Download StudyGeneral

Study Overview

Integrated Workforce Development and Sexual and Reproductive Health for Youth in Bangladesh Study
Study is 3ie funded:
Study ID:
Initial Registration Date:
Last Update Date:
Study Status:

This study seeks to test the hypothesis that an integrated workforce development (WfD) and sexual and reproductive health (SRH) intervention facilitates greater WfD and SRH outcomes than does a WfD intervention alone. Both study arms will use the same positive youth development features. By testing “with” and “without” integration, we will help fill a gap in the literature that largely examines the effects of different features of integrated WfD and SRH interventions. Impact evaluation findings will help policymakers and program designers to make better choices vis-à-vis youth wellbeing. The impact evaluation is a panel cluster-randomized design. A mixed-methods process evaluation explores and documents how integrating the sectors is done.

Registration Citation:

Rutherford, D. and Nanda, G., 2018. Integrated Workforce Development and Sexual and Reproductive Health for Youth in Bangladesh Study. Registry for International Development for Impact Evaluations (RIDIE). Available at: 10.23846/ridie155

Additional Keywords:
workforce development, sexual and reproductive health, youth, integrated development
Secondary ID Number(s):

Principal Investigator(s)

Name of First PI:
Diana Rutherford
FHI 360
Name of Second PI:
Geeta Nanda
FHI 360

Study Sponsor

Study Sponsor Location:
United States

Research Partner

Name of Partner Institution:
Save the Children/US and Save the Children/Bangladesh
Type of Organization:

Intervention Overview


Interventions will take place in youth clubs in the slums of Dhaka, Bangladesh and 300-partnered workplaces. Youth clubs are established as training center hubs where youth obtain employability, occupational health and safety, and gender sensitivity training, in addition to career counselling (and SRH training in arm 2). The program will work with 300 informal workplaces to improve work conditions (an estimated 5-10% of youth in any given cohort will come to the program through these workplaces rather than through community mobilization) by introducing Work Place Improvement Plans (WPIP) that include business benefit of improved work place, child rights business principles (CRBP), codes of conduct, occupational health and safety and employer’s social responsibility. 1,350 youth are expected to begin the program quarterly and receive the following: Quarter 1: intensive employability and soft skills training Quarter 2: training in technical field (Information communication technology/business process outsourcing; ICT/BPO) Quarters 3-4: opportunity to work with a mentor

Theory of Change:

Effective programs take a comprehensive positive youth development (PYD) approach that provides opportunities for youth to interact with each other and with others (including adult and peer mentors) in safe spaces; role play; play sports; and engage in community activities. Through these activities, youth share information and experience and may reinforce positive behavior. Effective programs also work with families, policymakers, and others in the community to engage and create a positive enabling environment for youth wellbeing. The assessment report findings are consistent with the PYD literature that focuses on positive personal relationships, addressing the enabling environment, and helping youth access to services that address their needs. The theory of change presents a holistic model for integrated WfD and SRH programming that builds on the evidence, incorporates external evidence on best practices, and aligns with the domains of positive youth development (PYD): (1) building skills, assets, and competencies; (2) fostering healthy relationships; (3) strengthening the environment; and (4) transforming systems. See the following for more details on the theory of change: Rutherford, D., Plourde, K., Galloway, T., Wang, E. Assessment of Integrated Workforce Development and Sexual and Reproductive Health Interventions with Recommendations for the Future, Washington, DC: USAID’s YouthPower: Implementation, YouthPower Action, 2017.

Multiple Treatment Arms Evaluated?

Implementing Agency

Name of Organization:
Save the Children
Type of Organization:
NGO (International)

Program Funder

Name of Organization:
Type of Organization:
Private for profit organization

Intervention Timing

Intervention or Program Started at time of Registration?
Start Date:
End Date:
Evaluation Method

Evaluation Method Overview

Primary (or First) Evaluation Method:
Randomized control trial
Other (not Listed) Method:
Additional Evaluation Method (If Any):
Other (not Listed) Method:

Method Details

Details of Evaluation Approach:

Panel cluster randomized trial. Youth cannot be randomized individually or by youth groups, because the youth clubs are geographically located within their neighborhoods and intervention activities involve all youth enrolled in a club. To maintain the youth clubs as safe spaces, youth will not be asked to travel to clubs outside of their neighborhoods. Each youth participant who is enrolled in the study will be surveyed at baseline (the month prior to intervention), mid-line (4 months after baseline), and endline (13 months after baseline) to capture KASI and behavior changes in workforce and SRH outcomes. Youth clubs will be randomly assigned into the WfD only study arm 1 or the integrated WfD and SRH study arm 2 as follows, according to study arm and implementing partner (IP).

Outcomes (Endpoints):

Monthly income Job Satisfaction Physical safety in the workplace Emotional safety in the workplace Type of employment: written contract or none # work hours in a typical week Perceived ability of youth to provide for themselves Job seeking knowledge/skills Employment seeking behavior Communication skills Interpersonal skills Higher-order thinking skills Self-control Positive identity Intention to use contraception in the future Contraceptive knowledge attitudes/preferences around birth spacing HIV/STI knowledge Awareness of services (contraception, HIV/STI) Attitudes toward gender equity/gender equitable norms Comfort communicating about contraception with partners Comfort communicating about contraception with MIL/influencers Comfort communicating about HIV/STI with health care provider Ease of access to SRH services (FP/contraceptives, HIV/STI) FP communication with partner/family (with partner, friends, MIL): depends on relevancy (age, sex, marital status) Ever been tested for HIV Current use of contraception Current use of modern contraception Use of condom at last sexual intercourse

Unit of Analysis:
individual youth

Test the hypothesis that an integrated WfD and SRH intervention facilitates greater workforce and SRH outcomes than does a WfD intervention alone.

Unit of Intervention or Assignment:
youth club (cluster)
Number of Clusters in Sample:
Number of Individuals in Sample:
Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:
15 clusters per study arm each with 1,350 youth (unless additional funding is found to enroll more cohorts in the study)

Supplementary Files

Other Documents:

Outcomes Data

Survey of youth includes the following: Knowledge, attitudes, skills and intentions about SRH and workforce Soft skills (also called life skills) SRH and workforce self-reported behavior
Data Already Collected?
Data Previously Used?
Data Access:
Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?
Data Approval Process:
Approval Status:

Treatment Assignment Data

Participation or Assignment Information:
Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?
Data Previously Used?
Data Access:
Data Obtained by the Study Researchers?
Data Approval Process:
Approval Status:

Data Analysis

Data Analysis Status:

Study Materials

Upload Study Materials:

Registration Category

Registration Category:
Prospective, Category 1: Data for measuring impacts have not been collected

Completion Overview

Intervention Completion Date:
Data Collection Completion Date:
Unit of Analysis:
Clusters in Final Sample:
Total Observations in Final Sample:
Size of Treatment, Control, or Comparison Subsamples:


Preliminary Report:
Preliminary Report URL:
Summary of Findings:
Paper Summary:
Paper Citation:

Data Availability

Data Availability (Primary Data):
Date of Data Availability:
Data URL or Contact:
Access procedure:

Other Materials

Survey Instrument Links or Contact:
Program Files:
Program Files Links or Contact:
External Link:
External Link Description:
Description of Changes:

Study Stopped