Frederick Sona
HomePortfolio › Impact report
Impact report · Editorial

Impact report

A workforce-development nonprofit's year in review. Problem framing, theory of change with inline SVG, outcomes over five years, participant stories, and next-year plan.

Impact Report · Program Year 2025
Getting people to the first paycheck, and to the second.
Coastal Employment Bridge places adults with employment barriers into stable work at a living wage. Five years, 2,528 people placed, 70 percent still employed twelve months later.
Coastal Employment Bridge · New Bedford, MA

The problem, said clearly

New Bedford, Fall River, and the surrounding communities host roughly 34,000 working-age adults with a stated barrier to employment. Sixty-eight percent of those adults name transportation as the first barrier. Fifty-nine percent name a lack of a diploma or industry credential as the second. Forty-one percent name childcare. The barriers show up together, not one at a time.

The regional labor market is not soft. Manufacturers, healthcare systems, and marine industries have 8,400 open positions across the same footprint, most at wages between $20 and $27 an hour. What is missing is the pathway that carries an adult from the barrier list to the offer letter.

34K
adults with a stated employment barrier
8,400
open regional positions at $20+/hr
68%
name transportation as barrier one
$4.10
public benefit displaced per $1 program spend

Our theory of change

The Bridge treats each participant's barrier list as the map. We do not train first and address barriers later. We address barriers on day one, and training runs alongside. Every referral names the barrier. Every intake pairs the barrier with a specific service. Every training week ends with a check on whether the barrier is still a barrier.

Theory of changeEach stage names a barrier and the outcome that clears it.ReferralBarriersnamedIntakeBarriersaddressedTrainingSkillsbuiltPlacementFirstjob startedRetentionWagegrowth in year oneProgram logic model, Coastal Employment Bridge, FY25
Figure 1. Five-stage program logic. Each stage has a named barrier and a measurable outcome that clears it.

Program outcomes, five years running

The 2025 cohort placed 462 people into jobs above $19 an hour, retained 411 into month twelve, and generated a median wage of $24.10 at the twelve-month mark. Aggregate program growth reflects both larger annual intake and improving conversion at each stage of the funnel.

Outcomes by cohort yearIntakePlacedRetained 12 months41226820120214683162462022511371302202354941435520245884624112025
Figure 2. Intake, placement, and twelve-month retention by cohort year, 2021 through 2025. Conversion from intake to placement rose from 65 percent to 79 percent across the period.
462
placed above $19/hr in FY25
89%
of placements retained at 12 months
$24.10
median wage at 12-month mark
71%
of participants report the transport barrier resolved

Two of the people the numbers describe

The first thing they did was hand me a bus pass and a car mechanic's number. Not a resume workshop. A bus pass. That was the day I believed them.

M., 34, placed as a lab technician at a regional hospital, February 2025

My program partner texts me on the fifteenth of every month for a year after placement. She has not missed one. I do not think she has ever missed one for anyone.

D., 41, placed as a welder at a marine yard, June 2024

The stories are not marketing. They are the mechanism. The bus pass and the fifteenth-of-the-month text are two lines on a program spec that we test, revise, and defend at the operations meeting each quarter. When retention drops on a cohort, we look at whether the mechanism was actually delivered before we look at anything else.

What we plan to do next year

Three commitments for program year 2026. First, expand the Fall River site from 120 seats to 200, tracking against a target of 720 total placements. Second, open a childcare-integrated pilot that lets fourteen participants attend training with children on site, testing whether the retention curve on parents changes when barrier three is treated in-house. Third, publish the full outcomes methodology and the participant surveys online so any peer program can replicate the measurement without asking for it.

The organization operates on a $6.8M annual budget. Ninety cents on the dollar goes into direct service. The board's target is to keep it there.

What the barrier list looks like in practice

Every participant intake begins with a written barrier list. The list is filled out by the participant, with a program partner reading each line aloud so nothing is skipped. The list has fourteen fixed items and one open response. In 2025, the median participant named four barriers on intake. The most common combination was transportation, credential, and childcare, in that order, present together on 38 percent of intake forms.

The barrier list drives the intake plan. If transportation is on the list, the participant leaves the intake session with a monthly bus pass, a mechanic phone number, and a scheduled call with an insurance broker who works our participant list at a reduced rate. If childcare is on the list, the participant leaves with a slot at one of our four partner childcare providers and the first month prepaid. If credential is on the list, the participant leaves with a training track that includes the specific coursework needed for their target job. Nothing about the list is aspirational. Every service is arranged inside the intake session or scheduled inside the same week.

Employer partners, and what we ask of them

The Bridge works with 84 employer partners across the region. Fourteen are healthcare systems, twenty-two are manufacturers, sixteen are marine industries, ten are municipal governments, and the remainder are logistics and food service. Each partner signs a memorandum with three commitments. They interview any candidate we forward without a resume screen. They pay a starting wage above $19 an hour. They accept one monthly check-in call with our program partner for the first twelve months of employment.

The three commitments are the reason we can promise our participants the retention curve we do. Employers who violate any commitment are removed from the partner list. Two employers were removed in fiscal 2025, both for skipping the twelve-month check-in call. We do not name them in this report but the participants who were affected were placed at replacement employers inside sixty days.

The economics, honestly

The program spent $6.4M on direct service in fiscal 2025 and placed 462 people at a median annual wage of $50,128. Aggregate wages earned by placed participants in the twelve months following placement were $22.3M. Aggregate public benefits displaced, calculated using the state's standard formula, were $26.2M. On a dollar-for-dollar basis, every dollar of direct program spend generated $4.10 of displaced public benefit and $3.48 of participant earned wages inside the first year. The ratios hold across the five-year window at similar levels.

Those numbers are not the reason we run the program. They are the reason the program can survive a state budget cycle. We report them because the funders who defend our line item at the statehouse need the ratios in a form they can quote from memory.

Where we fell short in fiscal 2025

Two things did not work in the year. First, the Fall River satellite site had a first-quarter placement rate of 61 percent, well below the 75 percent target. The reason was straightforward: we opened the site with three program partners and needed five. We hired the two missing partners in April and the site closed the year at 74 percent, essentially on target. Second, our childcare pilot did not launch in fiscal 2025 as planned. The partner facility we selected withdrew in Q3 and the replacement search took longer than expected. The pilot is now scheduled for the second quarter of fiscal 2026 with a new partner already contracted.

We report the shortfalls in the same section as the successes because a nonprofit that only reports successes is a nonprofit that will eventually stop noticing failures. We do not want to be that organization.

Independent evaluation

The outcomes reported in this document were audited by the Massachusetts Workforce Alliance research team using participant-level state wage records. Their methodology note and the 2025 cohort-level tables are posted at bridge.org/evaluation.

Interested in a piece like this? Tell me what you are trying to move.

Start a conversation
← Back to portfolio