Job Generation for Young Women:Impact Evaluation of a Training and Voucher

Program in Jordan

David Mckenzie

Rationale for Jordan NOW

0

20

40

60

80

100

20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Perc

enta

ge E

mpl

oyed

Age

Employment Rates of Community College Graduates by Age and Gender

Male Female

Community college courses taken by women

• We see the majority of students are taking courses in administration and finance (43%), which covers specializations such as accounting, electronic administration and management information systems; courses in medical assistance (24%), which covers mainly nursing and pharmacy specializations, and educational programs (10%) which covers those aiming to be teachers.

Barriers to Young Women working• Supply side difficulties affecting workers:

– Young female workers lack initial experience– Inability to signal quality credibly– Work environment and lack of flexibility might deter females from many

firms– Lack of confidence in approaching employers– New female graduates lack “soft skills” needed for lifelong learning and

effective employment.• Demand side issues affecting firms’ demand for female workers:

– Firms do not have good information about productivity of young female graduates

– Stereotypes: young graduates, particularly females lack reputation for job commitment

– Lack of experience in hiring women

Jordan New Opportunities for Women (Jordan NOW) aims to:

• Improve information between firms and potential workers

• Provide the opportunity to build a positive work reputation for female graduates

• Subsidize on-the-job skills acquisition• Change negative stereotypes among firms and

young women• Improve soft-skills and communication skills

Intervention Overview

• The Jordan NOW pilot consists of two interventions– interpersonal skills training• 3 week course based on interpersonal and basic job

skills

– job vouchers• salary vouchers worth 150 JD per month valid for a

maximum of 6 months

Treatment Assignment• 1395 out of the 1755 women in our baseline

survey passed the college exit exam• Example of a 2x 2 design• From this group, we assigned 300 women to

the training, 300 to job vouchers, 300 to both, and 450 to a control group

Training(300)

Voucher(300)

Both(300)

Control(450)

Why this sample size?

• This is pretty close to the universe of young women passing their exams and graduating from the main community colleges

• Did power calculations based on assumed sample size of around 1350– Can detect increase in employment from 0.20 to

0.30 with power=85% (T=300, C=450), or power = 95% (T=600, C=450).

Lottery to decide assignment

• Resources limited, so lottery amongst graduates was considered fair way to give each student an equal chance of being selected

• Also provides a means for impact evaluation – if vouchers were given out on first-come, first-served basis, it could be the most motivated job seekers who get them, and they wouldn’t be comparable to those who don’t get them.

Randomization stratification• Students were stratified into 16 strata on the basis of 2 geographic groups,

whether their examination score at the end of high school was above the sample median, whether they indicated at baseline that they planned to work full-time and thought it was likely or somewhat likely that they would have a job within 6 months, and whether or not she is usually permitted to travel to the market alone (a measure of empowerment).

• Why stratify?– Improves statistical power– Prevents chance imbalances in these characteristics that we are

interested in looking at the heterogeneity of treatment effects by

Table 4: Comparison of Means of Baseline Characteristics by Treatment GroupVoucher Training Voucher

Only Only & Training ControlStratification VariablesAmman, Salt or Zarqa 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44Tawjihi score above median 0.50 0.52 0.53 0.51Plans to work and expects to have job in 6 months 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41Is allowed to travel to market alone 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51Other variablesTawjihi score 64.3 64.2 64.0 63.8Age 21.2 21.1 21.0 21.3Married 0.15 0.16 0.12 0.13Mother currently works 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.06Father currently works 0.62 0.68 0.61 0.58She has previously worked 0.15 0.18 0.17 0.16Already has a job for after graduation 0.05 0.08 0.11 0.08Has taken a specialized English course 0.31 0.26 0.26 0.30Someone in household owns a business 0.27 0.25 0.29 0.23Someone in household owns a car 0.62 0.66 0.62 0.64Someone in household owns a computer 0.72 0.75 0.74 0.70Household has internet access 0.28 0.18 0.26 0.26Is very interested in job voucher 0.70 0.73 0.73 0.75Is very interested in training program 0.76 0.72 0.75 0.77

Sample Size 300 300 300 449Note: only the difference in internet access is statistically significant across treatment groups at the 10% significance level.

Surveying overview

• Baseline survey took advantage of students being at school for exam period– Self-administered questionnaire used (cheap and efficient given

short time window allowed for surveying)– One problem: asked for contact phone numbers/emails of friends in

case they moved – but since they weren’t allowed their cellphones in the classrooms, many couldn’t provide this information.

• Mid-line survey – just completed- majority done by telephone, with in-person follow-ups to find those who couldn’t get by phone.

• 1-2 more survey waves planned, probably one more by phone, and a longer one in person.

Take-up of the Employability skills Training

• The training intervention was organized and implemented by the Business Development Center, a respected local nongovernmental organization that specializes in the school-to-work transition facing Jordanian youth.

• The curriculum covered employability as well as professional skills development:– team building, communication skills, presentation skills, business writing, customer service,

C.V. writing, interviewing skills, and positive thinking

• The training was positivity evaluated by the vast majority of participants, with approximately 90-95% marking the sessions as Excellent.

• Training take-up is lower if:– Married– Don’t expect to work– Have high exam scores (perhaps they think they don’t need it)

• Training take-up higher if in admin/business courses• Overall 62% of those offered this training took it up.

Job Voucher take-up

• By mid-April, 51% of women who received vouchers had begun to use their vouchers

• Another 14% (77 women) are looking for a job and trying to use their voucher, but they have yet to find a job

• Early take-up regressions suggest: use higher among graduates around Amman, less likely to be redeemed among those with higher exam scores, and more likely to be used by those who can travel to a market by themselves and who are not married.

Early results

• Time-line:– August 2010: baseline survey taken during same week as

students taking exams.– Late August 2010: exam results issued, randomization done,

and students notified of treatment(s) if they were selected– Sept 25-Nov 2: rolling employability skills training courses– Oct 10, 2010-August 10, 2011: period vouchers are valid for.– May 2011: mid-line survey (gets employment status and

outcomes 8-9 months after graduation, and 7 months after employability skills training, at period when first few workers are ending voucher period).

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.17

0.55

0.19

0.57

Proportion of Female Graduates Currently Employed

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.17

0.37

0.19

0.38

Proportion of Women Who Expect to be Employed After Voucher Ends

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Proportion of Women Employed

Married/EngagedUnmarried

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Proportion of Women Employed

Outside AmmanIn and Around AmmanUnder Median TawjihiAbove Median TawjihiWork Full TimeNot Work Full TimeCan't Go Alone to MarketCan Go Alone to Market

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Proportion of Women Employed

Outside AmmanIn and Around Amman

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Proportion of Women Employed

Below Median TawjihiAbove Median Tawjihi

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Proportion of Women Employed

Expected to Work Full TimeNot Expected to Work Full Time

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

Proportion of Women Employed

Can't Go to to Market AloneCan Go to Market Alone

Control Voucher Training Both140

145

150

155

160

165

147

162

149

158

Mean Income Conditional on Being Employed

Minimum wage

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.39

0.52

0.460.49

Proportion Employed with a Formal Contract Conditional on Being Employed

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.43

0.21

0.50

0.16

Proportion Registered for Social Security Conditional on Being Employed

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.26

0.45

0.33

0.39

Proportion of Women Who Have Money of Their Own and Can Decide How to Use it

Control Voucher Training Both0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.39

0.62

0.54 0.54

Proportion of Employed Women Who Have Money of Their Own and Can Decide How to Use it

Extra slides

Regression results from mid-line survey

Table 1: Treatment Effects on Employment

Employment Status

Expected Employment Status After Voucher Expiration Income last month

Voucher 0.382*** 0.198*** 17.91**

(0.0348) (0.0340) (8.495)

Training 0.0228 0.0228 4.187

(0.0304) (0.0304) (10.92)

Voucher*Training -0.00261 -0.0106 -6.964

(0.0517) (0.0508) (11.72)

Constant 0.168*** 0.168*** 142.8***

(0.0188) (0.0188) (7.956)

Observations 1236 1236 445

R-squared 0.160 0.049 0.021

Robust standard errors in parentheses

*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1

Table 2: Treatment Effects on FormalityRegistered for Social Security in this job

Formal employment contract for this job

Voucher -0.217*** 0.129*

(0.0717) (0.0748)

Training 0.0738 0.0681

(0.0944) (0.0937)

Voucher*Training -0.124 -0.101

(0.104) (0.110)

Constant 0.426*** 0.393***

(0.0636) (0.0628)

Observations 417 417

R-squared 0.083 0.007

Robust standard errors in parentheses

*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1

Table 3: Treatment Effects on Gender EmpowermentConfidence in approaching employers when looking for a job

Money of her own that she can decide how to use

Permission to go to the market

Voucher 0.0294 0.191*** 0.0270

(0.0402) (0.0366) (0.0321)

Training -0.0150 0.0684* 0.00390

(0.0375) (0.0360) (0.0315)

Voucher*Training -0.0455 -0.130** 0.00473

(0.0573) (0.0549) (0.0476)

Constant 1.261*** 0.259*** 1.191***

(0.0242) (0.0220) (0.0204)

Observations 1237 1237 1237

R-squared 0.002 0.024 0.002

Robust standard errors in parentheses

*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1