Date of Award

Summer 1991

Document Type


Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)


Urban Services - Urban Management

Committee Director

Wolfgang Pindur

Committee Member

G. Steven Rhiel

Committee Member

Loretta Cornelius

Committee Member

William Patterson


The study was conducted to determine if there was a relationship between socio-demographic characteristics of Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) Title II-A applicants who were determined JTPA eligible, assessed and counseled, and subsequently referred by a counselor for on-the-job training (OJT), and their program outcome, as designated by (1) positive and negative terminations; and (2) enrollments and nonenrollments. The study was conducted on clients served by the Job Training Services (JTS), one of the Service Delivery Areas (SDA-13) in the State of Virginia. JTS is located in a largely urban area of the State.

The program outcome evaluation consisted of two components. The first component analyzed selected socio-demographic characteristics using discriminant function analysis to distinguish between positive and negative terminations. The second component analyzed selected socio-demographic characteristics using discriminant function analysis to distinguish between enrollments and nonenrollments. Univariate analyses were used to address hypotheses that were postulated for each of the characteristics.

With the exception of race, none of the selected socio-demographic variables was found to have a significant influence on program outcome, as represented by positive an negative terminations. Of the same variables which were also used to analyze the enrollment and nonenrollment groups, welfare grant status, mathematics score, and number of weeks unemployed formed a combination of variables to maximize the difference between these two program outcome groups. These three variables provided the greatest distinction between the enrollments and nonenrollments. Univariate test results provided evidence suggesting that for some socio-demographic variables, selectivity or discrimination may have occurred. Further research is needed before the findings can be generalized to applicants in earlier stages of the selection process, to include intake, assessment, and counseling.

The study culminates with a synthesis of the results, and recommendations for the program, policy, and future research. Included among the recommendations is a need for additional research that includes latent variables (such as client attitude, motivation, physical appearance, family problems, and staff attitude) which may intervene between socio-demographic variables and program outcome. The LISREL method of analyzing data is suggested.