Vocational Training for High School Students

BrazilIstanbul, May 14, 2015

Andrea Rocha – Secretaria de Educação do Estado do CearáInês Studart – Secretaria de Desenvolvimento Econômico

Victor Hugo de Oliveira – Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica do Ceará

Cristian Quijada Torres – WBCaio Piza – DIME/WB

Intervention SummaryI. Objective

– Evaluate the impact of the Vocational Education Program of the Secretary of Education of the Ceará State Government;

II. Components to be evaluated1. Vocational Education Program: combine high school education +

technical formation;• Full-day secondary school;• Compare outcomes between students from vocational program and students

from regular education;

2. Information about the returns associated to different careers to students who entered in the labor market;

3. Information to firms (employers) about the average quality of students who entered in the labor market;

Evaluation QuestionsI. Strategic Questions

a. What is the impact of the program on cognitive skills (Math, Portuguese, and technical skills) and non-cognitive skills of students;

b. What is the effect of the program on the employability, wages and other labor market outcomes?

c. Does the information about the returns of technical careers versus higher education (university) influence the decision making process about the career choice of students?

d. What is the impact of providing information about the quality of students who are in the labor market on the quality of job matching (employee-employer)?

II. Cross-cutting issuesa. Does the program have different effects between boys and girls?b. Does the program have heterogeneous effect between high-performing

and lower-performing students from the fundamental education?c. Does the program affect (negatively) the employability of students in the

control group (displacement effect)?

Evaluation Design• A large proportion of 112 schools that offer the program

has a waiting list (waiting list – oversubscription)– The program will focus on 10 out of 52 technical

courses that are more directly related to the private sector;

1. The selection into the schools will be randomized;2. Additional information about job market will be

randomly assigned to graduating students;3. Randomized firms to receive information about the

quality of students who want to enter the labor market.

Evaluation Design

Treatment 3: Information package about the quality of students…

Control 2: Current model of communication with the private sector

Treatment 1:Vocational education

Treatment 2:Vocational education +Information package

Control 1:Standard education

Experiment wth firms/employers

Expe

rimen

t with

stu

dent

s

Effect of T1

Effect of T2

Effect of T3

Effect of T1 and T3

Effect of T2 and T3

Pure control

Sample and data

• Currently: 45,000 students enrolled in the vocational schools (~500 students/schools)

• Sample to run the evaluation: 3,000 students.

Timeline

From Ideas to Market: Investment Readiness Program in the

Western Balkans

Istanbul, May 14, 2015

Intervention Summary• The problem: entrepreneurs are not “investment ready” (e.g.,

unwilling to seek external private funding and don’t know how to sell their new ideas/projects to investors)

• Lack of investment readiness compromises the effectiveness of supply-side interventions such as the creation of Seed or VC funds (e.g., Serbia, Croatia, Lebanon, Morocco).

• The intervention objectives:• Provide a comprehensive investment readiness program (IRP) to

innovative start-ups in the region.• Evaluate if IRP facilitates access to equity finance. • Components of the intervention: 1) mentoring to be investment

ready (e.g., management, IPRs, commercialization, marketing, etc) 2) mentoring presentation skills, 3) pitch event with investors.

Evaluation Questions• 1) Are investment readiness program for innovative start-

ups an effective intervention to facilitate access to equity finance?

• 2) Is it worthy to spend a lot of money in a tailored investment readiness intervention vis-à-vis a low cost online program?

• 3) What is the impact of the investment readiness program on medium-term firm performance (e.g., sales, profits, employment)

• 4) Do the IRPs scores predict medium-term firm performance?

Evaluation Design• Randomized Controlled Trial (after a pre-screening stage)• 5 Countries: Croatia, Kosovo, The FYR of Macedonia, Montenegro,

and Serbia.• Target group: innovative start-ups (sample size: 150 firms group)

TREATMENT 1

3 months of face-to-face mentoring; IR

workshops; Presentation skills.

TREATMENT 2 (CONTROL)

52-hour online investment readiness

program

Real pitch event: top participants will be invited to a final pitch event with regional investors

Mock pitch event: participants will give a 5-minute presentation to a committee that will evaluate and score their proposals

Sample and data

• Sample: qualified innovative start-ups in the targeted region

• Sample size: 150 T and 150 C• Data: baseline and endline surveys• Data 2: IRP scores on investment readiness

Timeline

• July 2015: launch event and call for application, roadshow to promote the program

• Sept-Dec. 2015: online (control) and face-to-face (treatment) mentoring program

• Jan-Feb. 2016: mock and final pitch event• March-May. 2016: data analysis

14

Risks• Take up: concern that the region does not have a significant

mass of innovative start-ups, encouragement channels (promotional events, advertising on tv, radio, social media, phone calls, SMS, emails).

• Attrition: concerns that if the quality/reputation of the mentors is not high or international then some start-ups may not show up for the IRP.

• Spillovers: we have to make clear that the process is competitive so that no communication happens btw treated and control

Thank You!

<High Impact Entrepreneurship Program>

<Mexico> Istanbul, May 14, 2015

Intervention SummaryThe High Impact Entrepreneurship Program has the objective to support firms to get tools to strength their development and operation in order to be more efficient and to have more opportunities to be successful.The firms must have an innovation in product, service or business model, high potential to be global and generate benefits beyond the economic factor.

Components to be evaluated Overall impact of the program The application process The support categories The monitoring process

Program Design

Promotion

Application Process

Proposal Evaluation

Monitoring

Evaluation QuestionsOverall Impact1.What is the impact of the High Impact Entrepreneurship

Program on firm’s performance (productivity, sales, job creation)?

Variations2. What is the impact of providing diagnostic/consulting services before applying to the program on the quality of the application and the firm’s performance?

3. What is the impact of eliminating the conditional expenditure categories from the grant scheme?

4. What is the impact of providing TA through project implementation on firm’s performance?

Evaluation DesignUniverse of interested firms

Randomly assignedconsulting?/diagnostic

services

Receive TA Don’t receive TA

Variation A)Technical

Assistance before application

Assess the impact on the quality of the application

Evaluation DesignFirms ranked above threshold

Randomly assigned matching grant

Receive Matching grant

Don´t receive Matching grant

Restrictedexpenditure categories

Unrestricted expenditure categories

Variation B)Elimination of

restricted expenditure categories

Assess the effectiveness of the design of the supporting instrument by

comparing performance

Assess the overall impact of the program on firm’s performance

Evaluation DesignFirms ranked above threshold

Randomly assigned matching grant

Technical assistance through project implementation

No Technical assistance

Variation C) Technical assistance

through project implementation

Asses the project implementation capacity

Receive Matching grant

Don´t receive Matching grant

Sample and dataSample: V1: Universe of interested firms (approx. 1000)

Q1: Eligible firms (approx. 500 firms)

V2,V3: Funded firms (approx. 100 firms)

Data:Administrative dataEnterprise/Managerial survey

Timeline1. i2i expression of interest: June 20152. INADEM approval of concept: June 20153. Concept note approval: November 20154. Launch of program: 2016 (month tbd)5. Baseline: tbd6. Endline: tbd7. Final analysis: tbd

Emergency Employment Investment Project

EgyptIstanbul, May 14, 2015

Intervention Summary• Context & Objectives

– Create short-term employment opportunities for the unemployed (unskilled and semi-skilled) workers

– Contribute to the creation and/or maintenance of community infrastructure and services

– Improve access to basic infrastructure and community services among the target population

– Improve the employability of the youth through short-term training or support to facilitate transitions to wage and self-employment.

• Interventions to be tested – Community infrastructure component– Community social services component – Youth employability [not yet developed in this design.]

Evaluation Questions• What are the effects of the cash for work program [on social

and economic outcomes of beneficiaries/ communities?– Effects of short-term employment– Effects of infrastructure and social services

• Do social accountability tools—such as community investigations or complaint mechanisms—enhance the efficacy of the cash for work program?

• Does combining community infrastructure with social services achieve greater social and economic impacts than community infrastructure alone?

• Can the cash for work program influence the welfare of the whole community (including eligible non-participants and ineligible)?

Key outcomes of interest• Consumption/food security

• Human development outcomes (e.g., education & health)

• Labor market outcomes (waged or self-employment)

• Access to social services

• Quality of infrastructures

• Revitalization of local economy

• Social participation & cohesion

Evaluation Design• We use a cluster-randomized phase-in approach to identify

effects of the different treatments and sub-treatments

Data

• Select a representative random sample of 10 individuals in each of 400 study community– Total sample is 4,000

• We plan to use 4 data sources:– Household surveys – Community surveys – High frequency data (mass sms) – Administrative data ( MIS )

32

Timeline (tentative)

• Field mission: End of July 2015 Refine IE design (fine tune treatments & hypotheses) Design IE for the youth employability component Re-examine study sample Develop IE implementation protocols

• Phase one rollout : August 2015-October2016

• Follow up data collection : October-December 2016

• Phase two rollout : December 2016 – End 2018

SME Centers

Dominican Republic Istanbul, May 14, 2015

Intervention Summary• Objective

– Increase the performance of the firm, providing the following services:

General Consultancy Training Technical Assistance

Components to be evaluated

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Evaluation Questions

• What's the impact of training provided by SME Centers on firm performance (Profit, Sales, Employment, etc)?

• What's the impact of training + technical assistance provided by SME Centers on firm performance (Profit, Sales, Employment, etc)?

Evaluation Design

Control Group

++

Treatment 1 Treatment 2

+

400 SME

400 SME

400 SME

4,800 SME Invited25% Take up= 1,200

Sample and data

• Centers provide services to MSMEs in urban areas (4 centers that serve firms in the services sector) and in rural areas (2 centers that serve farmers).– We may need to concentrate on urban areas, on small firms in the

services sector to reduce heterogeneity.

Pilot Project Profit

Sales

Employment

38

IE of SME CentersACTIVITY MONTHS

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IE Design

SMEs Invitations

Program start (BL Data Collection)

General Consultancy (Control)

GC +Training (Treatment 1)

GC + Training + Technical Assitance (Treatment 2)

Basic Follow up (3 variables)

Comprehensive Follow up

Thank you¡Gracias!

Contact Info: Noel Bou, noel.bou@mic.gob.do Cel. (829) 659-2913.

Rubi Breton, rubi.breton@mic.gob.do Cel. (809) 467-2015