This document summarizes the challenges facing American men today. It notes that over 20 million men ages 20-65 are not currently employed. Many blue-collar jobs have disappeared due to technology and globalization. Men now make up only 42% of college graduates. Approximately one-third of men without college degrees may be unemployed by mid-century according to estimates. The document interviews two friends from Pennsylvania who were recently laid off from oil and gas industry jobs and are supporting Donald Trump due to his promises to restore lost industries. It concludes that American men, especially those without college degrees, face significant health, employment and economic challenges.

1. Comprehensive Performance Evaluation
The typical objective of every human performance technologist,
as well as every educator, professional development specialist,
corporate trainer, human resources professional, middle-level
manager, corporate executive, psychologist, coach, and self-
help guru, is to create better human performance. In a 2 page
minimum paper following APA format using scholarly research
to back up your thoughts, please answer the following
questions:
· Describe the current evaluation models in HPT literature.
· Describe the theoretical variables for comprehensive
performance evaluation.
· Describe the required elements of a simple logic model and
key variables to make a generic logic model for comprehensive
performance evaluation (CPE).
The Opinion Pages | OP-ED COLUMNIST
Securing Social Security OCT. 1, 2014
There was this at the Senate debate in Iowa on Sunday:
“I will fight hard to protect Social Security and Medicare for
seniors like my mom and dad because our Greatest Generation
has worked so hard for the American dream for our families,”
said Republican Joni Ernst.
Like many conservatives, Ernst supports some sort of
privatization in the Social Security program. She’s a little hazy
on the details. But we do know that the Greatest Generation is
the name Tom Brokaw gave to the Americans who came through
the Depression and spent their young adulthood fighting World
War II. They would actually be Joni Ernst’s grandparents.

2. There are two possible interpretations to her statement:
A) She wants to portray Social Security and Medicare
recipients in the noblest light possible.
B) She is promising to protect benefits for everybody over
the age of 85.
I detect some anti-boomer sentiment. Ernst is 44, and like
most people born after the mid-1960s, she probably resented
having to grow up under our self-absorbed shadow.
“But many of those boomers, now in their late 60s, depend
on Social Security, especially after the Great Recession,” said
Brokaw, who always takes the high road on generational
matters.
Maybe Ernst just identifies the whole 60-something
generation with Hillary Clinton; Ernst’s husband did refer to
Clinton as a “hag” on his Facebook page. Although that incident
was less about Social Security than about the inadvisability of
giving political spouses access to social media.
The Senate race in Iowa is one of the tightest in the
country, and the debate drew so much attention that it got a
segment on “The Daily Show.” Jon Stewart highlighted the part
where Ernst got personal with her Democratic opponent,
Representative Bruce Braley. (“You threatened to sue a
neighbor over chickens that came onto your property.”)
We are not going to have time to delve deep into the
controversy that is known to political junkies as Chickengate.
We are focusing on Social Security! We haven’t talked about
this issue for a long time, and it ought to be part of our
election-year repertoire.

3. Conservative Republicans still tend to hew to the theory
that the system is “going bankrupt” and needs to be turned into
some kind of private retirement investment account. They also
generally promise to protect people 55 or over from any change.
“I’m not going to take away your Social Security. Don’t
worry about it. Anybody over 55 doesn’t have to worry about
any reform measure,” said Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas in a
recent debate. He added: “You don’t have to worry about doing
anything with Social Security in the next part of this session.
Harry Reid will block that real quick.”
Mentioning the mendacity of Majority Leader Harry Reid
in every other sentence is a verbal tic Roberts has acquired.
However, if you break that statement down, what he seems to be
saying is that if you’re, say, 52 and want to make sure Social
Security stays the way it is, you will have no problem as long as
Democrats control the U.S. Senate.
By the way, Social Security is not going bankrupt. In
2033, incoming payroll taxes will no longer be enough to pay
for all the benefits. But they’ll still cover about 75 percent of
the payments and we could take care of the rest of the problem
with a few tweaks — like getting rid of the cap on Social
Security taxes. (Currently, all income over $117,000 is exempt
from the payroll tax.)
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities also helpfully points
out that “by coincidence,” the amount Social Security would
need to stay completely in balance over the next 75 years is
almost exactly the same as the amount the government lost
when Congress extended the Bush tax cuts for people making
over $250,000 a year.
And Social Security is a terrific program. It currently
lifts more than 15 million elderly Americans out of poverty and

4. provides many millions more with comfort and security they
wouldn’t otherwise enjoy. Its administrative costs are well
below 1 percent of expenditures. “It’s much more efficient than
private sector retirement programs,” said Jason Furman, the
chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, in a phone
interview.
Furman actually thinks Social Security spending should be
increased, to create a minimum benefit floor. Elderly women
who’ve had an irregular work career due to family demands
often wind up losing a critical part of their coverage when their
husbands die. “Even George Bush wanted to extend the
minimum benefit,” he said.
If you happen upon a congressional debate in the next
few weeks, feel free to ask the candidates what they’re going to
do to protect Social Security. Bring along a 54-year-old friend
who might helpfully burst into tears when anyone starts
promising to protect the 55-year-olds.
New York Times
America at Home: Grandparents in the Attic, Children in the
Basement
THE NEW OLD AGEFEB. 17, 2018
Paula Span
Susan Yarbrough, lives with her mother, Betsy Yarbrough, and
their dog, Maddie, in Johns Creek, Ga. The Yarbroughs share
the house and its duties, part of a nationwide uptick in shared
and multigenerational households.
On a Sunday evening a few weeks back, Shobana Ram was
loading the dishwasher in her kitchen in Queens when her 85-
year-old father-in-law rose from the dinner table, carrying his
cane in one hand and an empty plate in the other.

5. “From the corner of my eye, I saw him stumble and lose his
balance,” recalled Ms. Ram. “I saw the cane fly out of his hand.
His head hit the corner of our granite countertop.”
She dialed 911 and thought, not for the first time, how fortunate
it was that in 2016 she and her husband sold their house and
bought one big enough to accommodate six people: themselves,
their two teenagers and his ailing parents, plus the family dog.
Her mother-in-law, who has dementia, would not have been able
to phone for help. In this case, after emergency room scans, her
father-in-law was “miraculously OK,” said Ms. Ram, 48.
But, she added, “there’ve been so many incidents where we’ve
felt if they’d still been in their apartment on their own, God
knows what would have happened.”
In an Indian-American family, a household encompassing three
generations isn’t uncommon. “There’s an understanding that
parents could be living with us at some point,” Ms. Ram said.
Yet her family’s decision also reflects a growing change in the
way Americans, including older people, are choosing to live.
A brief backward look: After the late 1800s, as two economists
pointed out in a landmark 2000 study, most elderly widows
lived with one of their children — so common a practice that it
developed a nostalgic sheen, enshrined as the way things ought
to be.
In 1940, however, that arrangement started crumbling. The
proportion of older widows living with children declined from
about 60 percent that year to 20 percent by the 1990 census.
Did Americans stop loving their mothers in 1940? No, but their
parents began receiving checks from a just-enacted New Deal
program called Social Security and no longer had to rely

6. financially on their families.
“As elderly people’s income increased, they chose to live
independently,” said Kathleen McGarry, an economist at the
University of California, Los Angeles, and co-author of the
study. “When they could afford it, they purchased privacy.”
A decade or so ago, as demographers began reporting an uptick
in shared and multigenerational housing, the trend again looked
to be economically driven, this time by the Great Recession.
A Census Bureau report noted that the number of shared
households had jumped more than 11 percent between 2007 and
2010. The spike came primarily from younger people —
buffeted by unemployment, foreclosures and student debt —
moving in with their parents or other relatives.
“It was a way to make ends meet,” said Laryssa Mykyta, co-
author of the report, now a sociologist at the University of
Texas Rio Grande Valley.
Let’s pause for some definitions. Though shared households and
multigenerational households may overlap, they aren’t identical.
When a householder lives with at least one adult who’s not a
spouse,partner or college student, that’s a shared household; its
members need not necessarily be related.
A multigenerational household, as defined by the Pew Research
Center (the census uses a different standard), includes at least
two generations of related adults, or grandparents and
grandchildren.
Both phenomena increased during the recession — and
interestingly, long after its end, they haven’t declined.
Multigenerational households, which hit a historic low of 12
percent of American households in 1980, reached 19 percent in
2014, Pew reported. “You have to conclude that this is a
phenomenon that has legs and will continue,” said D’Vera
Cohn, co-author of the report.

7. In pre-recession 2006, For example, 20 percent of those aged 85
and older lived in multigenerational households. By 2014 the
proportion had climbed to 24 percent.
Richard Fry, a Pew senior researcher, has uncovered a similar
trend in shared living. Although younger people remain more
likely than other age groups to live in someone else’s
household, the proportion of older people in those arrangements
has also increased. Last year, 14 percent of adults in a shared
household were parents of the household head, double the
proportion in 1995.
What’s creating this reversal of a decades-long trend?
One could point to several factors, including rising housing
prices, inadequate retirement savings and the costs of long-term
care. But the primary reason, Pew researchers contend, is that
“the country’s changing demographics encourage shared
living,” Dr. Fry said. “It’s much more prevalent among
nonwhite adults, and they’re a growing share of the adult
population.”
About a quarter of non-Hispanic white adults shared a
household last year, his analysis shows. But 40 percent of
blacks lived in shared households, and 42 percent of Asian-
Americans (who have higher median household income than the
national average, underscoring that economics probably isn’t
the primary driver).
So did nearly half of Hispanics. Shared housing is a more
common practice among immigrants, another growing segment
of the population. For multigenerational households, the
numbers “tell a similar story,” added Ms. Cohn.
“I think this is a change in what the typical American family
looks like,” said Sarita Gupta, co-director of the nonprofit

8. organization Caring Across Generations.
Three years ago, she moved her own parents, in their 70s and
struggling to cope with her father’s Alzheimer’s disease, into
her home in Silver Spring, Md., with her husband and young
daughter.
“Even in casual conversation with friends,” Ms. Gupta said,
“it’s amazing how many peers say, ‘I know one day in the
future, my parents will be moving in.’”
Let’s not romanticize this practice. Those who’ve undertaken it
caution that shared households demand tough adjustments —
physical, financial and emotional.
Shobana Ram knows that her in-laws, who have a home health
aide while her family is at work and school, are happier with
them than in any assisted living. She sees her children learning
important lessons, too. She and her husband tell themselves
they’ve made the right choice, for now.
The Opinion Pages |CAMPAIGN STOPS
Men Need Help. Is Hillary Clinton the Answer?
By SUSAN CHIRAOCT. 21, 2016
If Hillary Clinton wins this election and becomes the first
female president of the United States, American men may well
be one of her most urgent problems.
Consider some startling statistics.
More than a fifth of American men — about 20 million people
— between 20 and 65 had no paid work last year.
Seven million men between 25 and 55 are no longer even
looking for work, twice as many black men as white.
There are 20 million men with felony records who are not in
jail, with dim prospects of employment, and more of these are
black men.
Half the men not in the labor force report they are in bad

9. physical or mental health.
Men account for only 42 percent of college graduates,
handicapping them in a job market that rewards higher levels of
education.
Lawrence H. Summers, the former Treasury secretary and now a
professor of economics at Harvard, estimates that a third of men
between 25 and 54 without college educations could be out of
work by midcentury.
Well-paying jobs that don’t demand a college degree have been
shrinking for generations — and technology is accelerating that
trend. Driverless cars, for instance, could eliminate trucking as
we know it, a refuge for many blue-collar men.
The crisis is not confined to the white men backing Donald J.
Trump, who has commanding majorities among men without
college educations. The challenge of masculinity in America
extends beyond race and political party.
Economists and scholars have assembled a trove of disturbing
data about the plight of men, even as they acknowledge that
women’s employment has stalled for the past 15 years as well.
Nicholas N. Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute has
released the latest compendium, “Men Without Work.” Drawing
on multiple data sets, he sketches an unsettling portrait not just
of male unemployment, but also of lives deeply alienated from
civil society. The seven million men who are not even looking
for work — about 60 percent of whom do not have four-year
college degrees — spent an average of five and a half hours a
day watching television or movies. Very few cared for children
or other household members, or did housework. A third
admitted to illegal drug use.
Many of Mr. Trump’s backers talk about losing out in the new
economy, echoing the points the candidate makes on the
campaign trail.
Joe Peterson and Al Paslow, 61 years old and friends since high
school, waited for hours the other day to attend a Trump rally in
Ambridge, Pa. — a town named for the American Bridge
Company. It was a resonant spot, in the heart of what was once

10. a thriving steel and energy powerhouse. Mr. Paslow’s mother
grew up in Ambridge on the very street where the rally took
place. Their family, friends and relatives all worked in the
abundant steel mills in the Pittsburgh area — Mr. Peterson’s
father as an electrician, Mr. Paslow’s father as a blacksmith.
“Now these mills are gone, replaced by stores, shops and offices
that could have been placed almost anywhere,” Mr. Paslow said.
“No industry here now; it’s all been lost.”
The two friends most recently worked as independent
contractors in the oil and gas industry, earning six-figure
salaries. Mr. Peterson had a high school education; Mr. Paslow
a college degree. Last year, they were both laid off — no
severance or unemployment, because they were not technically
employees.
“I worked for the oil industry, which is dead because of
Hillary,” Mr. Peterson said. Now, he said, he was “considered
nothing.” He is worried about whether his son will find work;
both friends fear that they may never get a job again.
The friends were thrilled that Mr. Trump promised at the rally
to bring the oil and gas industry back on his very first day in
office. “Unbelievably, that was exactly what we wanted to
hear,” Mr. Paslow said. “Our hearts were uplifted.”
More than economic loss, though, support for Mr. Trump
appears to come from men who live in places where
intergenerational mobility is low and who report worries about
their finances, whatever their level of income, according to
Jonathan Rothwell, a senior economist at Gallup who analyzed
106,000 interviews conducted over the past year.
Add to economic anxiety a spate of illness and disability.
American men — particularly men without a college degree —
are simply less healthy than women.
Alan B. Krueger, a professor of economics at Princeton,
recently conducted a study of working-age men. “I came away
thinking our biggest social problem is men,” he said.
A huge number are on painkillers, including 43.5 percent of
men who have stopped looking for work. Both physical and

11. emotional pain — sadness, stress and dissatisfaction with their
lives — were particularly acute among men without college
degrees, the unemployed and those not looking for work.
On several measures of health, men fare worse than women, and
black men fare worse than white men. Black men die at higher
rates than white men from AIDS, heart disease, cancer and
homicide.
Yet the gaps are growing smaller by gender and race, and bigger
by income and education. A man born in 1950, who is now in
the lowest 10 percent of household earnings, can expect to live
14 fewer years than a man in the top 10 percent, according to a
Brookings Institution study. Smoking, the largest preventable
cause of death, is more prevalent among lower-income and less-
well-educated people, and accounted for a third to a fifth of the
gap in life expectancy between men with college degrees and
men with high school diplomas, according to Andrew Fenelon
of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Jessica
Ho of Duke University.
Poor health makes it harder to work. Mr. Krueger found that
11.5 percent of men who were not employed cited illness and
disability as a factor. Mr. Eberstadt’s analysis found that nearly
two-thirds of American households where men were not in the
labor force reported receiving money from at least one
disability program in 2013.
American men are also far more likely than women to be in jail
or to be convicted of a felony, compounding the difficulty of
finding work. The government keeps almost no data on the 20
million men who are not in prison but have felony convictions.
Mr. Eberstadt estimates that for men with a criminal record
between 45 and 54, the odds of being out of the work force are
35 percent for white males and 40 percent for black males.
A segment of American men feel under cultural as well as
economic assault.
Andrew J. Cherlin, a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University
and the author of “Labor’s Love Lost: Rise and Fall of the
Working Class Family in America,” directly links economic

12. upheaval to the loss of masculinity. “It’s much more difficult
now to say, I’m a real man,” he said. “A real man earns enough
so his wife doesn’t have to work.”
Most economists, though, don’t believe it’s possible to go back
to the days when manufacturing was king — and few women
would want to give up economic or societal power, either. So
what could help American men?
Many of the policies aimed at spurring economic growth and
supporting low-wage workers would assist American men
without college educations in particular.
In the short term, liberal economists and even some
conservative ones back an idea that Mrs. Clinton has said she
would push in her first 100 days — a $275 billion infrastructure
jobs plan, which could provide at least temporary employment
to a key segment of those hurting the most: blue-collar men.
Liberal economists tend to coalesce around other solutions, such
as raising the minimum wage and expanding eligibility for the
earned-income tax credit, a proven way to reduce poverty. Mr.
Summers is one of many who would push the Federal Reserve to
continue stimulating the economy to boost employment, rather
than focusing on curbing inflation. He also argues for
government subsidies to bolster the wages of less-skilled
employees.
Wage insurance could address the plight of men like Mr.
Paslow; as Mr. Krueger explains it, payroll taxes could be used
to make up some of the gap between the higher hourly wages
earned in manufacturing and the lower wages more common in
the service industry.
Liberal and conservative economists agree on the failings of the
education system and urge more focus on the school-to-work
transition, since so many men without a college education are
flailing.
Apprenticeship systems and expanded access to community
colleges — both ideas backed by President Obama — could help
train workers for high-demand jobs without requiring four-year
colleges, Mr. Cherlin said. But conservatives worry about the

13. cost of subsidizing community colleges.
Mr. Summers would like to see more government
investment in areas with bad school systems, but conservatives
prize local control.
Re-examining the effects of mass incarceration — on black men
in particular — and reconsidering mandatory sentences have
attracted bipartisan support, though such efforts stalled in
Congress. Mr. Summers calls for improving incarceration-to-
work programs.
While debate continues to rage about Obamacare, Mr. Krueger
is convinced that expanding health insurance could provide
American men with more preventive treatments and promote
healthier lifestyles.
But in the long term, Isabel V. Sawhill and Richard V. Reeves,
senior fellows at the Brookings Institution, argue that men must
resign themselves to working in “pink collar jobs” — those
known by the acronym HEAL, for health, education,
administration and literacy.
Economically, “women have adjusted better than men,” Ms.
Sawhill said. “They’re the ones who are winning.” Women
dominate the (often lower-paying) service jobs that are the
backbone of the new economy. Men make up just 20 percent of
elementary and middle-school teachers, 9 percent of nurses, 16
percent of personal aides and 6 percent of personal assistants,
Ms. Sawhill and Mr. Reeves noted.
Succeeding in the new economy and culture may well
require rethinking conventional ideas about masculinity. Mr.
Cherlin bemoans men’s “continued reluctance to take jobs they
think are beneath the dignity of real men.”
From the conservative end of the spectrum, Mr. Eberstadt flags
the disability system. He’d like to see it redefined as a “work
first” program, much like welfare reform under Bill Clinton. He
cites a Swedish program that ties disability benefits to showing
up for job training and job placement.
Mr. Eberstadt would also like to intensify social pressure on the
cadre of men who have stopped looking for work. “Why haven’t

14. we had the same sort of conversation about stigmatizing or
shaming unworking men that we had 20 years ago about mothers
on welfare?” he said. “They were not idle; they had little
kids.”
If she wins, focusing on American men could pay off for Mrs.
Clinton. She could shore up support with traditional Democratic
voters such as African-American men. Mrs. Clinton and the
Democratic Party have lost considerable ground with a
constituency they used to own, blue-collar men. Angry white
men are not likely to trust Mrs. Clinton, Beltway politicians or
the political system. But they will need their help.