Youth Builders

C. 1 PURPOSE The U. S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (ETA) is conducting a random assignment evaluation of the impact of the YouthBuild program on participants' post-program employment and education outcomes. The evaluation will also examine the program's cost-effectiveness. The study sample is being tracked for four years from the point of random assignment. This sole source contract is to complete the final tasks under the original multi-year contract with MDRC, tasks that were delayed due to the government decision to delay the award of 2011 YouthBuild grants, subject of this evaluation. C. 2 BACKGROUND A. The YouthBuild Program YouthBuild is a youth and community development program that simultaneously addresses several core issues facing low-income communities: housing, education, employment, crime prevention, and leadership development. The YouthBuild model balances in-school learning, geared toward a high school diploma or passing the General Educational Development (GED) test, and construction skills training, geared toward a career placement for the youth. The in-school component is an alternative education program that assists youth who are often significantly behind in basic skills to obtain a high school diploma or GED credential. The primary target populations for YouthBuild are high school dropouts that may also be adjudicated youth, youth aging out of foster care and other at-risk youth populations. There are currently over 270 YouthBuild programs operating in the United States of which about 200 are ETA grantees serving approximately 7,000 youth per year. The core objectives of YouthBuild are to: - Enable disadvantaged youth to obtain the education and employment skills necessary to achieve economic self-sufficiency in occupations in demand and post-secondary education and training opportunities; - Provide disadvantaged youth with opportunities for meaningful work and service to their communities; - Foster the development of employment and leadership skills and commitment to community development among youth in low income communities; and - Expand the supply of permanent affordable housing for homeless individuals and low-income families by utilizing the energies and talents of disadvantaged youth. B. Previous ETA-Sponsored Evaluation of YouthBuild Social Policy Research Associates conducted a process and outcomes evaluation of the YouthBuild Youth Offender Demonstration completed in 2009. Among the evaluation's key findings are: ? The majority of programs have developed highly selective screening procedures to ensure that they identify the most committed and dedicated youth, including drug screening, basic skills testing, and staff interviews and observations. Youth are also required to attend a Mental Toughness Orientation (MTO) to test their ability to thrive in a YouthBuild environment. ? Generally, grantees that provide participants with opportunities to earn certifications in the construction industry appear to provide more consistent and high-quality training. ? Over 68 percent of participants completed the program. More than one-third of participants received their GED or high school diploma, nearly two-thirds were placed in unsubsidized employment, education, or occupational training, and nearly three-fourths did not re-offend after entering YouthBuild. ? The results of multivariate analysis showed the following correlations: 1) grantees with higher rates of employment among participants also had lower student-to-classroom teacher ratios, owned and/or managed their own worksites, linked vocational and education instruction, and had active youth policy councils; and 2) grantees with higher rates of GED or high school diploma completion also had lower student-to-classroom teacher ratios and were more often charter schools. The final report is available at Evaluation of the YouthBuild Youth Offender Grants. C. 3 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the proposed sole source contract are to: 1. Estimate the impact of YouthBuild on participants' post-program earnings, employment, education, criminal justice, and other social and attitudinal outcomes, overall and for key subgroups. 2. Examine the effectiveness of alternative program models, for example: i. Providing opportunities to earn certifications in the construction industry ii. Measuring the quality of the educational component such as student-to-classroom teacher ratios iii. Grantee owned and/or managed worksites iv. Linked vocational and educational instruction v. Active youth policy councils vi. Charter schools vii. Offering rehabilitation, new construction, or both types of work sites 3. Examine the effects of Mental Toughness Orientation on the characteristics of individuals enrolled in YouthBuild after MTO, completion and student outcomes. 4. Examine the cost-effectiveness of the program. . C. 4 TASKS During the two-year sole source contract, the contractor will perform the following tasks: YouthBuild Evaluation Time Period Task Description Q3/2016-Q4/2017 Organization of cost data and cost effectiveness analysis The program analysis team will organize and analyze the vast amount of financial detail provided by the 75 sites across the country participating in the evaluation. These data include dollar costs associated with operating the YouthBuild programs and providing program services, including costs paid from the DOL grants as well as from other sources of funding and calculation of the implied dollar value of costs contributed by participants during the production of housing. The cost analysis will estimate the average gross and net costs of YouthBuild per program participant. The second phase of the analysis work will be to compare the net cost of YouthBuild services (that is, the cost of producing the observed service difference) to the resulting impacts (benefits) generated by the program. Q3/2017 Analyze 48-month survey data The impact analysis of data collected directly from study participants four years after random assignment into the study will determine the effects of the intervention on the overall sample and for key subgroups of youth. The basic estimation strategy is to compare average outcomes for the program and control groups- a straightforward calculation that is generally easy to explain to policymakers and other nontechnical audiences-although the analysis team will also use regression adjustment to increase the power of statistical tests that are performed. Q3/2017-Q1/2018 Draft, edit and publish 48-month report The evaluation team will describe the final impact estimates in the context of the process analysis results produced previously, and submit to ETA a preliminary version of the final report for an informal review. Following receipt of informal pre-review comments from ETA and CEO staff and feedback from the evaluation's Technical Work Group, the evaluation team will revise the final report, submit it for final editing to the MDRC Publications Department, and then submit it officially to DOL as a draft deliverable under this contract. Feedback received from ETA and CEO following review of the draft report and from a briefing for DOL leadership (see below, a separate task) will allow the evaluation team to finalize the report and make it 508 compliant once cleared by ETA for release. Q2/2018 Oral briefing for 48-month report Following submission of the official draft report to ETA, the evaluation team will present the findings to ETA and CEO leadership, possibly to include staff from YouthBuild USA (the technical assistance contractor responsible for assisting YouthBuild programs implement the program.) Feedback received during the briefing will be instrumental in helping the evaluation team to revise the report and submit it to ETA officially. Q2/2018 Create public use file Edited electronic data collected throughout the evaluation (save for NDNH data), stripped of personal identifiers, sufficient to provide easy and accurate retrieval of the data and information about its use. An electronic version of data specifications, variable listing and summary statistics will be included for each data set. Q3/2017-Q2/2018 General and financial project management Throughout, evaluation team management staff will oversee and monitor progress and time spent on each task to ensure that all are completed on schedule. As well, the staff will manage the financial state of the tasks to ensure that the required work is done within the approved budget. Monthly reports to the Contract Officer Representative will document the continued progress towards task completion and projections for upcoming activity in the near future. F. 1 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE The period of performance of this contract is from September 2016 through June 2018. F. 2 SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS The contractor shall be required to provide the necessary personnel to accomplish each task listed above. The key personnel positions and their required minimum time commitments are as follows: Project Director - 30% Principal Investigator(s) - 15% Task Leader(s) - 10% F. 3 DELIVERABLES The contractor shall deliver the following at the time specified to the ETA contract officer representative designated in the contract. In addition, the final deliverable of item 2 shall include a camera-ready electronic copy. ETA intends to post the final report on its website. 1. Monthly Progress Reports submitted electronically. The first such report shall be due thirty days after the contract beginning date and subsequent reports shall be due monthly thereafter. Reports should address monthly progress in terms of completing the tasks specified in the statement of work, identification of problems and plans for the resolution of those problems, and plans for the upcoming month. 2. Final Report, submitted electronically. The final report will be due after completion of the final round of follow-up interviews and present the final findings. An outline of the report shall be submitted 90 days before the draft report is due. The draft final report shall be submitted no later than 60 days before the final report is due. The final report incorporating ETA comments will be due two months after the contractor receives comments from ETA. 3. Oral Briefings. The contractor will present an oral briefing for ETA and CEO staff on the final report findings. Additional briefings may be scheduled at ETA's request. 4. Public Use Files and Documentation. The contractor will provide edited electronic files containing all data gathered for the evaluation, stripped of personal identifiers, along with documentation and instructions sufficient to allow easy and accurate retrieval of the data and its use by other researchers. An electronic version of the data specifications, variable listing, and summary statistics should be provided for each data set. The files shall be submitted to the project officer no later than 10 days before the expiration date of the contract. ****A determination not to compete this propose procurement based upon responses to this notice is soley within the discretion of the Government.********