Evaluation of the Second Round of Health Profession Opportunity Grants (HPOG 2.0) Participant Interview Data, United States, 2015-2025 (ICPSR 38561)
Version Date: Feb 13, 2023 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Jacob Klerman, Abt Associates;
Thomas Konrad, Abt Associates
Series:
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR38561.v1
Version V1
Alternate Title View help for Alternate Title
Summary View help for Summary
The purpose of the Health Profession Opportunity Grants (HPOG) Program was to provide education and training to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients and other individuals with low incomes for occupations in the healthcare field that pay well and are expected to either experience labor shortages or be in high demand.
HPOG programs used the career pathways framework that combines education, occupational training, and support services to help participants enter and advance in a sequence of occupations within a specific sector or occupational cluster. Such programs seek to address many of the challenges that might prevent low-income and other disadvantaged adults from succeeding on a chosen pathway. For example, programs are flexible, with strong supports, and connect participants to employers and employment, including work-based learning opportunities. HPOG programs were expected to:
- target skills and competencies demanded by the healthcare industry
- support clearly defined career pathways
- result in an employer- or industry-recognized certificate or degree
- combine supportive services with education and training services to help participants overcome barriers to employment; and
- provide training and services at times and locations that are easily accessible to targeted populations.
Both rounds of HPOG funding were administered by the Office of Family Assistance (OFA) within the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. In 2010, OFA awarded a first round of five-year HPOG funding (HPOG 1.0) to 32 organizations located across 23 states. In 2015, OFA awarded a second round of HPOG funding (HPOG 2.0) to 32 organizations located across 21 states for a new five-year period.
Abt Associates and its partners conducted a National Evaluation of HPOG 2.0. The Abt research team (Abt) conducted in-depth interviews with program participants as part of the Descriptive Evaluation component of the National Evaluation. The goal of these in-depth interviews was to gain insights into the motivations, decision making, expectations, and experiences of HPOG 2.0 program participants. The sample included 153 program participants across 14 local HPOG 2.0 programs. Interviews were semi-structured and covered a common set of topics: career pathways; employment and education histories; experience of the HPOG 2.0 training; managing work, family, and training; and finances.
Quantitative data from HPOG 2.0 are available in ICPSR 38247.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Restrictions View help for Restrictions
Access to these data is restricted. Users interested in obtaining these data must complete a Restricted Data Use Agreement, specify the reason for the request, and obtain IRB approval or notice of exemption for their research. Details, including the Restricted Data Use Agreement, are provided via the online application and email sent to the requestor after a request is initiated.
Distributor(s) View help for Distributor(s)
Time Period(s) View help for Time Period(s)
Date of Collection View help for Date of Collection
Data Collection Notes View help for Data Collection Notes
Key staff on this project include:
- Project Officers (OPRE): Nicole Constance, PhD and Lisa Zingman
- Project Directors (Abt Associates): Gretchen Locke and Robin Koralek
- Principal Investigators (Abt Associates): Jacob Klerman and Thomas Konrad, PhD
Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose
This study's research questions included:
- Why did participants apply for the HPOG 2.0 program? To what other job training programs (healthcare and non-healthcare related) did they consider applying?
- If they have chosen a particular occupation, why did they choose this occupation for training? What other occupations did they consider?
- What challenges do participants face in completing the program?
- How do participants' finances influence their participation in the program?
- How do HPOG 2.0 participants think about career ladders and pathways?
- What supports have HPOG 2.0 participants received both in the program and outside the program, and what are participants' experiences with those program supports (including personal, academic, and employment supports)?
Study Design View help for Study Design
Abt conducted 153 semi-structured in-depth interviews with HPOG 2.0 program participants from a sample of 14 HPOG 2.0 programs. Abt selected the 14 programs to reflect diversity in grantee organization type, geography, projected enrollment, prior HPOG grant experience, demographic characteristics of their participants, and percentage of those participants receiving non-financial support services such as academic coaching and career coaching.
Abt recruited interviewees to reflect each local program population in demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, levels of healthcare training (entry, mid-, or high-level), and variation in progress through training. Compared with HPOG 2.0 participants in the selected programs, the HPOG interviewees had slightly more participants who identified as White, slightly fewer participants who identified as Black or Hispanic, more women, slightly more participants receiving support services, and slightly fewer participants enrolling in multiple trainings.
Participation in the interviews was voluntary. Interviews usually lasted between 60 and 90 minutes. Abt scheduled interviews as flexibly as possible over 4 to 5 days in each program location. Interviewees received a gift card to thank them for their time.
Interviews were semi-structured and covered a common set of topics: career pathways; employment and education histories; experience of the HPOG 2.0 training; managing work, family, and training; and finances. Interviewers used a conversational approach to allow probing.
Data was analyzed using applied thematic analysis to draw lessons about each of the key research questions, as well as identify emergent themes in the data. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using qualitative software. Please refer to the design report for more details: Design Report for In-Depth Interviews with HPOG 2.0 Program Participants.
Time Method View help for Time Method
Universe View help for Universe
Low-income adults in the United States.
Unit(s) of Observation View help for Unit(s) of Observation
Data Source View help for Data Source
Interview transcripts
Data Type(s) View help for Data Type(s)
Mode of Data Collection View help for Mode of Data Collection
Description of Variables View help for Description of Variables
This study is comprised of 153 qualitative interview transcripts.
HideNotes
The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.
One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.
This study is provided by ICPSR. ICPSR provides leadership and training in data access, curation, and methods of analysis for a diverse and expanding social science research community.