Study Details | Pathways to Work

101045-Study of Accelerated

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the intervention.

Intervention: Accelerated Study in Associate Programs Ohio

Population and employment barriers:

Educational attainment (At least a high school diploma or equivalent)

Services provided:

Basic skills/bridge programs, Case management, Job readiness, Occupational or sectoral training, Performance- or behavior-based financial incentives, Tuition assistance/financial aid, Work supports

Setting: Tested in multiple settings

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Eligible students had low incomes such that they were eligible for Pell Grants, willing to attend college full-time, and seeking a degree that could be completed within three years. Students could be new to the college or be continuing students with up to 24 credits previously earned. Students were individually randomly assigned to a treatment group that could participate in ASAP or a control group that could not participate, but could access standard services and offerings from the college.

Time period of study:

2015 to 2023

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase short-term earnings, Increase long-term earnings, Increase very long-term earnings, Increase short-term employment, Increase long-term employment, Increase very long-term employment, Increase education and training

Study funded by:

Funding consortium built by MDRC, consisting of the Ascendium Education Group (formerly the Great Lakes Guaranty Corporation), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the ECMC Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Greater Cincinnati Foundation, Haile U.S. Bank Foundation, KnowledgeWorks, the Kresge Foundation, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, and the Lumina Foundation.

Results

View table help Need more context or definitions for the table below? View the table help to get insight into terms, measures, and definitions.

Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Intervention group mean	Impact	Units	Sample size
Increase short-term earnings	Quarterly earnings	Quarter 6	High	2,888.00	2,631.00	-257.00	2017 dollars	1,482
Increase long-term earnings	Annual earnings	Year 5	High	15,975.00	17,088.00	1,113.00	2021 dollars	1,482
Increase very long-term earnings	Annual earnings	Year 6	High	17,626.00	19,573.00	1,948.00	2022 dollars	1,482
Increase short-term employment	Ever employed, quarterly	Quarter 6	High	68.40	68.50	0.10	percentage points	1,482
Increase long-term employment	Ever employed, annual	Year 5	High	76.50	75.90	-0.70	percentage points	1,482
Increase very long-term employment	Ever employed, annual	Year 6	High	70.80	70.50	-0.30	percentage points	1,482
Increase education and training	Earned a bachelor's degree	Year 6	High	8.60	13.60	5.00	percentage points	1,501
Increase education and training	Earned a certificate from a training program	Year 6	High	6.70	9.20	2.50	percentage points	1,501
Increase education and training	Earned an associate's degree	Year 6	High	26.40	41.80	15.40	percentage points	1,501

Short-term outcomes are those measured 18 months or fewer after participants are first offered services. Long-term outcomes are those measured between 18 months and 5 years after participants are first offered services. Very long-term outcomes are those measured 5 years or more after participants are first offered services.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

The findings quality describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the intervention. We do not display findings that rate low.

Findings key:

A moderate-to-large favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large favorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that might be due to chance
A favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A favorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that might be due to chance
An unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
An unfavorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size or direction
A finding of no effect that might be due to chance

Favorable findings are impacts in a direction that is socially desirable. Statistical significance indicates the likelihood that a study finding is due to the intervention, rather than due to chance. Findings are described as moderate-to-large if the intervention produced a sufficiently large change in the outcome. An impact receives this designation if the standardized effect size is equal to or greater than 0.25 or equal to or less than -0.25.

Sample characteristics

On average, study sample members were about 23 years old at random assignment. A majority of participants were female (64 percent). About 46 percent of participants were White non-Hispanic and about 35 percent were Black. Nearly 60 percent were working at the time of enrollment, and about a third (34 percent) were the first in their family to attend college.

Age

Mean age

23 years

Sex

Female	64%
Male	36%

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	35%
White, not Hispanic	46%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	10%
Another race	2%
More than one race	7%

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if the authors reported race and ethnicity separately; in these cases, we report the category White, rather than White, not Hispanic.

Family status

Parents

27%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were employed	59%
Were unemployed	41%

Participant education

Had a high school diploma or GED	99%
Did not have a high school diploma or GED	1%
First-generation college students	34%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

Cincinnati State Technical and Community College, Cuyahoga Community College, and Lorain County Community College

Program history:

ASAP was originally developed and implemented at the City University of New York (CUNY). The ASAP Ohio Demonstration was launched in 2015, concurrent with the evaluation.

Intervention services:

The Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP), originally designed by the City University of New York (CUNY), provides community college students with up to three years of financial, academic, and personal supports to address barriers to success. Three Ohio community colleges—Cincinnati State Technical and Community College, Cuyahoga Community College, and Lorain County Community College—implemented the ASAP Ohio model. Participants received enhanced advising, career development services, and tutoring; a tuition waiver; assistance with textbook costs; a monthly financial incentive; blocked courses with consolidated schedules; and a first-year student success seminar.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

Members of the control group could not participate in ASAP Ohio, but could participate in all of their college’s usual offerings and services.

Service receipt duration:

Up to three years

Intervention funding:

Study publications

Hill, Colin, Colleen Sommo, and Kayla Warner (2023). From Degrees to Dollars: A Supplement to Six-Year Findings from the ASAP Ohio Demonstration. New York: MDRC. Available at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ASAP_Ohio_6-yr_Supplement_FINAL.pdf

Hill, Colin, Colleen Sommo, and Kayla Warner (2023). From Degrees to Dollars: Six-Year Findings from the ASAP Ohio Demonstration. New York: MDRC. Available at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ASAP-Ohio_6-yr_Brief_FINAL.pdf

Sommo, Colleen and Alyssa Ratledge (2016). Bringing CUNY Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) to Ohio: Early Findings from a Demonstration in Three Community Colleges. New York: MDRC. Available at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ASAP_Ohio_final.pdf

Sommo, Colleen and Alyssa Ratledge (2016). Bringing CUNY Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) to Ohio: Early Findings from a Demonstration in Three Community Colleges. Supplementary Tables. New York: MDRC. Available at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ASAP_Ohio_supplement_final_0.pdf

Sommo, Colleen, Dan Cullinan, Michelle Manno, Sierra Blake, and Evelyn Alonzo (2018). Doubling Graduation Rates in a New State: Two-Year Findings from the ASAP Ohio Demonstration. New York: MDRC. Available at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ASAP_brief_2018_Final.pdf

Sommo, Colleen, Michelle Manno, and Dan Cullinan (2019). Doubling Graduation Rates in a New State: Two-Year Findings from the ASAP Ohio Demonstration. Supplementary Appendices. New York: MDRC. Available at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/ASAP_OH_Tech_App_final.pdf

View the glossary for more information about these and other terms used on this page.

The Pathways Clearinghouse refers to interventions by the names used in study reports or manuscripts. Some intervention names may use language that is not consistent with our style guide, preferences, or the terminology we use to describe populations.

Study of Accelerated Study in Associate Programs Ohio