, and the world o f work. B. Manpower Train in g and R e tra in in g Programs According to the Manpower Report o f the President ( 1 9 6 8 ) , man­ power p o lic y and programs had three major focuses in 1967. These foci were on the concentration and u n i f i c a t i o n o f manpower forces to help the n a tio n 's most disadvantaged people achieve em p lo y a b ility and decently 20 paid jobs, on g r e a t l y increased e f f o r t s to involve p r i v a t e industry in the t r a i n i n g and job adjustment o f the hard core unemployed, and on new program developments aimed a t g re a t e r f l e x i b i l i t y in meeting the d i v e r ­ gent needs o f d i f f e r e n t in d i v i d u a l s and groups. A re p o rt prepared by Daniel H. Kruger (1972) reveals t h a t a v a i l ­ able data show t h a t t h ere are in d i v i d u a l s in the lab or fo rce who possess c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which impede or r e s t r i c t t h e i r e m p l o y a b i l it y , e . g . , o f ap pro priate s k i l l s or lack o f adequate schooling. lack Personal c h a ra c t e r­ i s t i c s , lack o f adequate supportive se rv ices , imperfections in the chan­ nels o f h i r i n g , and an inadequate supply o f jobs a l l c o n trib u te to the number and r a t e o f those unemployed in the Greater Lansing Area. T his, according to Kruger, ind ica te s the needs o f in d iv id u a ls f o r both manpowr services and jobs. Against t h is background o f fe d e ra l l e g i s l a t i o n and adminis tra ­ t i v e action in support o f a d u lt education and manpower programs, t h i s researcher intends to review some germane empirical studies on the sub­ j e c t o f manpower t r a i n i n g in the section which follows: 1. Economic Benefits o f Manpower Retraining Programs Page (1964) has done a somewhat in c lu s iv e c o s t - b e n e f i t study o f r e t r a i n i n g under the Manpower Development Act. His primary purpose was to analyze the e f f o r t s to maintain a higher level o f employment in the United States by studying a r e t r a i n i n g program under th e Massachusetts State Law, providing insights into costs and b e n e fits to be experienced under MDTA. 21 Data were compiled from a s t a t i s t i c a l summary o f 907 train ees in Massachusetts between 1958 and 1961, who sought r e t r a i n i n g to improve the steadiness o f t h e i r employment and t h e i r incomes. With these data supplemented by information from in t e rv ie w s , the author proceeded with his b e n e f i t - c o s t analysis approach. Page used f o r cost measures in his study: subsistence and supervision. c a p i t a l , education, Since the t ra in e e s were charged f o r t h e i r use o f educational m a t e r i a l s , the real value o f these educational were used in the a n a ly s is . items Subsistence costs were d i f f e r e n t i a l amounts, since the MDTA allows subsistence payments f o r f a m i l i e s t o t a l l i n g the s ta te average unemployment insurance b e n e f i t . Page notes the observation t h a t only 438 out o f 907 re tra in ee s obtained jobs in the areas in which they were r e t r a i n e d , discounting the program's assumption t h a t the men need only r e t r a i n i n g to get b e t t e r job s. Hardin ( 1 9 6 9 ), in his analysis o f b e n e f i t - c o s t studies c i t e s Cain and Stromdorfer (1969) as c a l c u l a t i n g the net present value of t r a i n i n g to be $3,325 f o r men, $76 f o r women, and $1,638 f o r both sexes combined, given a 10 percent discount r a t e . The new present values were $3,985, $80, and $1,990, r e s p e c t i v e l y , when the discount r a t e is f i v e percent. The p r i v a t e cost is estimated to be $233 f o r men, $30 f o r women, and $165 per average graduate. These r e s u l t s imply b e n e f i t - cost r a t i o s o f 1 5 . 3 , 3 . 5 , and 1 0 .9 , r e s p e c t i v e l y , given a 10 percent discount r a t e . This s i t u a t i o n appears to emphasize a serious dis crep ­ ancy and sex bias in employment p rac tice s which are c u r r e n t l y being corrected through-court action and a f f i r m a t i v e action programs. 22 Borus (1964) reports present values o f f u tu r e b e n e fits from $535 to $1,031 depending on the assumptions concerning the discount r a t e (5 or 15 percent) and the r a t e o f o u t-m ig ra tio n from the t r a i n i n g r e l a t e d occupation. The p r i v a t e cost per t r a i n e e is not estimated as a s i n g l e f i g u r e , but a range o f p o s s i b i l i t i e s is given. Hardin and Borus (1966) c a lc u la te d the annual b e n e fits f o r t h e i r e n t i r e sample as $174 per t r a in e e and a cost of $1800 per t r a i n e e , which represents a b e n e f i t - c o s t r a t i o o f 5 . 9 , given a 10 percent d i s ­ count r a te and a ten ye a r se rv ice l i f e . The average annual b e n e f i t f o r tr a in e e s in classes o f 60-200 hours was c a lc u la te d to be $745, and the cost is negative, -$5 6. This negative sum may be due to large t r a n s f e r payments to t r a in e e s . Cain and Stromdorfer (1969) indicate d a monthly gain o f $67 in net earnings plus imputed value o f voluntary n o n - p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the labor force f o r men. f o r women. They in d ica te d a corresponding monthly gain o f $9 These amounts imply a p r i v a t e b e n e f i t cost r a t i o o f 21.2 f o r men and 22.1 f o r women, given a 10 percent discount r a t e and a 10 year se rvice l i f e . Hardin and Borus (1966) f u r t h e r indicate d t h a t the government is able to c o l l e c t an average o f only $88 per t r a i n e e per year a f t e r t r a i n i n g but incurs an outlay o f $1,115 per t r a i n e e . being s l i g h t l y lower than 8 percent o f the i n i t i a l The annual gain o u t l a y , the govern­ ment is not able to recover i t s investment o f funds from the t r a i n e e s , unless the discount r a t e is s u b s t a n t i a l l y less than 8 percent. Hardin (1969) notes t h a t the inverse r e l a t i o n s h i p o f b e n e fits to course dur ation also appears to be present in government b e n e f i t s . 23 A t r a i n e e in a class f o r 60-200 hours returns to the government an annual amount w ith an average o f $275 a f t e r t r a i n i n g , and the govern­ ment spends only an average o f $404 on him. I f the se rv ice l i f e is 10 ye a r s , c i t e s Hardin, then the b e n e f i t - c o s t r a t i o f o r the government is approximately 4 . 2 , given a 10 percent discount r a t e , and a b e n e f i t cost r a t i o o f about 5 . 5 , given a 4 percent discount ra t e . According to Hardin and Borus the t r a n s f e r to r e t r a i n i n g e f f o r t s from medium and long classes to short classes and a reduction in discount ra te w i l l improve the government's recovery o f funds from the tra in ees and w i l l have no substa ntial e f f e c t on the t r a i n e e s . Magnum and Robson (1971) fe e l t h a t the important question is not "which manpower program has been most c o s t - e f f e c t i v e in achieving it s objective." Instead, i t is "what combination o f manpower services can make the g re a t e s t c o n t rib u t io n to a l l e v i a t e the employment prob­ lems o f the disadvantaged." This researcher concurs t h a t the social b en efits and in some cases the social costs exceed the economic costs. The complexity o f a d m i n is t r a t iv e problem is a r e s u l t o f the myrid man­ power l e g i s l a t i o n , i t s sponsorship, and a f l u c t u a t i n g national economic and f i s c a l p o l i c y . Figure 2 prepared by the Manpower Program Service a t Michigan State U n iv e rs ity i l l u s t r a t e s g r a p h i c a l l y the amorphous nature o f the a d m i n is t r a t iv e problem. Magnum and Robson (1971) f u r t h e r stress t h a t manpower programs, in a d d it io n to increasing em p lo y a b ility f o r t r a i n e e s , also stimulated the growth and development of experienced s t a f f personnel with conse­ quences f o r o th er public and p r i v a t e e f f o r t s . This re s e a rc h e r’ s expe­ riences i n d i c a te t h a t manpower programs also a f f e c t the a t t i t u d e s , lu u iu it ensure lEDiifc iSlkCr s r * T U G f « r i« » i r t & l e u i c u m in s i m t i Michigan State University School of Labor and Industrial Relations Manpower Program Service Figure 2 .—Manpower Programs and Funding Patterns. 25 perceptions, and services o f public agencies serving the poor, and develops in these agencies a g r e a t e r capac ity and s e n s i t i v i t y f o r d e l i v e r i n g human se rv ices . Magnum and Robson (1971) also emphasize t h a t in order to learn the real worth o f manpower programs, one must measure t h e i r t o t a l impact on the community. Measuring the impact of a manpower program requires a b e f o r e - a n d - a f t e r comparison, e . g . , "how were these things before the manpower program and how they are now?" Magnum and Robson (1971) fee l t h a t the c r i t i c a l impact o f man­ power programs is on the l i v e s o f the enrol less and t h e i r f a m i l i e s . a re su lt of training w ill As they experience more s t a b l e , more s a t i s f y i n g and b e t t e r paid employment in the future? be s u f f i c i e n t to j u s t i f y the cost? F urthe r, w i l l the improvement Magnum and Robson (1971) have sug­ gested two approaches in achieving s a t i s f i e d employment and earnings: (1) I f the problem is the i n d i v i d u a l ' s lack o f s k i l l , experience, educa­ t i o n , o r m oti vation, program ad min istra to rs would be concerned with programs designed to improve the i n d i v i d u a l ' s s k i l l s and a t t i t u d e ; (2) I f the problem is manifested in the s tru c tu re and fu nctio nin g o f the labor market, these conditions must be changed. Some o f these changes may re q u ire programs designed to bridge the geographical gap between people and job s, and to a f f e c t the lab or market dynamics which r e s t r a i n access. Hamermesh (1971) c i t e s c e r t a i n secondary e f f e c t s t h a t should be considered in c a l c u l a t i n g b en efits to be used in any b e n e f i t cost c a l c u la t io n f o r t r a i n i n g programs. P o s i t i v e l y there is a need to con­ sid e r unmeasured fa c to r s as the r i s e in morale among disadvantaged 26 trainees who f i n d employment and the generational e f f e c t s upon the children o f successful t r a i n e e s . N e gativ ely, a very important secondary impact o f t r a i n i n g programs is known as displacement. Unless workers are tra in e d f o r jobs in which vacancies e x i s t , the subsidies given to firms to employ disadvantaged workers r e s u l t , in the long run, in the displacement o f o t h e r, non-subsidized workers, and the possible longrun displacement of subsidized workers a f t e r su b sid iz a tio n ceases. Hamermesh (1971) stresses t h a t secondary e f f e c t s are important f o r p olicy e v a lu a t io n , e . g . , p o litical designed to help the disadvantaged. repercussions upon the programs He f u r t h e r stresses t h a t the most important secondary e f f e c t o f t r a i n i n g and job information programs is the change they cause in the s t r u c t u r e o f p r i v a t e economic decision­ making r e l a t i v e to the u t i l i z a t i o n o f the t r a i n e d , disadvantaged i n d i ­ vid u a l. He suggests t h a t secondary e f f e c t s o f t r a i n i n g and other man­ power programs be analyzed to a r r i v e a t a co rrec t evalu ation o f o n -th e job t r a i n i n g subsidies. Although Hamermesh (1971) s p e c ifie s c e r t a i n p o s i t i v e and nega­ t i v e secondary e f f e c t s , he adds t h a t these secondary e f f e c t s may be o f primary importance f o r e v a l u a t i o n , operation and success o f c e r t a i n manpower programs. Kiker and L i l e s (1972) have used the dis crim in ant an alysis tech­ nique to evaluate a p a r t i c u l a r r e t r a i n i n g program, instead o f the usual c o s t - b e n e f i t technique. The d is crim in an t analysis allows f o r detec tion o f p o t e n t ia l f a i l u r e s in a manpower program. They have suggested t h a t t h e i r re su lts may be useful to policymakers who are concerned w ith new entrants and graduates o f the r e t r a i n i n g program. 27 This study was conducted in South Carolina during 1965 and 1966, a t which 63 percent of the persons who were o f f e r e d t r a i n i n g under the Manpower Development and Train in g Act (MDTA) completed the program and 18 percent o f the graduates were unemployed a t the time o f the post­ t r a i n i n g , one-year f o ll o w up. The primary o b j e c t iv e o f t h i s study was to present d is c r im in ­ ate f u nc tio ns , based on an analysis o f several demographic and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the MDTA ap plicants in South Carolina in 1965 and 1966. These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were saidt to be o f importance in c l a s s i f y ­ ing into d i s t i n c t i v e groups (graduate or non-graduates) the fu ture MDTA app lic an ts in South Caro lina. I f i t can be assumed t h a t the a p p l i ­ cants o f f u tu re MDTA programs would have s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , the s p e c i f i c c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s may be used to aid in p olicy making. Kiker and L i l e s (1972) as sert t h a t the re s u l t s o f the d is crim in an t analysis should not be used as an acceptance c r i t e r i o n . In d iv id u a ls who would be c l a s s i f i e d as " f a i l u r e s " (non-graduates or unemployed graduates) are probably the ones t h a t the r e t r a i n i n g program are s p e c i f i c a l l y designed to a i d . This researcher contends th at perhaps the importance o f t h i s kind o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n is to be able to recognize these individuals e a r l y in order t h a t they may possibly complete the program or fin d employment as a r e s u l t o f proper counseling, guidance, and placement services . The d is crim in an t fac tors used in th is study were based on several demographic and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f approximately 4,600 persons. These persons were o ffe re d i n s t i t u t i o n a l t r a i n i n g conducted 28 under the MDTA in South Carolina ( 1 9 65 ,196 6). The d is c r im in a n t func­ tions were determined f o r ( 1 ) graduates vs. non-graduates, ( 2 ) gradu­ ates vs. dropouts, (3) employed graduates vs. unemployed graduates, and (4) dropouts, vs. non-enro llees. Members o f each category were defined by the follow ing demographic and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : age, sex, education, marital s t a t u s , number o f dependents, primary wage earn er , p r i o r weekly ea rnings, months in primary occupation and p r i o r unemploy­ ment. Resulting from data a n a l y s i s , i t was found t h a t the in d iv id u a l had a g re a t e r p r o b a b i l i t y o f being a graduate i f he had the fo llo w in g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , l i s t e d in descending order o f importance: (2) below average earnings on l a s t job p r i o r to t r a i n i n g , (1) female, (3) more dependents than average, (4) above average in age, (5 ) unemployed less than 5 weeks p r i o r to t r a i n i n g , (6) employed a s h o rte r period o f time than average in primary occupation, (7) primary wage ea rn e r , education than the average, and (9) married. (8) b e t t e r On the o t h e r hand, a general p r o f i l e of the unemployed graduate may be seen in the fo llo w in g characteristics: (1) less education than the average, (2) was unem­ ployed, on the average, more than f i v e weeks, (3) had below average weekly earnings in his l a s t job p r i o r to t r a i n i n g , (4) had more than the number o f months in primary occupations, ( 5 ) female, and ( 6 ) married. Stromdorfer (1968) sought to examine the b e n e f it s o f r e t r a i n i n g programs in West V i r g i n i a during the years 1959-1964. The programs studied were those estab lished under the Area Redevelopment Act (ARA) and the West V i r g i n i a Area Vocational Education Program (AVP). The study 29 examines and analyzes 879 t r a i n e e s , n o n - t ra in e e s , dropouts, r e j e c t s and those who did not re p o rt (DNR). two s i g n i f i c a n t questions: I f so, how much? This study i s b a s i c a l l y concerned w ith (1) does t r a i n i n g o f the unemployed pay o f f? And to whom? A second and e q u a lly important question is (2) what are the va ria b le s a f f e c t i n g the r e l a t i v e success or f a i l u r e of r e t r a i n e d wokers in the labor market? Moreover, how do these v a r i a ­ bles a f f e c t d i f f e r e n t groups o f workers exposed to r e t r a in i n g ? Stromdorfer (1968) considered his dependent variables as employ­ ment and earnings, and his independent v a r i a b l e s as t r a i n i n g s t a t u s , r e g u la r occupation, age, education, sex, m a rit a l s ta t u s , race, course sponsor, geographic m o b i l i t y , labor market ar ea, p r i o r lab o r force experience, r e t r a i n i n g s k i l l , and job guarantee a f t e r t r a i n i n g was completed. Variab les which were considered as i n s i g n i f i c a n t were race, m a rital status and sex. In his view, r e t r a i n i n g has a p o s i t i v e net e f f e c t on lab or market success in employment and ea rnings. Comparisons over an 18-month period showed t h a t the tra in e e s earned a net o f $63, $42, $86, and $109 more per month than the n o n - t ra in e e s , dropouts, r e j e c t s and those who did not r e p o r t , r e s p e c t i v e l y . Considering the remaining independent v a r i a b l e s - - e d u c a t i o n , sex, p r i o r lab or market experience, the study r e s u l t s were as expected: more years o f education suggested more employment o p p o r tu n itie s and higher earnings. P r i o r lab or force experience f a c i l i t a t e d b e t t e r employment o pp ortun itie s and more earning p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r t r a in e e s . With r e f e r ­ ence to sex, men were employed about 2.1 months more than women; men's earnings on net were $127 higher per month. Im p lic a tio n s revealed t h a t 30 t h is d i f f e r e n c e in employment and earnings were due to the v a r i e t y o f economic and i n s t i t u t i o n a l fa c t o r s which are bias again st women. The Stromdorfer (1968) study showed the net e f f e c t o f r e t r a i n i n g to be p o s i t i v e and s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01 l e v e l . With 4 respect to course sponsor, i t seems t h a t t ra in e es in ARA -sponsored 5 courses were b e t t e r o f f than those in AVP courses. Trainees in ARA earned a g re a t e r net amount o f $874 over the 18-month post t r a i n i n g period. ARA courses required less time to complete enabling t h e i r train ees to re turn to the labor market sooner. S o li e (1968) measured the b e n e fits o f r e t r a i n i n g in his study using a two-way method. The primary method was to determine the mean number o f weeks o f unemployment f o r each group over a two-year period. A second method o f determining b e n e fits o f the r e t r a i n i n g program was to c a l c u l a t e the mean number o f weeks o f employment f o r each group over the same two-year period. He contro ls f o r the socio-demographic d iffe re n c e s o f the in d i v i d u a l s in the four groups by using m u l t i p l e regression techniques. These va ria b le s include age, education, previous occupation, county o f residence, m a rit a l status and others. Following regression, the re s u l t s were evaluated by a t - t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e . The d i f f e r e n c e between the mean number o f weeks employed by the completes when compared with the non-completes are s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .05 l e v e l . The d i f f e r e n c e between the mean number o f weeks o f unemploy­ ment o f completes when compared with non-applicants was s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .01 l e v e l . S o lie found no other d if f e re n c e s to be important. ^Area Redevelopment Act o f 1960. C 3Appalacian Vocational Program. 31 S o li e (1968) measured these employment-unemployment d if f e r e n c e s several times over the two-year period. He generalized t h a t the bene­ f i t s o f t r a i n i n g tend to decrease over time. Manpower l i t e r a t u r e reveals t h a t the evaluations o f manpower programs are not very old (l e s s than 10 years) and t h e re f o r e data are not y e t a v a i l a b l e . As a r e s u l t some less s a t i s f a c t o r y method w i l l have to be devised in order t h a t more meaningful evaluations may be made. The more e f f i c i e n t method a t present seems to be the p ro je c tio n o f bene­ f i t s f o r several periods w hile they are incre asing, remaining constant, and d e c lin in g (Borus and Tash, 1970). The authors take into account t h a t the longer term pro je ction s should take m o r t a l i t y and labor force p a r t i c i p a t i o n rates into account. Hardin (1969) f e e ls t h a t progress has been made in estimating the economic consequences o f an important manpower program from the point o f view o f socie ty as a u n i t , o f the t r a i n e e , and possibly o f the government as an o rg an iza tio n . He argues th at f u r t h e r progress in measuring the economic b e n e fits and costs requires a c l e a r e r d e f i n i t i o n o f the social e f f e c t s , e s p e c a i l l y the choice between the productive capac ity and actual output i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ; a decision o f whether to focus on e f f e c t s on goods and services or to include also a considera­ t ion o f t r a n s f e r payments in determining the social e f f e c t s ; estimation o f output e f f e c t s from employee compensation instead o f earnings; and progress in i d e n t i f y i n g and measuring any external e f f e c t s o f t r a i n i n g . S i m i l a r l y , a d i s t i n c t i o n should be made between the d e f i n i t i o n o f p r i v a t e b en efits and costs in terms o f disposable income or othe r c r i ­ t e r i a , and a c l e a r meaning o f "economic e f f e c t s on the government." 32 Borus and Tash (1970) suggested t h a t the observed b e n e fits be projected i n t o the f u tu re in order to estimate the t o t a l gains o f the programs. These suggestions may be made using several methods. They fe e l t h a t a f e a s i b l e method o f accomplishing t h i s would be to base the p ro je c tio n on the experience o f p a r t i c i p a n t s in other programs. If the gains from a s i m i l a r program have increased a t an annual r a t e o f 5 percent, t h i s i d e n t i c a l f i g u r e may be a p p lie d. 2. Economic Effectiveness o f Manpower Retra ining Programs During the implementation o f manpower t r a i n i n g programs, admin­ i s t r a t o r s and t r a i n i n g counselors should have some in d ica to rs o f whether the a p p lic a n t w i l l fi n d a jo b . remain in the program and go on a f t e r graduation to This information is useful a t the outset in order to d e t e r ­ mine the ex ten t o f supportive services necessary f o r the a p p lic a n t and to maximize economic effe c tiv e n e s s o f the program. In t h i s connection, the Kiker and L il e s (1972) d is crim in an t analysis technique r e f e r r e d to above may be a useful p r e d i c t i v e t o o l , in t h a t i t detects p o t e n t i a l f a i l u r e s among the a p p lic a n t s . However, a more so p histi cated study by Niland (1972) uses a d i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i o n , and is geared more toward a determination o f program e f f e c t iv e n e s s than in d iv id u a l considerations. Nil and*s (1972) primary concern was f o r the r o l e o f p r i o r labor market experience in ev aluating manpower programs. The present study revealed t h a t in the f i r s t two years 1260 p a r t i c i p a n t s graduated from the 10-week job preparation course, based on a survey made in 1971 o f 33 graduates, dropouts, and r e j e c t s from the program. A se rie s o f m u l t i p l e regressions to determine the influence o f both program and non-program fac tors were used. The independent va ria b le s u t i l i z e d a r e : race, sex, m a rita l s t a t u s , the number o f school grades completed, the number o f other t r a i n i n g programs attended, weekly earnings at the time o f a p p l i ­ cation f o r the program, percent time employed in the 12 months p r i o r to a p p li c a t i o n f o r the program, and program s t a t u s , where the in d iv id u a l is e i t h e r a graduate or a r e j e c t from the program. Results show t h a t ra ce , sex, and m a rit a l status do not prove sig nificant. The p o s i t i v e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f education was expected and ind ica te s t h a t among graduates and non-graduates, earnings are higher as more schooling is completed, in a d d i t i o n , these regressions conclude t h a t graduation is associated with g r e a t e r earnings, but t h is is achieved only through higher paying jobs fo r those who p reviously had b e t t e r jobs in the lab or market p r i o r to t r a i n i n g . Reduced unemployment among graduates is not i n d ic a te d . Borus' 1964 study consists o f a second consideration o f e f f e c ­ tiveness in manpower r e t r a i n i n g . He weighs the b e n e fits and costs o f the Connecticut r e t r a i n i n g programs to determine i f r e t r a i n i n g is a sound investment f o r the i n d iv id u a l worker, the government, and the economy. The increase in income of workers who u t i l i z e d t r a i n i n g was p r i m a r i l y due to a f i v e week reduction in t h e i r expected annual unem­ ployment. A number o f factors reduced the b e n e f i t f o r the w orker-- increased tax es , reduced t r a n s f e r payments, discounting f o r time p r e f ­ erence, and a tendency f o r the t r a in e e s to leave the r e t r a i n i n g occupa­ tion. Borus notes t h a t not a l l tra in e e s who e n t e r the r e t r a i n i n g 34 programs make use o f the s k i l l s t h a t they have been taught. Aggregate b e n e fits from r e t r a i n i n g were g rea ter than the sum o f in d ividu al bene­ f i t s because, as Borus notes, the value of the workers' production (the ind ividu al b e n e f i t s ) was increased by secondary e f f e c t s , and the social r a t e o f time preference was assumed to be lower than the i n d i v i d u a l ' s rate. Since the r e t r a i n i n g allowance exceeded normal unemployment b e n e f i t s , i t was in the f i n a n c i a l i n t e r e s t o f the workers to e n ter the courses whether or not they planned to use the s k i l l s . The costs o f r e t r a i n i n g to the economy were the same as those to the government except f o r the r e t r a i n i n g allowances which were simply t r a n s f e r s . For the worker who had an opportunity cost o f undertaking r e t r a i n i n g a t $80 per week, the b e n e f i t cost r a t i o was between 3.2 and 6 . 2 . The govern­ ment's b e n e f i t - c o s t r a t i o was between 11.4 and 42.4 depending on worker c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and the program chosen. 3. Evaluation o f Manpower Pro­ grams— Conceptual Issues and Problems Evaluation o f manpower programs is of considerable i n t e r e s t , although evalu ations have been very slow f o r various reasons. Notwith­ standing, Barsby ( 19 72 ), Magnum and Rossi ( 1 9 7 1 ) , Weisbrod ( 1 9 6 9 ), Rossi (1 9 7 3 ) , Borus and Buntz ( 1 9 7 3 ), have a l l examined ev alu ation o f manpower programs. Barsby (1972) asserts t h a t the magnitude of expenditures on manpower programs e . g . , over $5 b i l l i o n a year is s u f f i c i e n t j u s t i f i ­ ca tion f o r r e q u irin g careful ev aluation o f t h e i r ope ra tio n. The wide range o f manpower programs serving o ther groups, i n d i c a te t h a t the past 35 years have been a period o f experimentation as well as one o f i n t e n ­ s i f i e d e f f o r t s to reduce poverty. Magnum and Robson (1971) fe e l t h a t an ev aluation study must answer two primary questions: (1) What was the t o t a l net impact o f the e n t i r e complex o f programs in each community? (2) In what ways have the d i f f e r i n g economic, p o l i t i c a l and social environments required d i f f e r i n g p o l i c i e s or influenced the r e l a t i v e success o f f a i l u r e o f the program? In t h i s connection, Weisbrod (1969) ind ica te s t h a t when the b e n e fits from p a r t i c u l a r manpower programs are being e v alu ate d , there is a r i s k o f overstatement since a combination o f programs is employed while a l l the b e n e fits ar e a t t r i b u t e d to one sin g le program. Problems o f ev aluati on have also been emphasized by Borus and Buntz (1 9 72 ). They have provided a comprehensive review o f the method­ ology o f manpower program ev aluation as well as some o f the improve­ ments which have occurred in ev alu ation techniques f o r manpower pro­ grams. The major emphasis o f the present authors was devoted to stud­ ies t h a t did not have s u f f i c i e n t l y supporting methodology in order t h a t manpower programs can produce worthy and r e l i a b l e answers to ques­ tion s concerning p olicy making dec isions. They note t h a t in ev aluating manpower programs the m a j o r i t y o f studies have used change in the income o f the program p a r t i c i p a n t s as a primary dependent v a r i a b l e . The use of change in income as a dependent v a r i a b l e is j u s t i f i a b l e fo r several reasons. F i r s t , most o f the evaluations have taken the point o f view t h a t one goal o f the manpower programs is to improve the level o f aggregate production. 36 I t is f u r t h e r noted t h a t many b e n e fits which accrue to the government from manpower programs are based on the earnings o f the p articipants. For example, tax revenues from the p a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l increase as t h e i r earnings r i s e (Hardin, 1969). On the oth er hand, social w e lfa r e and so cial services expenditures may d ec lin e i f man­ power programs are successful (Hard in, 1969). The d i f f i c u l t y o f measuring the varia bles d i r e c t l y is considered a problem, and t h e r e ­ fo re necessary to estimate the income gains o f p a r t i c i p a n t s in order to c a l c u la t e the e f f e c t s o f manpower programs on government budgets. Several major t h e o r e t i c a l works (Borus & Tash, 1970; Stromdorfer, 1968; Hardin, 1969; Borus, 1964; Becker, 1964) have advanced a v a r i e t y o f approaches f o r choosing the appro pria te discount r a t e f o r ev aluating returns to government p r o je c t s . Various studies have shown s i m i l a r i t i e s in the choice of discount rates used in p ro je c tin g the b e n e fits o f manpower programs. I t is noted t h a t tw o-th ir ds o f the studies which c a l c u la t e present values use a 10 percent discount r a t e to c a l c u l a t e social b e n e f i t s . The s i m i l a r discount rates im p lie s — to an e x t e n t - - t h a t the find ings o f various manpower evalu ations are some­ what comparable. Additional issues r e l a t i v e to ev alu ation were addressed by Cain and H o l l i s t e r (1973) and o thers . For example, Cain and H o l l i s t e r (1973) contend t h a t e x i s t i n g evaluations o f social action programs have come short of meeting the standards possible w it h in the d i s c i p l i n e s o f social sciences. These authors f e e l t h a t e x i s t i n g data and methods may permit evalu ations providing the rules o f evidence f o r determining 37 the degree to which programs have succeeded or f a i l e d . According to Cain and H o l l i s t e r (1 9 73 ), i t is expected t h a t ev alu ation programs should be designed in a manner to r e f l e c t an experimental s i t u a t i o n : That i s , a model s u i t a b l e f o r s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t i n g , wide range in the values o f the va ria b le s representing the program inputs, and the use o f control groups. In an e a r l i e r study, Cain and H o l l i s t e r (1969) d elin eated two broad types o f e v alu ation s. The f i r s t o f which is c a l le d "process e v a lu a t io n ," p r i m a r i l y concerned with a d m i n is t r a t iv e monitoring and the need to check on managerial fu n c tio n s , including the accuracy o f records, etc . A second type o f evaluation proposed by Cain and H i l l i s t e r (1969) is "outcome e v a l u a t i o n , " more commonly known as c o s t - b e n e f i t a n a ly s is . The inputs and outcomes o f the program re q u ire measurements, although the most d i f f i c u l t problem is deciding on the measuring o f outcomes. In many cases i t is possible t h a t a p r o je c t may be judged to be a success or a f a i l u r e i r r e s p e c t i v e o f how well i t was adminis­ tered . Borus and Tash (1970) as sert t h a t past evalu ations o f manpower programs have taken many forms which have d i f f e r e d in terms o f the vari ables considered f o r measuring. Consequently, they have d elin eated three basic types o f evalu ations which are a l i t t l e d i f f e r e n t from those proposed by Cain and H i l l i s t e r ( 1 9 6 9 ) , e . g . , (a) program monitor­ ing, (b) sh o rt-te rm feedback, and (c) impact e v a l u a t i o n . They have noted t h a t one o f the major problems in the ev alu ation o f manpower 38 programs Is t h a t these programs encompass a wide v a r i e t y o f services f o r the n a t i o n 's workers and p o te n t i a l workers. G en er ally, they seek to improve the employment s i t u a t i o n o f program p a r t i c i p a n t s through improving t h e i r economic, p h y s ic a l, and mental w e l l - b e in g . They seek also to increase the productive a b i l i t y o f the n a t i o n 's human resources and to reduce poverty and social dependency. However, these goals are said to be d i f f i c u l t to o p e r a t i o n a l i z e . Additional problems in manpower evaluations may serve in r e f e r ­ ring to the question o f "whom do manpower programs a f f e c t ? " Tash (1970) f e e l Borus and t h a t many studies have excluded— because o f lack of data o r t h e o r e t i c a l basis--many persons whose lab o r market experience was influenced by manpower programs. C. 1. Theory and A p p lica tio n o f C o st-B en efit Analysis and Investment in Human Capital Human Ca pital The concept o f human c a p it a l has long been looked upon (para ­ d o x i c a l l y ) as a means o f reducing man to a mere material component and impairing the freedom which man has long sought f o r him self. The e f f e c t o f indentured slave ry in the United S t a t e s , and the r i s e o f colonialis m elsewhere are the main reasons t h a t man was not considered a form o f c a p ita l. Moreover, as c e r t a i n l i b e r a l , emancipation forces began to appear on the p o l i t i c a l and economic horizons, the notion o f human c a p ita l became f u r t h e r unthinkable and unhumanitarian. According to Nicholson (1891) even J. S. M i l l a t one time in s is t e d t h a t "people o f a country should not be looked upon as wealth because wealth existed 39 only f o r the sake o f p e o p le .1' A lfre d Marshall somewhat supported M i l l s ' view, and in d ica te d th a t "w hile human beings are incon testab ly c a p ita l from an a b s tra c t and mathematical point o f view, i t would be out o f touch w ith the market place to t r e a t them as c a p ita l in p ra c tic a l a n a ly ­ sis (M a rs h a ll, 1930). On the c o n tra ry , supporters o f the concept o f humans as c a p ita l according to Nicholson (1891) include the philosopher-economist Adam Smith who b o ld ly included a l l o f the acquired and useful a b i l i t i e s o f a ll in h a b ita n ts o f a country as a p a rt o f c a p i t a l . H. Van Thuemen also argued th a t the concept o f c a p ita l as applied to man did not degrade or im pair his freedom and d ig n it y . The stream o f thought, th e r e fo r e , has been th a t i t is n e ith e r ap p ro priate nor p r a c tic a l to apply the concept o f c a p ita l to human beings. This s it u a t io n appears to have been g e n e ra lly accepted, or a t l e a s t remained w ith in the realm o f philosophical discussions u n t il Schultz (1961) in his p re s id e n tia l address spoke o f the b ir t h o f the economics o f education a t an Annual Meeting o f the American Economic A ssociation. He in d ica te d th a t the a c q u is itio n o f useful s k i l l s and knowledge is a form o f c a p i t a l , th a t th is c a p ita l is a su b sta n tial product o f d e lib e r a t e investment and th a t i t s growth in Western s o c ie tie s may w ell be the most d i s t i n c t i v e fe a tu r e o f the economic system. In d ic a tio n s are th a t since S c h u ltz 's speech, the economics o f education and health have become ra p id ly growing branches o f economics, and which during the l a s t 13 years have s i l e n t l y re v o lu tio n iz e d t r a ­ d it io n a l subjects such as growth economics, la b o r economics, 40 in te rn a tio n a l trade and public finance. I t is w ith in t h is general framework t h a t the fo llo w in g section d ealing w ith the theory and a p p li ­ cation o f c o s t-b e n e fit an a ly s is and investment in human c a p ita l is reviewed. Human c a p ita l is an important concept in r e l a t i o n to c o s tb e n e fit analysis and has been elaborated in the l i t e r a t u r e (S ch u lts , 1961; Becker, 1964). Becker (1964) has gathered extensive data concerning in v e s t­ ment in human c a p ita l development w ith s p e c if ic emphasis on e ffe c t s o f earnings, rates o f r e tu r n ; rates o f re tu rn from c o lle g e education, under investment in c o lle g e education; rates o f re tu rn from high school education and trends over time. He has d e lin e a te d the various forms o f investments in human c a p ita l to include schooling, o n -th e -jo b t r a in i n g , medical c a re , m ig ra tio n , and in fo rm atio n . He fe e ls th a t most investments in human c a p ita l r a is e observed earnings a t o ld e r ages because returns are a p a rt o f earnings. Becker f u r t h e r fe e ls th a t because these e f f e c t s are produced by very d i f f e r e n t kinds o f in v e s t­ ment in human c a p i t a l , a basis is provided f o r a u n ifie d and compre­ hensive th eo ry. Such a theory may help to e x p la in d i f f e r e n t phenomena, such as in te r-p e rs o n a l and in t e r - a r e a d iffe re n c e s in earnings, the shape o f age-earning p r o f i l e s , and the e f f e c t o f s p e c ia liz a t io n on s k ill. Some investments in human c a p ita l do not a f f e c t earnings because costs are paid and returns are c o lle c te d by firm s , in d u s tr ie s , or countries employing the in d iv id u a ls involved . These are considered " s p e c ific investments," according to Becker (1 9 6 4 ). He views " s p e c ific 41 tr a in in g " as t r a in in g which has no e f f e c t on the p r o d u c tiv ity o f tra in e s s in any f ir m o th e r than the one providing the t r a in i n g ; general t r a in in g increases the marginal p r o d u c tiv ity o f tra in e e s by the same amount in o th e r firm s as in the firm providing the t r a in i n g . S p e c ific t r a in in g is said to help in e x p la in in g th a t unemployment is g re a te r among u n s k ille d than s k i l l e d workers, and sometimes f o r r e s t r i c t i n g worker m o b ility among o ld er workers f o r whom returns to investment in t r a in in g would not be optim al. Becker (1964) fu r t h e r in v e s tig a te s e m p ir ic a lly the e f f e c t o f investment in formal education on earnings and p ro d u c tiv ity in the United S ta te s . He examines such areas as: the r e la tio n s h ip between earnings and c o lle g e education as measured by i t s e f f e c t s on n atio n al p r o d u c tiv it y , p r iv a t e rates o f re tu rn from high school education; the e ffe c ts o f the increase in education upon earnings d i f f e r e n t i a l s and emphasizes the age-earnings p r o f il e s caused by investment in education. 2. Investment in Human Capital According to Schultz (1961) much o f what is re fe r re d to as con­ sumption c o n s titu te s investment in human c a p ita l--e x p e n d itu re s on edu­ c a tio n , h e a lth , and in te r n a l m igration to take advantage o f b e t t e r job o p p o r tu n itie s . He in d ic a te s th a t economists have long been aware th a t people are important f o r the wealth o f n atio n s. The productive capacity o f human beings is said to be la r g e r than a l l o th e r forms o f wealth taken to g e th e r. Economists stress th a t people in v e s t in them­ selves and th a t these investments are u su ally very la r g e , e s p e c ia lly i f foregone earnings o r opportunity costs are taken in to con sideratio n . 42 However, these investments enlarge and extend the range o f options a v a ila b le to in d iv id u a ls . The research er's m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y back­ ground might be a case in p o in t. Schultz (1961) notes t h a t the thought o f investment in human beings is o ffe n s iv e . "Values and b e lie f s i n h i b i t us from looking upon human beings as c a p ita l goods— except in s la v e ry --a n d th is we abhor." I t seems th a t we are unaffected by the long s tru g g le to r i d society o f indentured se rv ic e and to evolve p o l i t i c a l and leg al i n s t i ­ tu tio n s in an e f f o r t to avoid bondage fo r fre e men. To use human beings as investment runs counter to s tro n g ly held values, and tends to reduce man to a m a te ria l component, to something very s im ila r to property. The f a i l u r e to t r e a t human resources as a form o f c a p i t a l , as a means o f production, as a product o f investment, has fo s te re d the re te n tio n o f the c la s s ic a l notion o f investment, and has fo stered the re te n tio n o f the c la s s ic a l notion o f la b o r as a ca p a c ity to do manual work re q u irin g l i t t l e knowledge and s k i l l . As c it e d by Schultz (1961) human resources have both q u a n ti­ t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e dimensions. The number o f people, the proportion who e n te r upon useful work, and hours worked are e s s e n t i a ll y q u a n t it a ­ t i v e c h a r a c t e r is t ic s . I t is noted th a t many in s ig h ts may be gained by examining some o f the more important a c t i v i t i e s th a t improve human c a p a b ilitie s . He concentrated on 5 basic ca teg o ries: (1 ) health f a c i l i t i e s and s e r v i c e s - - a l l expenditures th a t a f f e c t the l i f e expec­ tancy, strength and stamina, and the vig o r and v i t a l i t y o f a people; 43 {2} o n -th e -jo b t r a i n i n g - - o l d s t y le apprenticeship organized by firm s ; (3) fo rm a lly organized education a t the elem entary, secondary, and higher education l e v e ls , (4 ) study programs f o r adults th a t are not organized by firm s — extension programs e s p e c ia lly in a g r ic u ltu r e ; (5) m igration o f in d iv id u a ls and fa m ilie s to ad ju s t to changing job oppor­ tu n itie s . Schultz admits t h a t not much is known about these a c t i v i t i e s except f o r education. He f a i l s to ela b o ra te on these a c t i v i t i e s in any d e ta ile d manner. 3. The Economics o f Investment in Human Resources While discussing aspects o f investment in human c a p i t a l , i t is o f equal importance to in t e g r a te in to th is discussion the economics o f investment in human resources. The most d i s t i n c t i v e fe a tu re o f our economic system is the growth in human c a p i t a l . Marglin (1967) describes b e n e fit-c o s t an a ly sis as a t a c t ic a l r a th e r than a s t r a t e g ic weapon in economic development. b e n e fit-c o s t analysis to f u l f i l l In order f o r th is r o l e , economic planning must proceed through successive stages fo r s e ttin g o b je c tiv e s , a llo c a t in g resources among se cto rs , and d e riv in g c r i t e r i a f o r designing in d iv id u a l p r o je c ts . The goal o f p ro je c t design is the maximization of net bene­ f i t s under c o n s tra in ts . The meaning o f "b e n e fits " and "costs" depend on the program's o b je c tiv e s . The problem o f comparing b e n e fits w ith respect to d i f f e r e n t o b jec tiv es is s i m il a r to the problem o f comparing b e n e fits in d i f f e r e n t years: in both, weights are used; in the l a t t e r case the discount ra te is the weighing system. The marginal in te rn a l 44 ra te o f re tu rn in the p r iv a te sector is not an app ro priate ra te o f discount f o r the p ublic se cto r because th ere e x is ts no means o f which the economy as opposed to the in d iv id u a l can divorce the decisions o f choosing an investment program and d is t r i b u t i n g consumption over time. A value judgement about the in te r-te m p o ra l d is t r i b u t i o n o f b en efits must be incorporated in to th e investment c r i t e r i a . While the present c r i t e r i a is recommended fo r in te r-te m p o ra l comparisons, i t may lead to erro rs in the tim ing o f p ro je cts when b e n e fit rates increase over time. In t h is connection, Marglin (1967) introduces a c r i t e r i o n which may be applied in a r e l a t i v e l y wide v a r ie ty of such cases. Risk aversion is not n eces sarily the appro priate a t t i t u d e f o r a government: p r im a r ily , a government should concentrate on expected values instead o f worrying about the dispersion o f outcomes. Secondary b e n e fits are defined sep arately f o r each o b je c tiv e as in d i r e c t c o n trib u tio n not r e f le c te d in the d ir e c t consumption o f goals and services produced by p ub lic e n te rp ris e s . 4. Public Resource Development Whereas, Marglin (1967) is concerned w ith the d e s c rip tiv e nature o f b e n e fit-c o s t a n a ly s is , C iria c y (1955) is concerned w ith the public p o lic y aspects o f b e n e fit - c o s t a n a ly s is . C iria c y (1955) favors the use o f b e n e fit-c o s t an alysis as a guide to public investment in resource development f o r two main reasons: (1 ) i t is l i k e l y to r e s t r a in the abuse o f economic arguments in the p o l i t i c a l process, and (2 ) i t 45 may provide a stimulus to research and s c i e n t i f i c understanding. It is suggested t h a t in ta n g ib le s such as re c re a tio n a l o p p o rtu n itie s may be evaluated through in d i r e c t use o f market d ata. However, most i n d ir e c t and secondary b e n e fits and costs are evaluated d i r e c t l y in the market p la c e , although i t is not c e r t a in as to what e x ten t they w i l l be considered and added to d ir e c t b e n e fits and costs. C iria c y (1955) examines secondary b e n e fits and costs in view o f his a n a ly s is . He fe e ls th a t a l l classes o f secondary net b e n e fits should be dropped from consideration i f the problem area is p ro je c t s e le c tio n . D. S p e c ific A p p lic a tio n o f B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis Sewel, Davis, Scott and Ross (1961) have o u tlin e d the general p rin c ip le s and procedures o f b e n e f it - c o s t a n a ly s is . Among the p r a c t i ­ cal d i f f i c u l t i e s considered are the problems o f p r i c i n g , p ro je c t l i f e , discount r a t e , secondary e f f e c t s and in t a n g ib le s , damages and compen­ s a tio n , employment tax es , and c o n f lic t s between resource use. The authors have o u tlin e d procedures f o r e v a lu a tin g b e n e fits in the f o llo w ­ ing areas: flood c o n tr o l, h y d ro e le c tric power, f is h e r ie s improvements, domestic and others. The sample case re la te s to the economic merits o f a l t e r n a t i v e h y d ro e le c tric p ro je c ts . Rossi (1972) in his study has concerned h im se lf w ith the an aly­ sis o f social p o lic y . The e s s e n tia l elements o f c o s t- b e n e fit analysis are considered in the fo llo w in g a s s e rtio n : ra tio n a l decisions among a l t e r n a t i v e p o lic ie s may be accomplished by ordering a l l a l t e r n a t iv e s in terms o f the balances or r a t io s between a n tic ip a te d costs and the 46 a n tic ip a te d b e n e fits o f the p o lic ie s in question. The b e n e fits o f a p a r t i c u l a r p o lic y a l t e r n a t i v e are the a n tic ip a te d want f u l f i l l m e n t p atterns made possible by the proposed change. In view o f the above, i t is noted by Rossi (1972) th a t the key problems in c o s t-b e n e fit an alysis center around (a ) a determina­ tio n o f goals; (b) a reduction o f w a n t - f u l f il l m e n t p a tte rn s ; (c ) i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f costs and b e n e fits ; (d) i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f a l t e r n a ­ tiv e s and (e ) the development o f a mechanism by which to aggregate costs and b e n e fits to determine the d is t r ib u t io n o f w e ll-b e in g in a social system. B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f Occupational Train in g Programs Subsequent to S c h u ltz's (1961) re v o lu tio n a ry t r e a t i s e on investment in human c a p i t a l , the massive s ta te o f unemployment th a t ex iste d during the e a r ly 19 6 0 's , and the burgeoning e f f e c t th a t S c h u ltz's t r e a t i s e has had on the s ta te o f the a r t o f economics, a p r o l i f e r a t i o n o f economic studies r e l a t i v e to investment in human c a p ita l and i t s impact on manpower t r a in in g has occurred. A leading study in t h is area is th a t o f Hardin (1 9 6 9 ), which is concerned w ith a comparison o f recent studies on b e n e fit-c o s t analysis o f occupational t r a in in g programs. His comparisons are focused on occup ation ally o rie n te d , i n s t i ­ tu tio n a l t r a in in g o f a d u lt le a rn e rs . These workers are u s u a lly , but not e s p e c ia lly , unemployed o r underemployed. Other studies which are 47 included in H ardin's research (and re fe r re d to e a r l i e r ) are the West V ir g in ia r e t r a in in g courses studied by Somers (1 9 6 8 ), and re s u lts o f economic b e n e fits and costs published by Gibbard and Somer (1 9 6 8 ), Cain and Stromdorfer (1 9 6 8 ), and Stromdorfer (1 9 6 8 ). A re p o rt by S o lie has been published regarding ARA r e t r a in in g in Tennessee (1 9 6 8 ). Also, Borus has analyzed a state-sponsored and ARA r e t r a in in g in Connecticut (1 9 6 4 ). Page and Gooding have studied state-sponsored r e t r a in in g in Massachusetts (1 9 6 2 ). Hardin and Borus (1966) have evaluated ARA and Manpower development and T ra in in g Act (MDTA) r e t r a in in g in Michigan. The main focus o f H ard in 's (1969) a n a ly sis was on those studies which re su lted in complete b e n e f it- c o s t r a t i o s . He gave s l i g h t but considerable a t te n tio n on an alysis concerned p r im a r ily w ith other important economic aspects o f the r e t r a in in g process. Hardin (1969) begins his research a n a ly sis w ith in a conceptual and methodological framework. He emphasized various d e f in it io n s o f "b e n e fits f o r society" and has sought to compare, c o n tra s t, and analyze these various p erspectives. According to him, b e n e f it- c o s t analysis o f occupational t r a in in g may be undertaken from th re e d i f f e r e n t per­ spectives: Society as a whole, the in d iv id u a l t r a in e e , and the govern­ ment as an o rg a n iz a tio n . In th is connection, Page (1962) defines the so c ia l economic b e n e fits f o r so c ie ty as the sum o f the growth in tra in e e earnings and the d e c lin e in tr a in e e t r a n s f e r payments which occur a f t e r the course and are a t t r i b u t a b l e to i t . The economic costs o f so c ie ty co n sist o f the sum o f the re n ta l o f p r iv a te instrumental f a c i l i t i e s , and the operating costs o f 48 in s tru c tio n to gether w ith other expenditures. There appears to be a philosophical d iffe re n c e between the authors w ith respect to the com­ ponents o f b e n e fits and costs. Toward th a t end, Cain and Stromdorfer (1968) d efine the b e n e fits as the increase in tra in e e earnings r e s u l t ­ ing from t r a in i n g , w h ile Borus (1964) defines the b e n e fits as the aggregate increase in earnings in s o c ie ty , including an allowance f o r m u ltip le e f f e c t s , which re s u lts from r e t r a in i n g . Hardin and Borus (1966) d e fin e the b e n e fits from r e t r a in in g as the increase in tra in e e earnings occurring a f t e r the course and as a re s u lt of i t . An idea common to a l l o f these concepts is th a t an in d iv id u a l's earnings measure his c o n trib u tio n to production and th a t the impact o f t r a in in g upon n atio n al product may be concluded from the impact o f t r a in in g upon earnings. Twoard th is end, a number o f researchers (Wiseman, 1965; Weisbrod, 1969; Conley, 1969; Borus, Brennan and Rosen, 1970; Levin, 1970; Somers and Stromdorfer, 1971; C h r is t o f f e l and C lio , 1973) have contributed to the l i t e r a t u r e o f bene­ f i t s and costs o f occupational t r a in i n g . Programs researched were Upward Bound, vocational r e h a b i l i t a t i o n and Neighborhood Youth Corps (NYC) w ith t h e i r respective impact on the t r a n s f e r payment a lt e r n a t iv e s to investment in manpower t r a in i n g . Summary o f L it e r a tu r e Review In the sections above, an attempt has been made to look a t the l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t i v e to the genesis and development o f manpower t r a in in g programs. I t is in te r e s tin g to note th a t the concept o f 49 investment in human c a p ita l which appears to take i t s e a r l i e s t genesis w ith t r a d i t i o n a l economic t h e o r e tic ia n s , e . g . , Adam Smith, A lfre d M arsh all, e t c . , over fo u r ce n tu rie s ago did not become p e rtin e n t u n t il 1960 when Schultz (1961) discussed the economics o f education and human c a p ita l formation as a means o f improving the q u a lit y o f the lab or fo rce. What's more in t e r e s t in g is the f a c t th a t s o -c a lle d benevolent p o l i t i c ia n s and orthodox economists eschewed human c a p ita l when the concept involved a r e l a t i v e l y sm all, p a r t i c u l a r group o f people, because i t resembled slavery and re leg ate d the human being to a mer­ chandise which could be bought and/or sold. However, as the impact o f automation replaced la rg e numbers o f workers fo r whom the jo b had assigned a d d itio n a l favored status in the social system, and as more o f these workers l o s t t h e i r places in the economic mainstream o f s o c ie ty , the concept o f investment in education and human c a p ita l took on s ig ­ n i f i c a n t p o l i t i c a l proportions and emerged in the 1960's as a f u l l ­ blown d is c i p li n e in i t s own r i g h t . Following very c lo s e ly upon the emergence o f the economics o f investment in human c a p ita l was the massive amounts o f fe d e ra l d o lla rs and manpower programs which had been le g is la t e d f o r the purpose o f a m e lio ra tin g the impact o f automation and f o r r e t r a in in g the vast pool o f human resources needed to maintain and continue n atio n al economic growth. Varying degrees o f success has been claimed by the adminis­ t r a t o r s o f the manpower programs. While the question o f ra te o f return continues to be debatable among researchers, the e f f e c t s o f the 50 government investment appears to be successfully reducing the r a t e o f unemployment and, a t le a s t from th is research er's p oint o f view, is re s tr a in in g the tr a n s fe r payment a lte r n a t iv e s to investment in manpower t r a in in g . I m p l i c i t in the question o f program success is the question o f c o s t-e ffe c tiv e n e s s and the ap p ro p ria te measurement f o r i t . Some authors (Magnum and Robson, 1971) have attached a g re a te r s ig n ific a n c e to "how things were before the manpower program and how they are now." Others (Borus and Hardin, 1969) advocate the measurement o f program impact beginning w ith the end o f the f i r s t year a f t e r t r a in in g and continuing a t six-month in t e r v a ls over a period o f tim e. A t h ir d group o f researchers (K iker and L il e s , 1972) looked a t what was c a lle d d is ­ c rim inant analysis techniques o f p o te n tia l f a i l u r e s . Notwithstanding these d iffe re n c e s in philosophy r e l a t i v e to c o s t-e ffe c tiv e n e s s o f man­ power t r a i n i n g , the o v e rrid in g concern o f the a d m in is tra to r should be d irec ted toward accomplishing the stated o b je c tiv e s o f the le g is l a t i o n and the p a r t i c u l a r t r a in in g program. Other areas o f considerable in t e r e s t were demographic and o ther c h a r a c te r is tic s o f tr a in e e s , e . g . , sex, p r i o r lab o r force expe­ rie n c e , le v e ls o f education and earnings a f t e r t r a in i n g . For the most p a r t , a s u b tle v a r ie ty o f economic and/or c u ltu r a l fa c to rs were biased ag ain st women which re s u lte d in longer periods o f unemployment a f t e r t r a i n i n g , and a t lower wages. The research er's i n t e r e s t is considerably aroused by lab or economists (Borus, 1964; Borus and Hardin, 1966; e t c . ) concern w ith 51 the c o s t-e ffe c tiv e n e s s o f manpower programs. He agrees w ith Magnum and Hobson (1971) who fe e ls th a t the important question is not which manpower program has been most c o s t - e f f e c t iv e in achieving i t s objec­ t i v e , but r a th e r , what combination o f manpower services can make the g re a te s t c o n trib u tio n to a l l e v i a t e the employment problems o f the d is ­ advantaged. Indeed th is is a c ru c ia l q uestion , one th a t more ade­ q u ately and a p p ro p ria te ly r e f le c t s the basis f o r the c rea tio n and expansion o f the manpower l e g is l a t i o n o f the 1960's. This is the question which must be addressed by ad m in is tra to rs o f manpower programs, r e a l i z i n g th a t the instruments f o r measuring the impact o f social programs should not be based e x c lu s iv e ly on a set o f economic c r i t e r i a . An important measurement o f program e ffe c tiv e n e s s would be the exten t to which program ad m in istrators can bridge the gap between people and jobs and, according to Magnum and Robson (1971) and " a f f e c t the labor market dynamics which r e s tr a in access." The question o f worker displacement fo llow ing the cessation o f government subsidy to industry was, according to Hamermesh (1971) a p o t e n t i a l l y serious problem. Hamermesh (1971) f e l t th a t unless workers were tra in e d fo r jobs in which vacancies e x is te d , the sub­ s id ie s given to firm s to employ disadvantaged workers re s u lte d in the long run, in the displacement o f o th e r, non-subsidized workers, and the possible long-run displacement o f subsidized workers a f t e r sub­ s id iz a tio n ceases. This researcher takes issue w ith Hamermesh (1 9 7 1 ). I t appears th a t he f e l t th a t industry was pressured in to h ir in g the disadvantaged. 52 This was not the case. On the c o n tra ry , the high unemployment o f the e a r ly 1960's which gave r is e to MDTA o f 1962 was occasioned by automa­ tio n and a reduction in labor market tra n s a c tio n . Concomitantly, the propensity o f consumer to spend was reduced due to high unemployment. I t might be concluded th e r e fo r e , th a t industry might have employed the disadvantaged in view o f p o te n tia l gains to industry and not due to coersion by government. This researcher found the K iker and L ile s (1972) d is c rim in a te analysis technique f o r ev alu atin g programs i n t e r e s t in g , and thinks i t is more o b je c tiv e than the several c o s t-e ffe c tiv e n e s s models advanced by o ther researchers. The d is c rim in a te analysis allows f o r d etection o f p o te n tia l f a i l u r e s , and suggests th a t programs be stru c tu red to a s s is t the in d iv id u a ls to graduate and fin d jobs through proper coun­ s e lin g , guidance and placement s e rv ices . I t is to be r e g r e tte d , how­ e v e r, th a t the study f a i l e d to include race among the c h a r a c te r is tic s o f the p a r t ic ip a n t s . F i n a l l y , researchers caution ag ain st o v e rs ta tin g the b e n e fits o f t r a in i n g . In d ic a tio n is th a t a combination o f programs is employed in e ffe c t u a t in g t r a in in g but the b e n e fits are o fte n a t t r ib u t e d to one. Moreover, t r a in e e income is l i k e l y to be d i f f e r e n t from n on -tra in ee due to g re a te r job placement e f f o r t s on b e h a lf o f tr a in e e s , and th a t an alysis o f b e n e fits and cost must be undertaken from the point o f view o f so c ie ty as a whole, the in d iv id u a l t r a in e e , and government. In the next ch apter, a design and methodology o f the research is es tab lish ed by which to measure changes in income o f the tra in e e s 53 as a r e s u lt o f the t r a in in g program, and the s t a t i s t i c a l s ig n ific a n c e o f the change. Also, an attempt w i l l be made to i d e n t i f y those v a r i ­ ables which make the g re a te s t impact on the e m p lo y a b ility o f the tra in e e s . CHAPTER I I I RESEARCH DESIGN The general scope o f the in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l program is to provide the a d u lt learn ers the opp ortun ity to achieve t h e i r occupa­ tio n a l o b je c tiv e s . The program allows the in d iv id u a l the f l e x i b i l i t y o f obtain ing academic c r e d its and a vocational s k i l l . The tr a in e e s ' m o tiv a tio n , p r i o r la b o r force experiences and ( f o r the most p a r t ) high school completion are the d is tin g u is h in g features o f the program as compared w ith tra in e e c h a r a c te r is tic s o f o th e r MDTA programs. The in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l program was i n i t i a t e d in Michigan in 1968 as a p a rt o f the national th r u s t in manpower development. respective vocational classes is l im it e d to ten enrol le e s . The They attend classes a t the t r a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n nearest to t h e i r home through con­ tr a c tu a l arrangements with the Michigan Employment S e c u rity Commission (MESC). Where market demand f o r a p a r t i c u l a r occupation warrants i t , class sizes are not r e s t r i c t e d , and the occupational t r a in in g is o ffe re d w ithout preconditions o f m o tiv a tio n , p r i o r lab o r fo rce expe­ rience or high school completion. This study is undertaken to determine the e f fe c tiv e n e s s , in Michigan, o f the in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l program in terms o f i t s enhance­ ment o f tra in e e e m p lo y a b ility and change in earnings during 1968-1972. The hypothesis is th a t there were p o s itiv e changes in t r a in e e incomes 54 55 a f t e r t r a in i n g , and th a t these changes are s i g n i f i c a n t . The study is also designed, using a c lu s te rin g method as described in the s t a t i s t i ­ cal method below, and in Figures 5, 6, and 7 to determine the e x te n t to which i n s t i t u t i o n a l r a c ia l and sex bias among other v a ria b le s might a f f e c t employment and earnings before and a f t e r t r a in i n g . A. The Sample A random sample o f 500 or 25 percent in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l { IR) tra in e e s was selected from the 1968-1972 t o t a l tr a in e e population o f 2058 who had e n ro lle d in Michigan MDTA. This la rg e sample was b elieved j u s t i f i e d due to the small population which, under more favorab le circumstances, e . g . , budget and tim e , might have j u s t i f i e d a study o f the e n t i r e population. However, in view o f serious c o n s tra in ts which appear to be a c h a r a c te r is t ic o f re tro s p e c tiv e research, 6 the response 7 from the o r ig in a l random sample o f 500 was used as the basis o f the a n a ly sis in th is research. T herefo re, the s iz e o f the sample used in th is study was 140 or seven percent o f the population o f 2058. This sample s iz e was based g H ardin, Einar and Michael E. Borus. Economic B enefits and Costs o f R etrain ing Courses in Michigan. MSU, East Lansing, Michigan, 1969, p. iv . Also H ild a N. Barnes, Finding and In te rv ie w in g the Hard to Locate: The DMI Experience. Evaluating the Impact o f Manpower Programs. Proceedings o f a Conference Conducted June 15-17 , 1971. The Center f o r Human Resource Research, The Ohio U n iv e rs ity (mimeo­ graphed) and C e lia Homans. Finding the Hard to Locate: The NORC Experience. ^ Z uw aylif, F a d il , General Applied S t a t i s t i c s , Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Massachusetts 1970, p. 114. 56 on the number o f in d iv id u a ls in the o r ig in a l random sample o f 500 fo r whom complete, useful data was a v a ila b le w ith in the budgetary and time c o n stra in ts imposed by the research. The in d iv id u a ls in the sample were e n ro lle d in classes held during FY 1968 through FY 1972 (J u ly , 1968-June, 1972). B. Data C o lle c tio n The data c o lle c t io n process consisted o f o b ta in in g inform ation p e rta in in g to in d iv id u a l c h a r a c te r is tic s o f the 140 in d iv id u a ls in the sample from th e D e t r o it c e n tra l o f f i c e f i l e s o f the Michigan Employ­ ment S e c u rity Commission. The data was obtained from forms MA-101, MA-102 and from MA-103 f o r those who reported employment status and earnings a f t e r t r a in in g was completed (See Appendix B, C, and D). Where the data on MA-103 was incomplete or u n a va ilab le several months were spent contacting the in d iv id u a ls (as f a r as the researcher was able to lo c a te them) by telephone. This task was so time-consuming and monumental (due to the high m o b ility o f the in d iv id u a ls and t h e i r suspicions o f the nature o f the fo llo w -u p ) th a t the decision was made to term inate the fo llo w -u p a f t e r 90 days, and to use the 140 responses as the sample on which to base the research fin d in g s . Data r e l a t i v e to t r a in in g costs and allowances, e . g . , tra n s p o rta tio n , dependency, e t c . , was obtained from MA-103 forms. The demographic and earnings data was coded on Data Layout sheets and punched onto IBM cards fo r a n a ly s is . tis tic a l routines used by the S t a t i s t i c a l E x is tin g general s t a ­ Evaluation D ivisio n o f the 57 Michigan Department o f Social Services were used to e d i t and analyze the data. C. S t a t i s t i c a l Method g AID, an acronym f o r Automatic In te r a c tio n Detector was used. AID is a computer program designed to provide inform ation about the d is t r ib u t io n o f a dependent v a r ia b le and i t s r e l a t i o n to several explana­ to ry v a ria b le s . Unlike most le a s t squares a n a ly t ic a l programs, i t is very f l e x i b l e — th a t i s , i t assumes very l i t t l e about the shape o f the d is t r ib u t io n o f the explanatory v a ir a b ie s , n e ith e r th a t they are prop­ e r ly scaled nor whether t h e i r e ffe c ts on the dependent v a ria b le s are a d d it iv e . The technique o f in v e s tig a tio n is both searching and s e q u e n tia l; i t searches f o r s tr u c tu r a l r e la tio n s h ip s between a dependent v a ria b le and selected explanatory v a ria b le s s e p a ra te ly , allow ing one to answer the question, "Once th is f i r s t explanatory v a r ia b le has been accounted f o r , does the second one matter?" The sequential procedure looks a t one explanatory v a ria b le a t a tim e; i t also ascertain s whether explanatory v a ria b le s have an e f f e c t over the e n t ir e sample or over small defined subgroups. AID allows more e a s ily than a conventional regression program the determ ination o f the existence o f in t e r a c tio n e f f e c t s . Q F. M. Andrews, J. N. Morgan and T. A. Sonquist. The Detection o f In te r a c tio n A f f e c ts -- A Report on a Computer Program f o r S e le ctio n o f Optimal Combinations o f Explanatory V a r ia b le s . I n s t i t u t e fo r Social Research. The U n iv e rs ity o f Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1964. 58 Based on the above, th is research has i d e n t i f i e d the dependent v a ria b le s under consideration in the analysis as income, e m p lo y a b ility and employment. Income is a c e n tra l and predominant f a c t o r being determined, e . g . , change in income a f t e r completion o f t r a in i n g . Employment and e m p lo y a b ility are also fa c to rs to be addressed and are analyzed by r e la t in g various explanatory v a ria b le s to employ­ ment and e m p lo y a b ility . o f education and ra c e . The independent v a ria b le s are age, sex, lev el These v a ria b le s play an important p a rt in determining the degree by which an i n d iv id u a l's e m p lo y a b ility is enhanced. Analyses o f va ria n c e, using the AID computer process, is undertaken to determine the s e t o f v a ria b le s most important in p re­ d ic tin g outcomes a t an .05 degree lev el o f s ig n ific a n c e . The s t a t i s t i c a l computations f o r e m p lo y a b ility were not lim ite d to tra in e es who completed the program, but also included the drop-outs as w e l l , both o f whom are subsumed under the general category o f com­ p le t io n . The researcher fe e ls confident w ith th is assumption because 94 percent o f the in d iv id u a ls in the sample completed the program. Moreover, drop-outs are considered as having completed the course, in the sense th a t t h e i r performance on the job and income are said to be improved as a r e s u lt o f having e n ro lle d in a t r a in in g program (Borus and Tash, 1970). In order to determine the s ig n ific a n c e o f the change in wages a f t e r t r a i n i n g , a t - t e s t o f the average earnings was undertaken. More­ over, the e f f e c t o f i n f l a t i o n during the period o f the study was te s te d . The re s u lts are reported in Table 37. The n ull hypothesis is th a t 59 there is no d iffe re n c e between the average wage before and a f t e r t r a in in g . In Chapter IV which fo llo w s , the demographic and cost data which had been gathered from the f i l e s o f MESC and telephone fo llo w up w i l l be tab u la ted and analyzed fo r the purpose o f determining fin a l r e s u lts . CHAPTER IV ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK A. Measuring Changes in P ric e — Note on Consumer Price Index The recent h is to r y o f the United States economy shows a con­ tin u in g concern among consumers, bankers, labor union o f f i c i a l s , and government o f f i c i a l s , about the r is in g lev el o f p ric e s . Discussions about prices g e n e ra lly depend upon a measure known as the Consumer Price Index (CPI) f o r fa c tu a l support. The consumer P rice Index calcu­ la te d and reported by the Bureau o f Labor S t a t i s t i c s has a s in g le pur­ pose— to describe r e l a t i v e changes in the general level o f prices over tim e. In o ther words, the p rin c ip a l purpose o f an index o f prices is to measure r e l a t i v e change in prices over time fo r some re le v a n t group o f goods and services and f o r some re le v a n t group o f purchasers. The group o f re le v a n t consumers fo r the purpose o f t h is study comprise b a s ic a lly urban wage workers o f several categories already s p e c ifie d . The consumer p rice index is intended to measure changes in the r e l a t i v e p rice le v e ls o f commodities such as food, re n ts , c lo th in g , automobiles, e t c . , th a t are normally consumed by urban wage earners. Normally, these indices are c a lc u la te d w ith reference to a base period or normal y e a r , or period in which the prices o f consumer goods have maintained a steady le v e l w ithout wide flu c t u a t io n s . 60 The consumer 61 p rice index is also c a lc u la te d f o r d i f f e r e n t classes o f items o f con­ sumption so th a t p ric e movements can be compared between d i f f e r e n t categories o f goods and s e rv ices . Consumers know, however, th a t goods and services do not remain constant over time because o f changes in technology, s k i l l s , educational l e v e l s , job inform ation o p p o r tu n itie s , environmental conditions or the workplace, e tc . Inasmuch as real goods and services cannot be held constant over tim e, the i m p l i c i t assumption made in the c a lc u la tio n o f p ric e indices cannot be tru e in a rigorous sense. Some economists have argued vehemently in recent years th a t the s l i g h t i n f l a t i o n ( r a t e or level o f change in the p ric e l e v e l ) observed in recent years is a s t a t i s t i c a l mirage, e . g . , th a t improvements in the q u a lit y o f goods and services may completely compensate f o r the observed increase in p ric e . U n fo rtu n a te ly , i t ment e m p ir ic a lly . is impossible to prove or disprove t h is argu­ One can only s ta te o r conclude th at the consumer p rice index tends to o v e rs ta te an increase in the p ric e le v e l o f some items o f goods and serv ices . B. Measurement o f Real Income --R e a l Purchasing Power The measurement o f changes in prices over time provides impor­ ta n t d e s c rip tiv e data about the economic system, but any questions o f measuring w e lfa re must take in to consideration changes in income as well as changes in p ric e s . One basic measure o f general w e lfa re is real income--the physical amount o f goods and services consumed. measurement o f real income, ag a in , cannot be precise but only The 62 approximate due to l im it a t io n s on measurement o f prices over time. Also, real income cannot be measured d i r e c t l y because the u n its o f measurements are not homogeneous among goods and s e rv ic e s . One can, however, consider th a t income can be expressed in terms o f g en eralized purchasing power c a lle d real income, defined as the r a t i o o f actual income to the consumer p ric e index f o r any s p e c ifie d class o f goods and s e rv ices . However, as pointed out e a r l i e r , these measures o f w e lfa re in terms of real income undoubtedly understate the actual increase in w e lfa re during the periods covered because o f the f a i l u r e o f consumer p ric e index to measure the e f f e c t s o f an improvement in technology, q u a li t y o f education, improvement in s k i l l l e v e l s , physical incen tives on the jo b , urban t r a n s i t growth, changes in the social s tr u c tu r e , employment growth in the p u b lic s e c to r, demand and supply of s k ill lab o r fo rc e , e tc . Notwithstanding some re se rv atio n s w ith respect to the ca p acity o f the consumer p ric e index to adequately measure the tru e e f f e c t o f changes in p ric e l e v e l s , i t is important th a t the e f f e c t o f i n f l a t i o n on the wage change o f the tra in e e s in t h is research be te s te d . The re s u lts are in d ica te d in Table 37. In th is section o f the research, the demographic c h a r a c te r is ­ tic s o f the 140 tra in e e s in the sample and cost data are ta b u la te d . A lso, graphical p resentations o f the analyses is presented using the AID method as described in Chapter I I I above. The graphical presenta­ tio n f o r the average number o f weeks unemployed (F ig ure 5) is derived from the computer p r i n t - o u t in the appendix. Computer p r i n t - o u t f o r 63 Figures 6 and 7 are also included in Appendix A. F i n a l l y , the n ull hypothesis is te s te d to determine the s ig n ific a n c e o f the a f t e r t r a i n ­ ing earnings. C. General C h a ra c te ris tic s o f the 140 Trainees The c h a r a c te r is tic s o f the Michigan in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l { IR) tra in e e s and areas o f program preferences based on the re s u lts o f the sample in d ic a te an in t e r e s t in g amalgam o f in d iv id u a l c h a r a c t e r is t ic s , program enrollment areas and co s t. In the sections which fo llo w , the data r e l a t i v e to these elements are presented. Age On the basis o f the sample, the age o f the IR tra in e e s ranges from age 15-60 (see Table 1 and Figure 3) with an average age o f 32 years and a median age o f 30 years. TABLE 2 . — Sample o f Age Grouping o f IR Trainees in the Michigan MDTA Program. Percentage Age Frequency 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-60 1 46 23 17 21 12 7 9 4 0.71 32.86 16.43 12.15 15.00 8.57 5.00 6.43 2.85 TOTAL 140 100.00 64 The highest percentage (32.85%) f a l l s in the age group 20-24 and the lowest percentage (0.71%) f a l l s in age group 15-19. R e la t iv e ly high percentages (1 6 .4 3 and 15.00 ) appear between the ages 25-29 and 35-39 r e s p e c tiv e ly . Figure 3 is a graphical re p res en tatio n o f age d is t r ib u t io n f o r the population. The sample does not show enrollm ent a f t e r age 60; i t does i n d i ­ cate one e n try (0.71%) in the age group 15-19. Sex The sex make-up o f the program e n ro lle e s in d ic a te a s u b s t a n t ia lly higher enrollm ent f o r females than f o r males. Table 3 in d ic a te s th a t o f the 140 in d iv id u a ls in the sample, 109 or 77.86 percent were females, and 31 or 22.14 percent were males. TABLE 3 . — IR Enrollment by Sex Sex 1 - Female 2 - Male TOTAL Frequency Percentage 109 ?7.86 31 22.14 140 100.00 Education A s i g n i f i c a n t l y la rg e percentage (82.14%) o f the sample com­ p le te d the 12th grade whereas ten percent completed grades 8-11 and seven percent experienced some c o lle g e study. 65 50 40 30 20 10 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 YEARS Figure 3 . --Age D is t r ib u tio n o f Trainees. 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-60 66 TABLE 4- — IR Trainees According to Percentage o f Educational Level Completed. Educational Level Frequency Percentage 8th Grade 1 0.71 9th Grade 2 1.43 10th Grade 6 4 .2 9 11th Grade 5 3.57 12th Grade 115 82.14 13th Grade 11 7.86 140 100.00 TOTAL Race A m a jo r ity (65%) of the tra in e e s were w hite followed by a r e l a t i v e l y larg e percentage (30%) black and f i v e percent o th e r, includ ing Indians and O r ie n ta ls . TABLE 5 . — IR Trainees by Race. Race Frequency Percentage White 91 65.00 Black 42 30.00 Mexican American 0 0.00 Other 7 5.00 TOTAL 140 100.00 67 The next s ix ta b le s of (Tables 6 -1 1 ) represent a c ro s s -ta b u la tio n the fo llo w in g v a ria b le s : age, sex, race and le v e l o f education. Tables 6 , 7 , and 8 cro s s -ta b u la te s these v a r ia b le s , using the female as the independent v a r ia b le , and tab les 9 , 10, and 11 uses the male as the independent v a r ia b le . Table 6 in d ic a te s a d is t r i b u t i o n o f w hite females (N - 7 3 ), t h e i r ages and le v e ls o f education. The ta b le shows t h a t no white females were e n ro lle d whose age was less than 19 years o r more than 59 years; 28 w hite females were between ages 20-29; 32 w h ile females were between ages 30-44, and 13 w hite females were between ages 45-50 y e a rs . TABLE 6 . --L e v e l o f Education (Grade L e v e l) , White Females. Grade Level Age -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0-14 15-19 20-29 30-44 45-59 60 and Over 1- 8 0 9 0 0 0 1 10 0 0 0 1 11 0 12 0 0 26 27 11 0 64 13 _g _0 _0 _3 _J_ __0 _4 0 0 28 32 13 0 73 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 2 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 68 TABLE 7 . — Age, Level o f Education (Grade L e v e l) , Black Females. Age Grade Level Total 0-14 15-19 20-29 30-44 45-59 60 and Over 1-10 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 11 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 12 0 1 20 5 1 0 27 13 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 TOTAL 0 1 22 6 3 0 32 TABLE 8 . — Age, Level o f Education (Grade L e v e l) , Other Females. Age Ul UUL L I VL! 1 1-12 13 TOTAL Total 0-14 15-19 20-29 30-44 45-59 60 and Over 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 _0 _0 _0 _0 _0 _0 _0 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 Of the 73 white females in the sample, a m a jo r ity (64) had completed the 12th grade, one the 9th grade, two the 1 0 th , two the 11th, 64 the 12th and fo ur had completed grade le v e l 13. Table 7 shows a d is t r i b u t i o n f o r black females (N = 3 2 ), t h e i r age and le v e ls o f education. One black female was e n ro lle d between ages 15-19 y e a rs , 22 between ages 20-29 and th ree between ages 45 -59 . F u rth e r, a m a jo r ity (27) o f the black females in d ic a te d an educational le v e l o f 12th grade. 69 With respect to grade l e v e l , one black female was reported to have completed the 10th grade, two the 11th grade, 27 the 12th grade and two grade le v e l 13. Table 9 in d ic a te s white males {N = 1 8 ) , t h e i r ages and educa­ tio n a l l e v e l . The t a b le shows th a t e ig h t w hite males were e n ro lle d in the t r a in in g program whose ages were between 20-29 y e a rs , e ig h t between the ages 30-44 y e ars, two between the ages 54-59 years. No w hite male tra in e e s were e n ro lle d whose ages were e i t h e r less than 19 or more than 59 years. A considerable number (11) w hite males tra in e e s were in the 12th grade. With respect to grade l e v e l , one white male had completed the 8th grade, two the 10th grade, 11 the 12th grade, and 4 had completed grade lev el 13. TABLE 9 . — Age, Level o f Education (Grade L e v e l), White Males. Grade Level Age ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------0-14 15-19 20-29 30-44 45-59 65 and Over Total 1 -8 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 6 4 1 0 11 13 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 4 TOTAL 0 0 8 8 2 0 18 . . - 70 TABLE 1 0 . --A g e, Level o f Education (Grade L e v e l) , Black Males. Age Grade Level Total 0-14 15-19 20-29 30-44 45-59 65 and Over 1-9 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 12 0 0 2 2 1 0 5 13 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 TOTAL 0 0 5 3 1 0 9 TABLE 1 1 . — Age , Level o f Education (Grade Level) , Other Males. Age Total Grade Level 1-12 13 TOTAL 0-14 15-19 20-29 30-44 45-59 60 and Over 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 _0 _0 _0 _0 J3 _0 _0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 Table 10 shows black males, (N = 9 ) , t h e i r ages and lev el o f education. The ta b le in d ic a te s t h a t f i v e black males were e n ro lle d in the t r a in i n g program whose ages were between 20-29 y e a rs , th ree between 30-44 y e a rs , and one between 45-59 years. A m a jo r ity (12) o f the black males had completed the 12th grade. With respect to grade l e v e l , one black male e n ro lle e had com­ p le te d the 9th grade, one the 1 0 th , one the 11th, f i v e the 12th and one 71 the 13th. Again there were no black male e n ro lle e s who were reported as being more than 59 years o ld . Public Assistance Table 12 below in d ica te s th a t some of the tra in e e s (1 9 .2 8 p er­ cent) were re ce ivin g some s o rt o f public assistance (a t the time o f enrollm ent in the t r a in in g program) e . g . , payments from the a d u lt and fa m ily categories o f the Social S ecu rity Acts, unemployment b e n e fit s , e tc . TABLE 1 2 . — Public Assistance Recipients Enrolled in IR Program. PA Recipient Frequency Percentage Yes 27 19.28 No 112 80.00 1 .71 140 100.00 Unknown TOTAL Some in d iv id u a ls who did not q u a lif y f o r public assistance payments were e i t h e r the c h r o n ic a lly unemployed or were engaged in low s k i l l e d , low paying jobs. jh T ra in i ng T rain in g enrollm ent data fo r the IR tr a in e e sample covers the period 1968-1972. Table 12 shows th a t the g re a te s t percentage (35.7%) o f tra in e e s e n ro lle d during f is c a l 1970-71. Why the reasons f o r t h is 72 increase is u n s p e cified , one might speculate th a t the increased e n r o l l ­ ment in t r a in in g is r e la te d to the General Motors s t r ik e during the autumn o f 1970. TABLE 1 3 .— IR T ra in in g Enrollment by Years o f Enrollment. Fiscal Year Frequency Percentage 68-69 11 7.86 69-70 44 31.43 70-71 50 35.71 71-72 35 25.00 TOTAL 140 100.00 The second highest (31.4%) e n ro lle d during f i s c a l 1969-70, and the t h ir d la r g e s t enrollm ent (25.0%) occurred in f i s c a l 1971-72. The sm allest percentage (7.86%) o f enrollm ent occurred during f is c a l 1968-69. Type o f T rain in g The type o f t r a in in g o ffe re d under MDTA ( i n s t i t u t i o n a l ) is always determined according to market demand in the p a r t i c u l a r l o c a l ­ ity . Table 14 represents a l i s t i n g o f occupations o ffe re d under the in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l the sample. program as obtained from the 140 in d iv id u a ls in 73 TABLE 1 4 .— Type o f T ra in in g o f IR Sample by Frequency and Percentage, 1968-72. T rain in g Frequency Percentage Stenographer 6 4.2 9 Secretary 8 5.72 Medical Secretary 4 2.86 T y p is t 2 1.43 Bookkeeper 3 2.14 Clerk-General and Other 1 .71 Junior Accountant 8 5.72 Accountant Clerk 1 .71 Medical A ssista n t 8 5.72 60 42.85 Barber 9 6.4 3 Cosmetologist 8 5.72 Truck D riv e r 1 .71 T ra c to r T r a i l e r Truck D riv e r 3 2.14 Auto Mechanic 1 .71 Mechanical Technician 1 .71 D ig it a l Computer Programmer 3 2.14 Operating Engineer 9 6.43 Miscellaneous 4 2.86 140 100.00 Licensed P ra c tic a l Nurse (LPN) TOTAL As shown, the g re a te s t percentage o f tra in e e s in any s in g le category were tra in e d in the Licensed P ra c tic a l Nurse area (LPN), (approximately 43%). from 1% to 6%. Percentages in the remaining categories range Areas which appear to be less appealing to the tra in e e s consists o f the fo llo w in g : Truck D riv e r (.7 1 % ), Auto Mechanic (.7 1 % ), 74 Accountant C lerk (.7 1 % ), Mechanical Technician (-71 % ), and C le rk General (.71% ). Table 15 below represents a breakdown o f type o f t r a in in g preference by le v e l o f education. TABLE 1 5 .— Level o f Education (Grade L e v e l) , Type of T ra in in g . Grade Level Type o f T rain in g Total 0-7 8 9 10 Stenographer 0 0 0 1 Junior Accountant 0 0 0 Secretary 0 0 Medical A ssista n t 0 Barber 12 13 2 3 0 6 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 8 0 4 0 0 0 0 7 1 8 0 0 0 2 0 7 0 9 Cosmetologist 0 0 1 1 1 4 1 8 Truck D riv e r 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 LPN 0 0 0 1 1 53 5 60 T ra c to r T r a i l e r Truck D riv e r 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 Auto Mechanic 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 T y p is t 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Bookkeeper 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 Accountant C lerk 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 D ig it a l Computer 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 Mechanical Technician 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Operating Engineer 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 9 Clerk-General and Other 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Miscellaneous 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 __ 4 0 1 2 6 5 115 11 140 TOTAL n 75 The ta b le in d ic a te s th a t 115 enrol lees out o f the sample o f 140 or 82 percent had completed the 12th grade o f which 46 percent (53) were e n ro lle d in the licensed p r a c tic a l nursing (LPN) course. Completion o f T rain in g A c r i t i c a l aspect o f the MDT program is the lik e lih o o d o f e n ro lle e s to drop out as o p p o rtu n itie s f o r employment a r i s e , o r as tr a in e e s ' c a re er goals s h i f t . For instan ce, a cursory look a t some o f the t r a in e e data revealed a number o f reasons f o r dropping o u t, e . g . , m arriage, r e lo c a tio n , m a te r n ity , in d iv id u a l i n s t a b i l i t y , e tc . Notwithstanding, Table 16 below in d ic a te s t h a t 94 percent o f the enrol lees completed the t r a i n i n g , and only a r e l a t i v e l y small percentage (6%) dropped out. TABLE 1 6 . --Number and Percentage o f IR Trainees Completing T ra in in g in the Sample. Completed T rain in g Frequency Percentage 131 93.57 No 8 5.72 Unknown (Missing Data) 1 .71 140 100.00 Yes TOTAL Employment Status An an a ly sis o f the sample data before and a f t e r t r a in in g revealed a s i g n i f i c a n t percentage o f the tra in e e s were g e n e ra lly 76 unemployed before t r a in i n g . For example, p r i o r to t r a i n i n g , 54 per­ cent o f the tra in e e s were unemployed and 40 .7 percent were under­ employed, w h ile only 4 .3 percent were employed. The r e l a t i v e l y la rg e (54%) percentages unemployed and under­ employed (40.7%) before t r a in in g appears to be adequate j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r i n s t i t u t i n g t r a in in g programs, w ith a view to improving the employ­ a b i l i t y and increasing the income o f these in d iv id u a ls . Table 17a is a ta b u la r re p re s e n ta tio n o f the employment status o f tra in e e s p r i o r to enrollm ent in the t r a in i n g program. TABLE 17a.--Employment Status before T ra in in g . Employment Status Unemployed Employed Underemployed Other (Missing Data) TOTAL Frequency Percentage 76 54.29 6 4.2 9 57 40.71 1 .71 140 100.00 Further to the research o b je c tiv e o f a s c e rta in in g the impact o f the t r a in in g program on the e m p lo y a b ility o f the tr a in e e s , Table 17b in d ic a te s the employment status o f e n ro lle e s a f t e r t r a i n i n g . In comparison w ith 17a above, Table 17b below r e f l e c t s an increase (92 percent) in employment a f t e r t r a i n i n g , as compared w ith 4 percent p r io r to t r a i n i n g . Also, underemployment dropped from 40 percent p r i o r to t r a in in g as compared w ith 1.43 percent a f t e r t r a in i n g . 77 TABLE 17 b .— Employment Status a f t e r T ra in in g . Employment Status Frequency Unemployed Percentage 5 3.57 129 92.14 Underemployed 2 1.43 Other (Missing Data) 4 2.86 140 100.00 Employed TOTAL A condensed view o f Tables 17a and 17b is presented in Tables 18a and 18b. Table 18a below shows the employment status o f tra in e e s before and a f t e r t r a in in g f o r those who completed the t r a in in g program. TABLE 18a.--Employment Status Before and A f t e r T r a in in g — Completed T ra in in g . Employment A f t e r T rain in g Unemployed Employed TOTAL 3 126 Underemployed Other Total 1 __ 2 132 Employment Before T ra in in g Total 3 Unemployed Employed 126 Underemployed 1 Other 1 TOTAL 132 The ta b le shows th a t a considerable number o f e n ro lle e s who completed t r a in in g and who were e i t h e r unemployed or underemployed before t r a in in g became employed a f t e r t r a in i n g . 78 Table 18b represents employment status before and a f t e r t r a i n ­ ing f o r those en ro lle es who did not complete the t r a in in g program. TABLE 18b.--Employment Status Before and A f t e r T ra in in g --D id Not Complete T ra in in g . Employment A f t e r T rain in g Total Employment Before T ra in in g Total Unemployed 2 Unemployed 2 Empl oyed 3 Employed 3 Underemployed 1 Underemployed 4 Other _2 TOTAL Other _o 8 8 The ta b le in d ica te s th a t e ig h t tra in e e s did not complete the program but some o f them were able to obtain employment, possibly as a r e s u l t o f enrollm ent in the program. This p o s s i b i l i t y is borne out by Borus and Tash (1 9 7 0 ). Table 19 is an assessment o f the program's success in meeting the o b je c tiv e s o f the MDT l e g i s l a t i o n . The ta b le in d ic a te s t h a t 81 percent o f the tra in e e s acquired jobs th a t were s k i l l r e la te d and 13 percent acquired jobs which were not s k i l l r e la t e d . TABLE 1 9 .--Number o f Percentage o f S k i l l S k ille d Related Yes No Unknown TOTAL (Missing Data) Related Employment. Frequency Percentage 114 19 7 81.43 13.57 S .00 140 100.00 79 These re s u lts represent an improvement in Page's (1964) study in which t r a in in g enhanced the e m p lo y a b ility o f only 51 percent o f the tra in e e s . E. Wages P r io r to and A f t e r T rain in g A dditional s t a t i s t i c s o f i n t e r e s t in th is research is the wages before and a f t e r t r a in i n g . Table 20 shows the average monthly wage in the l a s t f u l l - t i m e job held p r i o r to t r a in i n g . The average monthly wage was computed a t $302.36, w ith a median income equal to $285.99. TABLE 2 0 . --Average Monthly Wage in Last Full-T im e Job Held. Wage Frequency Percentage 10 7.14 50- 99 1 .71 100-149 1 .71 150-199 2 1.43 200-249 29 20.71 250-299 37 26.43 300-349 18 12.86 350-399 13 9.29 400-449 11 7.86 450-499 7 5.00 500-549 6 4 .2 9 550-599 2 1.43 600 and above 3 2.14 140 100.00 Less than $49 TOTAL 80 I t is shown (Table 20) th a t the highest percentage (26.4%) o f tra in e e s earned between $250 to $299 per month on the l a s t job held before t r a i n i n g , although a considerable percentage (60%) re p re ­ senting three income groups, earned between $200 to $349 per month. Moreover, only 10 percent o f the tra in e e s earned less than $199 p r io r to enrollm ent. An a d d itio n a l 26 percent spread out among four income groups received incomes between $350-$549, and a r e l a t i v e l y sm aller proportion (3%) were earning between $550 to $650 p r io r to t r a in in g (see Figure 4 ) . An an alysis o f wage change a f t e r t r a in in g suggests ra th e r in te r e s t in g r e s u lt s . The e f f e c t o f i n f l a t i o n during the 1968-1972 period was te s te d by converting actual income to real was accomplished by d e f la t in g the actual income. This income through the use o f the Consumer P ric e Index (CPI) f o r the period covered. The t e s t was c a rrie d out to determine the s ig n ific a n c e o f the d iffe re n c e in wage before and a f t e r t r a in i n g . The re s u lts in d ic a te d th a t d espite d e f l a t i o n , the s ig n ific a n c e was m aintained, e . g . , the p revio u sly computed value t - 6.15 w ithout d e f la tio n compared fa v o ra b ly to the d e fla te d value t = 2 .3 0 . The s ig n ific a n c e in the former case (u n d eflate d incomes) is f a r higher than 1% lev el o f s ig n ific a n c e , where in the l a t t e r case (d e fla t e d or real incomes) the e f f e c t is reduced, but the s ig n ific a n c e is s t i l l close to the 1% l e v e l . The increase in wages a f t e r t r a in in g is pre­ sented in Table 21 on page 8 2 . * Of those earning above $650/month, *See Table 37 f o r Real Income D is t r ib u t io n . 81 LEGEND Before Training A ft e r Training 50 - 99 100 - 150 149 199 £50 - 299 2 00 - 2 4 0 300 - 350 - 399 450 - 4 9 9 5 5 0 - 599 349 4 00 - 4 4 9 5 00 - 5 49 600 - 6 50 MONTHLY WAGE $ Figure 4 . — Income D is tr ib u tio n Before and A f t e r T ra in in g . 82 one earned $650-699, two earned $80Q-$849, one earned $850-$899 and one earned above $1,000. Notw ithstanding, the average increase from $302.36 per month before t r a in in g to $ 3 9 6 .00/month a f t e r t r a in in g represents a wage increase o f approximately 24 percent as a r e s u lt o f t r a in i n g . The median income amounted to $418.00. TABLE 2 1 . — Monthly Wage in F u lltim e Job Held A f t e r T ra in in g . Wage Frequency Less than $49 9 6 .4 3 1 .71 100-149 2 1.43 150-199 2 1.43 200-249 3 2.14 250-299 5 3.57 300-349 19 13.57 350-399 13 9.29 400-449 44 31.43 450-499 16 11.43 500-549 10 7.15 550-599 6 4.29 10 7.13 140 100.00 50 - 99 600 and above TOTAL Note: Percentage Average Monthly Wage = $396.00 Median Wage = $418.00 A f u r t h e r review o f employment status a f t e r t r a in in g in d ica te s th a t o f the 27 w e lfa re re c ip ie n ts in the sample, 21 were employed a f t e r t r a i n i n g , one was underemployed and two were in "other" category, e . g . , 83 a t home w ith the c h ild re n . With regard to 112 non -w elfare r e c ip ie n ts in the sample, t h e i r employment status a f t e r t r a in i n g reveals th a t 107 were employed, two were unemployed and one was underemployed. A summary o f increase (o r decrease) in wage and t h e i r correspond­ ing percentages according to the 20 occupational c a teg o ries in the IR program is presented in Tables 21-23 below f o r w e lfa re re c ip ie n ts and non-w elfare r e c ip ie n ts r e s p e c tiv e ly . TABLE 2 2 .--P ercentage Increase o f W elfare R e cip ie n ts ' Wages Based on Average Monthly Wage and Occupation o f those Before and A f t e r T ra in in g . Type o f T rain in g Before A f te r Stenographer Junior Accuntant Secretary Medical Secretary Medical A s sista n t Barber Cosmetologist Truck D riv e r LPN T ra c to r T r a i l e r Truck D riv e r Legal Secretary Auto Mechanic T yp is t Cashier Wrapper Bookkeeper Accountant C lerk D ig it a l Computer Programmer Mechanical Technician Operating Engineer Clerk-General and Other Miscellaneous 286.00 262.00 118.00 200.00 272.00 192.00 320.00 360.00 320.00 336.00 448.00 264.00 Di ffe re n c e B e fo r e -A fte r Percentage In c r . or Dec 34.00 98.00 202.00 136.00 176.00 72.00 11% 37% 171% 68% 64% 38% 207.00 83% — — 2 4 9 .GO _ _ — 456.00 — — 200.00 800.00 600.00 400.00 480.00 80.00 — 300 20% — — 253.00 — —— 239.00 - - -1 4 .0 0 5% 84 TABLE 2 3 .--P ercentage Increase o f Non-Welfare R e c ip ie n ts ' Wages Based on Average Monthly Wage and Occupation o f those Employed Before and A f t e r T ra in in g . Di ffe re n c e B e fo re -A fte r Percentage In c . o r Dec. Type o f T rain in g Before A fte r Stenographer 357.00 442.00 85.00 24% Junior Accountant 305.00 410.00 105.00 34% Secretary 285.00 359.00 74.00 26% Medical Secretary 263.00 356.00 93.00 35% Medical A ssista n t 288.00 458.00 170.00 59% Barber 230.00 367.00 137.00 60% Cosmetologist 275.00 430.00 155.00 56% Truck D riv e r 400.00 457.00 57.00 14% LPN 281.00 439.00 158.00 56% T ra c to r T r a i l e r Truck D riv e r 253.00 640.00 387.00 152% 00.00 .00 .00 499.00 694.00 195.00 39% Typ is t 00.00 336.00 336.00 100% Cashier Wrapper 00.00 .00 .00 0% Bookkeeper 232.00 360.00 128.00 55% Accountant C lerk 324.00 480.00 156.00 48% D ig it a l Computer Programmer 480.00 635.00 155.00 32% Mechanical Technician 204.00 150.00 -5 4 .0 0 Operating Engineer 239.00 433.00 194.00 Clerk-General and Other 480.00 382.00 -9 8 .0 0 Miscellaneous 558.00 426.00 Legal Secretary Auto Mechanic -1 3 2 .0 0 0 26% 82% 20% 23% 85 TABLE 2 4 . --Percentage Increase o f Welfare and Non-Welfare R e cip ients' Wages Based on Average Monthly Wage A f t e r T ra in in g and Type o f T ra in in g o f Those Employed A f t e r T ra in in g . Average Monthly Wage o f W elfare vs. Non-Welfare Recipeints Type o f T rain in g W elfare R ecipient Non-Wei fa re Recipient D ifferen ce Non-Wei fa re — Welfare Percentage In c . o r Dec. Stenographer 320.00 442.00 116.00 36% Junior Accountant 360.00 410.00 50.00 14% Secretary 320.00 359.00 39.00 12% Medical Secretary 336.00 356.00 20.00 6% Medical A ssistant 448.00 458.00 10.00 2% Barber 264.00 367.00 103.00 39% 430.00 430.00 100% 457.00 457.00 100% 439.00 -1 7 .0 0 640.00 640.00 100% 6 9 4 .QU 694.00 100% 336,00 -4 6 4 .0 0 58% 360.00 -1 2 0 .0 0 25% — 480.00 480.00 100% — _ 635.00 635.00 100% —_ 150.00 150.00 100% 239.00 433.00 194.00 81% 382.00 382.00 100% 426.00 426.00 100% Cosmetologist — Truck D riv e r LPN 456.00 T ra c to r T r a i l e r TD - - Legal Secretary _ _ Auto Mechanic — T y p is t 800.00 Cashier Wrapper Bookkeeper Accountant Clerk D ig it a l Computer Programer Mechanical Technician Operating Engineer — 480.00 Clerk-General and Other Miscellaneous 4% — - 86 F. Labor Force Status Table 25 below in d ic a te s the number o f weeks IR tra in e e s were unemployed p r i o r to enro llm en t. I t is shown t h a t the g re a te s t per­ centage (37%) were unemployed one week p r io r to enrollm ent in the t r a i n ­ ing program; 12.9 percent were unemployed fo u r weeks p r io r to e n r o l l ­ ment. Less than one percent ( 0 .7 1 ) were unemployed 17 weeks p r io r to en terin g the t r a in in g program. TABLE 2 5 . --Weeks Unemployed P r io r to E n ro llin g in Class. Weeks Frequency Percentage Less than 1 45 32.14 1 52 37.14 2 17 12.14 3 4 2.86 4 18 12.86 5 3 2.15 17 1 .71 140 100.00 TOTAL To summarize the lab or fo rce sta tu s o f these enrol le e s , one would have to conclude th a t a m a jo rity (69%) o f the e n ro lle e s entered the IR t r a in in g program w ith in a week a f t e r becoming unemployed. Hours Worked A f t e r T rain in g The data presented in Table 26 below in d ic a te s the average num­ ber o f hours worked by tra in e e s a f t e r completion o f the t r a in in g program. 87 TABLE 2 6 .— Average Number o f Hours Worked Per Week A f t e r T ra in in g . Hours Percentage 15 10.72 10 - 19 2 1.43 20 - 29 3 2.14 30 - 39 1 0.71 40 - 50 119 85.00 TOTAL 140 100.00 o ■ lO Frequency I t should be noted th a t the m a jo r ity (85%) o f the graduates worked f u l l - t i m e ranging 40-50 hours per week. Approximately 3 .6 p er­ cent worked 10-39 hours per week, but a r e l a t i v e l y la r g e r percentage (10%) worked up to nine hours per week. G. Class Cost The cost o f the t r a in in g program is based on several v a r ia b le s , e .g ., (1 ) the c o n tra c t cost o f the t r a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n ; (2 ) academic equipment* and supplied d i r e c t l y re la te d to the t r a in e e s 1 needs; (3 ) tra n s p o rta tio n and subsistence allowances fo r the tr a in e e s , e tc . I n s t it u t io n a l costs are paid by the S ta te Department o f Education d i r e c t l y to the t r a in i n g i n s t i t u t i o n , and subsistence allowance, paid by the employment s e rv ic e , is paid d i r e c t l y to the in d iv id u a l on the basis o f number o f dependents. Tran spo rtatio n c o s t, where a p p lic a b le , is also paid d i r e c t l y to the in d iv id u a l by the employment s e rv ic e . Table 27 represents the basis on which subsistence allowance is p aid . For in d iv id u a ls on p u b lic as sistan ce, the allowance is TABLE 27.—Training Allowance. Number of Dependents Basic Amount of Regular Training Allowance Amount Added by Number of Dependents Regular Training Allowance Payable During F irs t 10 Weeks of Training Amount Added A fter Comple­ tion of 10 weeks of Training Regular Training Allowance Payable Beginning With 11th Week of Training 0 60 0 60 10 70 1 60 5 65 5 70 2 60 10 70 0 70 3 60 15 75 0 75 4 60 20 80 0 80 5 60 25 85 0 85 6+ 60 30 90 0 90 89 added to our subtracted from p u b lic assistance payment, but the r e c ip ­ i e n t receives whichever amount is the h ig her, but w ith in the average allowance schedules es tab lish ed f o r unemployment insurance r e c ip ie n t s . The aggregate cost o f the t r a in i n g program is presented in Table 28. I t is shown t h a t a m a jo r ity (24.3%) o f the tra in e e s were e n ro lle d in classes costing between $3500 to $3999, a considerable number (16.4%) e n ro lle d in classes costing between $4000 to $4499. TABLE 2 8 . --C osts o f Class. Frequency Costs $ 0 500 1000 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 _ - 499 999 1499 2499 2999 3499 3999 4499 4999 5499 5999 6499 7499 Percentage 8 8 10 11 8 11 34 23 5 4 3 3 1 5.71 5.71 7.15 7.86 5.71 7.86 24.29 16.43 3.57 2.86 2.14 2.14 .71 140 100.00 Trainees seem to be somewhat evenly d is t r ib u t e d among cost in t e r v a ls f a l l i n g in the $0-3499 range. Average cost o f t r a in in g was computed to be $ 3 ,1 1 7 .3 6 . A d d itio n al i n t e r e s t w ith respect to class cost is the cost o f the re s p e c tiv e t r a in i n g programs. The highest costs f o r classes were f o r Bookkeeping, Junior Accountant, Licensed P r a c tic a l Nursing (LPN), Stenographer, $ 5 ,2 1 6 .0 0 , $ 3 ,6 9 2 .0 0 , $ 2 ,9 9 2 .0 0 , $2 ,9 0 0 .0 0 re s p e c tiv e ly . 90 H. Class Clock Hours Table 29 below summarizes the range o f clock hours spent in the t r a in in g programs. TABLE 2 9 . --Average Class Clock Hours. Class Clock Hours Frequency Percentage 0 - 299 18 12.87 300 - 499 5 3.57 500 - 699 6 4 .2 9 899 8 5.71 1099 12 8.57 1100 - 1299 11 7.85 1300 - 1499 26 18.57 1500 - 1699 23 16.43 1700 - 1999 10 7.14 2000 - 2199 21 15.00 140 100.00 700 900 - TOTAL While no attempt was made to determine the s p e c ific number of hours spent in each program, the ta b u la tio n in d ica te s th a t the la r g e s t p er­ centage (18.6%) o f in d iv id u a ls were e n ro lle d in programs re q u irin g 1300-1499 hours. The second la r g e s t percentage (16%) was e n ro lle d in programs re q u irin g 1500-1699 hours. A sm aller percentage (15%) was e n ro lle d between 2000-2199 hours, and 12 percent o f the tra in e e s were e n ro lle d 0-299 class hours. The remaining 37 percent was d is t r ib u t e d across the remaining number o f class clock hours in the ta b le . 91 I. Analysis o f Variance Analyses o f va ria n c e , using AID was run to t e s t the in te r a c t io n e f f e c t o f several dependent and independent v a r ia b le s , and to determine the le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e o f the outcome. The f i r s t t e s t centered around t e s tin g the in t e r a c tio n e f f e c t and the s ig n ific a n c e o f the number o f weeks unemployed (dependent v a r ia b le ) ag ain st the fo llo w in g explanatory v a ria b le s : education, race, and sex. age, le v e l o f The sample mean and standard d e v ia tio n were computed accordingly and presented in Table 31. A graphical i l l u s t r a t i o n o f the in t e r a c tio n o f v a ria b le s as c a rr ie d out by the AID computer process includes Figures 5 - 7 and appear in Appendix A .9 The an alysis o f variance ta b le below (Table 30) in d ic a te s an F - r a t i o o f .80 which means th a t the several explanatory v a ria b le s used 1n the analysis (age, le v e l o f ed u catio n, race and sex) are not s i g n i f i cant w ith r e la t io n to the in t e r a c t io n between them and the dependent v a ria b le (th e number o f weeks unemployed before t r a i n i n g ) . TABLE 3 0 . —Analysis o f Variance o f Average Number o f Weeks Unemployed. Source o f V a ria tio n Sum o f Squares DF. Total 1146.74 139 Between Wi th in 46.94 1099.80 7 132 Mean Square 6 .7 0 8.3 3 F .80 S ig n ific a n c e Level n o n -s ig n ific a n t 9Please read in s tr u c tio n s in Appendix f o r i n t e r p r e tin g AID before attem pting to read Figures 5 , 6, and/or 7. 92 TABLE 3 1 .— Mean and Standard Deviation o f S p e c ific V ariab les Used in Analysis o f Number o f Weeks Unemployed P r io r to T ra in in g . V a ria b le Mean Standard D eviation N Percentage Oi (X) (s ) 0 -1 4 20 - 29 30 - 44 1.63 3.03 120 85.70 15 - 19 45 - 59 1.00 1.37 20 14.30 Grade Grade 1.88 1.36 17 12.10 9 Grade Grade 1 .59 3.22 103 73.60 0-14 30 - 44 1.88 4.68 43 30.70 20 - 29 1 .38 1.42 60 42.90 2.09 1 .11 5.20 1 .37 34 9 24.30 6.40 2.28 1.00 5.61 0.00 29 5 20.70 3.60 1.75 1.06 1.40 1.34 28 32 20.00 22.90 2.67 1.00 1.33 .71 9 8 6.40 5.70 Age Educational Level 10-11 13 8 12 Age Race White and Other Black Sex Female Male Race Black and Other White Age 20 - 29 30 - 34 93 The second t e s t centered around te s tin g the s ig n ific a n c e o f wage in l a s t f u l l - t i m e job held p r io r to t r a in in g (dependent v a r ia b le ) ag a in st the explanatory v a ria b le s as analyzed under the f i r s t t e s t above, e . g . , age, le v e l o f education, race and sex. and standard d e v ia tio n were computed The sample mean and presented in Table 32. The analysis o f variance ta b le on page 95 (Table 33) in d ica te s an F - r a t i o o f 6 . 6 . This means th a t there is in t e r a c tio n between the several explanatory v a ria b le s (age, le v e l o f education, race and sex) and the dependent v a r ia b le (average wage in f u l l - t i m e jo b p r io r to tra in in g .) This in te r a c tio n is s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .05 l e v e l . Figure 6 in Appendix A is a diagram atic presentation o f the in te r a c t io n o f the explanatory v a ria b le s (age, le v e l o f education, race and sex) and the dependent v a ria b le s (wage in f u l l - t i m e jo b p r i o r to t r a in i n g ) as d e te r­ mined by AID. The explanatory v a ria b le s which had the highest i n t e r ­ action occurred in the fo llo w in g order: t io n , (1 ) sex, (2) le v e l o f educa­ (3 ) age and (4 ) race. The t h i r d and f i n a l analysis o f variance d e a lt w ith the a v er­ age monthly wage in f u l l - t i m e job held a f t e r t r a in in g as a dependent v a ria b le and the fo llo w in g explanatory v a ria b le s : age, ra c e , sex, completed t r a i n i n g , clock hours, class c o s t, employment status before t r a i n i n g , and w e lfa re sta tu s . The an alysis o f variance ta b le (Table 35) on page 98 in d ica te s th a t th ere is in t e r a c tio n between the dependent v a ria b le (wage a f t e r t r a in i n g ) and the explanatory variables completed t r a in in g sex, race, age, class clock hours, w e lfa re s ta tu s , employment status before tr a in in g 94 TABLE 3 2 . — Mean and Standard D eviation w ith S p e c ific Variables used in Analysis o f the Average Wage in F u ll- t im e Job P r io r to T ra in in g . V a riab le Mean Standard D eviation (X) (s) N Percentage Sex Male Female 379.00 274.00 179.00 102.00 31 109 22.10 77.90 387.00 268.00 141.00 95.60 6 103 4.3 0 73.60 446.00 324.00 120.00 199.00 14 17 10.00 12.10 284.00 89 .00 37 26.40 259.00 98.00 66 47.10 464.00 266.00 96.00 202.00 5 12 3.60 8.6 0 320.00 254.00 76.00 9 8 .00 5 61 3.60 43.60 263.00 239.00 75.00 124.00 37 24 26.40 17.10 312.00 277.00 78.00 90.00 7 30 5.00 21.40 Educational Level 13 8 -9 ,1 0 -1 1 ,1 2 Age 3 0 -4 4 ,4 5 -5 9 20-29 Age 0 -1 4 ,3 0 -4 4 1 5 -1 9 ,2 0 -2 9 , 45-59 Race Black White and Other Educational Level 10-11 Grade 12 Race White Black and Other Race Black White and Other 95 TABLE 3 3 .— Analysis o f Variance o f Average Wage P r io r to T ra in in g . V a ria tio n Total Between W ithin Sum Squares 2 ,3 9 7 .6 1 3 .0 0 DF. Mean Square F S ig n ific a n c e Level 139 64 8,018.00 8 8 1 ,0 0 2 .2 5 1 ,7 4 9 ,5 9 5 .0 0 131 1 3 ,35 5.68 6 .0 6 .05 96 TABLE 3 4 .— Mean and Standard D eviation o f S p e c ific V ariab les Used in Analysis o f Monthly Wage in F u ll-tim e Job Held A f t e r T ra in in g . V a ria b le Mean D eviation N Percentage 407.00 125.00 142.00 180.00 132 8 94.30 5.70 483.00 386.00 166.00 126.00 29 103 20.70 73.60 408.00 336.00 114.00 137.00 71 32 50.70 22.90 0 -4 9 9 ,5 0 0 -9 9 9 , 1000-1499 387.00 132.00 44 31.40 1500-1999 2000-2499 441.00 65.00 27 19.30 539.00 392.00 106.00 202.00 18 11 12.90 7.90 426.00 361.00 119.00 134.00 18 26 12.90 18.60 151.00 218.00 5 3.6 0 77.00 27 19.30 418.00 90.00 9 6.40 330.00 143.00 17 12.10 354.00 287.00 138.00 143.00 11 6 7.90 4.3 0 Completed T rain in g Yes and NoResponse No Sex Male Female Race White Black andOther Class Clock Hours Race White Black and Other Age 20-29 3 0 -4 4 ,4 5 -5 9 Class Clock Hours 0-499 500-999,1000-1499, 1500-1999,2000-2499 370.00 Employment Status Before T rain in g Underemployed Unemployed and Employed Welfare No Yes 97 TABLE 3 4 . — Continued V a ria b le Mean Standard D eviatio n 503.00 192.00 5 3.60 396.00 47.00 13 9.30 580.00 113.00 11 7.90 476.00 41 .00 7 5.0 0 380.00 335.00 60.00 113.00 21 6 15.00 4.3 0 431.00 62 .00 19 13.60 465.00 65.00 8 5.7 0 405.00 68.00 5 3.60 372.00 55.00 16 11.40 463.00 413.00 75.00 43.00 7 12 5.00 8.60 354.00 4 3 .0 0 11 7 .9 0 412.00 58.00 5 3.6 0 N Percentage Cost o f Class $0-1999 2000-3999 4000-5999 Cost o f Class 0-1999,2000-3999 4000-5999, 6000-6999 Age 0 -1 4 ,2 0 -2 9 , 45-59 30-34 Cost o f Class 0-1999,2000-3999 4000-5999 6000-6999 Employment Status Before Train in g Underemployed Unemployed, Employed Cost o f Class $0-1999 2000-3999 Class Clock Hours 500-999 100-1499 1500-1999, 200-2499 98 TABLE 3 5 .— Analysis o f Variance o f Average Wages A f t e r T ra in in g . Source o f V a ria tio n Sum o f Squares DF. Total 3 ,5 2 0 ,0 8 0 .0 0 139 Between W ithin 1 ,5 6 8 ,2 4 0 .0 0 1 ,9 5 1 ,8 4 0 .0 0 16 123 Mean Square F S ig n ific a n c e Level 98,015.00 15,868.61 6.17 .05 and cost o f class and th a t the in t e r a c tio n is s i g n i f i c a n t a t the .05 le v e l. Figure 7 in Appendix A is a diagram atic p resentation o f the in te r a c tio n o f the explanatory v a ria b le s (average monthly wage a f t e r t r a in in g as determined by A ID ). The independent v a ria b le s which had the highest in flu e n c e on wage a f t e r t r a in in g occurred in the fo llo w in g order: (1 ) completion o f t r a in i n g , (2 ) sex, (3 ) race, (4 ) class clock hours; (5 ) employment status before t r a i n i n g , (6 ) age and (7) w e lfa re sta tu s : r e c ip ie n t vs. non r e c ip ie n t . J. S ig n ific a n c e o f Wage D i f f e r e n t i a l From e a r l i e r computations, i t was determined th a t the average monthly wage before t r a in in g was $302.36 and th a t the average monthly wage a f t e r t r a in in g increased to $396.00. Questions i m p l i c i t in th is wage change are (1) is the change s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , and (2 ) a t what lev el o f s ig n ific a n c e ? cant e ffe c t? Moreover, did i n f l a t i o n have a s i g n i f i ­ These questions are answered l a t e r in the chapter. 99 Table 36 shows a summary o f the average before t r a i n i n g / a f t e r * t r a in in g wage f o r the 140 in d iv id u a ls in the sample and t h e i r respective standard d e v ia tio n . TABLE 3 6 .— Average Monthly Wage Before and A f t e r T ra in in g . Before T ra in in g A f t e r T rain in g 140 140 Sample Size Average Earnings X1 = $302.36 Standard Deviation » X2 = $396.00 s2 = 5.73 42.69 The answers to questions 1 and 2 above presuppose c e r ta in hypotheses regarding the s ig n ific a n c e o f the d iffe re n c e s between the before and a f t e r - t r a i n i n g wages, e . g . , the Null Hypothesis is th a t there is no d iffe re n c e between the average wage before and a f t e r t r a i n ­ ing: Null hypothesis HQ: h^ = h2 : A lt e r n a t iv e hypothesis $302.36 = 396.00 H-j: h-j f h2 : $302.36 ^ 396.00 The standard e r r o r o f the d iffe re n c e between two sample means is 15.238. The t e s t is defined by: t SE (X1 - X2 ) = 6 . 1 5 where X^ is the average wage before t r a in i n g , X2 is the average wage a f t e r t r a in in g and SE is the standard e r r o r o f TOO the d iffe r e n c e . The computed value o f t = 6.15 is s i g n i f i c a n t a t the 1% le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e ( 2 . 3 2 1 ) , in d ic a tin g th a t th ere e x is ts s i g n i f i ­ cant d iffe re n c e between the average monthly earnings before and a f t e r tr a in in g . The impact o f i n f l a t i o n was discussed a t some length in the e a r l i e s t p a rt o f th is ch apter, consequently an an alysis o f real was undertaken and is presented as real income income d is t r i b u t i o n in Table 37 below: TABLE 3 7 . --R e al Income D is t r ib u t io n . Income Range Frequency Less than 49 99 50 to 100 to 149 150 to 199 200 to 249 250 to 299 300 to 349 350 to 399 400 to 449 450 to 499 500 to 549 550 to 599 600 over 4 1 3 3 6 21 21 42 23 4 6 2 4 140 Average Real Income a f t e r T rain in g = $329.90 Average Real Income before T ra in in g = $302.36 3 2 9 .9 0 -3 0 2 .3 6 t = ---------------------12.00 (1967=100) = 2.2950 t qjj t 0i ( le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e ) = 1.645 (le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e ) = 2.326 The computed t - v a lu e is s i g n i f i c a n t a t 1% le v e l 101 I t is in t e r e s tin g to note th a t the d e fla te d value o f the a f t e r ­ t r a in in g wage does not a l t e r the p r io r hypothesis regarding the s i g n i f i ­ cance o f the wage before-and a f t e r - t r a i n i n g . In f a c t , the computed t - value o f the del fated wage is s i g n i f i c a n t a t the ^ le v e l. This is an in d ic a tio n t h a t t r a in in g made a d iffe re n c e in the a f t e r t r a in in g wage, and t h a t the d iffe re n c e is s i g n i f i c a n t ir r e s p e c tiv e o f i n f l a t i o n during the 1968-72 period. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The o b je c tiv e o f t h is research has been to determine the suc­ cess in Michigan o f the MDTA in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l system. The c r i t e r i a f o r measuring success was determined by the e x te n t to which en ro lle es increased t h e i r incomes and enhanced t h e i r e m p lo y a b ility as a r e s u l t o f enrollm ent in the program and obtained a t r a i n i n g - r e l a t e d job upon graduation. Analyses undertaken in Chapter IV in d ic a te th a t the Michigan program was successful. l a t e r in th is ch apter. The degree o f success w i l l be summarized However, p r io r to t h a t , i t might be o f i n t e r ­ e s t to summarize some o f the o th e r r e s u lts o f the study, as fo llo w s : 1. Age S t r u c tu r e . Although the age o f the sample o f tra in e e s ranges from 15 -60 , the average age o f the sample was 32 and the median was 30 y e a rs , w ith the highest percentage f a l l i n g in the age group 20-24 (see Table 2 ) . Sex. I t was in t e r e s t in g to note th a t females dominated the program w ith an enrollm ent o f 77 percent. One might have assumed th a t w ith MDTA designed p r im a r ily to address s t r u c t u r a l changes in the lab or market which was male o r ie n te d , th a t more males would have e n ro lle d in the t r a in in g programs. 102 The f a c t th a t more females than 103 males e n ro lle d has led th is researcher to speculate th a t (a ) during s tr u c tu r a l changes in the lab or market which a f f e c t the length o f unemployment, th e re is a g re a te r propensity f o r women to seek t r a in in g f o r fu tu re employment. Moreover, th a t t r a in i n g programs c o n s titu te a s in g u la r v e h ic le f o r enhancing e q u a lity o f access to employment f o r females; (b) th a t t h is la rg e female tr a in in g p a r t i c ip a t i o n ra te was generated as a consequence o f the market demand f o r " t r a d i t i o n a l " female professions, e . g . , s e c re ta ry , licensed p r a c tic a l nursing, e tc . 3. Program Enrollm ent. The overwhelming enrollm ent was in licensed p r a c tic a l nursing, follow ed by cosmetology, s e c re ta ry , medi­ cal a s s is ta n t. Enrollment in the " t r a d i t i o n a l l y " male p ro fession , e . g . , tru ck d r iv in g , auto mechanic, mechanical te c h n ic ia n , e t c . , was low (see Table 1 4 ). 4. Educational L e v e l. Eighty-two percent o f the e n ro lle e s had compel ted the 12th grade upon en ro llm en t. While the program th ru s t was d ire c te d a t t h is le v e l o f educational achievement, the educational le v e l o f the enrol lees ranged from grades 8-13 (see Table 4 ) . 5. P a r t ic ip a t io n by Race. An in t e r e s t in g observation was the r e l a t i v e l y low t r a in i n g p a r t ic ip a t io n r a te f o r blacks and o th e r minor­ itie s . Table 5 shows th a t approxim ately 35 percent blacks and o ther m in o ritie s were e n ro lle d as compared w ith 65 percent w hites. While the research was not designed to determine the reasons f o r low m in o rity p a r t ic ip a t io n r a te s , one might assume th a t (a ) m in o r itie s who had com­ p leted the 12th grade saw a b r ig h t e r fu tu r e in o b tain ing a c o lle g e degree; (b) g re a te r percentages o f m in o r itie s were probably e n ro lle d 104 in re g u la r MDTA ( i n s t i t u t i o n ) programs; (c ) m in o r itie s had t r a d i t i o n a l l y had lim ite d access to employment o p p o rtu n itie s and th e re fo re were not d i r e c t l y a ffe c te d by s tr u c tu r a l changes in the lab or market. A f u r t h e r observation r e l a t i v e to r a c ia l p a r t ic ip a t io n rates is th a t a g re a te r number o f w hite females age 30 and above e n ro lle d in the program than t h e i r black co u n te rp a rts . This s it u a t io n appears to re in fo rc e lab o r fo rce s t a t i s t i c s which in d ic a te an increasing number o f post c h ild -b e a rin g aged women re tu rn in g to o r e n te rin g the lab or forces f o r the f i r s t tim e. Now, in order to determine the ex te n t to which the t r a in in g program was successful, th is researcher reviewed employment status o f the tra in e e s before and a f t e r t r a i n i n g , assuming th a t i f an e n ro lle e completed the t r a in in g program and obtained a t r a i n i n g - r e l a t e d jo b , the program was successful. Moreover, a comparison was made o f wages immediately p r i o r to and a f t e r o b tain ing employment to determine income d i f f e r e n t i a l and the s ig n ific a n c e o f the d iff e r e n c e . o f real Also, an an alysis income o f the tra in e e s during the period was undertaken to determine whether i n f l a t i o n had an impact on th e a f t e r - t r a i n i n g wage. The re s u lts are as fo llo w s : 1. Analyses o f the employmentstatus o f the sample p r i o r to t r a in in g in d ic a te t h a t 54 percent was unemployed, 41 percent under­ employed, fo u r percent employed, and one percent undecided (see Table 17a). A f t e r the t r a in in g program, approximately 92 percent o f the sample was employed, one percent underemployed, fo u r percent continued umemployed, and th re e percent undecided (see Table 17b). 105 2. Following completion o f the t r a i n i n g , 81 percent o f the graduates were employed in t r a i n i n g - r e l a t e d jobs (see Table 1 9 ). 3. A computation o f average and median wages before and a f t e r t r a in i n g revealed the fo llo w in g : a. Average wage before t r a in i n g : Median wage before t r a in i n g : $302.36 285.99 b. Average wage a f t e r t r a in i n g : Median wage a f t e r tr a in in g : 396.00 418.00 A t - t e s t (see Chapter IV ) in d ica te d th a t the wage d i f f e r e n t i a l was s i g n i f i c a n t a t the one percent le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e ( 2 .3 2 1 ) . a t - t e s t o f the value o f real Also, incomes f o r the p e rio d , using the Con­ sumer P ric e Index in d ic a te d a s ig n ific a n c e a t the one percent le v e l (see Table 3 7 ), meaning th a t i n f l a t i o n had no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on wages. 4. A se rie s o f te s ts based on analyses o f variance were used to determine in t e r a c t io n e f f e c t o f (a ) average monthly wage in f u l l ­ time jo b p r i o r to t r a in in g based on c e r t a in v a r ia b le s , e . g . , age, race, sex, educational le v e l and (b) average monthly wage in f u l l - t i m e job a f t e r t r a in in g also based on the same set o f v a ria b le s . The analyses o f variance was designed also to t e s t the s ig n ific a n c e o f the i n t e r ­ ac tio n o f the dependent and explanatory v a r ia b le s . (a) in d ica te d a strong in t e r a c t io n ( . 0 5 l e v e l ) . The an alysis f o r The in te r a c tio n was strongest f o r (1 ) sex, followed by (2 ) lev el o f education, (3) age and then (4 ) race. ( .0 5 l e v e l ) . Analysis f o r (b) in d ic a te d a high in te r a c tio n The in t e r a c t io n was strongest f o r (1 ) completion of t r a i n i n g , follow ed by (2 ) sex (3 ) race (4 ) class clock hours (5 ) employ­ ment status before t r a in in g (6 ) age and (7 ) w e lfa re s ta tu s . 106 5. That w h ile the t r a in in g program was useful in improving em p lo y a b ility and the earning cap acity o f the in d iv id u a l graduate, in s titu tio n a l r a c ia l biases in the labor market continued to su b ject blacks and other m in o r itie s to less than p a r i t y wage w ith t h e i r white counterparts (see Figure 7 ) . S i m i l a r l y , market d is c rim in a to ry prac­ t ic e s r e s t r ic t e d the earning c a p a c itie s o f q u a li f i e d females. Conclusions which may be drawn from th is study co n sist o f the fo llo w in g : 1. That c o s t-e ffe c tiv e n e s s as c it e d in the l i t e r a t u r e review section o f th is study is a good a d m in is tra tiv e tool f o r improving the e f f ic ie n c y o f a manpower t r a in in g program but i t should not be used e x c lu s iv e ly to determine the a llo c a t io n o f government resources. 2. That the in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l t r a in in g program under MDTA was e f f e c t i v e in upgrading the vocational s k i l l s o f the e n ro lle e s and in improving t h e i r earning p o t e n t i a l . 3. That re tro s p e c tiv e e v a lu a tio n o f a t r a in in g program poses serious l im it a t io n s o f the v a l i d i t y o f research re s u lts due to the d i f f i c u l t y o f o b tain ing re le v a n t data. 4. That an alysis w ith respect to real income in d ica te s th a t there has been an important e f f e c t o f the t r a in in g program in increas­ ing the real purchasing power o f the tr a in e e s . 5. That the explanatory v a r ia b le most s i g n i f i c a n t in the determ ination o f the amount o f average monthly wage p r io r to t r a in in g was sex. Males were more l i k e l y than females to receive the highest monthly wage. cance. Level o f education, age and race followed sex in s i g n i f i ­ 107 6. That the explanatory v a ria b le most s i g n i f i c a n t in the determination o f the amount o f average monthly wage a f t e r tr a in in g was whether the p a r t ic ip a n t completed t r a in i n g . This v a ria b le was followed by sex, race, number o f class clock hours, age and w e lfa re s ta tu s . Recommendations 1. That g re a te r emphasis be placed by the Michigan Employment S e cu rity Commission upon updating i t s records r e l a t i v e to t r a in in g programs. Toward t h is end, e n ro lle e s in t r a in in g programs might be required to cooperate in providing p o s t -tr a in in g inform ation r e l a t i v e to t h e i r employment and earnings as a p re -c o n d itio n f o r enrollm ent in a t r a in in g program. 2. That the prime sponsorship o f manpower programs where only s ta te and local governmental units are the prime sponsors presents a g reat p o s s i b i l i t y f o r the achievement o f the l e g i s l a t i v e o b je c tiv e s , and should be encouraged. However, th is researcher b elieves th a t s ta te governments should be given a g re a te r c o o rd in a tiv e r e s p o n s ib ility over local governmental u n its . 3. That t r a in in g under the in d iv id u a l r e f e r r a l system should be continued because i t provides the o p p ortun ity fo r o btain ing a broad mix o f vocational and educational competence. 4. That the r e l a t i v e l y low male enrollm ent in the program could be a r e s u l t o f the need by MESC f o r improvement in communicating the program. T herefore, MESC should undertake a more vigorous r o le in recruitm ent in to t r a in in g through a c le a r e r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f the publics a t which the program is d ir e c te d . 108 5. That the MESC should e s ta b lis h a more useful record keepi and data control system r e l a t i v e to manpower s t a t i s t i c s . An e f f e c t i v e system o f fo llo w up would have y ie ld e d more o f the data th a t was neces­ sary f o r t h is study. While f o r the most p a r t , in ta ke data was a v a i l ­ a b le , there was a paucity o f inform ation on the tra in e e s a f t e r they dropped out o r graduated from the program. L im ita tio n o f the Study The o r ig in a l sample had to be reduced from 25% o f the popula­ tio n to 7% o f the populatio n, meaning th a t conclusions are based on a 28% response r a t e . While f o r a la rg e population th is s it u a t io n might not be a problem, i t may have an a f f e c t on a small population such as was used in th is study, and may th e re fo re tend to place lim it a t io n s on the fin d in g s . APPENDICES 109 APPENDIX A INSTRUCTIONS FOR READING AID 110 APPENDIX A In s tru c tio n s f o r Reading AID Graphical Presentations in Figures 5 , 6, and 7 as Derived from Computer P rin t-O u t 1. The numbers on the l e f t , outside corner o f the squares are group numbers, e . g . , group 1, group 2, e tc . 2. The meaning o f the notations in s id e and between the squares may be determined from the legend. 3. The e n trie s are read from the top down s t a r t in g w ith the group in which the reader may have an i n t e r e s t . Example, using Figure 5. 1. Group 1 represents the t o t a l sample population in which N = 140 and X - 1.54 represents the average number o f weeks unemployed before t r a in i n g . 2. tia te d Groups 2 and 3 are derived from group 1 on the basis o f age, e . g . , group 3 contained and group 2 contained age groups 1 , 3, 3. Successive groups continue and are d i f f e r e n ­ age groups 2 and 5 4. to be derived on the basis o f s ig n ific a n c e o f v a ria b le s in s id e and between the groups. T herefo re, i f the reader i s in te re s te d in the high (X 2 .2 8 ) number o f weeks o f unemployment as represented in group 10, i t may be read as fo llo w s : females, w hite o r o th e r, in age group ( 1 , 4 ) 0-14 and 30-44 w ith educational le v e ls 8-9 and/or 12th grades. Ill 112 Conclusion: White females representing these c h a r a c t e r is t ic s were unemployed the longest. On the c o n tra ry , males w ith s im ila r char­ a c t e r is t i c s (group 11) were unemployed f o r a s h o rte r d u ra tio n , e . g . , one week. 113 X - l . 54 X -1 .0 0 X - l . 63 N - 17 X" 1.03 H-9 X -1.00 X * l .06 N-34 N-23 X -l .75 LEGEHO 10 Race N-29 X -1.00 X * Average nurrtor o f weeks unemployed White Black Mexican American Other ias. 1 m 0 -1 4 2 a 15-19 3 - 20-29 4 m 30-44 5 - 4 5 -39 6 m 60 A over 4*See computer p r ln t-o u t Appendix B fo r d e riv a tio n o f Figure 5 . Figures 6 and 7 are s im ila r ly derived. Sex 1 * Female 2 - Hale Educational level 1 » 0 -9 th grade 2 - 10-11 3-12 4 - 13 Figure 5 . — Average Number o f Weeks Unemployed Before T ra in in g . " " 114 X-297 N= 109 N-31 X-379 N-6 N-12 N*37 M*5 X*266 N-30 X-277 LEGEHO N ■ 140 nuirbor o f X ■ Average WocKS unemployed £22. 1 2 3 4 5 6 ■ - 0-14 15-19 20-29 30-44 45-59 60 & over Race O 1 2 3 . white Block Moxlcon Other Soy 1 • Fomale 2 a Male Educational LavoI 1 • B-9th grade 2 « 10-11 " 3-12 4-13 " Figure 6 . --Average Wage in F u ll- t im e Job Held. b> 115 LEGEHO 7*391 Raoa H * (4 0 X Avarega n i r t a r of ■ M k i unanployad * X-40? 10 22 H -II Clei* celt 1.2 N-ID Ret* 0 ■ • * 20-29 30-44 43-39 60 4 ovar Anar lean 1 a Faawla 2 • Ha la E d u c a tio n a l 1 ■ 11-29 Laval B - 9 th g ra d a 2 ■ 10-11 i 7*483 X*539 7*580 3 4 5 0 Bladi Haul can Sax 1 ■ 0 -1 4 2 ■ 1 5 -1 9 H -1 3 2 Wtilta 1 ■ 2 a 3 a (K h a r Aga X - l 25 0■ 3 - 1 2 " 4 - 1 3 " X-3BG H*7 14-11 7*476 7-392 19 2, 3, 4, 5 Clock Hi.. N«7I N-32 X-40 8 x-336 23 M-27 N*6 Age 4 7-335 7*370 11-5 N-21 X—(51 7*380 X -3 B 7 X -4 2 6 7-503 x -1 6 1 14*49 M-0 N*5 N»l 6 X*43l X-465 7*405 7*372 X -3 9 6 L< X -4 1 8 N *I7 30 \ 14*7 31 V / 33 \ O' N-12 M -11 N*5 X-413 7*354 X-412 7*330 X*46S 17 7-354 X-2B7 Figure 7 . --Average Monthly Wage A f t e r T rain in g * APPENDIX B MA-101 116 117 U. S. DEPARTMENTOPLABOR MANPOWER ADM INIS I I * I ION Pena M A .1 0 I |4 44l A P P L IC A N T IN F O R M A T IO N RECORD IfUUWftUbC---------------- t . C0NT1ACT IDENTIFICATION a. Sigia at training a A ------C IP B _ - M o d a l City C ___ CWIP — — Other TScecJyt t . Star* Code | c. Final yoar approval I _l_ A Cob- (Preltit " (Film*) I I (Sub) I I I I 11 b A-----MOIA B-----ID A C—— Social Security _ — Other (Speedy/ 7e. NAME OP CONTRACTOR IS 3 IS 37. .—Other UpecAt OFFICE N O . 7b . ADDRESS (hhmber .Seeet Cry. Sea. end Zf> Code! ( Bb. DOT (Q d & l ?o . TARGET A K A IMomeJ 11a. NAME OP APPLICANT /ton. bit mddb mfall 17. HAND). CAPPED 1—..Y ar 3 - -N o ,9 b . CODE 1 11b. PHONE N O . |11c. SOCIAL SECURITY N O . J----------------------- L — .................. 12. ADDRESS (Number, ireer Cry, So*, ond if s Code! 1 ——Mala 3——Fomole 11. CAA • a . OCCUPATIONAL O O A l INdmal IB. SEX 31 4 . LOCAL U I IS . DATE OF BIRTH (M a S y rj 3 . PROORAM KXNTIFtCATION 01— —MDTA-tnititultonol 0 1 _ _ M D !A .Q J I 0S_ -MOT A-Coup led OT(BBM O tA For|.|ine 11 _ _ NYC*ln ichoel IJ _ _ N V C -O u lo l tchool IS -----NVC-Summor 3 . W M ONLY 4 . MOTA tNSTITUTIONAl S I C N O . 10. START DATE (Mo. dor. yrj FOAm A F F iO V ID RUDGEI lU lf A U N O . 41- i 1301.3 fa. C oda IS . COUNTY OF RESIDENCE a. Nama 1 4 . CONGRESSIONAL DOT. a. Sisia Code Jb, Dutrlcl No. IB. MILITARY SERVICE STATUS I?* MARITAL STATUS 1— V .laror. J „ _ S .,.c ia . l^ ^ N f v B f inorrlEil 2 **aBMerri«d , fMonPi day. 4 wort ^ 3 - •■Widow/Widower •D ivo rced /U eelty teporoied □ lh * r r>OF>-v#l ------------------------------------ - — “ 31, HEAD OF 24. IF SPANISH SURNAME, 2 3 , y . it 32. N O . O F DEPENDENTS 23o CHECK O N l 26 W c K i t t ™ ' CLAIMANT CHECK O N E FAMILY OR 1 - .W h ite 0_ 4__ HEAD OF 2 —_ N *g ro 1___No 1___Yar HOUSEHOLD 1__ 5 __ 1----- Vet f ---- M tilto n Amsricon 2 —-AlTltT. Ia d«in l-- Y e r 3 __ Bond —_ rn s u a i 7 ___ Na 1— Yar 2 ,—fy * it o Rltort 4 * b O riiA la l j oyer m r i e roe 3 __ N a 7 __ No _ Evhouttee ^ _ _ O lh * r 5 —_ O ih e f 3 7 . HIGHEST 5CHOOL 3 9 . PARTICIPATION IN OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS 3E. PREVIOUS JOE TRAININO GRADE COMPLETED 9— ^N on r Poriicipated In (d a d of ralroii arm,; I T r i f# YES cotnpbv Aa at MDTA el _ -Job Cerpt I l No 1 NYC 2_ _ J o b Carpi II 4 — —Project Troniliien 4 -,-J o b Corpi 111 a. Job Tula 96. H I m A M W AGE EARNER btijwu/ fa. DO I (B-dlgllJ I _L 30o. PRIMARY OCCUPATION TITLE t io u f i ,3 0 b . DOT ID-dgFJ S3. TEARS O F GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT 33»lS !tM A T lD A V fftA O E HOUXLY BAJtNINOS O N LAST FULUTIMB CIVIUAJNJOS l_ —Under I rear 2——J -9 raorr 3 I -2 yeerr b l ——Operation M o ln b io m ! - . —Special Imped 4 Vforb Incentive |t- Data tomplalad (Mo i yrj 7 Caraarr Olhar 310. OCCUPATION TITLE O F LAST FULL-TIME CIVILIAN JOS ,31b. D O T lO d o d 34a INCOME o, A p p tlu n T l filim o lfd aornlngt loil 12 month* b, Bttlmolod family In com* loti 12 no n ih t ^ . . I D yaarr and era r 3 3 . LAROR FORCE STATUS AT TIME' 3 6 . W RIKS INTERVIEWED (One L cnV one/ UNBMFLOYEO d I N a w — — c Number Infamily d. Fomlly below po vtriy l* « * l I ,N o 3E. DISADVAN. TAOEO O I - . E . ' Ou I reach D R .—Other community group 11— Employ id ( ao I under employed) Loal 12 Mo*. 0 3 —-N Y C 11——Coop School Graduate < J aep*. 12 ..U h r fir » n fF o r ttf I--Y et 0 1 - —Jab Carpa I } — C etp School Dropout con*/ m * Piean 7 Na 04 __U n io n 21 ——S*l. Serulce Raheb. [Art fulling Stoiion] Current ap ell l4 « _ F « m lly fflrm worlitr O i_ _ E m p lo ra r 3 3 _ _ S a l, Serrlce Rahab. ( a FEES) 2 L - N o t In fobor lo r t i - In ichool 0 4 _ _ S rll 2 J _ _ 5 t l. Sarulca Rahab. (lacel Beard] 2 2 « ^ N o l In Idbor forte * oifcer 0 7 — —W elfare 3 l--O th a 4 1.CHECK APPROPRIATE ITEMb) 4 0 . IL IO IIIL IT Y FOR TRAIN !N O ALLOW A N C l >9. REFERRAL TO TRAINING OR EMPLOYMENT IP ELKMSLE FOR OTHER ALLOW . e. Actaptad ralarral b, Enrolled In c. Placed 9__ Not Eligible lert to training ar |ob training In |eb eligible 1-_Sitbndeitce ■——Regular d——Special NYC 3 - —Tramper rattan 1—-Y a r l _ —Tor 1__ Yar 3 - —Augmented S——Incenllre 3 _ -N o 3__ Na 3___Youth 3 Olhar 2 ___N a 6 —-Perl-rim e I3 II 3 7 . REFUSED BY ployed 43 . b a r r ie r s t o e m p lo y m e n t 9 — —Nona e l . _ A | e - tea young b l ——Health problem 3 - -A g e - loo aid 1 _ -P e rto n a l problem 4 - _lrc t» aducottan. training tLiJI, 4v -Tr on ip a rto Ita n aiparianca. ar hat ebra/elo Mill _______ problem_________ cl ——Child care problem 2. Care ol other family member 4——Convkllon record d 1——Gar nlthm ant 7 Olhar 4 3 . DATE OP INTERVIEW iMonA. dor. A rood 118 APfUCANT INFORMATION RECORD SUmEMENT tonnMA401 PART A • A l l PUBLIC A SSIS TA N C E RECMIENTS PART C - SERVICES PROVIOEO I . FDLAPECIAL A B RICETVED EMPLOYABILITY PLAN DEVOLVES tC tm i a * a r a a LnAcJ ' I ——ARID I - —G antral A u lila M t } ..A fO C 1 OAA A ^ ^ a FOC ■ n IG t n a r d A u lilaitc t 9_ .O A ir A _a. Covniallng AAtO Svpparllta S a ir rtti _b. Orianlalian Haallh . I. IfllAtA) fiahablUiattan _ _ g . W atlafa _ _ h . Olhar .d . Raloialton I_*« 1 . R U B E S IN PUBLIC H OU SM O 3 . PARTIOPATEO I I 3 No CWT AMO /O R n u t V o F u n 3 _ _ » e * CWTond Itrio V CW I TYPEOP SERVICE 4. NUAARER O F DEPEN0ENT3 RY AOE ANO ARRANGEMENT MADE FOR THEIR CAR! 3 1. Undar ( art. b: N o n lit n 3 . PARTICIPANT OF PROJECT 1 0 0400 IAi u k M on Form VfS II a. Vaa _ _ b . No 4 . SERVICES PROVIOEO 4 _ „ N a t*a r 1 _ _ !(■ • V FAMIIT INCOME GROUP 615 T il. 4. 12-64 »i». 16 21 YU- a. COUNSELING INTERVIEWS S. 65 r » . & o v ti b. COUNSELING SESSIONS t. GUlOANCE SESSIONS ANwnbar el doptndonli d. JOB DEVELOPMENT CONTACT I . Naaibar lor s lig n loro It naodod ■. PLACEMENT IN JOB 1 DAYS OR LESS J. fOR ttXJIH 064 Y — APPLICANT LIVES WITH l_ _ B e ili paranlt 3 __M oHiti 3 . . F giIi i i 4 __Guardian DOT CODE S DAIE TAdQtf Olhar JiC 13dflU I. PLACEMENT IN REGULAR JOB PART B . W IN APPLICANTS O N L Y 6 . REFERRAL CATEOORY fl. a p p l ic a n t .e m p l o y e r in t e r v ie w 7 , AMOUNT OF WELFARE CASH ASSISTANCE TO FAMILY FOR MONTH PRIOR TO REFUSAL 1. . R. OTHER FAMILY MEMBER ALREADY IN W M | h. SPECIAL PLACEMENT y„ P. SEASONAL AGRICULTURAL WORKER APPROVED FOR AFDC IN LAST 3 YEARS I..T a t 3 3 Na No ( I ) HEALTH I. REFERRED TO SUPPORTIVE SERVICE ( I ) REHABILITATION (31WELFARE (41 OTHER 10. LENGTH O f THAI O N AFDC MonIM a. Total Kota daring la il ll«a r a i n f . FOLIOWUP CONTACT Mon Nil b. C ornw all* a ran a tin t a m oil (oconl approval o> AFDC I I . COMMENTS L. OTHER dpac4d 3. TRAJHLNO REFERRALS ANO ENROLLMENTS TYPE OP TRAINING a. MDTA • INSTITUTIONAL b. NYC 4. NYC - MDTA CONCURRENT d. JOB CORPS a. OPERATION MAINSTREAM SIGNATURE OF R4IERVIEWER I. NEW CAREERS g. SPECIAL IMPACT TITLE DATE h. RETURN TO SCHOOL I. OTHER OATE REFERRED ENROllEO APPENDIX C MA-102 119 120 EY/ l * f l / H l W r ..ii» tin iM ii 1, N A U J INDIVIDUA L TCflMIMATION/THANSFEB BtPOBT_________________ * “*»•' ■— »" "*• T£» OF l l t A I N I N l ) P A C I t I T V / C Q N f N A C 2 , A U L fR tV S r A T W w , T i N # r f C N r # S la la * • » n a m e u f t r a in e e J* b u r. S ue. N o , I . A O P R IS S f N V n W a f. S lr a a f , C lt r , I f f N , t o i l t i p C e t f t J 0 . C O N T R A C T {P R O J E C T ! lO T N T IF IC A T tO N u * N u n ** n l S la t * 01 M O T A - ln it Eft I f . St* in C o rfu w ■1* O kt . ic . v - f T ( m O O S A M t o t NT m e AT IO N C » f l t c a l y a a t A p iF o v O d |P Y lffl* | (S u b ) I I 1 • » S oc. No. 1 I I 1 1 N o # C .IN 4 H M O T A 'O J T 23 D n iY lt lO f t U * 1 n , U D T A -C n u p fc td 41 O H M fS p o tttv t M O T A p f t f i. it m p 11 N Y C In S c h o o l U N Y C O w l/ S c h o o l 15 NYC S m n r a r a. t l i t l d o r !• N O . O f C iM ! DATS I). L n tt d a y IQ . C LO CK HOURS n * A llo n d w i t l. W t M M f 1 1 , L A S T S E R V IC E OR T R A IN IN G C O V E R E D BY T H IS REPORT 1 1 , WORK A S S IG N M E N T fO n W r t u t m > t A i A l) il4 |n B ii|t ( 1 Non* 1 C o u n t * II n q N o . o f C lo c k H i t . 2 f a i l Inn N n . o l C lo c k l i f t . c o w r it f V r u p H lf w u il 07 I n k 04 P r o fV u c n M o n .il 01 U a r f le a l E « a m *n # H o n OH t n * i . $ k U 1 /O r lo n t a l In n 02 U H lc a l S tr v lt i 11. O lh g f f S p e t i f v j 04 D e n i a l E k a m J n a ilo n OS D e n i a l S o rw lc o t r a in in g TEO o b je c tiv e D ID N O T A C H IE V E t r a in in g o e jiC T iv i i 2 t a t l y C o m p lm lo n 3 A c c o ( 4 * 4 F u l M i m * |ni> fu ll t o u t • 4 I m o l u n l M l Iv d ro p p n d ft V o l u n t a r i l y d to o o v t f T r « n i l » f r « f i d (H h * r M D T A ir o t n ln g M t f f u d f r o m iifw o OS W a g n a itc y o f ir a ln a a 09 Lac* of p fo g m i w 13 O k til t c h o o l t O m i l to * M O M / 1/ Ri>1 u rn * r f f o u r h o c 1 0* A it n h o M in , d 'u p i to P o o r a iia n ija n c e 14 A o ra c m o n t L<* f u N 'lC d A tr tw d I c r c d OT C a r s c:f f a m ily 11 M uconduC t IS U nknow n in l l l n n * ! . *1 I f n in e * 00 D ia d 12 H t c p m * in a liQ iL fif: tOfr^rt to t A lQ tA t 10 O th o r 1t in n » i « i t L n C I I lM i! 0 1 ft, N A T U R E I S ER VIC E S R E N D E R E D ( O m it f i t M O M f 01 E d u c a tio n • . ATT E N D AMCC tMO.4 • t» r * p .< 5 C la c S H r * . 71 07 14 \3 . T R A IN IN G f M A U f f e r * l t i * t * v * n t ttm ln litg l " tm * f t p C ortot fO in tt f t v M O r £. IT . STATUS AT T IV f OF TERMINATION /C om ptef# A or 9 to r o t t ttw lo o o t t A , W o r k in g o r S c M d u la d ID R e p o rt I 1 1 1 1 2 I 1 N o f t ‘ 1f i i n i n g r t l a t o d 0 , N o t S c h e d u le d l o R o p o ri po a J o b . B u i: dl n in g r * l * 1* ( t jo b T M n o r t n 's nam e a n d |o b 3 L o o k in g f o r m o rk S S e h # d u io d f o r m o r v lr n g . 4 N o t lo o k in g to t * c * k 0 N ot know n f fO * MOM Trolnoo* o n /tf [ 2 j j M ot lo f G ood | 3 | E m o lo y a r I t ; 1 P ue t«c 1 Y ai 2 W l v a la . n o n p r o f it 2 No 3 fY i v i t * . lo r p rn N i I f , M V J lW I T l A C l l l f V OS O I F A I T U t N T H E A D (C o m fittt o to r M O M tr n m n a i t t § * m in * t io n * * » t N o t to * p o o d c n t i t : t i t o t t e r c r v g r t m t to * 1 h a v a r a v i» A * d t h * r i r c u m M a n c * * tu r ro w n a ftn g Thn in * m m a ito n o f 1 N j T h i» I s l o c R H t lv t h * l t h « c t r c u m t ia n e a a o f la r m l n a i ion to * 1 h * ir a ln a a to w h om t h i t ta p o rt ra fa r t C tu U i {1J i t t r a m t * a i p r a v lo u a w o r k s la llo r address I S , C E R T IF IC A T IO N S T T R A IN IN G F A C IL IT Y \ | C . P r im .ify W o r k i l a l l c n p O m it to * M f l M / Tfllnup lo which (hit rtpMl Icluit dft) hlvit fgund them to lio JCCWSloly datenbad. tte m t 9 t 4. A G E N C Y NAME A N O AOCHtSS u* F A C IL IT Y N A M t A N O A D D R E S S b . N A M E A N O TITLE OF A U T H Q R U I D O F F IC IA L t>, N A M E A N O T l f L l OF A U T H O R I N G O f F l C t A l c . S IG N A T U R E c . S IG N A T U R E d . PATE FOB USt BY 8ELICTION/BEFtHBAt OFFICE OB SPONSOR 2 0. A R | ALL PM AHS O f TRAINING OR SERVICES 1 TEJIMINATfO IN THIS PROGRAM? 2 A llo w i f NO any * r o i v t T t f i i i i l D O T C n/o to r o c c itp m tio n h s t r f t i n Hem f f f , DOT CODE « - 1 * o o i r < o w * t o n c o N T iN u m o a c t i v it y i » t c m o u t t o If* S la iu C o d a a , S |* 1 a N i m * c . 1 v Appapw d R u w iiim Id u n n I I c a t I o n C o d a 7i S l* n t u l Im p a c t 3? U p w a rd R o u n d J f* J o l) t ; r a p t 43 O th a t <1 ci r n W IN t lA lE NAM A N D CODS tlr a c l N o . A la * 1 111 4 . So. . No* Sub 1 3 4 . DO T CDDC f S p m t lt r i 2 2 * O C C U P A T IO N 2 f t , IS T R A I N f f f N R O L I ED IN A O O IT IO N A L A C T IV IT Y ? on: r! C o m p la t a fa * M D T A P ro g r a m * o n ly 2 2 . M D T A C O N T R A C T p m D J t C T p lO C N T P f IC A T IO N ■ co u n m 21 • PRO G H AW i D I N T i f |C A T IO N t f r n o e r o J a t*o m tie r ri t mhovo o* r A t f i o p t* lic o b to p io g tt m } VfS i i t 1 Y ua I N n f i t " f f f f , " o n ti*r m a i m O F flC C OR A (|RE EMC NT N L fU R i.fi 2 4 . Rt A M I N r a f * I r o n f r i ’ m f i t a A iiv W OATI APPENDIX D MA-103 121 122 AS AN M DTA TR A IN EE , YO U ARE ASKED TO FURNISH IN FO R M A ­ T IO N 3 MONTHS AND 6 MONTHS AFTER COMPLETION O F YO UR TR A IN IN G TO MEASURE THE RESULTS OF THE M DTA PROGRAM, READ TH E INSTRUCTIONS BELOW, COMPLETE THE QUESTIONS AND M A IL TH IS Q UESTIO NNAIRE TO YO UR EMPLOYMENT SERVICE O FFIC E IN TH E ENCLOSED SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE. NO POSTAGE IS REQUIRED D O N O T TEAR O R C U T T H IS CA RD ( F o l d o n t h i s ft n r / P a r t ic ip a n ts o f D e p a rtm e n t o f L a b o r T r a in in g a n d th o s e w h o re c e iv e d s p e c ia l s e r v ic e s lo a d in g to e m p lo y ­ m e n t: P le a s e c o m p le te th e d e s ig n a te d ite m s b e lo w , r e f o ld , a nd m a ll. If y o u r nam e a nd a d d re s s in d i f f e r ­ e n t fro m th a t s h o w n , p le a s e c o r r e c t a n d r e tu r n th e e n v e lo p e fo ld e d . T elephone* N o . (W h e re y o u c a n h e r e a c h e d I C h e c k o n l y O N E o f b o n e s 1. 2. 3 , 4, o r B u n d e r " A ” /)r*/ow . t f y o u c h e c k b o x t o r 2. a n s w e r n i l Q u e s t i o n s t o t h e r i g h t o f the box c h e c k e d * A , During last week w ere you: h o w m any ho u rs d id you w ork C . D a te la s t w o rk e d ( M o . , d a y , ye a r) lo s t w e e k ? M oro Loss th a n □ 1* EMPLOYED ( A n s iv u r n tto stion s B t o F o n ly ) D. H o w m a n y w o e k s h a v e y o u h o ld jo b s in c o c o m p le t in g tr a in in g ? t h is E. H o w m u c h d id yo u e a rn a n h o u r? ( D o n o t i n e tode o ve rtim e ) w eeks f . W hat □ you ^ c h e c k b o x 3, 4 b e lo w , re tu rn out □ □ Q u e s tio n G o n ly ) If G , W hat w a s th e re a s o n y o u w e re n o t w o r k in g o r lo o k in g to r w o rk ? (C h e c k ONE box w h ic h b e s t s u its your re a s o n ./ 1, T a k in g 3 , R e c e iv e d o rd e r 2 . In s c h o o l c a re o f to re p o rt lo r o r t r a in lo g f a m i ly M ilit a r y d u ty 2 . N O T W ORKING A N D NO T L O O K IN G FOR A JO B fA n s w e r or jo b ? ( I n c l u d e a c t u a l j o b t it t t * i f k n o w n ) do you do on your S. P erm a­ n e n tly le d d J s a b li 5 □ □ f IG. Other 1— 1 (sped, ok fvi D O N O T WHITE I N THIS SP A C E — FOB O F F IC E USE O NLY t h is fo rth w i t h ' a n s w e r/n o an y o th e r q u e s tio n s . S o c ia l S e c u r ity N um her □ 3 , IN THE ARMED FORCES S ta to C o d e □ 4 . LO O K IN G FOR A JO B C o n tr a c t /P r o ju n l N um ber □ 6 , W A IT IN G TO REPORT TO A JO B IN THE NEXT 3(J DAYS m m m u F is c a l Y ear m P re r e fix p rim e Sub S e c tio n m DO T Codu 1 R u p e rt N u m b e r □ ] 2 m 4 □ □ 5 □ 6 S o u rc e U .S . DEPARTM ENT OF LABOR M ANPOW ER A D M IN IS T R A T IO N F o rm M A -1 0 3 [8-GDt (1 -7 0 ) □ □ □ □ CURRENT JOB STATUS REPORT □ □ 7 □ 8 □ 9 □ F orm A p p ro v e d B u d g e t B u re a u N o . 4 4 -R 1 2 4 6 APPENDIX E COMPUTER PRINT-OUT FOR FIGURES 5 , 6 , 7 123 124 m *r 1 o o N N O O UJ UJ , Uj Ui o o o o o o * o o O CM O N ) o* ■*• i CM **» ■4 Q im in (o > o o o o < oo o o o o o n - oo* p H O cm m m • io N ** • p o: CO pH oo Si* m 1 b- • L io k O in > t w ! => o o: oo o o oo o o o«n oo o o oo oo o o oo fg ui Uj o o O Oi O 0 ft1 o g2 1 0* o* O n m , Al* O O it:« 3 £ o p ui ► *K ratti:n ' Si. VI > : l3 X ' p V) to b H s t O 01 o o *n •# ©c o o O © > *- • 1 * tL © (J V © u , o o UJU1 , H fM 1 4* • I p O ; *5 cj °D > ■ iI ■ ^ *! *t > , 3 w iuuj >.a ; o- s *» a * Lu ft 4 > ► H ft ■ •4 > ■> m c* 1 Ui . ^ > rr , ! — : IU u< r« , Cl , t « J t kUJ r / u rv O ■ 4 7* H J pH J , * J i *i r r» C m « z> ' 1 "ft H ^ ■ 1- , -J «4 k O 1- J J K ♦ tj b tr ar —— l - in — HVI w 4 in vi M f - v» l 4 VIM «* > Ui o tf P tr at CA i V* ' cn in t- t* (-* *-• N O o p re* * O O Ui *jj l j ui illm S h uj u* n (, ■a >c o o m ; ui r>-# p or* 1 P K ) 0 <1 © r*- o r j ra o H W T) -J(0 (o »m ri, F i f g m •* 01 o .o £»; u '■ u J > O *T P « z in fttn ■; * « j I - Ui — J 4 in vi ’ t* to »1c0(0(0 ft ^ ci n *-<((' n g !? ^• ■• re < ; i t o io ! eft uj <1 ' re ; , 1 i r fj t_ t_ Uu I f»- V ^ I u »- <— i a k © n •J *»• r J k iT M f — i (u Hi ktn — * cj n * UJ a* *V 0. . tL I j i ■ «u in r »v II Ik ; * *■ L> « 1 v 9 I ft k ► • 7 r k *i j -J b *4 , T 19 U 13 ft* — Ci I LU 1 S h « (V UJ u 1 I 1 1 . tk ft Ui — L K .J I lu u v tiH in Cj m *“ a a 1 : S . 1 m n c » ; I ■ # J J I Ji u im T .* J H H4 > « * p * 1 rv J a “ [ Cl a' « o , ft*1 u 1 • i-4 f\ i» * #-* i 1 i * * J — * V in k I M h J * f <9 — UJ » i 1 1i 1- u nr. m ftft IM Cp Hri N t o o O- tv ft ^ a. 4 r»1 *< r. ift UJ Of © ft O Hi • n ^ n L* _i J r- ^ , r< u •— k « r 4 — t L* k — <\ O m « c UJ M- CL CL ! i ■II i h rj h 4 jc *• ;■ f j pi n * It .» 13 ; « *4 > ir * 1* n ’ UI IT. tt * i in i C *• r V n. iu r t pj n' Cl U >> pH p4 « • pj > O iiiiL hj tn 1 a. I. o ftft h. •4 o u. n k ? rt o o u» * U) '• r °1% L ^ ! »e * «► n w* t* ■* r * IrtM i ° • , III hfl' ' OIA . W 1 1 1 L k J pj 1 < m rtr IM n J. m O' 43 >r o o tn C l «ft IM 4 f i m (*> tf > • r: f-i -* jv in ^ 4 * II » zn c; o•fc>o ■'» ■ « ;. Z !• • <1 t> £» U I l i t UI V) n. i : E n. -J r> I C-p I a o out D I . !* r*< L ' 'II *- I/' • I' i 1 IT _l » ► - CM M e\ IU f. in k « I* -« r U ' IL — Cl p -I r PH ■' **» 4 IO J n Li r» Uft M • C: : *4 UJ ft «r ti ti 1 k O* ^ tn ►i i- *T U i u ►- • It ■ no «■» tir» . H '• h* *•* -4 © U H O •4 ft ft 1 « n (fc mj n N H n n w u* -• m j h h re O ft W * IM < pH r iN O t > Jt- r+O pH ^ r c*,<3 > ™ * • *1 t» Cl u u i uj m h ft' ( T u ; t \ iu ft 0 9 0 t■ ■ .M II tS I t- . ri rf 1 O O P ftC a H ■ m ft (i a: o * a *x * iT • -1 _i 1 r* iu n a'Lh k j ; L' IU in j tf i c *i * : s t- 1 J */- I U Ip , * i l i* U H * t- if hi * • UJ UJ UJ i m r- n m li ft* r* IL 111 Lit VI i C L9 IX ^ r- c“ Hi fti i i t• i UJ Of i i 1 i- h: c ii*t i/, • C j t ^ 1 c* HP —1j H L: u ! fi­ \ —<1 ll • U t UJ UJ J fH s f o r- m P J N p4 k ( fi( 4 P tH / | fit < 4 0 A IM u ttm > pi J H UJ _l tfl < Ui ui uj f'^r* (MO* ^ ptMfl N r > im N «-• p-* : fM m m N . o « * o : ^ M oo © m Ift o * lU Ui in i/i 1 .-3 ! n < J>e» *f J' UI U i I ac -i ■ . 2 *t Ui f: m r* ftj c <4 cr Cl ri H * ; ©o a 1**-* I iUUP lu V) U. >. Cl it *1 ; ^ » Cl | tz tt o »* pi*) ■ ti i ©: 2, P o ,I ft ;> o "J r-* n k it 1 ■ €.» b O I k in a **Ui ’ pj >i •a »-* rC 3 #v **■ * «f If IM, mo>* * •-* t- w IU c .c tf r Jl a *r(D pi' r* ! m n rj i « ^ r> © o o n j j n o ft.*O' , M H ^ O —im M’ o n © nn ^f Nitl D m «-h m D 5: eg r - UJ I u Hi c y ~ ~ |— CO ym j r. O 4 V) M H > < CO CO I- H l/l T> \ in >» ; fit ■ o* fr o* 1 if o o * , O — *-* M '» m , n (ii in UJ *c tn o* ; HiTO* * «* -M ! flH N, * • ii » • > o m II to o c* w o o c* o f1 © * o i f IB 1' O O Cf V 4#' WM>M H o t rji O H OM fn O g :c £T» rt « ii a M N o o o; i ' i * im! O p m t il UJ Hi (0*OH O' 'O g* o r o h * H ® o no o o © o m Q i O N H © O O i .Ui Ui Ui cm h F °? U i tU H i Ni i I* *- i i • u. r . p.* a 4 * i • ■ 1 . -i fX VI i r’iJj «i «j o k • « r-itk * 1Ju I * 1. IU Ifk O , 0. SPLIT' FA*i:' SKCUI*-~ 6 " 3«I— VARIABLE....... v*m c£” *.e P9 EDICTi'S l> f(,l*? = 0 ARE 1 — » • * “ tt-T *— S’ f l p * ” I S " kFTAINFO AS ONE" O F " FINALS. ” ' ' " * 9 MEAN « 0 .1 1 I1 1 1 0 7 E 01 RirUP ngVTATION a - C ,*3 1 7 *5 5 3 6 00 7 s s r lT „ _ r r t l - B, 3 B 5 E . c W Eir-'T S— * St c , - c EV.“*« 0.l3(S99692E 01' p c t cp w / a , 6 ,4 >*7 3 , mea:; s : . * u . i n u i o 7 E 02 ( I SS H »/TSSt T 1 J ■ C .1 W 2 7 6 9 3 E -0 1 * 5?? V L l J{ * *■— G -.r*P ' ‘ i~ . " ' 1 C 3=PREDICTOR *' » WE1CHT f " * . * PCT T -T -u - V il.'H s m -T v lr ■ WEIC-T S - PCT OF T -T .\ l 29 2 0 .7 7~li MEAN ■ 0.22752617E 01 ........ STO.'OEV-.- a 0.3507233S E 01------v r : , MEAN SO. ■ U .U02u&{l6E 03 ' i3 split IS r^Z'J? fsgk- * .........- ------- ---------------- ------------ MEAN * O.dSDUOOOE 01 fiRO’JP DEVIATION ■ 0 .2 0 7 l*3 7 8 E 00 SUN Y • O.ASOOOOOOE 02 STB. o r? — r-a -; i S 0 9 7 Iu a £ ~ O I--------------------------------T 5 S f I ) ■ 7:37?37JUOE~Ot------- 5UH~Y~SO. « - grP»lOOtTOOF~or k TO, KEAN S3. • 0 . 6S750000E 02 ( TSS( I ) / T S S IT I) a L .* 9 l7 9 9 2 4 E -0 l i a s p i r r ' F 3n*f GRPti?— ?— as— v j t u s l e ------- T T S t E ---------------------1---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- of SPLIT— p p e d ic t d r GRMUp in c l u d e d 0N'-VARIA3Lr are IS ' =FTA7 N F j""A S '''C ,JE « OF V tiG F — F TJA L S I*"........... KEAN a O .IO O OOOOOE • * * s r-j’ C^ -= .a~ I • T*7‘j s i *m C HLYSIS t*f S«U*9«S OF SO-* Y » Q.2*Q0Q000£ 02 SUH Y SO. « 0.80000000E 02 a flRf'JP DEVIATION a - D .5*7856226 00 r j n T 1 _ s_ _ < ; 01 * "WETC:rr ' 3 ' r j- a --------------------a,----------------S1UT DEV. 0 . J'J H T677rOCT PCT CF T"T;L a 5 ,7 * 7 3 . MEAN SO. a U.3COOUOODE Cl T---a j crace PBECICTra INCL'nFO ARE 3 STj UP IS '’ ETtp.E T A S '* r : £ " D F -FINALS. ............... » 9 N£AN a 0.26666660E 01 CKc’JP DEVIATION • O .ll^ F o V a g 01 , ........ ............ v , "'S T D -i'O E V .-'*-0 '-I3 3 3 3 3 3 3 E 01..................... ‘ ' " T S S d ) a M lS.'.O O O lSE'0 2 * 6 .A WTO. MEAN S 3, a o .6 3 9 9 9 9 8 *E 02 ( TSSt 1 1 /T S 5 IT )1 a L*. 1395256BE-01 • ** * T -I* *■ 7—on—variable ■-*v Zc 0T3- P-- «3, - n * value* ---------------------------------------- ......................................................... CRHUP DEVIATION a-D .5*P 8562Z E 00 SuK Y ■ 0 .5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E .01 00-" " ............................. TSSf t ) '■ 'G*.'S7h Q3000E 0 0 SUM Y'SGV • O.SOOOOOOQE 01 01 (TSSt I )/T S S (T » I a (j.OOi.OL'OOOE 00 01 -3. I? S P L IT ■FPflH KR^UF....... 7 " DN"“ VARIABLE....... 'A'tR'ACE................. ) ' ........ “ ................. ................................................................................ 3F PPEDICT'IO INCLUDED ARE 3 S T f .'F " IS - P c T ir r : F D * " iS '* - * : t — OF— FTT2XS;---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------* 33 KrAN ■ C.1C62S00CE 01 GROUP DEVIATION a-C .*90 35 *>2 2 e 00 SUH Y a 0.3AOOOOOOE 02 tU tT Y 'S Q . V O.VSOOOOOOE 02 37. ’ STD. r-E V :-. 0-.13AA3391E 01......... .............................T S S ( I ) ‘ V 0.57R73000E 0 2 a 2 2 .9 H 3 . HE AN S3. ■ O.35125000E 02 (TSS ( IJ /T S S (T ) I a C .5 :* 6 9 q 15E-01 G'Dr19 " *’D i Vf-L ' t * *a « T -I< 1 VEIO -T S'tv PCT : f T -T iL SUN Y ■ 0.66 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 02 •SUH'Tf'SQ'.' *o;io62ooooroA' VARIANCE qeoree of TABLE ( T S S t ll /T S S l T l l a D .3 *« e t3 9 2 E -0 2 * * * * kean FREEOUN"...................SOUARE 3.1: a<7»377 OA’..................ltr...................... . SUH Y * 0.80000000E 01 02 125 (is :'-9 ■ /.L 'c r - « e -T iH •• WEIGHT S PCT DP T-'TiL 0.73700552E 00 •J.91175296E 0 3 ' 0 .7 7 4 1 1523E 00 INCLUDED AS? 1 3 ‘'ETAlNF' "A S '‘ C,''E"'aF---F-I\,A L *.............................................................................. ......................................... ........ ~ ................................ pSeDICT.jS 11 * <-3 ' V E lt - 5T-'S-™“ * --------------- 2 * ; PCT Dc T.-'Ta*. . 3 0 .0 *■ r.Knyp d e v ia t io n ......................T S S (l) ( T S S ( Ii/T S S ( T ) I ii" sri it ---fvw—crcu?— s—un—rantable-----rtscx------------ r --------------------------------------------------------------------- VAL“ Cr * - x'tsE r- variably ARE ■ 3= PREDICT^ I'lCl'JOED AS E 2 i i ; 1!? is t E lil'v n - ii- p if - t lP - P IiiL Ii * s SEAN = O.noOjOOOE . -• - s. .............S T O .- llt V .- ■■ O.OOOOOOOOE * 3 .6 V-TO, HEIN 5 3 . ■ 0.50000000E "*r,? **« INCLUDED n . ■«■ - cpo,,p- * a;; F 5 tJ J r" G S D 'J F ' * 8 ‘ l -rpi*-*--5»7Tp—is—* etm*-*f?—at—cr^:—t F—FHAtSv------------ VAL'.'a* - S P L IT SUN Y « O.IOOOOOOOE 02 TJ72Boooooonjr 126 frfcTrfCE" 0? f , O.OTOS11Z9E P i 0 ,fip 4 7 9 4 3 > IE 0 0 T t T M t V ---------------------- 0 , 1 0 ‘J'>»C7«te 0 4 - ........................... I3 Z V ...................U ;S J 3 1 B 7 3 9 F -0 T .................................................... ReSTDr>ALS ARE «<^T PEfJESTED. ’ ■ — — * ■ ^ N ^ ..m .................................. "TIME IS--"3 " 11-13-44(HH.rtM.SS, I " ............................................................................................ - L A S T ' G ? O i i p " O c n a T A * AID !S'Tc^t*lKATE3 MA S ' BFEW-o-f ap-«TJ0” PRtlCES5'eiT ..... .............. ............... ~ **FDST3Axi -- * ir - ) T 3 » ft EXEC A X T lP 'N Z S , 1 8 0 /6 0 0 0 127 ui O n f* M> r- o 0 :* 1 In tn (H«'DE *£ u'I Ol — O rJ o m TO'J*t cn « h H »T ** — t■ • JC P I » :■ > x vi z> V» ftX 3 ec ; ;< ;X oo V * ic « p v* > s o p n !« > ;• a £ m 3 vi >- 1 - oo o ro co rtf'* 04 r* o 04rt ! ! I I » Ii : opo U'UIUI m PN O TO+ M fl N OOP NHN 4\ 4 « m r-i rN H *t • • * 0 0 0 1 n N* W *«. I—V> in Cl ti IM OH o oo I _jli' U4 OiON O o wi n^»n TOrt *© a o '4 rt HO ir -•VI • • « o o • ft ft oo 0 ft h ». or X V) m ct M rt rt rt Vi *4 VI VI - VI > rt UI V. o w a. n VI u VI X rt w c (ft <| rt Oo o 1 1UUI UJ rt b o to O ft NOO rt O rt a a f\ i# o *r cmp ,• p CJ o ■ ■ *• n 1c •_— r* n w k rt V> w 4 VI VI M h-m rt > UJ •h. P —> w a r> VI o 40 ft! rt — O N «b 5O O c: 03 (o w m 0- < fO* 0O B !■4- O O' P g o to * • ■* lo b i • ft * in ~ £ VI v> rt * « o W ** NOO QOO CM43 0 Q 1 Ui uj rt oc n Vi EOO> 'C O 4 0D 0 CMfth rt -h r* * m r* IT — Hh Q M -C 04 * • • oo o Krt p - ft ‘ft ft r ~ i- tn *— rt in vi > Ui * P; Cj *n * i S 4IS » a p e p uj Ui ii rt rt ho o o UJ UJ IU 4 NO O* rt 04 rt o rt rt CO rt OJ OJ rt -*£>*> oj rt rt n h m ■ 4 • Z ' O o f> n i n «i « *!«??*• t '( h o UJ UJ uj V) cr x ci &« •* < r» f n * O UJ u n C 10 d r» r CO «■ IL f cn im o p LJ UJ rt rt p in m rt O rt in x rt P rt -r rt-rt > to rt c < O UI ro ; ^ i UJ UJ^ s ° i| On 2 *04 O rt * ♦ rt ! O IM h m • * o o vj | 04 h * O f; m »n *■wH *- vi *-* mviin rt h- in £ t P - o o Ui 1*4 o o Oh o# O O' rt oi m - * - o X VI 3 vt > c v i; 3 • n >> ; D fc ftrt po + r^ c : o o O ISI OO OH h h n oi r* n IM 00 • * 3O oto * a: D CJ (14IU in o v m rt v\ ♦t o <4* 0) N O 0 n IMrt :* * ©© » * * 1 ir • ; *1 '-> ' Li uj . SCCl • r.) Lv i; f * . ( A1UT3KATIC ( t INTERACTION (0)£T£CTOR : * o o O O' o to rt O' O' CO <0 to O' n (SI -o O poo ill IU IV o ow m o p h !t> ^ •4 N O « C f* H O' H TOO' * :r»• rj• p o* :s n !p v> to o o ; « Oo ON o * : rj m n m h- 4 ac: r t r t rt o o o 1 UJ UJ UJ UJ h O' C f V) 4) if ♦ 04) # rt O' N H rt O rt n •r r m rt > rt r t it r t 1-44 w p• o* p,* T cr Ui ui il m X X t* 5■ W4 i ; • *r 3 J i O uj ef o ! rt M b uj » V •t ’ Cj f ! ! O rt -i Uo fli *" IL —i j rt fC fH * rt h •J rt ;t in a o V>*H < O UJ Na CL fl£ a > J *1 : > • > ■m , U* i u* J o j ■-- • « fM IM iM r t er, t i• r i *■ ’ rt M 'X ■ J i rt ■ ' r p rt [ - ui■ n. B Ii X4 p> 1 1 ft 1 " LJ tn rt « rt r t -.J ou. r ; UJ ' ! 5- ^ V • opo r ; * :ft » , O UJ IU IU VI a r t a *j . rr r* ;• «j 3 am ic a h a il UJ in r. ; ■ r» 1 n x rt c fv H tf O' 1 ►♦w C > H D a rj t~* v j« rt | uu ! TOtt o. i F '° -uji xo: i O. I M ; • * . rtn r* ODO IU UJ LU 4N O oj ^ O rt m a> rg ir» o oj m 41 h Om in r n # 'm V rx. uj ti Cl *J Ct 4 o> * _ft TOTOO OPO i 1 UJ t> UJ pJ m n sf IS j N O o i • TO^ rt V> TOrt r i J ID 4 1 ' X 4 4 n r t rTO O rt > TOrt it* rt * Lr fc i o p o F. • r ! u. ft U 1* j a ■L TO X rt • 1 UI IU UJIli VI * ar U h. *• Cl IU »n in I f ;** r . 3 rt rt DJh y *0 *3 n u O> » -1 * ! rt X HU •u :« i K► -i u to r j rt b o o 1 UJ iXj Lu UJ _J TOrt r t cj w rh il * * rt p o o . n rt I .ri ft ft j 1 ! TO iz » .* CL 4 fc* r t r* t* in ►n ; ^ Co IT u *- r. u m^ Ir » r UJ IJJHi VI u: r: x o . ci i: • rt n Uj rj rrf -m CuJU Zl i C CJ I o: 4** ; U ** • I i I- * Ui 4 • ■ li« l/ a u t> v>« I £1 * b H ■Z ^> Ii c-* : l H nno * « n U a tu * ■ f. O -I rt 4 O > O op r> H n l** * r t (i JW h O . -t V. r *-* i Hr i • CM T h 17; * IV f t nc CL UJ _J 1 rjj - 4 rt cr 4 * > n n ho o o lu UI UJ w i> a « M i * 04 O O in *r m m j -o h c 4 in o D r: -j n o u. * • .* in ♦— t L* ►T O IL «l Hi >■ h iJ i* v ; ; 1 3 n jh cr M c > 1 9’ * 4 ft 1 * i t- in Mt ^ I* in U H X O rt H r h . IL 1I UJ j dJ <1 m ' X rt ' > - VI rt Cj uj p a a N m I* ■ P O n -h i i i* c ui D ■ til X a. rt i r: \ a4c i: 'i-1 In rt rt nu > VI ■— n ' kJJ m tt a 1*1 i *u n n ft ft n n 'ii " v Cl tu a -j cr ** *• ^ ft IJJJ V ii j . M “# i T O > ( *-' mh rt 1 T » o u » «h V a ** & | 'I . C-RD ■> -- VAt • 7. UP — ^ IS '-fT S ■' i P"T DF T - T ; l * "*• GRO VAL.’5« — IT # — r = r : — ’ ‘-TIGHT *S‘VT OF T iT .v. .i L bl 9 S U IT GRUMP 5 i]M VARIABLE PREDICTS INCLUDED ASS 2 3-------3 -------fi :iE4M * J.25965136E 03 fee.-------------STD. O E V ;-* t f .9 7 3 I3 3 e z E -o r * 7 .1 WTO. MEAN SJ. ■ 0.4*1>437C E 07 1 (ACE e. 10' e UO 1 GROUP DEVIATION •-0.3879B 5B 3E 02 ir $ S ( I> /T $ S I T U SUH V * 0.17Q71000E 05 1* * ■ 0.26335359E 00 ---------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------*'•?: 10 SPLIT FFCiH GROUP 7 QN VARIABLE '4 (RACE*' ' Y ' DP PREOICTC* TNCLUOED ARE 1 GRDtT?— !S— P -rjm F O — AS— ote— uf . F iN a is ;---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• 5 MEA’R ■ U.46439990E 03 GROUP DEVIATION ■ 0 .1 6 6 9 *9 9 5 E 03 SUM V ■ 0.23220000E 0 * ■ .............. • > . . STG. DEV." * 0.9563A719E 0 2 ’ " ............. .........T S S II > *-” 0Y*573i)OOOE-OJ SOU V S fl." * 0 .n 2 4 0 6 6 0 E ' 07 3 .6 *T D , NF4N $ } . • 0.10783360E 07 (T$S ( I ) / T S S lT l) • 0 .1 9 » 731 36E -01 — GK7,-P— '■7 7 11 S P . C I T " e ^ r M - ‘ G S O t ' P ----- T— D N V A R I A B L E * m t A C E -------------- J---------------------------------------VAL I T ' OF PREDICTOR r.CLUOEO ARE 0 3 #■ * T - I r GROUP IS RETAIUEO - AS • 7UE — OF— FlriA L S i ...........— .............................. .................................................... * -- T IG H T S -I B p ; t df t **t v _ >- 0R0:O V*L. -- a**- Tiit; S.-T ~p T - 7; 4-*- dp 12 SPLIT p r e d ic t? * ” EA;I * 0 ,2 6 5 9 1 6 5 0 = 03 GROUP O tV IA T T G N •-3 .3 1 R 3 ? 4 4 7 E 02 S T rv C E V ." B" 0 .2 0 2 1 4 2 9 9 E “0 3 ......................... TSSIU ’ V 0 .* 9 ft3 * l* A E '0 6■SUIT ' -tTO. y.EA’t SQ. * 0.96353956E 06 ( IS S ( I >/T 5 5 ( T >» . O .2 0 *5 l2 3 0 E 00 j-.ROJP in c lu d e d ape 9 -'"DM‘ "VARIABLE ' 3 (EDUCLFVEL ) SUH Y ■ 0.31910000E 0 * O'. 13388aiOE 07 y - 2 GROUP IS ■ A 'T i T T D - A S - - 7 N E " DF— FIXALS. ........ - ............ « 5 T A N * O.32OCCO0CE 03 GROUP DEVIATION - * -------------------- p i -------------STrr—C fV. *-0 .7 5 0 9 4 6 3 3 £ -0 2 ---------------------------------- rSSI I I 3 .6 “ Tr;. - = AM S 3. * 0.5123C.00DE 06 ( Tss 11) /TSS t T ) ) GR3'°" T . “ 13 SPLIT " F*0*< ■ r.RflUP — 9 — QM— V A R IA B tr----DF PREDICTJR INCLUDED ARE 3 -----------------------------f . j ----------------------------------------------rE 5 ‘t-5 -O T j5 3 5 * 2 9 A E -o r T I G H T S-v ■ 61. STO, DEV, ■ 0 . 97&9950BE 02 •C ^ T F T * r u - 1 ---- - 4 3 .6 - ------*T O .-rE A *i 33.—a-0;3923390C E 07 VALVE" - ............... ...................... • 0.22S500*BE 02 • 7rr2BKOOOOOE"05" . 0 . 1 2 0 ll9 * 5 E -0 1 SUH Y ■ 0.16000000E 0 * "SUH'Y 6 Q .- «- 0 1.5ROBOOOOr_0 6 ' T’ rEOUC"LEVEL—Y (RACE - -• r.RQ'iP *13. 14 SPLIT AROH GR.1UP 13 r)N VARIABLE * - CF— ?REGICTn# — T T £ tH F 3 — jP E ---------------------------------- 1---------------------------T I = GROUP IS ri = T • i \ f o AS ONE CF F I UAL S. ' *' * 37 ‘ T A N ■ 0 .2 6 2 3 1079E 03 •'EIGHT S-w . 3 7 . STD. DEV. ■ 0 .7 4 6 0 3 4 2 *E 02 - F - r -tc T * T .i i“i' - * 7 6 . 4 ----- MTD. MEA^ SO . - * 0.-2 3 5 5 5 120E 07 ~S(3H T * U .1 3*71POOE~05— TSSdl • 0.3a?2S700E 06 SUH Y SQ, ■ O.A5060570E 07 -(TSSTlT/TSSCTir**-0.24P8AB5BE-D0T-............................ ............... GROUP D E V IA T lT T 'i-g ',3 4 A 3 9 l6 0 E "U 2 .................. 5UH*Y” *-T).9?Z40000E 0 * TSSt 11 • 0.20593000E Ob SUM Y SQ, ■ O.2761502OE 07 f T S S r n / T S S t T ) ] " . 0.35RB9577E-O1....... ..................................... ....................... * GPC<3 13 SPLIT F-tr:n f.KUUP 13 ON VARIABLE 4 (RACE ) ' V A L .-'. J ~ ■—PPEDKT'1* T-.CL'ICGO APE ’ I ‘ 3 ............... .................................... - --------*** T- I t G#OUp i s R= Ta i ‘ -EB as one OF FIUALS. ................ -V - 7L — HEAM-*0123945333E 0 7 -------------- GR0OP"CEVTATl7"'r’ i- C .'5 7 9 9 H 2 2 r '0 2 '................. S 0 M 'W '(r.-5 7 *7 0 0 0 0 E ' OR " T IG H T S-..f * 2 t; STO. LEV. * 0.1233731D E 03 T$511) • C.36«33BOOE 06 SUH Y SQ. - 0.17443530E 07 •rr^r T-rr.-i 77-.:---------- gnrr^^rsn-s^. " o: i 37si670E~m----- 7TSSTTT7TSS ( T T r r U T I 5 1 6 * r 7 E F '0 0 ~ » CPC-P -D . 16 SPLIT e-l'M uP.OUP 8 ON VARIABLE 4 (PACE — VAL’-E1; OF PREriCTtw riCL'JDED ■“ APE------- 1 ' . a it T -It GR3U? is 3 E T4r!E 0 AS ONE OF FINALS. ----------------- -•— » 7 '■-------------------- TfiTr"*- '073 7171411 E~03~ . > Q . A * i * 0 ‘* i o u t m------------------- SUH T ' V O 7 ? T B 2 0 0 0 < r F T > T ' GROUP*C IIG H T S '*’ ■ 7. s t g . DEV. - U.7B620056E 02 T S S d l ■ C .*32ft? e l3E 05 SUM Y 5Q. • 0.72342800E 06 T IT 7 F -T -T ;, l * .........S .'O "............... T O . HEATl' S T ." * Oi65O14019E’ 0 6 --------- ’ C T S S (I1 7 T S S (T U "« *C .1 8 n 4 6 2 0 0 E -0 1 ........... .............................. ................... m ORC' -’ 17 SPLIT = ii» ‘ r.#p'jp g r>(I VARIABLE 4 (PACE 128 — TIGHr-s- "D. 12 ... -------12> B .6 129 UJ UJ ■ o o . r* o n ; ; > • a t o »■ ; X vt llJU Jttl ^ O t r*(M A O >6 h « « O tM in** r\ cW O ■ i • 2 tu ■ a< x Ul«i a: 3 C P to M C* , Ct - L C TX Cl tu t] in ui KU I DQ £ iuLl 3 i i V 4 1 1 1 1 4 1 f l *t v rr 1lb n:iu vi m: s ! CTui *0 ■ K C * : *; o • IT fM *i rj • i f* O ’ » o Ui UI o , o o • in O' »4 *T> <; C P •J- f*- * 1 tM j ‘ J; 1 41 » ■»■* it- N II 'J ■ T: ■ o tu ■ ’ , t i" : £ CO f! CT C* i i I i CT > U| ■ i/ i , in ; <-• > Ui ’ u I 1 * ! * ; h ct l 1 #« 1 • s ifl I ui . • * X t “ • f X ! x ! V ! <1 I * 1 J * _ Cl 1 to •— d uj *0 to tu u n ut ft* ■ j i 1 ^ ■ D m* A 0 O A oo « o o K * s. . ■ L °t t v 3 in > 0 4 0 i3 d ♦ ♦ix < omr\ « ■c > N pop bo ■ I* W -* ap s* 4 m vt UJ p I *£ f r Pi a u; a ttT! o • !• 1 I IL « h * t) n N n - N j- m w «n rt ui ui p & tU) h Si? tx — g c. ! *x - K h V - UJ S M P° UJ ui UI tU lL f 0 ~ J * o«o 0 ^ 4 ) £ oo* rt « *-•r- *-4o «o (3 O I' C *O 0 rt a 0 cd m m &s po 1 •X i X* o* n*t if X N 1 ■t 1 3' \ I 3 S £i • 7 S u n j i- X o . 5j -j 3 UJ I k tuI _l I tt I c* • ; \9O I \ (X < o * * , ML au j r to ' r* r v> r J- C rt « 3 * p > ( on. r r *- 1» i ->!-• p» I I il t# z| po ON ' rt HH I 1 e b ilium 1 uj rt O i «x rt rt L 't ’ o J k.ip n _rt O! a t r> c O O r.: rt OlA | ' J r • rt ka c . O uj ; d > o T -J P O | t'UHl I ft' J T ! c r;r M-rt u i f h rt D -•O X I 1 LJ►* H On 1 UJ f t rt I } * n n a. i I to ! T. * 3 i< -V J T_ W I vi l! I rv-jj- , J *ij* C LU r* m*H «, 1 C l O] i u j N, » '* a I C L 4 t 1 1 •1 1 ! nn b 1B■ i r -* i » 7 : > TO U Iu . I' a i u n : :j i ir rt o> j * 51 IT* * O ’ *V L too f t «* i. 0 I1 Ii 1 *i ftt ! O * ft !> t si a - * • rt PUJ h £ m ; • rt to (lj o ii cV ft1 • V* t n t h Jx* H N CL 14 , V)t* O I P o • U'i u r 1/ IX Ui o u a t ft O k *h JO I - i: V»N t ; ♦- ► -; T LL ! O J ft nh < ♦flN in . tn w ft rt - ♦ rum < tut* PJ ci 3 > eft m rt | r»'n* rt » I* ID C I- £ 9 UJ J ift » O >- *1 - rt H U J H x U ft « o UJ D N 4 0* • IV ; ft rt ! ir v *!«»** O ' X .[* H 2 i i ; B !b k W5h=i xU J; -»i' ■ t»-J > * O uj id (u m rt l: to | I’ r, rt O < ro OID o to J -» O u u r^ rst • i ft N • ft i 1 } * £i Ob “ J rt £ o h . rt • rt t. ID UJ ID J f t A V t C a UJUI UJ Vt *u :inj M U» ' rn )• • •• t>o to ■ *V 1 1& r* rt rt J T13 in n rt igiuUJVI o w C L1 4 bl n , o U J Art 1< L D I u 1 a ►* £ 3 < j • (I ff nrto WB > b J 1h E ! I-* 3 f t N Iftfn O ■ ♦ H N # a O H H f i n o U A f t Itnin « ^ N® I O: in t rr* U J1 *• t >_ f f t j m m > no# H #0 DON o o oo U Ju *U J ^ ♦ f t ♦ A N rt * rt rv o ( VI M VI J M tt a > >A rt a* -**C LW I nu M «-i lu y So I f t «M ! a ji/i m o 1tf - cr UJ Ui UJ im •> c# h f t N f t h « 3Qp IJU Jill ftWN rt ■ *o < o c i m O IU 4 Zw » "r * iumij OHO OOA UJ i • ec w. O « ■4 ftl » 0 0 3 1* ff>CI C in u j u i v i Jro { tuuj ot> i 30 i » ar ; h t* • I* • II a: (nm 3 ooo m n ♦- | 7 i £! o :P N •4 i 31 ♦ O N VI A H e Si 1 « mo a 0O 'n tr c c ; I bl *ft fc * 1 3 O O f t N - in*- 4VtVt 4l to \ N p *-• *- d {lj L L |ill 1 . ;• j — *n I h« rt M rt phyt o non I I" p M ■» *“* •»* 4VtVI > Ift { hi Njftf m m ♦ 1b S“ t n boo £I ° "n* i* in ri fe -E a; i- i o o o tx Mn g Hiyb 0 . ui iu U iu jU J UJ ID UJ -■i- IN O ■Op m* * om 5 9D»«o P o ^ n o o ^ cr O \ P!! *ft o o p I* » ;• b r ® t >■ ki r- t> n « 3Z! * * oa oo o :I 4* O N X in I/) Suu Bi ££ KfrS^ Infg OO 0o * oA Il I ■ B■ y\a p o « Uh U i 1 cs •O' N 4 • po o o O H £° iu UJ p A UitU O PJ o o o oo!' or* oo O9 : 9 *4, 0 4M; 4 > rt ' H rt * OO O O UJUI o o OO oo 0*4 oo r* O 9 « H I* *4•(A OO• 09 O O o * rt rt 04 * m *4 •' • o • 1 4 P° i o '• • !« 0 *M >• • J >- :* O 1 r v^ t :„ vi >• I r ! XL rt X> v» rt § * K op j\ I ♦ oo IU |U I oo * oo 1 o o o o o j in io SR 2S rt rt • 9 rt OlM rt ru : o b • « O O O o ; ! miii ! >4i cr V !JC K i ; 1 £ i Si ft 1 ■ » * iO *4 OO I o n 3 *4 VO O >3r9 «* 0-0 vl in OO UJ i l l UJ *4 o rt d o n r t n *n o o n 111 m 9 X 4 rt o m *4icD 0 9h rtO« ^ *rt in 4 I* rt rt fM rt N I* ■ Or^* 4MV) > ! UJ j -• *" >* j A J w = ) 1 CJ ■ rt Vi at t | H 1 ft ' | i f*3 rt O iu 4j ui m in o rt o ^ ^ rt o • o* jo UI UJ rt (tic -C L* * CUl CL *4 t it Of rt *- T. O IU if' rj • o o T< *J C J < af •rt a* <*• u «&nw Ci * 9 tu : n *j rt rt r t— rt “ O 'C o r < l*J u n 9 a il l 4 i* ’ uj « * m u m uj e t ; : iO U 4 I3 i n « Ort ;T 5t *J rt . V « c 3 O rt C ^ uj U J Q r t r u *4 1 rt rv *r d OC rt ru *4 fu f » *r *4p * • +* o o p M 3 m o UJ «f fc it 1 ff tr o U/ ' K 13 i: • <1 C a U H rt I? fi i fa *4 Ju °j UJ J I/I pf v> ift ; F *1 .. _ I 7 *4 D H " | H ^ h | r t r t w, < VIM H K « * >r E t| X. . X O u. r' I jtr * rt u i • « a m ; rt H {' 3 C* n — i h iv -l T . o > * o a —t Hi & = s U 3U c -* rr *1 o> uj m *x r> _i in o rt < 0 HI uk o m o N 9 T n x n ** t n o r gf « N A H m f u n i*\ ♦ • tn f-4*4 a o p o i H NH . u it ^ CL *JC l .ii. « • 4*1 IM ru u < * UJ tu UJ U■ * ^ *l £ —Ii + » 10 1 *1 t* O UJ UJUJ Iff a i: a. *i T3 f 12 i a rtat iu V. O Uj V r ip tu UJ OJ rt CD c* N 4 *r o h ff o obh In O o tfi U fM W ~4Co -X rt I i H \J H x nr ih »opo I • » •* o rr o n rt k UJ UI LL’ u v> F ! rt O l A u UJ «c "h • ■ '- rt 7 * < > n uj uj * tu r t CL 2. p a it i / •• 4 b u* n I Lj UJ - r* o ra L? UJ O z> 1 C3 ; rt « in 4 * ■O 4 rt : j U .- J - ! j -? i • tt U i-l » rt *-4 rt • ;• * «u h n ' m HI rt 1 O D O tc o f rt ! rtort rt«r® H •a < ■» , ^ rt rt > ^ h i Of w1/ rt rt rt* rtr. rt m rO D O t UJ tu Ui Hh O H m rt o cuo Hi * v pg h t f c !< -«C N < • il^ a u ; lfl*4 *4 'J 4 4 JH r-4 Cl U rt m -ir t i rt U ■ rt *4 n » l i UJ j +J i tn * <1 m * a u if / IP - or v-i • Ul * *h :; OC . | rtrth ooo i. *4 m o p Ui I IU or c iff I °oc ! is rt o uj < H o • Ct j 3 4 * 3 / !* • HI > O CL *U *-* C o o o o ’ us uj A i. Ci • • opo i/» — ft in - IS) HhW >■ rt uj ] s. £ in IM *H iL *1 o J w r to tr i > * j OV\fr ^ J«a o #* Cil « n o l I2 *4 rt LI 4 l f ) r t H N C r ■ ; *4 if 39 N 9 n r* M^ o o rt rt 4i 1r t * -• UJ Ui UJ 4^1 r t O X N f) * rt CD 43 m •# r t m . a n o c tu •J d 4 9 D«' * ■ 1 I rt v» < — tr o 0c m rn h* o o o 4 4 4 nai* fi i l l It H D. u if 4 4IM O I *-»rt < O rt u 1 t 1 1 1 1 «•* - O ^ ** rt rt n i ooo- U ltU lU j * K* h t t M •M O *4i io t fa I *»% ro rt opm *4 h M « o n *4 «f> r t — o m bokJ .t. O H*4 -h*4 X rt ** O * " M l>» H *- rt — 4 rt r t UJ kj ui I ■ U UJ 9o *4 |M mm rt N H obo ■ opo I4J rt *4 rt 0*4 j 50 NO O DOO T fS IO H o o o o o o * * 1 pi X O LL i rt rt ix uj •* c a H rt . a u» • n Om 1 uj , ■X« « rt Urt m o ! * in rt cr rt * -»rt rww rt h r,ag H& :■* a rr p n o r* h • u. nn >» * * v u a ujfc* Ti Z U n -ir t , o > i J* 4 j ! I iITx f ' IL ' L 1, * A r ■* v ;■ t * rt H < A UJ H •*«, 6J O 4 o > rt rt S , « O *4 » 132 1 r Fo o o o Ul U J o o o o o o o o o o N *0 H H H O • 1• o o Ul Ul o O o 0 * I O *n C MO mm 01H o o O O | ■ ■ m > : J • 00 > a: w 3 vl >* ■ ■ > > * 0 X tn. S J * VI > n ^ VI l • ! : • • 1 ± 3 V » 4 NON OOO m O ri o o o 1 ' U JUl ut » IftCiD ! o o o ! o rn ft * O it H m om ft *« r S ft«tr im r i **«a » • • ■ o p o w It 6 “ " . M WH i h v iM < to n ’ MH VI > , H ; Ui ^ i o * □r X VI h e 3 il > I 1 1 * m o OOO! ■ tu U JIU 1 P llk i’ *r d m mn « %: (♦I m m * no* n ! 4 a o tj N< J ‘ h ri m i • 1 * * 1 OOO! 1 * • 0 *r o ID o o r« in «r (MH * • o p : • ! o o OH o n • ' 1I u* lu 1 1 1■ oom I It io o C DO O' 1 tH *4 h lo n < n « < » o n o • • > * «r 0 ** — **1 M VI «KVl H > 's. U J o ! n o Z Z ** h# H I h W “ l *-• Hv» J m tk fit O . : w • 3 . VI 1 C . trn » at : *- i tc ° Ul 3 l /i P U * * i i V * C l rt «i • i -1 • i l j a , * ! rtP IO 1 OOO U JU >Ul |1 J •j C O n tn m a * > > 4 ) ft*O ion/. I«HC *o m0 . r n «O a * • i z • c » ■ 4J| (jj UJ III 1/1 « " ar n n*j ► * < t -t o: L ft 1 1 I < ** < n . NH f. O fsl ^ «>o o o io m n 1 tu- o* n to m -* • ^ nn , WM1 on n ' :«Hh •?n n < i r*c- c ** m infHh it • «rt ^ ■ * • o »* i U l * K s I • * T -lift v\ _ ^ ^ *J pg r * ■ ’ a u tM I1 I. •♦f oj L • AHU r : :t < vi H r H H T O (4. 1 i* 1* » ui ; 3t H ! U ; ft. CD V f O r ' n; *« H* • U lilf a K” m o n . o • O f O VI OUJ'f 0 O IkJ «n • r l i o O H lit < y / ; u ► -<*— • i *J I—• ft u ! ■ t* ! j o 1«IL ^ t‘! r> 41 1 I V ; D. U J ft* */ r- X Cl J H rt 0 , Ui •J IT 4 ft* Ilf y ♦ j * » c.) t j o i CL o C) (If o c i at 1 u O« * : tt o: i 0 UJ ■ . C lJ 1 * r? -*!* h t f r* i ui * n ft m m : c- li L O at «ft a (go. a *■ *at N a «, r r )* nUl «o I oM ' u ttu u t n : & v : cj a *j r» * • t* n u. ■ r* o :*r j ct U »I v i^ tn T n u ! ! r»; c UU' i i t r. fc- tv o ! ■ *r u ; ft UJM > J *■ o JUl to Ui uj U 9: n • * i? t t o Ul 0 ui *» ■ 1 es>■ « ui U X * ?■ H «-* m f t * if 4 H d > O it - lit 4i in ft H a h « i o fy v u ti j * r r 3 QJH I i.'4 II p . trt N 4* _ *4 4 C uitfi a v < \* r> «n« o 5m ! D i j r ■ • • i *t > f* u l ptr ii/ UJ U U4 • n cm ^ . cn • ri o m , • 01 -• i VI at ! ftj r i m o 4 ■ *1 01 kj* A •* H m r* 43 ! H 1» ■ -• «k - 1 H •I u ■* * ro ,*>iu n 3 0 0 o o o m O (li o IS nm o m w r* IU UJ UJ ftw m | OI U , u v» pi f* Ul ill Ul iu r O ui , ooo J»- ! VlH J [ -or mm • •-*’3(i n ^O tI Hd a i P S n t*ii r* hr* o ? if t' i r* *< u i' p H JH N 4 • • * o d a □ H ' ft im*■* *r z *r in VI mm & S > Cl at c ! R P ih 1 OOO U i OMn | 4 H H ft‘ V • C M .*■ *j : v v -s r in h (V U J*“* r %: a n - iH H H r (t ■ *( O ti. 0 3* *4 «V ! ft L 'J i * A H 1 • Li * . ft. 1 1 «34 u>« » C L Ui I W1MU1 I ■ Ui • •r o r ■ N ft Ui i m at , r* cwn. i 0 »-* I r* r* • u r-' • one* k « * ! - it a ui r ;• vi H d U tH O J. C t *1 I H H T I Q p ih C T* i r V V •„ ■ r J9* ! 12fc ; I st j 4) N 1 — * I| 1 n *•u ! ■ » a 0 •1 Jr ii r: l V tu ii »*?r ° ‘r . uj r i : Sii ft ; n l. a a c< 133 *h * ff- U JU l OO oo OH tu U J « Dft* 0 O cum NO • .» i tufci** o o o a t , IUU JU J N Vl N OOO O OO o o m AON O ftO « r» N MN ^ ( in 1I IU IUU J h oo r* €j > •"• -■ JM n t ■ ar , c opo I U iO JU J ««Ci M« 0-6 h- & ^ *t a tn 0-0 0 fsl O ^ rg * n J U t te lM *■:■ • t iT ■• « p Ul o u j: U' J z D □ i. * C Ui if l N 3L 4 Ul 4 O -j o i - f i (T -t O T fl < to h j g j? o r- *-1 Off p(C □ ' II - ftrt c l h Lj £ n r u tu t H i* ft i: h o IUM £ O or . f t r n n ? -i Cu ? j t- u »1 ha ' m4- in a i— Ui Oft m O tUQ . p i? ! ■ « ■ ■ i -*f; j ir | r ; Ii « ft I U m V ) H tr.a r r i h u < , 5:' t * » ■ j h r F 3**i o j *k r r v ir ftlOM 1 1 1« M '1 □ t' ft' - o: (j « ■ ,i u §m> Ipr ri h r »« h v < v t r tnh & ui t. hh b Ii T |y « » i3 u . o « Cj iff 4 “ U # a . • tr n > Cl ) ft 4 G J*. & r* , *h rj [ 0 4U fto v i h i: e u ' < tn i Ci J• n b f. J □ H »” U I** J' -J H '* M . i \ , l j *-* C£ r ’ r •i » ' i/ i/ lTV liu h tr it i,i * * t j « uj irt h r » — u x O II M( Id e ft ‘f t Ci jf c Cl n. •» o r YOM C Ul 4 n r> r u o u ii* r ir * 41 CJ UJ v - i: m * P 4- l; * i■ t Ll J h Y ff ^ r r.r > Iu U J' Jia j U JIU(ii f ' OM iim h < m y lO O f f X J h ftB iff r*« < n «* *-g 'ff ff* T r* « : *-* g m v > • IL * * ,* 11 | CJtffU. OOO *II ft ft u ! rt* ] z N 1 4 > Cl u j lu tn tu tu CL 4 • ♦ rr ^ l-t ti * a ft D 1* t~l I » cf r i C lU J »; in a; o in PU ?4 O M > j I jn c u it Y J* * * ■- 4- n" Uj rt • ’ Y H ^4 ' j r4 , ‘ —f h1 4 11 o tn n m i ^ (J M 1 UJ I 1 M **v » ; ■ • D i Ui i < rt U r* T s ♦ |l IT r r •t*i « ft TT'O H I CL uj r- ^ I > fr iu uj m • Ii 1 * 4IJ I" n* n C L •-» n h- m OM rt D. £k r *i •o : 1 t 1 | O 11 *o I- ft uir o ;r * '«• O hr, rj: f lN O o o o j • ft ft • - r. iT - rs ct I f • U rr o u |i r- r ft f fjr Na N ft ft • >30 u I ? C .« n ui ; to « ’ NU d * Zf I I • u. ° rr NNC M h ff f t * flflO *-* „ tr* a * n rf ,_ i ft>< #r-4 •4 ftl **3if o r r> n n i g h 01 y ■ f* IU i- fT L< 3 * C i r* . i ru rioo 'L iu ft u ui M in tf>M W 1 oi * - ff o •4 -f ; c t uj fl I id t t M *- T in , *3 |i« < L "! U J 1 r» * C i < D j r ^ i- • «; or o 43m *■»; ^ i b * i* ft >t> UUM ™ L ,,u U a: L: o . « i ? Li ft e m « ft ft >J1fT Ui iJ U /1 > n iS n iftN ft ft m! * 4i -/ tu i ** " h- C *« « -• i m cc ! -i Mffl K < J -4 N Off l V) 4 > J C gh H ;• * '* oo p m gh h (J JJ MON op - « n MOM N ftO 401 ■ >o X O U I4 r* r» c» o ft d > - (iiUJ til m m .C * ru r- in U JUi Ui cn ! 4 m1 n , tu r tN h p o o MNh- U p u j i l 1 ill i/1 t bU * ‘ ; c' ri *. O M O I 7* p ** < i H C »u. KClM »* ) x r i * h- i: j uj or. *r a(V « ft4 1- 4 r t M 1 p pru : » u L L ft a s * > » h i 1 I t o o o o oo > i Ah I ! U ; a d d r> I? (|( C CU. . IT 1 ^ r C L D L « U « £ V > h- > & n S h ] r MhUl mm > 4 U JUi U J ! « *! a ^ a m *— V-«4h HW I4MVI 44HM > IUi O r* -I Wh n irt ui U Jru Ui OMO «Jh -O 1 V ; rn : ■ H1 ' I *** tu _J or u rft ■ ' ft M w t- F r j DO Oh h ftO OlMh ft- * « r>ft) rt ,-• < * *4 * • '* 3 O t) h VI « MN<0 Oh O | • O *4 41 I I u« N O ff on < h ih m jn ih n rt ff O ff *i ■ »n (*i h U J rg p ft < l T 4• • OO'O uj U i uU » Ui g o *n M |* it Ui I • HT p j tt (h rt y C L Z I'J J* *nin p* gj O f fJ * ~4 ' < Jg < 1Ift h ^ > r-o * h - • i C^* 1 IL » * • 0 0,0 o o ft ft m rgrOOO D «| N« N m j« n 30 0 » ■s o 1 1 » 1 r tN h tr * U J 7 ^ J M> i mi C(ft O 1 Id tx * * a ; r in P a £ m o o> H Z' « C - •- ~ ■ -*-h h r t4MV> •-» i- tn >: h Ui 1 *^p 1 — 44 C L» D 1 in & • «n at ! hO : «• ~ ^ *>-w»« # 1MM wKM > h U J : ""n 1 1 il 1 ft ' > I rr * * ft ft n tjg ft jft ft • rl * I ft IMi^N 0 3© I U JU J Ui NO O OMN O (MM Hlft OO* * i* * ' * o «nin o v IU< o » •• 0 o : z! ■ P * in ' ODO l i o 0N * * 3 O 7 X ^ C P X U l '3 < M >• « NO 3 I* « r jm o * t- im J K 1 j > f ( ’ i o r* o M ft ff N > > !• z w 3i V O> * t « D M ft O Iff NN o # ru « > ° P *-k n o St r* r* • !■ r- o o o o o « o ib Ui L k | o o o o ' OH o o lu U J o o o«r O o o a o oo oo 1 /1H I h *- r . tj u. —(/ i.> A *u > < : !i/ i/ r= ,;■ « ■< rv ujM • ; t O J h it M O> | « I 4 , u>h r h h T , OIL ^ f U j # » » 134 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A s h e n fe lte r, Orley and Mooney, Joseph D. "Graduate Education, A b i l i t y , and Earninqs." Review o f Economics and S t a t i s t i c s (January, 1968). Andrews, F. N ., Morgan, J. N . , and Sonquist, T. A. The Detection o f In te ra c tio n A ff e c t s — A Report on a Computer Program f o r S elec­ tio n o f Optimal Combinations o f Explanatory V a r ia b le s . I n s t i ­ t u te f o r Social Research, The U n iv e rs ity o f Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1964. Barsby, Steve L. C o s t-B e n e fit Analysis D. C. Heath and Company, 1972. and ManpowrPrograms. " Mass.: Bateman, Worth. "An A p p lic a tio n o f C o s t-B e n e fit Analysis to the WorkExperience Program." American Economic Review (May, 1967): 82. Becker, Gary S. Human C a p i t a l . 1964, Chapter 3. New York: Columbia U n iv e rs ity Press, Benson, Edward. "A Review o f C r itiq u e o f 'The Demand f o r Labor by Educa­ tio n a l C a te g o ry .'" March, 1970 (Mineographed). Borus, Michael E ., and Buntz, Charles G. "Problems and Issues in the Evaluation o f Manpower Programs." In d u s tr ia l and Labor Rela­ tions Review 25 (January, 1972). ________ , and Tash, A Prim er. tions 17. U n iv e rs ity W illia m . Measuring the Impact o f Manpower Programs: P o lic y Papers in Human Resources and In d u s tr ia l Rela­ I n s t i t u t e o f Labor and In d u s tr ia l R e la tio n s , The o f Michigan--Wayne S ta te U n iv e r s ity , 1970. ________ , Brennan, J. P ., and Rosen, Sidney. "A B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f the Neighborhood Youth Corps: The Out-of-School Program in In d ia n a ." Journal o f Human Resources 5 (S p ring , 1970): 139-159. ________ . "Time Trends in the B enefits from R e tra in in g in Connecticut." School o f Labor and In d u s tr ia l R e la tio n s , Reprint Series No. 103, Michigan S ta te U n iv e r s ity , East Lansing, Michigan, 1968-69. ________ , and Hardin, E in a r. Economic B enefits and Costs o f R etraining in Michigan. Final Report, Research Contract No. MDTA 9-6 3. East Lansing, School o f Labor and In d u s tr ia l R e la tio n s , Michigan S tate U n iv e r s ity , 1969. 136 137 ________ . "The Economic E ffectiven ess o f R e tra in in g the Unemployed." A D is s e rta tio n presented to the Faculty o f Graduate School o f Yale U n iv e r s ity , June, 1964, p. 95. Research Report to the Federal Reserve Bank o f Boston, N. 35, J u ly , 1966, 219 p. Bowley, Roger L . , and S c h riv e r, W illia m R. "Non-Wage B en e fits o f Vocatinal T ra in in g : E m p loyab ility and M o b i li t y ." In d u s tr ia l and Human Relations Review (J u ly , 1970): 500-510. B r a z z ie l, W illia m F. "E ffe c ts o f General Education in Manpower Pro­ grams." Journal o f Human Resources 1 (Summer, 1966): 39-44. Bronfenbrenner, M a rtin . "What the Radical Economists Are Saying." Harvard Business Review, September-October, 1973. Cain, Glen, and H o l l i s t e r , Robinson. "Evaluating Manpower Programs f o r the Disadvantaged." C o st-B en efit Analysis o f Manpower P o lic ie s , Proceedings o f a North American Conference. Edited by G. G. Somers and W. D. Wood. Queen's U n iv e r s ity , Kingston, O ntario: In d u s tr ia l Relations Center, May 14-15, pp. 109-52. C h r i s t o f f e ] , Pamela, and C e lio , Mary B. "A B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f the Upward Bound Program: A Comment." Journal o f Human Resources V I I I (W in te r, 1973): 110-114. Ciriacy-W anthrup, S. V. "B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f Public Resource Development." Journal o f Farm Economics 37 (November, 1955): 677-689. Conley, Ronald W. "A B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f the Vocational R e h a b ili­ t a tio n Proqram." Journal o f Human Resources 4 (S p rin q , 1969): 220-252. ________ . The Economics o f Vocational R e h a b i l i t a t i o n . Hopkins Press, 1965. Baltim ore: Corrazzine, A. J. "The Decision to In v e s t in Vocational Education: Analysis o f C o s t-B e n e fits ." Journal o f Human Resources I I I (Supplement, 1968): 88-120. Johns An ________ . Vocational Education: A Study o f B en e fits and Costs (A Case Study o f Worcester, M ass.). Princeton: In d u s tr ia l R elations S ection , Princeton U n iv e r s ity , 1966, p. I l l a n d .126. ________ . "When Should Vocational Education Begin?" Resources. I I (W in te r, 1967): 41-50. Journal o f Human Correa, Hector. "Optimum Choice Between General and Vocational Educa­ t io n ." Kyklos 18 FASC., 1 (1 9 6 5 ): 107-115. 138 Dietch, Kenneth. "Some Observations on the A llo c a tio n o f Resources in Higher Education." Review o f Economics and S t a t i s t i c s 42 (Supplement, 1960): 192-198. Dorland, James R. "The Impact o f l e g is l a t i o n on A dult Education." In Adm inistration o f Continuing Education. Edited by Nathan C. Shaw. Washington, D. C .: 1969, pp. 118-26. Evans, Rupert N ., Magnum, Garth L . , and Pragan, O tto. "Education f o r Employment: The Background and P o te n tia l o f the 1968 Vocational Education Amendments." Ann Arbor, Michigan: A J o in t P u b lic a tio n o f the I n s t i t u t e o f Labor and In d u s tria l R e la tio n s . The Univer­ s i t y o f Michigan, Wayne S tate U n iv e rs ity and the National Manpowr Po licy Task Force, Washington, C. C ., 1969. Friedman, Eugene A. "Changing Value O rie n ta tio n in Adult L i f e . " S ociological Backgrounds o f A d u lt Education. CSLEA. 41 (1963): 39-64. — — ■ Fryer, Douglas H ., Feiberg, Mortimer R ., and Z a lk in d , Sheldon S. Devel­ oping People in In d u s try , P rin c ip le s and Methods o f T r a in in g . New York: Harper, 1956. Garms, W alter I . Reply to "A B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f the Upward Bound Proqram: A Comment." The Journal o f Human Resources V I I I (W in te r, 1973). ________ . "A B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f the Upward Bound Program." Journal o f Human Resources (S p rin g , 1971): 206-20. The G lic k , Paul C ., and M i l l e r , Herman P. "Educational Level and P o te n tia l Income." American Sociolo gical Review 21 (January, 1956): 307-312. Goldhammer, K e ith , and T a y lo r, Robert E. Career Education: Perspective and Promise. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. M e r r i l l Publishing Company, 1972), pp. 20-29. Hamermesh, Daniel S. Economic Aspects o f Manpower T rain in g Programs. Mass.: D. C. Heath and Company, 1971. ________ . "The Secondary E ffe c ts o f Manpower Programs." Presentation a t the Conference on the Evaluation o f the Impact o f Manpower Progarms. Columbus, Ohio, June 16, 1971. Handbook o f A d u lt Education. A P u b lic a tio n o f the Adult Education Association. Edited by Robert M. Smith, e t . a l . London: MacMillan Company, C o llie r -M a c M illa n LTD., 1970, pp. 473-486. Hanock, G iora. "An Economic Analysis o f Earnings and Schooling." Journal o f Human Resources 11 (Summer, 1967): 310-329. Hansen, W. L. "Total and P riv a te Rates o f Return to Investment in Schooling." Journal o f P o l i t i c a l Economy 71 ( A p r i l , 1963): 128-140. Hardin, E in a r, and Borus, M ichael. The Economic B enefits and Costs o f R e tra in in g . Mass.: D. C. Heath and Co., Lexington, 1971. ________ . "On the Choice Conference on the ment o f Labor and S tate U n iv e rs ity , o f Control Groups." Paper presented a t the Evaluation o f Manpower Programs. U. S. Depart the Center fo r Human Resource Research, Ohio June 15-17, 1971, Columbus, Ohio. ________ . "B e n e fit-C o s t Analysis o f Occupational T rain in g Programs: A Comparison o f Recent S tu d ies ." In C o s t-B e n e fit Analysis o f Manpower P o li c ie s . Edited by Gerald G. Somers and Donald W. Wood. Kingston: Queen's U n iv e r s ity , SLIR Reprint No. 115, 1969 Harrison, Bennett. "The P a r t ic ip a tio n o f Ghetto Residents in the Model C itie s Program." AIP Journal (January, 1973): 43-55. Hu, Teh-Wei e t a l . "A C o st-E ffectiven ess Study o f Vocational Education." U n iv e rs ity Park: I n s t i t u t e f o r Research on Human Resources. Pennsylvania S ta te U n iv e r s ity , March, 1969. X I I I and 301 p. Johnson, George E. "The Demand f o r Labor by Education Category." Southern Economic Journal 37 (October, 1970). K ik e r, B. F . , and L i l e s , W. P. " Id e n t if y in g P o te n tia l F a ilu re s in R etrain ing Programs." The Journal o f Human Resources. V I I ( F a l l , 1972): 548-54. Kruger, Daniel H. Paper on O bjectives and S tra te g ie s f o r the Lansing Manpower D e liv e ry System--Lansing Planning Department 1115 P r o j e c t . Prepared in cooperation w ith C ity o f Lansing Manpower Department, the Lansing T ri-C o un ty Manpower Area Planning Council and Systems Research Incorpo rated , August 23, 1972. Kuhlen, Raymond, ed. Psychological Backgrounds o f Adult Education. CLSEA (1963): 1-148. L ark in , Timothy. "A Moving P ic tu re o f the Middle Years." Manpower. U. S. Department o f Labor, Manpower A d m in is tra tio n , 5 :5 , May, 1973, pp. 9-13. Levin, Henry M. "A C o st-E ffectiven ess Analysis o f Teacher S e le c tio n ." Journal o f Human Resources 1 (1970): 24-35. 140 L e v ita n , Sar A ., and Mangum, Garth L. Federal T ra in in g and Work Pro­ grams In the S i x t i e s . I n s t i t u t e o f Labor and In d u s tr ia l Relatio n s . The U n iv e rs ity o f Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1969. Mangum, Garth, and Robson, R. Thayne. "The Optimum Measures o f the Impact o f Manpower Programs on the Community." Proceedings o f the Conference on the Evaluation o f the Impact o f Manpower Programs. June 15-17, The Ohio S ta te U n iv e r s ity , 1971. Main, Earl D. "A Nationwide Evaluation o f MDTA— I n s t i t u t i o n a l Job T ra in in q ." Journal o f Human Resources I I I (Sprinq, 1968): 159-70. M arg lin , Stephen A. Public Investment C r i t e r i a : A B e n e fit Cost Analy­ sis f o r Planned Economic Growth. Cambridge, Mass.: The M . I . T . Press, 1964, p. 103. M arsh all, A lf r e d . P rin c ip le s o f Economics. p. 787-788. 8th e d it io n . London, 1930, Michigan Department o f Education. "Public High School Dropouts in Michigan 1970-71. A Comparison by Counties and D i s t r i c t s . " S t a t i s t i c a l B u lle t in 4007. J u ly , 1972. Michigan Department o f Education, D ivisio n o f Vocational R e h a b ilita t io n , February, 1971. The Vocational Status o f Michigan R e h a b ilita n ts o f Fiscal Year 1969--Two Years A f te r Case Closure. (The re s u lts o f a fo llo w -u p study and B e n e fit Cost Analysis-conducted by the Progaam Ananlysis, Planning and Development Section o f the D ivisio n o f Vocational R e h a b i l i t a t i o n .) M i l l e r , Harry L. L ib eral A dult Education. CSLEA, 1959. Nicholson, J. S. "The L ivin g Capital o f the United Kingdom." Journal 1:95 (March, 1981). Economic N ilan d, John. " P r io r Labor Market Experience and the E ffectiven ess of Manpower Programs: Communications." The Journal o f Human Resources V I I I ( F a l l , 1972): 554-59. Page, David. "R e tra in in g Under the Manpower Development Act: A CostB e n e fit A n a ly s is ." Public Po licy X I I I (1964): 257-67. Parmes, Herbert S . , and Shea, John R. "Use o f the National Longitudinal Surveys fo r Evaluation Purposes." Presentation to Conference on the Evaluation o f the Impact o f Manpower Programs. Columbus, Ohio, June 15 -17 , 1971 (Mimeographed). Peterson, Gene B ., and Drury, Thomas F. Basic Education Services in Manpower T ra in in q Programs: A Report from the National Inven­ to ry o f Manpower Programs^ Washington, D. C . : Bureau o f Social Science Research, I n c . , September, 1972. 141 Rossi, Peter H. "Testing f o r Success and F a ilu re in Social A c tio n ." In Evaluating Social Programs: Theory, P r a c tic e , and P o l i t i c s . Edited by P e te r H. Rossi and W alter W illia m s . New York: Seminar Press, 1973. ________ , and W illia m s , W alter eds. York: Seminar Press, 1972. S c h u ltz, Theodore. Human C a p i t a l . Evaluating Social Programs. New York: New The Free Press, 1971. ________ . "The Rate o f Return in A llo c a tin g Investment Resources in Education." The Journal o f Human Resources 11 (Summer, 1967): 293-309. ________ . The Economic Value o f Education. v e r s ity Press, 1963. X I I and 92 p. "Investment in Human C a p it a l." 51 (March, 1961): 1-17. Schwertman, John B. I Want Many Loadstars. New York: Columbia Uni­ American Economic Review CSLEA (1958): 1-98. S c o tt, Loren C. "The Economic E ffec tiv es n es o f On-The-Job T rain in g : The Experience o f the Bureau o f Indian A f f a ir s in Oklahoma." The In d u s t r ia l and Labor Relations Review 23 (January, 1970): 220-36. Sew ell, W. R. D. e t . a l . "Guide to B ene fit-C o s t A n a ly s is ." A Paper Prepared f o r the Resources f o r Tomorrow Conference. M o n tre al, October 23 -28 , 1961, p. 49. S o lie , Richard J. "Employment E ffe c ts o f R e tra in in g the Unemployed." In d u s tr ia l and Labor Relations Review. January, 1968, p d . 21025. Somers, Gerald G ., and Stromsdorfer, Ernest W. "Measures o f the Impact o f Manpower Programs on Education." Conference on the Evalua­ tio n o f the Impact o f Manpower Programs, June 15-17 , Ohio S ta te U n iv e r s ity , 1971. ________ , and Wood, W. E. eds. C o s t-B e n e fit Analysis o f Manpower P o l i c i e s . Proceedings from a North American Conference, May 14-15 , 1969, pp. 3-261. ________ , and Gibbard, Harold. "Government R etrain ing o f the Unemployed in West V i r g i n i a . " R e tra in in g the Unemployed. Edited by Gerald Somers, U n iv e rs ity o f Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1968. ________ , and McKechnie, Graeme H. "Vocational R e tra in in g Programs fo r the Unemployed." Proceedings o f the 20th Annual W inter Meeting In d u s tria l R elations Research A ssociation. Edited by Gerald Somers, 1967. 142 Stromsdorfer, Ernest W. "Determinants o f Economic Success in R etrain in g the Unemployed." Journal o f Human Resources ( S p r in g ,,1 9 6 8 ). Theobald, Robert. "Education and the Cybernation R evo lution ." Perspec­ tiv e s on M o tiv a tio n . Center f o r the Studies o f L ib eral Education f o r Adults (CSLEA) 43, 1964. The Job Gap f o r College Graduates in the 7 0 's. Business Week. New Jersey: McGraw-Hill P u b lic a tio n s , September 23, 1972, pp. 5458. The Common Goals o f Education. Recommendations o f The Task Force on the Goals o f Michigan Education. Submitted to the S tate Board o f Education, Lansing, Michigan, June 9 , 1970. U .S ., Department o f Labor. Manpower Report on the P re s id e n t. "Contribu­ tion s o f Vocational Education. A Report on Manpower Require­ ments, Resources, U t i l i z a t i o n and T ra in in g . March, 1972, pp. 93-94. U .S ., C om troller General. Report to the Congress. Federal Manpower T rain in q Programs— GAO Conclusions and Observations. February 17, 1972. U .S ., Department o f Labor. Manpower Report o f the Presid en t. Trans­ m itted to Congress A p r i l , 1968. Washington, D .C.: Government P rin tin g O f f i c e , 1968. Veen, Grant. "Vocational-Technical Eduation." In Handbook o f Adult Education. Edited by Robert M. Smith e t a l . New York: The MacMillan Press, 1970, pp. 473-86. Weisbrod, Burton A. "B enefits o f Manpower Programs: T h e o re tic a l and Methodological Issues." In C o s t-B e n e fit Analysis o f Manpower P o lic ie s , Proceedings from a North American Conference. May 14-15, 1969. Edited by G. G. Somers and W. D. Wood, pp. 3-1 5 . Published j o i n t l y by the Center f o r Studies in Vocational and Technical Education, the U n iv e r s ity o f Wisconsin, Madison, isc o n sin , 1969. "Conceptual Issues in Evaluating T ra in in g Programs." Labor Review 89 (October, 1966): 1091-97. . External B en e fits o f P ublic Education. Princeton: In d u s t r ia l Relations Section , Princeton U n iv e r s it y , 1964. XI and 143 p. _ _ . Monthly "Education and Investment in Human C a p ita l." Journal o f "P o litic a l Economy 70 (Supplement, P a rt 2, 1962): 106-123. 143 _________. "Education and Investment in Human C a p it a l." Journal o f P o l i t i c a l Economy 70:5 {Supplement, P a rt 2, October, 1962): 106-123. Wood, W. D ., and Campbell, H. F. C o s t-B e n e fit Analysis and the Econ­ omics o f Investment in Human Resources: An Annotated B i b l i -: ography. Kingston: In d u s t r ia l Relations Center, Queen's U n iv e rs ity , 1970. Z u w a y lif, Fadil H. General Applied S t a t i s t i c s . Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1969, pp. 1-289.