| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Trial Title | Before Improving skills in Bihar: how to improve training completion and placement into jobs? | After The right person for the right job: Can information about job prospects reduce dropout in a large Indian training programme? |
| Field Investigator | Before wiji arulampalam | After Bhaskar Chakravorty |
| Field Trial Status | Before in_development | After on_going |
| Field Abstract | Before In recognition of the importance of the youth employment challenge in India, the Government of India launched Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Grameen Kaushal Yojana (DDU-GKY) in 2014 across India. This is one of India's most prominent skills and job creation schemes. The scheme follows a Public-Private Partnership mode (PPP model), where registered private sector project implementation partners (PIAs) bid for government funds, and plan and implement skills training and job placement programs, targeting rural youth from poor families. After completion of training programs, trained individuals are placed in jobs which offer regular monthly wages. The objective of the project is to shed new light on the determinants of attrition and job uptake/retention under DDU-GKY, which is a major concern for the PIAs. This project will use a randomised controlled trial to measure the influence of two interventions on training completion, and retention in employment post-training. The first intervention, to be carried out at the start of the training, will provide information regarding job specifications and working conditions in the placement jobs the trainees will be offered at the completion of the training. The second intervention, to be carried out at the end of the class-based training, will provide information to alleviate candidates' fears and doubts about starting a job and migrating far from home. | After DDU-GKY is a large-scale training programme in India. It is targeted at the rural poor youth, and combines short-term training with guaranteed job placement. Dropout during training and the lack of retention in placement jobs are the main problems faced by the programme. Based on evidence gathered in a previous project, we hypothesise that an important determinant of dropout is misinformation of trainees about the programme and placement jobs. We design an information intervention that takes the form of two information sessions, one before the training starts and the second before trainees are placed with employers for on-the-job training. We randomise these interventions across 90 training batches in Bihar and Jharkhand. We intend to use administrative and survey data to analyse the effects of these interventions on training completion, job uptake and retention, as well as other outcomes describing the labour-market and socio-economic situation of trainees. |
| Field Last Published | Before December 10, 2018 02:17 PM | After February 26, 2020 07:29 AM |
| Field Intervention (Public) | Before Intervention (A) Objective: Provide information that help candidates to be better informed about the characteristics of the available placement jobs in terms of the location, wages, etc. Intervention: The intervention takes place at the very beginning of the training. We gather trainees in a presentation room and provide them with a list of detailed characteristics of potentially available placement jobs. The list would include job title, company name, location (city and state), and compensation package. Trainees would have the opportunity to ask questions about the contents of the list. Intervention (B) Objective: Prepare trainees to the transition between training and work. Intervention: The intervention takes place a few days before the start of the on-the-job training (the first step out of the centre) phase. This consists of a short training session at the training centre. Unlike the traditional job readiness modules that revolve around the principle to improve candidates' employability for employers, this session would be focused on candidates' fears and doubts about starting a job and migrating far from home. Aspects related to work, relations with the boss, with colleagues would be covered as well as aspects related to life in another city/state (access to healthcare, accommodation, where to get help). | After Intervention (A) The intervention takes place at the very beginning of the training, before "batch freezing". Before batch freezing, trainee dropout has low cost for training providers: they have time to attract more students to meet their quantitative objectives. We gather trainees in a classroom and provide them with a list of detailed characteristics of potentially available placement jobs. The list includes job title, company name, location (city and state), and compensation package (net monthly wage and in-kind benefits). Trainees will have an opportunity to ask the placement officer, questions regarding the contents of the list. Intervention (B) This intervention takes place a few days before placement. We gather trainees in a classroom and provide them with a list of detailed characteristics of positions that are actually available to them for placement. The list includes job title, company name, location (city and state), and compensation package (net monthly wage and in-kind benefits). Trainees will have an opportunity to ask the placement officer questions regarding the contents of the list. |
| Field Primary Outcomes (End Points) | Before Training completion outcomes: Time spent in training, Entering the on-the-job training phase, Completing the on-the-job training, Labour-market outcomes: Being placed into a job, Job retention (time spent on the job), Quality of the job, Satisfaction on the job. | After Main outcomes: Job retention three months after the end of the training; Dropout before batch freezing; Training completion conditional on being there after batch freezing; Job retention after three months conditional on training completion. |
| Field Primary Outcomes (Explanation) | Before Training completion outcomes: from the administrative data of the training provider. Labour-market outcomes: from the endline survey and the administrative data of the training provider. | After Training completion and placement outcomes: from the administrative data of the state implementation agency. Other labour-market outcomes: from the endline survey. |
| Field Planned Number of Clusters | Before 50 training batches. | After 90 training batches. |
| Field Planned Number of Observations | Before 2,000 trainees (about 40 trainees per batch). | After 2,700 trainees (about 30 trainees per batch). |
| Field Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms | Before 25 training batches control, and 25 training batches as treatment. | After 45 training batches control, and 45 training batches as treatment. |
| Field Power calculation: Minimum Detectable Effect Size for Main Outcomes | Before We are considering a power of 80% and a significance level of 5%. For the main outcome (retention in employment 3 months after placement), we assume a base mean of 70% and intra-correlation cluster of 0.1. The minimum detectable effect is 0.127 with 25 clusters per group and 40 observations per cluster. | After We consider a power of 80% and a significance level of 5%. For the main outcome (retention in employment 3 months after placement), we assume a base mean of 70% and intra-cluster correlation of 0.1. The minimum detectable effect is 10.6 percentage points with 45 clusters per group and 30 observations per cluster. |
| Field Additional Keyword(s) | Before On-the-job-training, dropout, rural development | After training, on-the-job-training, dropout, rural development, skills, job placement |
| Field Pi as first author | Before No | After Yes |
| Field | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Field Document | Before |
After
pap_information.pdf
MD5:
70578c0cb9b2896c60742f893b05a1f0
SHA1:
c7b34761594fae8ec30f2dd7061486cdd965e76e
|
| Field Title | Before | After Pre-analysis plan, before starting data analysis |