Cover: Methodological Issues in the Evaluation of CETA Programs

Methodological Issues in the Evaluation of CETA Programs

Endogenous Participation, Completion, and Program Assignment

Published 1986

by Lee A. Lillard, Subal Kumbhakar


Download eBook for Free

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.8 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.


Purchase Print Copy

 Format Price
Add to Cart Paperback55 pages $23.00

This Note examines selected methodological issues for the evaluation of training programs similar to the one established by the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act. It addresses two aspects of the training programs that are treated only casually in the literature. First, in addition to the worker's endogenous participation and program-completion decisions, the authors' analysis includes the program sponsor's endogenous decisions concerning the type of training received by the trainee (i.e., assignment to a program type) and the placement of the trainee in a job at the end of the training period. Second, the authors analyze various components of earnings (in terms of wage rates, hours per week, and weeks worked), as well as individual differences in the long-run level and growth of these components, and transitory variations.

This report is part of the RAND note series. The note was a product of RAND from 1979 to 1993 that reported other outputs of sponsored research for general distribution.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.