The study examined 92 projects started and completed during the 1995-2000 period. The sample constituted about one-third of the universe during that period, after adjusting for continuation projects. A mail survey collected data on implementation, monitoring, and impact. In addition, five case-study site visits were conducted. A two-tier sample of projects was developed to assess the impact before and after full implementation of ARC's performance measurement system: Cohort 1 (before full implementation) selected 67 projects from the 1995-1999 period; and Cohort 2 (after full implementation) selected 25 projects funded in 2000.

Types of Performance Measured

• Obtained skills, for example, basic skills, academic skills, vocational skills, or employability habits.
• Individual employment gains, for example, helped laid-off workers or underemployed obtain new work; helped those without full-time job experience gain initial full-time jobs; helped employed individuals increase skills, responsibilities, wages, and position.

• A clear majority of Cohort 1 projects reported achieving all of their objectives (45 percent) or all but one objective (27 percent).
• Only 9 percent reported achieving less than half of their objectives (six projects).
• The vast majority of projects had quantifiable output measurements, but a higher proportion of Cohort 2 projects had clear and quantifiable outputs.

• Results from comparison of Cohorts 1 and 2 indicate that ARC's efforts to improve the quality of project application and implementation have paid off.
• Many of Cohort 2 projects are planning to collect some new data through mail or telephone surveys.
• The key issue is how to collect data on long-term employment impacts without placing undue burdens and high overhead costs on project grantees.

• Realign designations used to classify vocational education and workforce training projects.
• Disseminate information on best practices.
• Enhance quality of final reports.
• Require each project to have at least one numeric outcome and output.
• Develop application materials on each project type.
• Meet with other federal agencies to better understand their funding and reporting requirements.
• Assess common reporting practices among states.
• Use project approval process to reinforce performance measurement criteria.
• Provide additional evaluation training and technical assistance to project grantees and ARC staff.