IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mpr/mprres/9af520d14c1b4654b8080d304146e2d8.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluation of the Charleston Claimant Placement and Work Test Demonstration

Author

Listed:
  • Walter Corson
  • David Long
  • Walter Nicholson

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Walter Corson & David Long & Walter Nicholson, 1985. "Evaluation of the Charleston Claimant Placement and Work Test Demonstration," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 9af520d14c1b4654b8080d304, Mathematica Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:mpr:mprres:9af520d14c1b4654b8080d304146e2d8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mathematica.org/-/media/publications/pdfs/labor/charleston_claimant_placement.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dan A. Black & Mark C. Berger & Jeffrey A. Smith & Brett J. Noel, 1999. "Is the Threat of Training More Effective Than Training Itself? Experimental Evidence from the UI System," University of Western Ontario, Departmental Research Report Series 9907, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
    2. Philip K. Robins & Robert G. Spiegelman (ed.), 2001. "Reemployment Bonuses in the Unemployment Insurance System: Evidence from Three Field Experiments," Books from Upjohn Press, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, number rbuis, December.
    3. Tulio Cravo & Christopher J. O'Leary & Ana Cristina Sierra & Leandro Justino Veloso, 2020. "Heterogeneous impacts on layoffs of changes in Brazilian unemployment insurance eligibility rules," Upjohn Working Papers 20-318, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    4. David E. Balducchi & Christopher J. O'Leary, 2018. "The Employment Service-Unemployment Insurance Partnership: Origin, Evolutioin, and Revitalization," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Stephen A. Wandner (ed.),Unemployment Insurance Reform: Fixing a Broken System, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    5. Dan A. Black & Jeffrey A. Smith & Mark C. Berger & Brett J. Noel, 2002. "Is the Threat of Reemployment Services More Effective than the Services Themselves? Experimental Evidence from the UI System," NBER Working Papers 8825, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Barnow, Burt S. & Greenberg, David, 2013. "Replication issues in social experiments: lessons from US labor market programs," Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 46(3), pages 239-252.
    7. Christopher J. O'Leary, 2004. "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Labor Exchange Services," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: David E. Balducchi & Randall W. Eberts & Christopher J. O'Leary (ed.), Labor Exchange Policy in the United States, chapter 5, pages 135-178, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    8. Stephen A. Woodbury & Murray Rubin, 1997. "The Duration of Benefits," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Christopher J. O'Leary & Stephen A. Wandner (ed.), Unemployment Insurance in the United States: Analysis of Policy Issues, chapter 6, pages 211-283, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    9. Christopher J. O'Leary, 2017. "Evaluating Public Employment Programs with Field Experiments: A Survey of American Evidence," Upjohn Working Papers 17-279, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    10. Bruce D. Meyer, 1992. "Policy Lessons from the U.S. Unemployment Experiments," NBER Working Papers 4197, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Ashenfelter, Orley & Ashmore, David & Deschenes, Olivier, 2005. "Do unemployment insurance recipients actively seek work? Evidence from randomized trials in four U.S. States," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 53-75.
    12. Woodbury, Stephen A., 2000. "Economics, economists, and public policy," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 417-430.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mpr:mprres:9af520d14c1b4654b8080d304146e2d8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joanne Pfleiderer or Cindy George (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mathius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.