Seedco Career Advancement Policy Report

8/14/2019 Seedco Career Advancement Policy Report

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/seedco-career-advancement-policy-report 1/18

CAREER ADVANCEMENT

Fr m ‘W r F rs ’ ‘W r r M b ’

A RepoRt FRoM the Seedco policy centeR

DECEMBER 2008



AcknoWledgMentSThe authors grate ully acknowledge Seedco’s Becky Grayand Nakisha Evans or their support and guidance, as wellas Andrea Phillips, Julie Shapiro, and Carla Zanoni or theireditorial direction. Thanks to Neil K leiman or helping to de-velop the concept or the report, Julie Strawn and Neil Ridley

rom Center or Law and Social Policy and Karin Martinsonand John Trutko rom the Urban Institute or their critical

eedback, and Demetra Smith Nightingale or her leader-ship on the Policy Center Advisory Council. We also o erour gratitude to the Earn More career coaches and programparticipants who took the time to give us their thoughts andperspectives.

This report was unded by the MetLi e Foundation, withadditional support rom the Mizuho USA Foundation and

Wachovia Foundation.

In addition to the above unders, operating support or theEarnMore pilot was provided by the New York City Center orEconomic Opportunity and the New York City Departmento Small Business Services. Additional support or Seedco’scareer advancement work has been provided by the AltmanFoundation, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the ClarkFoundation, the Ford Foundation, the Starr Foundation,and the Manhattan Borough President’s O ce.

DESIGN: Red Rooster Group, NY

Seedco is a national nonproft intermediary that workswith local partners to create economic opportunities

or disadvantaged job seekers, low-wage workers, andneighborhood entrepreneurs. Seedco’s policy researcho ers a practitioner’s perspective on work orce andeconomic development policy implementation, pre-senting a pragmatic assessment o the opportunitiesand obstacles inherent in developing programs andaccomplishing systemic re orm.

915 Br a wa , 17 F r, n w y r , ny 10010

Tel: 212 473-0255 • Fax: 212 473-0357

Email: [email protected] • www.seedco.org

Seedco Pol c Center Adv sor Co nc l

C a r: Demetra Sm t N g t ngaleJ s h s U rs

T omas Ba le c mmu c R s ar c r

L ll am Barr os-PaolSa S a

Jared Bernste n e m p i s u

Angela Blackwell p l

Dav d Calla an d m s

M c ael F M ra p i s u

Mark Greenberg c r r Am r a pr r ss

Kat er ne Newman pr U rs

Pa l Osterman Massa us s i s u t

St art Rosen eld R a t S ra s, i .



tABle oF contentS

2 Introduction

3 Context

5 LOOKiNG OuTSiDE: A Field Scano Career Advancement Programs

9 LOOKiNG WiThiN: Seedco’s Approachto Career Advancement

15 LOOKiNG FORWARD: Action Steps

Fr m ‘W r F rs ’ ‘W r r M b ’A CRiTiCAL REViEW OF CAREER ADVANCEMENT STRATEGiESby Emma Oppenheim and Ben Seigel

DECEMBER 2008

execUtive SUMMARy

Career Advancement strategies in work orce develop-

ment have captured the attention o program admin-

istrators, unders, and researchers alike. New models

have emerged to help low-wage workers gain upward

mobility through intensive and sector- ocused training

programs. But these programs serve a narrow range

o workers, screening out those with lower skills or

career aspirations outside o a hand ul o industries,

and operate at a small scale. Seedco’s Earn More pilot

explores an alternative career advancement program

model, o ering intensive career coaching services

and leveraging labor market services available in thecommunity. Preliminary results suggest that this client-

ocused and lower-cost model is flling a crucial gap

in services or incumbent workers, helping a broader

range o workers advance in a diversity o ways.



pAge 2 FROM ‘WORK FIRST’ TO ‘WORKER MOBILITY’: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF CAREER ADVANCEMENT STRATEGIES

Seedco became interested in career advancementstrategies in part through its own experience assistingclients o its large-scale WtW and One-Stop work orcedevelopment programs. Although Seedco o ered itsclients high-quality employment services and suc-cess ully helped many job seekers obtain and retainemployment, its clients were o ten unable to move

beyond initial low-wage jobs.O course, Seedco was not alone. In the past 10 years,career advancement has become one o the mostdiscussed topics among practitioners, policymakers,and unders who are ocused on helping the workingpoor succeed in the labor market. Nonpro ts, commu-nity colleges, public agencies and others have developedprograms that are dedicated to improving disadvan-taged workers’ earnings and helping them establishcareers. Evidence suggests that these programs have

helped participants attain jobs with amily-sustainingwages and a potential or continued upward mobility.They have attracted signi cant attention or theiroutcomes, and their models have been examined orlessons learned and replication across the country.

Still, much work remains. It’s true that thousandso low-wage workers have been helped by career

advancement strategies—o ten re erred to as careerpathways, career ladders, or “sectoral” employmentinitiatives. Numerous best-practice case studies havepushed practitioners across the country to continu-ously improve their programs. Yet, these experimentsin career advancement are primarily small-scale ordemonstration pilots. They reach a limited range o workers, mostly enrolling participants with relativelyhigh skills.

intRodUction

For millions o low-wage workers, just getting by is a act o li e. Althoughthey play by the rules, work hard, and bring in a paycheck, disadvantagedworkers ace a rustrating path to upward mobility.

A new generation o “work rst” employment programs, guided and undedby the Temporary Assistance or Needy Families’ (TANF) Wel are-to-Work

(WtW) system and the Work orce Investment Act’s (WIA) One-Stop system,have ocused primarily on improving the working poor’s economic well-beingthrough the power o the labor market. Contracts at the state and local levels

or WtW, One-Stop, and other work orce services largely reward programs thatachieve short-term employment outcomes, such as initial job placement andsix-month job retention. These employment programs have primarily helpedlow-income people without jobs and ormer wel are recipients nd employ-ment and stay in the labor market. However, too many o these workers arestuck in low-wage jobs and lack access to fexible and convenient services thatcan help them advance beyond entry-level positions. Now, as the economyslips deeper into recession, and millions more low-wage workers ace economicinstability, it is even more critical to explore solutions that help workers’prospects or advancement.



A REPORT FROM THE SEEDCO POLICY CENTER pAge 3

Although many career advancement programs drawon public dollars including TANF and WIA unds,they also tend to invest in high-cost services thatrequire unding beyond that o ered by the large-scalework orce development and human services contractsat the state and local levels.

Seedco’s Earn More program explores a new approachto scalable career advancement programming. Seedcois interested not only in programmatic best practicesbut also in system-wide re orm. As a practitioneroperating publicly unded work orce programs, Seedcowas driven to investigate pragmatic and incrementalsolutions to creating career advancement opportunities

or a wide range o workers through its WtW andOne-Stop contracts. Enrollment in Earn More is opento workers o all educational and skill backgrounds andcareer interests, and costs are kept low by leveraging

partnerships and a constellation o existing services.Early results suggest that career advancement strategiescan produce real gains or a broader range o low-wageworkers, at a lower per-capita cost, than is currentlyachieved by existing career advancement programs.

This report examines the landscape o career advance-ment programs, compares their strategies and per-

ormance to Seedco’s Earn More program, and o ersrecommendations to practitioners, policymakers, and

unders about how to make good on the promise o the last decade’s work orce revolution and move rom“work rst” to “worker mobility.”

context

Today, the poor and disadvantaged are more l ikelyto be working than those o a generation past, butthey are also less likely to enjoy decent wages, em-ployer-sponsored bene ts, or career mobility options.Changes in the economy have dramatically increasedthe number o jobs that pay poorly, while changes inpolicy have ensured that disadvantaged workers drawmost o their income rom a paycheck, not a wel arecheck. 1 Some o these workers use their entry-level jobsas a stepping stone toward better positions and higherwages. But a large and growing cohort o workers willspend the majority o their working lives toiling at ornear minimum wage. 2

Over the past ew decades, employment and train-ing policy has refected changing priorities. From the1970s to the 1990s, ederal policy emphasized jobtraining and skill development, as per the Compre-hensive Employment and Training Act and later the

Job Training Partnership Act. In the 1990s, policybacked away rom government- unded human capitalinvestments in avor o policies that emphasized workexperience. Through the passage o wel are re orm in1996, which created TANF, and the overhaul o ederalwork orce legislation in 1998, under the WIA, unding

and program guidelines were reorganized under a“work rst” philosophy, prioritizing employmentover training and education. 3

The newly recon gured policies refected a belie in the power o employment to li t individuals outo economic straits and on the path to prosperity.

Under TANF and WIA, and their respective WtW andOne-Stop systems, work orce programs were measuredby—and rewarded or—achieving job placements andshort-term job retention. As a result, “l ight-touch”job placement programs fourished, since employment

programs guided and unded by these policies realignedresources to ocus on helping clients get a job—what-ever job they were quali ed to get at that momentin time. Once employed, the thinking went, workerswould gain skills on the job, as well as access topro essional networks that no training program couldo er. Their careers, naturally, would advance upward.

These programs success ully helped millions o workersnd jobs and stay in the labor market. But studies also

showed that ew workers experienced wage growth.Instead, most were cycling in and out o low-wage

jobs.4, 5, 6

Seedco’s own experiences operating WtWand One-Stop contracts mirrored those o its peers.With obligations to its state and local government

unders to meet ambitious job placement and reten-tion goals, Seedco ound it nearly impossible to helpclients advance in their careers under these contracts.A recent analysis o a sample o Seedco’s clients underits New York City WtW contract ound that whileabout 75 percent o clients were still employed12 months a ter their initial job placement (though

Once emplo ed, t e t nk ng went,workers wo ld ga n sk lls on-t e-job

and access pro ess onal networkst at no tra n ng program co ld o er.T e r careers, nat rall , wo ldadvance pward.



FROM ‘WORK FIRST’ TO ‘WORKER MOBILITY’: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF CAREER ADVANCEMENT STRATEGIESpAge 4

not necessarily in the same jobs), the average wagegain rom initial placement was six cents. 7

The rustrations o Seedco and its peers inspired arange o attempts—some new, some old—to improveprospects or the working poor. Most unctioned byo ering additional support to low-income workers.Some advocates launched campaigns to raise theminimum wage, establish local living wage ordinances,unionize vulnerable workers, and expand the Earned

Income Tax Credit. Others sought to promote thegrowth o jobs in living-wage industries by o ering taxincentives to selected businesses. Some e orts soughtto convince businesses to improve their treatment o employees as a productivity-enhancing investment. 8

Alongside these campaigns and e orts, career advance-ment programs have generated much activity andattracted signi cant attention. Entrepreneurial work-

orce development organizations began to explore newstrategies within the limits o ederal unding streamsand the corresponding state and local contracts thatrewarded employment programs ocused on short-termoutcomes strategies. With the encouragement andsupport o private philanthropy, and the enthusiasticinterest o a small number o industries experiencingskilled worker shortages, programs cra ted a service

model that was explicitly advancement-oriented,seeking to help workers achieve wage and careerupgrades. Many drew on the “work rst” ederal und-ing streams, but they almost always depended heavilyon private philanthropic support or pilot grants romgovernment. These small-scale programs, explored

in detail below, aimed to demonstrate that upward mo-bility was possible with the right kind o investment—the kind o investment that was not possible under therestrictions o the ederal unding streams behind stateand local contracts. 9

These career advancement programs boasted strongeroutcomes than many other work orce developmentprograms. But, at a very broad level, they also high-lighted a widening schism in the work orce eld.Light-touch job placement programs, which relylargely on the major ederal unding streams, are

on one end o the spectrum. At the opposite endare the intensive career advancement programs thatrely largely on private philanthropy. While someprogramming occupies the middle ground betweenthe two, such as occupational training, apprenticeship,and supported work programs, no replicable advance-ment models have emerged.

As Seedco acutely understood serving disadvantagedworkers through WtW and One-Stop contracts, a cru-cial concern was how to assist a broad range o clients,with a wide range o skills and needs—at a low enoughcost that the model could be replicated system-wide.

T ese programs s ccess ll elpedm ll ons o workers fnd jobs and sta

n t e labor market. B t st d es alsos owed t at ew workers e per encedwage growt . instead, most were

c cl ng n and o t o low-wage jobs.




The ederal unding streams or employment servicesto disadvantaged individuals and dislocated workersare generally poorly designed or incumbent, work-ing adults. This is true o vehicles such as TANF andWIA with their ocus on immediate job placement, aswell as other programs, such as the states’ Adult BasicEducation and community college o erings, whichprovide limited services beyond skills training duringtraditional working hours. Career advancement pro-grams, meanwhile, help workers pursue good jobs inhigh-growth, high-wage industries with opportunity

or advancement.

For example, Capital Idea, located in Austin, Texas,identi es industries with good wages and signi -cant labor needs, such as health care or in ormationtechnology, and o ers underemployed participantsintensive and customized training to prepare them or

entry-level jobs in those elds. Philadelphia’s District1199C Training and Upgrading Fund operates an ac-credited health care training center jointly unded bythe health care union and a coalition o local hospitalsand health care providers, with courses ranging rompractical nursing to radiation technology, even boast-ing students who have gone on to receive doctorates.The Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership o ers askilled trades apprenticeship program.

Some programs have been examined closely andoutcomes are promising: An Aspen Institute surveyo graduates o six advancement- ocused programs

ound that working participants’ earnings had risenrom an average o $8,580 be ore the program to

$14,040 in the year ollowing, and $17,732 in the

second year a ter completion. In addition, 66 percento clients were working year-round in the second year,compared to 23 percent be ore training. 10 The eld haseven matured enough that a cadre o technical assis-tance and training providers now o er organizationsand governments help in designing and implementingcareer advancement programs.

At the same time, many states’ community collegesystems and campuses have also begun new initia-tives to target speci c barriers to career mobility. Forexample, Michigan has begun a new initiative to makecommunity college ree or large numbers o workers,while Washington has begun to o er nancial aid,case management, and supportive services to cohortso disadvantaged students pursuing high-demand

elds. The ederal Department o Labor’s High Growth Job Training Initiative unds advancement-orientedtraining programs in a range o high-growth industrysectors such as health care, advanced manu acturing,and biotechnology.

LOOKiNG OuTSiDE:A Field ScAn oF cAReeR AdvAnceMent pRogRAMS

Across the country, private nonpro ts, community colleges, public agencies,

unions, businesses, and others have launched career advancement programs.These e orts aim to put low-income workers on the path to prosperity byo ering participants a highly structured package o activities intended tohelp them ascend within a particular industry.

T ese programs look or felds t ato er am l -s sta n ng wages at entr -and m d-level pos t ons b t are av ngtro ble fnd ng workers, and seek tobr ng part c pants’ ed cat on and sk lllevels p to meet emplo ers’ needs.



FROM ‘WORK FIRST’ TO ‘WORKER MOBILITY’: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF CAREER ADVANCEMENT STRATEGIESpAge 6

the Model: A StRUctURed pAckAge

Career advancement programs share some essentialeatures regardless o whether they are administered

by nonpro ts, community colleges, employer partner-ships, unions, training institutions, or public agencies.

iNDuSTRy ENGAGEMENT involves programs workingcollaboratively with businesses to design strategiesthat bene t both workers and employers. Programrepresentatives o ten serve as intermediaries, match-ing in ormation between workers and employers andproviding necessary interventions to align the interestsand needs o both. By ocusing intently on high-growth,high-wage industries that o er opportunities oradvancement, programs ensure their participants

will nd jobs that lead to sel -su ciency and upwardmobility. Career advancement programs develop abody o in-depth knowledge about the eld or whichthey are preparing workers, identi y industry work orceneeds that are not being met, compare employers’needs to the skills and education o the local laborpool, use that knowledge to design and implementa training program, and continually stay on top o changes in the industry or the work orce. Additionally,some advancement programs use their close relation-ships with employers to encourage industry-wideimprovements in worker conditions and businesspractices.

SECTOR-FOCuSED TRAiNiNG is at the heart o mostadvancement programs. Programs identi y the skillsand education that workers will need to be hired orjob openings, and then design appropriate trainingor instruction that provides real-world and business-relevant skills with the help o employer partners and

advisers. Practical experience is a core component o training, and many programs also place participantsin apprenticeships and internships. Mike Leach o theSouthern Good Faith Fund explained that their CareerPathways program, delivered in partnership with localcommunity colleges, strongly emphasizes employerengagement: “In many ways they’re doing whatcommunity colleges are supposed to be doing anyway:Providing training that’s supposed to be worth some-thing in the market.”

Worker- riendly advancement programs try to cra t

their curricula to better meet the speci c needso working students. One o the largest barriers acedby working students is the length o time it takes tocomplete a course o study while studying part-time,especially i preceded by a ew semesters o remediationor complicated by changing li e circumstances. Thus,many programs o er accelerated and intensive coursesthat can help workers quickly. Anne Keeney, executivedirector o Seattle Jobs Initiative (SJI) explained,“There’s no magic to this, it’s a trade-o . You couldsay people are going to have to work ull-time andwe’re going to o er this class two nights a week and

weekends. But my ear is one night a week is going totake them orever and it’s really easy to get discouraged.”

SCREENiNG AND PREPARATiON allows advancementprograms to ensure they enroll the right candidates orwork in that eld. Because the programs are rigorousand intensive, they cast a wide net to bring a largenumber o potential participants and select partici-pants based on their knowledge, experience, interestand motivation. Although participants come in witha relatively strong base o both hard and so t skills,most programs also o er bridge programs to help par-

ticipants prepare or di cult and intensive educationand skills training. These bridge programs, or exam-ple, might accelerate the time rame o a conventionaladult education program or incorporate aspects o vo-cational training to make courses more accessible. JudyTaylor, program director at Jobs or the Future (JFF),explained, “For employers who are hunting or people

T e g per-cap ta cost o alternat veserv ces— n some cases, as gas $17,000 per cl ent—create afnanc al mperat ve or programsto screen o t part c pants w o manot ave t e appropr ate base oknowledge or work e per ence.




with mid-level technical skills and experiencing short-ages, there’s real interest. But the people who work orthat employer are our, ve, six grade levels away rombeing a technician. It’s a long and discouraging activ-ity or employers to think about moving them up, andthey usually lose interest. So the programs go and nd

people who read at 10th grade level, pull them romOne-Stops, and put them in a bridge program.”

CASE MANAGEMENThelps participants manage prob-lems that might prevent them rom completing aprogram and nding employment. Program sta helpconnect participants to ancillary services to handlesuch issues as arranging child care and transporta-tion or overcoming housing problems. Urban Instituteresearcher Karin Martinson, who has studied careeradvancement programs, said: “What we ound in allthese programs, regardless o how the ladders worked,

was the importance o supports—a career counselor,case manager—someone that’s ocused on helping younavigate the system as well as other barriers.”

Case management also provides encouragement topersist in the ace o adversity and helps with problem-solving. Taylor rom JFF explained how importantshe has ound this role to be: “We’ve ound the li eproblems are extensive. A lot o the coaching becomessaying, ‘Hang in there, I know this is a dark time.’”Programs also develop participant cohorts, in whicha group o students progresses in program activitiestogether, to help low-income workers overcome thedisheartening aspects o training and education by

ostering peer support.

JOB PLACEMENT helps participants nd work quicklyupon program completion, in part through cultivatedrelationships with employers. Traditionally, commu-nity colleges and other training providers have donelittle to help students apply their new skills and cre-dentials to the labor market. Advancement programs,on the other hand, teach participants to plan a careerthat complements other newly acquired skills. Theseprograms help participants locate their rst jobs ando er ongoing support to employed clients in navigat-ing workplace challenges. Placement services also con-tinue a ter a participant is hired, and ollow-up helpsensure that participants keep their jobs or nd alterna-tive employment i an initial placement is a bad t.

liMitAtionS

Career advancement programs can help disadvantagedworkers move toward amily-sustaining wages andeconomic stability. But their approaches have typicallyexhibited a limited breadth and reach, discussed below.

ALTERNATiVE SERViCES

Career advancement programs o ten build a set o services that parallels that o ered by ederally undedemployment services programs, as well as other,additional services. The costs o establishing thesealternative services can be high. Allison Gerber, a re-search associate at the Aspen Institute who ocuses onsector-based work orce programs, explained that, “It’sun ortunate when a sector program is duplicating whatshould already be happening rom other resources, butit happens.” Keeney points out that SJI is only able to

o er a case manager or community college studentsbecause: “We get $2.4 million rom the cityo Seattle out o a total budget o $3.2 million. It’s awell-liked program and those are general und dol-lars. We have that luxury and we consider it importantenough to pay or.” But by building expensive services,advancement programs’ nancing is vulnerable in thelong run.

Furthermore, the high per-capita cost o alternativeservices—in some cases, as high as $17,000 per client—create a nancial imperative or programs to screen outparticipants who may not have the appropriate base o knowledge or work experience. “I somebody is clearlynot t or an industry, a sector program isn’t obligatedto serve them,” explained Cheryl Feldman, executivedirector o the District 1199C Training and UpgradingFund. What’s more, students with signi cant personaldi culties are o ten unable to participate in short,intensive courses because o ull-time work schedulesand amily demands that keep them rom ocusingintensively on their studies.




SECTOR FOCuS

A sector approach can limit a program’s ability toreach workers outside o the narrow range o indus-tries served by advancement programs. While a sectorapproach is theoretically applicable to all industries,in reality it is most success ul in health care and, toa lesser extent, in manu acturing, with a scatteringo successes in a ew other elds. For example, whenKentucky announced career advancement unding orits colleges, 12 o the 16 original applications proposedprograms in health care and nursing. As Martinson,

rom the Urban Institute, explained, “Some industriesare more amenable to career ladders than others. It iseasy to go rom Certi ed Nurse’s Assistant to LicensedPractical Nurse to Registered Nurse: There is a paththere. But in some elds it may not make sense, anda better job could be in another sector, or may be a

path that you create or yoursel .” Not all workers wantto work in the targeted industries, and the growth inlow-wage jobs in the retail and service sectors meansthat many disadvantaged workers will work in indus-tries that are not a good t or existing advancementmodels.

Additionally, a sector strategy’s success is contingenton industries and economies per orming as expected.Programs work hard to gather labor market andeconomic data, and connect with business ownersto urther enhance their understanding o the targetsector’s employment needs, but the uture is ultimatelynot predictable, especially within the current, unstableeconomy. Guaranteed entrance to a good industrywith good jobs, is, by de nition, out o the program’scontrol. Davis Jenkins, a Center or CommunityColleges researcher, expressed this concern, saying,“There are certain things you need to know, and youneed a degree to get into the game. But these careersare so dynamic, and your eld may lead you tocareers in other elds as the industry changes. ”

SCALE

By ocusing on alternative services and particular sec-tors, career advancement programs have and will con-tinue to have a limited impact. Gerber rom the AspenInstitute acknowledges that the existing advancementprograms can’t serve everyone: “The goal is a higherpercentage o Americans at amily-sustaining wagesand ewer people utilizing public services. Is it OK thatit’s not a wholesale answer? That depends on whetheror not you believe a wholesale answer is possible.”

Many advancement programs hope that piloting moree ective practices will encourage changes in the struc-ture o ederal work orce policies, but there is limitedevidence that this is happening. The Southern GoodFaith Fund’s Leach admitted, “We have not gotten tothe point where these programs are leading to systemicchange. It’s a pocket o wonder ul activity within thecolleges.” Shauna King-Simms o the Kentucky Com-munity and Technical College System went so ar asto question the practicality o advancement-orientedsystemic change: “I describe what we’ve done as anintentionally-orchestrated collision o work orce andacademic programs, o academic and developmentaleducation aculty, not to mention the student supportand administrative pieces. You need this collision toget to systemic change, but it’s not pretty and probablynot worth it unless you can identi y a high-wage andhigh-growth employment sector with employers whounderstand that collaboration with community col-leges can advance their bottom line.”

The question that remains unanswered is how to de-sign advancement strategies that can be incorporatedinto employment services on a global scale. As Jenkins

rom the Center or Community Colleges stated, “A loto these programs work on the margin o communitycolleges, or work with community-based organizations,but real change is not going to happen on a large scaleunless we take on the mainstream.”




As required by its TANF and WIA- unded contracts,Seedco helps clients nd work quickly. Going aboveand beyond contractual obligations by leveraging ad-ditional public resources and also oundation grants,Seedco has its own approach to worker retentionbased on experience and research revealing that manyworkers do not access all o the stabilizing bene ts

or which they are eligible—such as ood stamps,health care, and child care. The research, published in

Seedco’s 2003 report “Bene ts and Low Wage Work,”outlined a new vision or utilizing income-enhancingbene ts as “work supports” to help workers keeptheir jobs and achieve more stable employment. Theresearch inspired the development o Earn Bene ts,an integral part o Seedco’s work orce services. OnceSeedco helps clients nd a job, the Earn Bene ts pro-gram helps them navigate the application and enroll-ment procedures o various bene ts that can buttresstheir nances.

Yet, even when Seedco’s clients gain access to new

bene ts, advancement remains di cult. Many workersace signi cant barriers to upward career mobility that

do not disappear when they maintain employment atan entry-level job.

In 2002, Seedco launched its rst explicitly advance-ment-oriented program, the New York In ormationTechnology Career Ladders Consortium (NYITCLC).The e ort mirrored other sector-based advancementprograms by connecting participants to training andservices that could help them secure well-paid jobs—

in this instance, jobs in the in ormation technologyindustry. With the help o the Work orce StrategyCenter, a leading technical assistance provider in thearea o career pathways, Seedco designed a modelwherein courses at local community colleges werematched to the needs o “Sil icon Alley,” New York’semergent IT industry. By 2004, 223 participants hadenrolled in the program; 62 percent o the studentswere placed in jobs, at an average wage o $12.38

an hour.

Despite these strong outcomes, the model was notully adequate or disadvantaged workers. The educa-

tion and skill levels o clients re erred by TANF andWIA programs were generally too low or them toenroll in the NYITCLC program. As a result, Seedcohad to go beyond its traditional client base, in somecases recruiting through the City University o NewYork’s our-year colleges, to nd enough participantsthat could pass the entry exam and meet employers’demands. Moreover, the jobs that the Career Ladders

program graduates ound were o ten not in thein ormation technology eld, in large part due tothe narrowing o Silicon Alley during the program’simplementation years. So, Seedco went back to thedrawing board.

To explore how its hard-to-employ clients, includ-ing people leaving TANF, were aring one year a ter

nding a job, Seedco embarked on internal research,unded by the Starr Foundation. A survey o a sample

o Seedco’s placed workers revealed that more than

LOOKiNG WiThiN:Seedco’S AppRoAch to cAReeR AdvAnceMent

Over the past decade, Seedco has served and placed thousands o people into

jobs, primarily in New York City and more recently in Memphis, TN. In thecurrent calendar year, Seedco is on pace to document 8,000 job placements.Seedco primarily works with community-based organizations (CBOs) to en-gage and serve clients with barriers to employment. In its work, Seedco strives

or higher-quality job placements or its clients, and seeks to acilitate accessto work supports and other services that help individuals manage barriers likecriminal records, housing instability, and limited English pro ciency. WhileSeedco’s clients typically earn a wage above the average or people placed byWtW and One-Stop contractors in New York City, those with relatively lowskill and education levels have ew options or good-paying and high-qualityjobs, at least in the short term.




three-quarters o those who responded were stillworking 12 months a ter the initial job placement,and more than 60 percent o them had retained theiroriginal job. Still, the respondents were having lesssuccess advancing. On average, workers had increasedtheir weekly earnings by $19, but only 8 percent had

been promoted. Furthermore, the average hourly wagegain was only six cents, indicating that most workershad increased their earnings through additional hoursworked, not through wage gain or promotion.

Seedco’s placed clients were not advancing on theirown, and the surveys showed clients believed theywould bene t rom services to help them to do so.Respondents were particularly interested in careeradvancement workshops and 65 percent o clientsrequested to meet with a Seedco sta member todiscuss their advancement options. Seedco concluded

that because its clients’ skills and circumstancesvaried widely, some—though not all—would behelped by the typical career advancement programlike the NYITCLC and those discussed in the eldscan above.

As a result, Seedco began to look or a new advance-ment strategy—one that would incorporate someo the promising eatures o existing advancementmodels but would also take into account its clients’needs. Seedco’s clients wanted to move up, and wantedhelp to advance in the workplace, but they neededservices that were diverse and fexible enough tomeet their widely varying needs.

Just as Seedco was beginning to consider new advance-ment program models, Manpower DemonstrationResearch Corporation (MDRC) began piloting its ownlarge-scale attempts to study the e ects o broadly-de ned advancement services. The EmploymentRetention and Advancement Program, begun in 1999,o ers advancement services to working TANF recipi-ents. Over 16 models are being explored through thatinitiative and results have been promising. In 2005,MDRC launched the Worker Advancement and Sup-port Center (WASC) at three sites nationwide. This pro-gram o ers help to the ull range o workers engagedin ederally- unded work orce services through inten-sive one-on-one career coaching; assistance accessingservices, bene ts, and work supports to clients o theWIA- unded One-Stops; and by developing worksite-based advancement and bene ts-access services withemployers. While WASC is still under evaluation byMDRC, initial results show that workers are using theadvancement services and work supports available

to them, and that career coaches can be e ective inhelping workers make career decisions.

Seedco drew on these initial lessons to put together Earn More, a pilot program delivering advancementservices at scale and within the context o existing ser-vices. This e ort received initial support or planningand development rom the Mizuho USA Foundation,the Wachovia Foundation, and the MetLi e Founda-tion. The New York City Department o Small BusinessServices (DSBS), with the city’s Center or EconomicOpportunity (CEO), provided operational support orthe pilot. The Department was interested in supporting Earn More as part o its strategy to provide advance-ment opportunities to the working poor through itsWork orce1 Career Centers, the local one-stop system.Launched in mid 2007, Earn More seeks to provide amore fexible and client-centered approach to advance-

ment within the context o the services and toolsprovided by the major ederal employment services

unding streams.

the Model: A FlexiBle,client-deFined pAthWAy

In order to maximize Earn More’s impact and minimizeits costs, Seedco’s pilot, in part, seeks to utilize the ser-vices that already exist to serve disadvantaged workers.Seedco’s approach also di ers rom other advancementprograms by serving clients regardless o their eld o

work, rather than ocusing on just one sector. To servethis broad spectrum o low-income workers, Seedco’smodel considers each participant’s skills, needs, andgoals in the development o career and services plans.

The core eatures o Seedco’s pilot model o careeradvancement are discussed below.

ExPANSiVE ENROLLMENT allows Seedco to target abroad range o workers; the only requirements orenrollment in the Earn More pilot are that participantsmust have been working or at least six months andbe earning $14 per hour or less. Seedco systematically

reaches out to workers who were served through itsTANF and WIA- unded work orce programs, and thoseaccount or about one-third o the participants acrossthe our program sites. At one program site, ormerclients represent 50 percent o participants.

Clients enrolled in Earn More’s rst year varied widely.Their ages are airly evenly distributed between par-ticipants in their 20s, 30s, and 40s. Sixty percent o the participants are women. Earn More participantsare typically harder to serve than those enrolled in




more heavily screened career advancement programs.For example, many have criminal records and speakEnglish as a second language. However, they also havea higher level o education than Seedco’s average TANFor WIA customer: Most have at least a high schooldiploma but less than a college degree. They also tend

to have a stronger recent work history than Seedco’stypical TANF or WIA client, with an average lengtho employment o 18 months be ore enrolling in theprogram. Finally, clients have an average wage o $9.35an hour, on par with Seedco’s general TANF and WIApopulation.

CLiENT-TAiLORED SERViCES allow clients to pick theadvancement-oriented activities that best meet theirneeds. Earn More acts as an in ormation and re erralnetwork, combining resources into a package thatworks or each client, including community college

and nonpro t-based education and training coursesthat are generally the same as those o ered to allstudents.

As a result, Earn More participants enroll in a widevariety o career advancement-oriented services. Forexample, in the program’s rst year, no single sectoraccounted or the majority o elds being pursuedby the participants engaged in skills training andeducation. Courses o study include—but are notlimited to—basic education and English language,health care, hospitality, technology, commercial driv-ing, building maintenance, ood service, and humanservices; a number o participants also enrolled in arange o community college associate’s degree programs.

CAREER COAChiNG is the linchpin o Seedco’sadvancement model. Coaches, based at three com-munity organizations in the Bronx and Manhattan—Citizens Advice Bureau, Gay Men’s Health Crisis,and Henry Street Settlement—and at and theUpper Manhattan Work orce1 Career Centeroperated by Seedco, work with each participant todevelop a personalized advancement plan, and thenhelp participants put their plans into action. Unlikemore traditional case managers, career coaches helpplan and implement a career strategy and selectappropriate service options. In addition, the coacho ers career training on topics such as how tonegotiate with employers or better wages or hours.

Early results suggest that just the help o a career coachcan lead to positive results. So ar, more than hal o Earn More’s clients who have enjoyed an upgrade havedone so without additional training. This does not

S r BaShirley Baylock had spent years moving from one job to the next,

a u w- a r a a ar m ss s a rar r b f s a r s ra

pay her bills each month. Baylock had been so anxious to havea a s a j b a s a r r- rmas ra s—f a s ba us r .

Ba r Earn M r a r h r S r S m ,w r s a a a w -w j b r a ss w r ss ra ars b r , r a u r. S w r w r

ar r a a m a ar ab u j b r ua a ab r f a a s r s, r w r r résumé, abu r f r j b r ws, u rato present her previous experience as a cashier. After two months,Ba a a j b as a ba r a ca a o Ba . h r

w j b a s $12 a ur—a r as a m s $4 a urr m r r us s . t s rs a a

ra as w as b f s u a 401( ) r r m aand paid vacation and sick days. Her career coach explained that“s was r rm ,” bu ss a s f aam u m r ar r . Ba

u s j b a as r su ss: “h au m s r r m , a a i ’ a s r jus a

Br a SA u Br a S a a s a j b as a ar - msu r s r w U par S r (UpS) r ars,

s ar r was s a . W a am r r ssu r , S s U r Ma a a W r r 1 carc r ra b S w r r Earn M r .

S w r w s ar r a r ar a ar, ua s r - rm a - rm a a . F rs , aa r a WiA- u ra r a bu ma

a ra r ram. S , w ra , w r

r ar r a w r a s s, w m s ura r rma -bas ra s a s urr s , ma a $50 r a . n w, a m s ra

r ram, Br a s r ss f a b r j b us new skills, either within UPS or another company. Scott explained

a , “t Earn M r r ram as m ar ar r s s,su as as r a ra s a w s ru a w

a w r a s ua s. A r i a aras r ar m r ar r r u s.”

PARTiCiPANT PROFiLES




discount the importance o training as a componento career mobility: Many participants are currentlyenrolled in training, and will see an upgrade a ter theircourses are complete, while others have achieved aninitial pay raise or increase in hours through counsel-ing, but are also enrolled in training as part o their

longer-term career plan. But it does suggest that thereare signi cant bene ts in o ering disadvantagedworkers access to one-on-one assistance in plottingand executing a course to advancement.

EMPLOyER PARTNERShiPS allow Seedco to target in-dustries and employers that o er better opportunities

or participants. Earn More works closely with employ-ers to identi y upcoming job openings and require-ments or workers. Seedco also works with employersto place new entry-level workers rom Seedco’s TANFand WIA programs in positions le t vacant by advanc-

ing workers. In addition, Seedco leverages its reebusiness services to coach companies about the bot-tom-line bene ts o promoting internal advancement.

For example, Seedco has orged a strong partnershipwith the New York City online grocery delivery com-pany Fresh-Direct to help participants get their com-mercial driver’s licenses (CDLs). The company, whichhires many o its entry-level workers rom Seedco’sTANF and WIA work orce programs, has an ongoingneed or drivers with CDLs. With Seedco’s encour-agement, FreshDirect agreed to pay its drivers whoattained provisional CDLs a bonus o $220, and thosewho attained their permanent CDLs an additional$500 bonus, and $1 per hour raise. Seedco arrangedwith the training provider to give permit training tointerested workers, recruiting 12 participants or its

rst cohort. Ten o those participants passed the entryexam and were enrolled in CDL training, o whomeight completed training and achieved their CDLon the rst try.

CuSTOMizED TRAiNiNG COhORTS are sometimesdeveloped rom scratch in partnership with employersand training providers to help ll crucial gaps in thelandscape o readily available education and trainingservices. In its rst year, Earn More has worked with itstraining and community partners to organize groups

o participants to take part in short-term trainings inelds typically not supported by current programs,

such as guest services and hospitality, commercialdriving, and hazardous materials sa ety.

Seedco is currently experimenting with “learningcommunities” or working community college studentswho are at risk o dropping out. Select participants—working students who have completed at least twelvecredits and are enrolled in at least nine credits orthe upcoming semester—are o ered career coachingand internships related to their eld o study. Though

students are enrolled in associate’s degree programsand work in entry-level jobs, ew work in jobs relatedto their targeted careers. The hope is they can use theirinternship experience to apply their studies to the workworld and nd jobs conducive to their long-term goals.

pReliMinARy oUtcoMeS

Since its launch in July 2007, the Earn More pilot hasshown promising results. The program operates atabout $2,000 per participant and about $5,000 peradvancement outcome. In its rst ull year o opera-

tion, 528 workers participated, o whom 213 achievedupgrades by July 2008, with many still enrolled inprogram services. Average weekly earnings amongclients rose rom $295 a week to $411 a week.

O those who achieved upgrades, 73 did so throughcareer coaching and supportive services alone—either by increasing the hours they worked, obtainingemployer-sponsored bene ts, or receiving a payraise—and the remaining 140 had either enrolledin or completed training. Most participants whoachieved upgrades—63 percent—did so at theircurrent employer, with 86 percent receiving awage gain, 45 percent increasing their hours, and47 percent receiving employer-sponsored bene ts.




liMitAtionS

The extent to which Seedco is able to help clientswho would otherwise ail is unclear. It is importantto note that Earn More is a voluntary program andclients are sel -selected. As such, it is likely that someclients would have achieved career mobility withoutthe program’s intervention. Beyond this limitation,some o the key operational challenges that Seedcohas experienced during the rst year o Earn Moreare discussed below.

LEVERAGiNG ExiSTiNG SERViCES

Seedco’s Earn More pilot puts the existing in rastruc-ture o employment services to use in order to keepits per capita costs low and the number o workers itserves high. While the Earn More pilot makes as muchuse o community resources as possible, Seedco has

ound that due to signi cant gaps in existing services,especially around individual counseling and custom-ized, employer-based skills training, it has needed toaugment available o erings with new services.

O course, the intensive career coaching that is thehallmark o Earn More is not provided or within TANFand WIA guidelines. Nonetheless, Seedco eels thisservice is essential i workers are to make use o existing resources. Disadvantaged workers o ten arrivea ter years o rustration, having navigated the workworld largely on their own with varying degrees o

success. Many need help to gure out what they wantto do and how to get there. One participant, who wason parole and working as a warehouse laborer, voicedhow important it was or him to have a coach o eringa di erent perspective on what it takes to make it:“I know that in order to survive you’ve got to do theright thing. But every time you try to do the rightthing it always seems like you get screwed and you’rebetter o doing the wrong thing. They [ Earn More] tellyou straight up, ‘You’re always gonna be at the bottomi you don’t step it up.’ They tell you the truth.”

As the scale o the program increases, Seedco plans toexperiment with using group settings and technologyto o er some o the coaching services now providedon an individual basis. This, in turn, will help to

urther lower the costs o services. Seedco has alreadybegun the process by creating a careers section o its Earn Bene ts web portal (http://newyork.earnbene ts.org/careers/).

Seedco ound that the Earn More model could closegaps in the in rastructure o work orce services avail-able to incumbent workers outside o the One-Stopsystem, which typically serves unemployed adults andrecently dislocated workers. Many participants could

nd entry-level jobs, but needed basic employment

help to position themselves or better jobs. Frequentareas o assistance have included how to approach aboss about a promotion or a raise, translating oreigndegrees into US-recognized pro essional certi cations,or basic computer training.

Seedco also learned that existing services are o ten abad t or working adults. Many clients aced seriousdi culty nding sa e and a ordable child care andhousing, which hindered their ability to take partin education and training. Other clients enrolled intraining only to nd their programs were inconve-

nient, especially i they were working. One participant

uPGRADE TyPE %

Sam em r 63%

n w em r 37%

Wa ga 86%

A a h urs 45%

Wa ga + A a h urs 32%

M m em r S s r B f s 47

hoURly WAge Weekly eMployMenteARningS

UpgRAde UpgRAdeintAke intAke

$9.35

$295

$11.43 $411

39%i r as

22%i r as




completing her child care provider certi cation eltunprepared or her impending state certi cation exambecause o her training provider’s unresponsiveness.Another was unable to complete his culinary artstraining because the classes were o ered at a timethat conficted with his work schedule: “When I

started, they helped me out with a job and put mein a class. They got me motivated, they got me in ache school. But right now I’m out o the class becausethe job didn’t want to let me go earlier to take theclasses. So I’m kinda stuck.” In response, Seedco hasworked with community colleges and other trainingproviders to schedule specialized Earn More classesduring evening and weekend hours.

A CLiENT-FOCuSED PAThWAy

In order to reach as many workers as possible, Seedco

o ers participants the opportunity to pursue advance-ment in a wide range o elds. The program is open todisadvantaged workers with ew exceptions, and it isup to them, with the guidance o their coach, to plota course to achieve their target careers.

Early ndings show that participants do pursue a widerange o advancement strategies: Training was notthe most common path, and those in training chosea wide variety o industries. At one program site, onlynine o the 50 participants were enrolled in training,many o whom were changing careers rather than try-ing to move within the industry. Among that minorityo participants in training, programs ranged romtraining in A+ certi cation to commercial drivingto hospitality management to practical nursing. Thegoals o participants varied considerably, some havinglittle to do with moving ahead in a traditional careerpathway. Some expressed that the ultimate success wasbeing your own boss and owning your own company.Others were looking simply or job satis action.

While the Earn More program is open to participantspursuing any career, not all workers nd it to be a good

t. Participants expressed that career advancement

takes a long time, especially or those with educationand skill de ciencies and demanding personal ci rcum-stances, and Seedco quickly discovered that Earn Moreparticipants were highly sel -motivated.

Seedco also noticed that one key di erence between Earn More participants and other low-wage workersis that ewer o them are caring or children; more o them are adults without custodial children or are olderadults with grown children. Participants with childrenexplained that they had to make a choice between

devoting time to their amilies and devoting timeto their career progress. One participant explained,“For me, my kids’ schedule does not match with mine.I nd that I spend most o the time on the phonewith them because we’re all in di erent places, andwhen I get home they’re sleeping. There’s no balance.”

But although adults without dependents have moretime to invest in moving up the career and incomescale, they are less likely to be eligible or crucial worksupport bene ts than workers with children. Becauseo this, Seedco is exploring strategies to better connect

its single participants without dependents to bene tsand services that can be use ul to helping them holdon to their existing jobs and succeed on the path tocareer and nancial mobility.

SCALE

Seedco’s experience with Earn More indicates that scaleis possible—but that scale does not mean a one-size-

ts-all solution. Earn More has shown that existing,publicly unded work orce services can be harnessedto assist a wide range o disadvantaged workers. Mostnotably, e orts to help clients move up career andincome ladders in a wide range o industries can besigni cantly aided by the help and guidance o acoach, a ar less intensive and expensive interventionthan other advancement models.

Though the Earn More model shows promise to reacha larger number o people in a wider range o careers,it cannot reach everyone. Career advancement servicesshould be available to all disadvantaged workers, butworkers who are the most ready to move up—thosewithout young children, and those who are sel -moti-vated—will most be able to bene t rom these services.

Without larger policy changes, a career advancementmodel will never address the needs o workers orwhom advancement remains many steps away. Still,the lessons o Earn More suggest that o ering addition-al support to vulnerable working populations willgive a broader range o workers career mobility.




Seedco’s experience suggests that broad advancement-oriented policy changes can help stabilize disadvan-

taged workers—many o whom teeter on the brinko economic catastrophe—by creating a system thathelps them achieve upward mobility.

The ollowing recommendations, gleaned rom thelessons o the Earn More pilot, suggest a path orward.

ESTABLiSh iNTERiM iNDiCATORS AND MiLESTONES. The ultimate advancement outcomes—a signi cantwage gain, job promotion, or access to employer-sponsored bene ts can take at least six months andmore typically a year or more to achieve. Yet thereare ew commonly accepted interim indicators to

identi y workers’ progress along the path to upwardcareer mobility. Policymakers, practitioners, and

unders should work to identi y interim milestonesalong the path to advancement, and then both mea-sure and reward programs that achieve these outcomes.

BuiLD ADVANCEMENT iNCENTiVES iNTO WORKFORCEPOLiCiES AND PROGRAMS. It is widely-recognized thatTANF and WIA requirements have pushed states andlocal governments to emphasize labor market attach-ment and short-term job retention. But in the decadesince the creation o those programs, it has become

clear that these incentives have been less e ectivein helping workers achieve career advancement andhigher earnings. All o the stakeholders in work orcedevelopment—practitioners, higher and adult educa-tion providers, and employers—should have clear goalsand incentives that measure and reward advancement,not just job placement and retention.

ADVANCEMENT ShOuLD BE PART OF ALL WORKFORCEPROGRAMMiNG. Financial and career mobility must

be integrated into any e ort to help disadvantagedworkers. Advancement-oriented milestones and goalswithin unding streams should be strengthened, andinterventions or working clients should be built intothe in rastructure o existing programs.

ADuLT EDuCATiON AND COMMuNiTy COLLEGESySTEMS ShOuLD MAKE TRAiNiNG AND EDuCATiONFRiENDLy TO WORKERS AND RELEVANT TO EMPLOyERS. As part-time study and juggling work with schoolbecome more common, students need access toeducation at nontraditional times. They also neededucation that ensures their success in the labormarket, which means it must be industry-relevantand provide basic educational competency. As such,education and training providers should continueto improve their e orts to develop market-responsivecurricula and to success ully enroll and graduatepart-time and working students.

WORKERS ShOuLD SEE STRONGER iNCENTiVES TOADVANCE iN ThE LABOR MARKET. Higher earningsmake low-wage workers ineligible or a number o means-tested bene ts, which reduces incentives topursue advancement. Policy tools such as the Earned

Income Tax Credit and subsidized health insuranceshould be strengthened, especially or workers withoutchildren, and restrictions such as bene ts asset testsloosened, in order to support workers as they work tomove into higher-wage jobs.

LOOKiNG FORWARD:Action StepS

A low-wage worker hoping to nd better pay, long-term career prospects,

or employer-sponsored bene ts has ew places to turn to or guidance andservices. Even more troubling, the current recession threatens to push moreand more low-wage workers out o their jobs and into dependence on adrastically retracted social sa ety net than the one that existed a generationago. It is these workers—those who maintain steady but low-wage jobs—who will need employment-related skills to keep and strengthen their

oothold in the altering labor market.



FORGE EMPLOyER PARTNERShiPS. Employers shouldbe encouraged to partner with work orce programs.Strong employer partnerships are essential in develop-ing success ul advancement programming. Businessesshould be encouraged to partner with work orce pro-grams beyond the basic quid pro quo exchange o job

postings or quali ed applicants through, and seats on,Work orce Investment Boards. Tools and policies, suchas employer tax credits linked to wage increases, couldprovide the necessary encouragement.

LEVERAGE AND ExPAND AVAiLABLE RESOuRCES. Work orce development is increasingly stretched thin,with less unding available to assist harder-to-servepopulations. A ter a decade o experimentation withsmall-scale pilots, advancement strategies should helpa broader range o disadvantaged workers, includingworking adults without custodial children, in waysthat can be replicated broadly and cost e ectively.

Seedco has learned that designing career advancementmodels that broadly and fexibly serve disadvantagedworkers will require not just new programs, but newways o thinking. The existing public unding streams

or employment services are power ul tools to helpdisadvantaged workers enter and stay in the labormarket—but it is now our collective responsibility toharness and strengthen those tools to help workersachieve upward mobility.

end noteS

1. Lawrence Mishel and Jared Bernstein, “The State o WorkingAmerica 2008/2009,” Economic Policy Institute, 2008.

2. Harry Holzer, “Better Workers or Better Jobs: Improving WorkerAdvancement in the Low-Wage Labor Market,” The BrookingsInstitution, 2007.

3. Paul Osterman, “Employment and Training Policies: NewDirections or Less Skilled Adults,” Paper prepared or Urban InstituteCon erence Work orce Policies For The Next Decade And Beyond,MIT Sloan School, 2005.

4. “DOL Annual Report, Fiscal Year 2007 Per ormance andAccountability Report,” United States Department o Labor, 2007.

5. Pamela Loprest, “Families Who Le t Wel are: Who Are They andHow Are They Doing?,” Urban Institute, 1999.

6. “Success ul Transitions out o Low-Wage Work or TANF Recipients,”United States Department o Health and Human Services, 2004.

7. “Grant Report to the Starr Foundation,” Seedco, September 2007.

8. Paul Osterman, “Improving Job Quality: Policies Aimed atthe Demand Side o the Low-Wage Labor Market” in A Future o Good Jobs: America’s Challenge in the Global Economy, ed. Timothy

J. Bartik and Susan N. Houseman. W.E. Upjohn Institute, 2008.

9. Karin Martinson, “Building Skills and Promoting Job Advancement:The Promise o Employer-Focused Strategies,” Urban Institute, 2007.

10. Lily Zandniapour and Maureen Conway, “Closing the Gap:How Sectoral Work orce Development Programs Bene it theWorking Poor,” The Aspen Institute, 2001.

Documents

Seedco Career Advancement Policy Report