Meta-analysis of the ESF counterfactual impact evaluations. Final Report.

Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige

Trefferliste

Autor/inn/en	Pompili, Marco; Kluve, Jochen; Jessen, Jonas; Seebauer, Johannes; Gallassi, Ginevra; Peruccacci, Eleonora; Merkaj, Elvina
Institution	Europäische Kommission / Generaldirektion Beschäftigung, Soziales und Integration; Ismeri Europa
Titel	Meta-analysis of the ESF counterfactual impact evaluations. Final Report. Gefälligkeitsübersetzung: Meta-Analyse der kontrafaktischen ESF-Folgenabschätzungen.
Quelle	Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union (2022), 102 S. PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	online; Monographie
ISBN	978-92-76-58948-8
DOI	10.2767/580759
Schlagwörter	Bildungspolitik; Jugendpolitik; Schule; Bildungsabschluss; Erfolgskontrolle; Schulleistung; Arbeitspolitik; Europäischer Sozialfonds; Beschäftigungseffekt; Lohnsubvention; Ausbildung; Arbeitsloser; Arbeitslosigkeit; Arbeitsmarkt; Arbeitsmarktpolitik; Berufliche Integration; Beschäftigungspolitik; Arbeitsförderungsmaßnahme; Ausbildungsförderung; Beschäftigungsförderung; Praktikum; Weiterbildungsförderung; Internationaler Vergleich; Abbruch; Auswirkung; Effizienz; Forschungsbericht; Trainingsmaßnahme; Europäische Union; Jugendlicher; Junger Erwachsener; Langzeitarbeitsloser
Abstract	"The study's objective is to conduct a meta-analysis of the available ESF and YEI counterfactual impact evaluations (CIEs) implemented in the 27 Member States of the EU and the UK during the 2007-2013 and 2014-2020 programming periods. The meta-analysis aims at finding systematic evidence of the effectiveness and sustainability of ESF and YEI operations. Three ESF thematic objectives (TOs) are covered, namely TO8 (Employment), TO9 (Social inclusion), and TO10 (Education and training). Importantly, this is the first study focusing exclusively on ESF/YEI interventions. The study comprises CIEs analysing effects in terms of employment and education outcomes, while it does not cover social inclusion outcomes. The results emerging from the analysis will feed the ex-post evaluation of the 2014-2020 ESF and YEI programmes. The methodology adopted can be summarized as follows. As a first step, the evaluation team identified a set of primary studies to be coded: the initial sample of CIEs was identified relying on the reports collected in the COM evaluation library and complemented with other sources, totalling 138 potential ESF/YEI CIEs. In the coding phase, CIEs were included in the meta-database if they fulfilled the following minimum criteria: clearly distinguishable treatment and control groups in the CIE report; application of some version of a (quasi-) experimental method to account for potential selection bias and time trends; use of quantitative and objective outcome(s) to measure program effectiveness, which can be compared across a larger number of studies and settings; a clear and transparent indication of the direction of the effect. The final meta-database includes variables structured into four parts: study characteristics, intervention characteristics, variables related to the empirical analysis, and other additional variables relevant to the analysis. Of the 138 CIEs in the initial sample, 94 CIEs were eventually included in the meta-database, providing a total of 882 estimates on program effectiveness, all analysing ESF/YEI intervention impacts on participants' employment outcomes. For these 94 evaluations, a quantitative meta-analysis was carried out. 19 CIEs, exclusively or partly analyzing education outcomes, could not be coded due to the low number of primary studies and estimates available and the heterogeneity of the outcome variables used. A narrative approach was carried out for the latter to synthesize their characteristics and findings. It is important to stress that most of the evaluations analyzed in this report are related to interventions which were implemented before 2020, thus assessing interventions which were not influenced by the pandemic. The spread of Covid-19 gave rise to several new needs and rapidly changed the socio-economic contexts of countries worldwide. For this reason, the results presented in this report and the effectiveness of the support analyzed might change in the future." The study refers to the period 2017-2020. (Author's abstract, IAB-Doku)..
Erfasst von	Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung, Nürnberg
Update	2024/1