National Evaluation of Welfare-to-Work Strategies: 2-Year Child Outcomes Study (COS) Files: Additional background information on survey responses and outcome measures (public)

09/10/2001

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON CHILD OUTCOMES STUDY SURVEY MEASURES

RECORD NUMBER 1: OUTCOMES

Outcome: Raw Score on the Bracken Basic Concept Scale/School Readiness
Composite

Variable Name: BRAKNRAW

Description: This is a direct assessment of academic school readiness
administered to the focal child during the two-year follow-up.  While
the full Bracken Basic Concept Scale consists of 11 sub-tests, the
Child Outcomes Study used only the 5 sub-tests comprising the School
Readiness Composite.  These 5 sub-tests assess the child's  knowledge
of  colors, letters, numbers/counting, comparisons, and shapes.
Previous research provides evidence of reliability as well as  validity
for the Bracken Basic Concept Scale (Bracken, 1984).  Raw scores
reflect the number of concepts (to 61) that the child answered correctly.

Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Lowest 25th
Percentile of Raw Scores on the Bracken Basic Concept Scale/School
Readiness Composite

Variable Name: LO25BBCS

Description: Percentage of focal children scoring lower than the  25th
percentile in the national standardization sample of the Bracken  Basic
Concept Scale/School Readiness Composite.  We determined that the
bottom quartile of the national standardization sample had an
age-standardized score of 7.8 or lower.  Thus, focal children  in the
Child Outcomes Study sample with age-standardized scores of 7.8  or
lower were categorized as scoring "low" on the BBCS/SRC.


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Highest 25th
Percentile of Raw Scores on the Bracken Basic Concept Scale/School
Readiness Composite

Variable Name: HI25BBCS

Description: Percentage of focal children scoring higher than the 75th
percentile of the national standardization sample of the Bracken Basic
Concept Scale/School Readiness Composite.  We determined that the top
quartile of the national standardization sample had an age-standardized
score of 12.2 or higher (total possible = 19).  Thus, focal children in
the Child Outcomes Study sample with age-standardized scores of at least
12.2 were categorized as scoring "high" on the BBCS/SRC.


Outcome: Percentage of Respondents Reporting any Academic Problems for the
Focal Child Since RAD

Variable Name: CTACDFD2

Description: This is a dichotomous (yes/no) measure, calculated separately
for the focal child and for any children in the family.  A "yes" on this
measure indicates the presence of either one or both of the following
academic problems in school since random assignment: (1) the focal child
has repeated any grade for any reason; (2) the focal child goes to a
special class or special school or gets special help in school for learning
problems. A score of zero indicates that neither problem has occurred, while
a score of one indicates that at least one has occurred for the focal child
since random assignment.


Outcome: Total Behavioral Problems (Mean Frequency of 28 Behaviors)

Variable Name: ABPI

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  This variable is the mean
frequency across the 28 behaviors and can range from 0 to 2.  These describe
such behaviors as: the child is high strung, tense or nervous; the child
cheats or tells lies; the child has trouble getting along with other
children. Previous work with the Behavior Problems Index indicates high
internal consistency reliability.  Further, this measure discriminates
between children who have and have not received clinical treatment (Zill,
1985).


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Lowest 25th Percentile
of the Frequency of Total Behavior Problems

Variable Name: LO25ABPI

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  We determined that the 25th
percentile of the frequency of total behavior problem scores for five- to
seven-year-old children in the full National Longitudinal Survey of Youth-
Child Supplement (NLSY-CS) sample was 0.18, and we categorized COS children
as having "infrequent" total behavior problems is they scored this low or
lower on the BPI.


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Highest 25th Percentile
of the Frequency of Total Behavior Problems.

Variable Name: HI25ABPI

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months. We determined that the 75th
percentile of the frequency of total behavior problem scores for five- to
seven-year-old children in the full NLSY-CS sample was 0.54, and we
categorized COS focal children as having "frequent" total behavior problems
if they scored 0.54 or higher.


Outcome: Externalizing Behavior Problems (Mean Frequency of 5 Externalizing
Behaviors)

Variable Name: PABPI

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  Five items
comprising the Antisocial Subscale of the BPI were used to tap the
externalizing behavior problems in focal children:

"My child bullies or is cruel or mean to others."
"My child cheats or tells lies."
"My child is disobedient at home."
"My child is disobedient at school."
"My child does not seem to feel sorry after she or he misbehaves."

The choice of these particular subscales was made in light of factor analyses
with the Behavior Problems Index items in the present sample, and also in light
of previous work by Peterson and Zill (1986).


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Lowest 25th Percentile
of the Frequency of Externalizing Behavior Problems

Variable Name: LO25PABP

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  With respect to externalizing
behavior problems, we determined that the 25th percentile of scores on the
Antisocial Subscale of the BPI for five- to seven-year-old children in the
full NLSY-CS sample was 0.20, and we categorized COS focal children as
having "infrequent" externalizing behavior problems if they scored this
low or lower.


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Highest 25th Percentile
of the Frequency of Externalizing Behavior Problems

Variable Name: HI25PABP

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months. We determined that the 75th
percentile of externalizing behavior problem scores on the Antisocial
Subscale of the BPI for five- to seven-year-old children in the full NLSY-CS
sample was 0.60, and we categorized COS focal children as having "frequent"
externalizing behavior problems if they scored 0.60 or higher.


Outcome: Internalizing Behavioral Problems (Mean Frequency of 5 Internalizing
Behaviors)

Variable Name: PDBPI

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  Five items
comprising the Depressed/Withdrawn Subscale of the BPI were used to tap
internalizing behavior problems in focal children:

"My child is unhappy, sad, or depressed."
"My child feels or complains that no one loves him or her."
"My child feels worthless or inferior."
"My child is not liked by other children."
"My child is withdrawn, does not get involved with others."


Outcome: No Internalizing Behavior Problems

Variable Name: LO25PDBP

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to
indicate whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or
often true (2) about her child over the previous 3 months.  For
internalizing behavior problems, we determined that 55 percent of five-
to seven-year-old children in the full NLSY-CS sample were reported to
have no internalizing behavior problems; we similarly categorized COS
focal children at the "low" end if they had no internalizing behavior
problems.


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Highest 25th Percentile
of the Frequency of Internalizing Behavior Problems

Variable Name: HI25PDBP

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  We determined that the 75th
percentile of internalizing behavior problem scores on the Depressed/
Withdrawn Subscale of the BPI for five- to seven-year-old children in
the full NLSY-CS sample was 0.20, and we categorized COS children as
having "frequent" internalizing behavior problems if they scored 0.20 or
higher.


Outcome: Positive Behaviors (Mean Frequency of 7 Positive Behaviors)

Variable Name: PCB

Description: The Social Competence Subscale of the Positive Child Behavior
Scale was used in the present evaluation, as in other evaluation studies,
to assure that program effects on positive social behaviors (and not only
effects on problem behaviors) could be assessed.  The Positive Child
Behavior Scale was developed by Denise Polit for the New Chance Evaluation
(Polit, 1996), using modifications of items from existing scales so as to
be appropriate for a sample of disadvantaged mothers.  As for the Behavior
Problems Index, the mother is asked to indicate whether behaviors are not
true (0), somewhat true (1), or often true (2) of her child.  Seven items
comprise the Social Competence Subscale:

"My child is warm, loving."
"My child gets along well with other children."
"My child is admired and well-liked by other children."
"My child shows concern for other people's feelings."
"My child is helpful and cooperative."
"My child is considerate and thoughtful of other children."
"My child tends to give, lend, and share."


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Lowest 25th Percentile
of the Frequency on the Positive Behavior Scale/Social Competence Subscale

Variable Name: LO25PCB

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  Because national data on the
PCBS/SCS are not available, we calculated z-scores for the distribution of
Behavior Problems Index scores for five- to seven-year-old children in the
full sample of the NLSY-CS, identified the corresponding raw scores on the
PCBS/SCS in the COS sample, and categorized COS focal children as "low" in
terms of positive behaviors if their mean scores fell below the low cutoff.
Specifically, COS focal children with a mean PCBS/SCS score of 1.28 or lower
were categorized as having "infrequent" positive behaviors.


Outcome: Proportion of Focal Children Scoring in the Highest 25th Percentile
of the Frequency of the Positive Behavior Scale

Variable Name: HI25PCB

Description: In the Behavior Problems Index the mother is asked to indicate
whether statements are not true (0), sometimes true (1), or often true (2)
about her child over the previous 3 months.  Because national data on the
PCBS/SCS are not available, we calculated z-scores for the distribution of
Behavior Problems Index scores for five- to seven-year-old children in teh
full sample of the NLSY-CS, identified the corresponding raw score on the
PCBS/SCS in the COS sample, and categorized COS focal children as "high" in
terms of positive behaviors if their mean scores fell above the high cutoff.
Specifically, COS focal children with a mean PCBS/SCS score of 1.85 or
higher were considered to have "frequent" positive behaviors.


Outcome: General Health Rating (mean, 1-5)

Variable Name: GENHLTH

Description: The mother provided a rating of her child's overall health in
response to the single interview question: "Would you say that your child's
health in general is excellent (5), very good (4), good (3), fair (2), or
poor (1)?"  This measure has been widely used.  (See the National Health
Interview Survey, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, the
Rand Health Insurance Experiment, the Medical Outcomes Study, and the Child
Health Questionnaire; Krause & Jay, 1994; Langraf, Abetz, & Ware, 1996).
Validation work indicates that this health rating primarily reflects
physical health problems (Krause and Jay, 1994).


Outcome: Percentage of Focal Children Rated in "very good" or "excellent"
Health

Variable Name: CTHLTFD2

Description: We dichotomized the General Health Rating measure,
distinguishing between focal children with a rating of excellent and
very good (to which we assigned a score of 1), and those with a rating of
good, fair, or poor (to which we assigned a score of 0).


Outcome: Focal Child with an Accident, Injury, or Poisoning Requiring an
Emergency Hospital Visit Since RAD (%)

Variable Name: CTHOSFD2

Description: This measure was based on a single maternal report item,
answered separately for the focal child and for any child in the family:
"Since [the date of the respondent's random assignment in the evaluation],
has the focal child/any of your children had an accident, injury, or
poisoning requiring a visit to a hospital emergency room or clinic?"
A score of 0 indicates that the focal child did not have such an accident
or injury, while a score of 1 indicates that such an accident or injury did
occur since random assignment.


Outcome: Any Child with Academic Problems Since RAD (%) (Any Child)

Variable Name: CTACDAD2

Description: This is a dichotomous (yes/no) measure, calculated for any
child.  A "yes" on this measure indicates the presence of either one or
both of the following academic problems in school: (1) any child in the
family has repeated any grade for any reason; (2) any child in the family
goes to a special class or special school or gets special help in school
for learning problems.  A score of zero indicates that neither problem has
occurred, while a score of one indicates that at least one has occurred.


Outcome: Any Child Suspended Since RAD (%)

Variable Name: CTSUSAD2

Description: This measure is based on a single maternal response item,
recorded separately for the focal child and regarding all the children
in the family: "Have any of your children ever been suspended, excluded
or expelled from school?"  A score of 0 indicates that no child in the
family has been suspended, excluded, or expelled from school, while a
score of 1 indicates that this has occurred for at least one child in the
family.


Outcome: Any Child Emotional Problems Since RAD (%)

Variable Name: CTEMOAD2

Description: This is a dichotomous (yes/no) measure.  A "yes" indicates the
presence of any one or more of the following, according to maternal report:
(1) at least one child in the family is currently getting help for any
emotional, mental, or behavioral problem; (2) since random assignment in
the evaluation, the mother feels or someone has suggested that at least
one child in the family needed help for any emotional, mental, or
behavioral problem; (3) at least one child in the family goes to a
special class or special school or gets special help for behavioral or
emotional problems.  A score of 1 indicates that at least one child in the
family has had at least one of these problems, while a score of 0 indicates
that no child in the family experienced any of these indicators of emotional
problems.


Outcome: Any Child in the Family with an Accident, Injury, or Poisoning
Requiring an Emergency Hospital Visit Since RAD (%)

Variable Name: CTHOSAD2

Description: This measure was based on a single maternal report item,
answered separately for the focal child and for all children in the family:
"Since [the date of the respondent's random assignment in the evaluation],
has the focal child/any of your children had an accident, injury, or
poisoning requiring a visit to a hospital emergency room or clinic?"
A score of 0 indicates that no child in the family experienced such an
accident or injury, while a score of 1 indicates that such an accident or
injury did occur for at least one child in the family since random
assignment.





RECORD NUMBER 2: TARGETED INTERVENING MECHANISMS


Intervening Mechanism: If Ever Received Child Support Award

Variable Name: CSPTAWD2

Description: Mothers were asked: "A child's natural, birth father can be
made the child's legal father by going to a judge in a court or going to
the child support system, to establish paternity.  Have you either gone to
court or gone to a child support office to have (CHILD)'s father made
(his/her) legal father?"

1 YES, JUDGE OR COURT
2 YES, CHILD SUPPORT OFFICE
3 YES, BOTH
4 NO NEED TO ESTABLISH PATERNITY: FATHER SIGNED BIRTH CERTIFICATE -- SKIP
5 OTHER (SPECIFY):
6 NO

Mothers reported whether child support payments for the focal child had
ever been awarded, either by a court or judge, in writing, or informally.
Respondents indicating that they had gone through a judge or court, through
a child support office, or both, were coded "1".


Intervening Mechanism: If Dad Gave Money in Last 12 Months

Variable Name: DADPAYS2

Description: Mothers reported whether, in the previous 12 months, they had
received any money from the focal child's biological father, either through
the welfare office or child support enforcement office, or directly from
the father.  Respondents reporting assistance from the father through either
of these mechanisms were coded "1".


Intervening Mechanism: If Minimum Wage or Less

Variable Name: MINWAGE2

Description: Respondents earning less than $4.25 an hour at their current
job were coded as "1" indicating less than the minimum wage.


Intervening Mechanism: If Weekly Hours Working Was More Than 40

Variable Name: MANYHRS2

Description: Mothers who reported working less than 40 hours a week were
coded as 0 and those who reported working more than 40 hours a week were
coded as 1.


Intervening Mechanism: Child Has Any Health Insurance

Variable Name: ANYINSR2

Description: Respondents reported whether the focal child was, at the time
of the interview, covered under his or her father's medical insurance policy,
or by private insurance, an HMO, or Medicaid.  If the mother responded yes
to any of these, we defined the focal child as currently having health
coverage.


Intervening Mechanism: Any Non-Maternal Care for Focal Child

Variable Name: ANYCCFC2

Description: Mothers reporting having used any non-maternal care for the
focal child on a regular basis (i.e., at least once a week during the last
month) -- for any reason -- in the last month prior to the interview were
coded "1".


Intervening Mechanism: Employed and Using Any Non-Maternal Care

Variable Name: EMPANY

Description: Mothers reporting both employment and using any regular
non-maternal care for the focal child in the month prior to the survey were
coded as "1".

NOTE: The variable XEMPANY codes mothers not employed and using
exclusive mother care as 0; XEMPANY was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: Employed and Using Formal Care

Variable Name: EMPFORM

Description: Mothers reporting both employment and using formal non-maternal
care for the focal child in the month prior to the survey were coded as "1".
The following were coded as formal care arrangements: Head Start, day care
center, nursery school or preschool, kindergarten, before-school care
sponsored by the school, after-school care sponsored by the school.

NOTE: The variable XEMPFORM codes mothers not employed and using
exclusive mother care as 0; XEMPFORM was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: Employed and Using Informal Care

Variable Name: EMPINF

Description: Mothers reporting both employment and using informal
non-maternal care for the focal child in the month prior to the survey were
coded as "1".  The following were coded as informal care arrangements:
the focal child's father in respondent's home or in another home, focal
child's sibling in respondent's home or another home, focal child's
grandparent in respondent's home or another home, another relative in
respondent's home or in another home, a neighbor in respondent's home or in
another home, another non-relative in respondent's home or in another home,
or focal child cares for him or herself.

NOTE: The variable XEMPINF codes mothers not employed and using
exclusive mother care as 0; XEMPINF was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: Employed and Total Hours Per Week Focal Child in Care

Variable Name: EMPCCHR

Description: Employed mothers reported on how many hours in a typical week
the focal child was in each of the arrangements identified.

NOTE: The variable XEMPCCHR codes mothers not employed and using
exclusive mother care as 0; XEMPCCHR was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: Employed and Using Care During Irregular Hours

Variable Name: EMPIRRE

Description: Employed mothers reported whether the focal child was in any
of the identified arrangements on a regular basis after 6 p.m., on weekends,
and whether the schedule for any of the focal child's regular arrangements
varied week to week.  Mothers responding "yes" to any of these items were
considered to have care during "irregular" hours.

NOTE: The variable XEMPIRRE codes mothers not employed and using
exclusive mother care as 0; XEMPIRRE was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: Employment-Related Non-Maternal Care for Any Children

Variable Name: XRHANYC2

Description: Respondents with any paid employment since baseline reported
whether they had used any regular child care (not including elementary
school) for any of their children (not just the focal child) while they
were employed in their current or most recent job.






RECORD NUMBER 3: NON-TARGETED INTERVENING MECHANISMS



Intervening Mechanism: Number of Depressive Symptoms

Variable Name: DEP12SM2

Description: Twelve items from the 20-item CES-D Scale (Radloff, 1977)
were used to measure depressive symptoms at the two-year follow-up.
Respondents rated how often in the past week:

"I was bothered by things that usually don't bother me".

"I did not feel like eating; my appetite was poor".

"I felt that I could not shake off the blues even with help from my family
 or friends".

"I had trouble keeping my mind on what I was doing".

"I felt that everything I did was an effort".

"I felt fearful".

"My sleep was restless".

"I talked less than usual".

"I felt lonely".

"I felt sad".

"I could not get going".

Respondents rated the frequency as:

0 "RARELY (LESS THAN 1 DAY)"
1 "SOME (1-2 DAYS)"
2 "OCCASIONALLY (3-4 DAYS)"
3 "MOST"

This measure sums responses to these 12 items and, thus, could range from
0 to 36.   Cronbach's alpha is .89.


Intervening Mechanism: Many Depressive Symptoms

Variable Name: DEPSMRK2

Description: Based on a cutoff for the full CES-D Scale suggestive of
clinical depression (16 out of 60; Devins & Orme, 1985), we defined an
analogous cutoff for the summary measure (i.e., DEP12SM2) in order to
identify respondents with scores that may signal clinical depression.
Thus, respondents whose summary score was a 10 or higher were coded as
having relatively "many" depressive symptoms.


Intervening Mechanism: Mean Locus of Control

Variable Name: LOC2MN2

Description: Two items selected from the Pearlin Mastery/Locus of
Control Scale (Pearlin, Managhan, Lieberman, & Mullan, 1981) were used
to measure whether the respondent generally feels in control of her life,
or whether she generally feels that circumstances are beyond her
control.  Respondents rated how often, from 0 ("none of the time")
to 10 ("all of the time"), they felt that:

"There is little I can do to change the important things in my life."
"I have little control over the things that happen to me."

This measure is a mean of these two items and, thus, could range from 0 to
10.


Intervening Mechanism: Feeling Rushed

Variable Name: FFRUSHED

Description: Mothers rated how often, from 0 ("none of the time") to 10
("all of the time"), they "always feel rushed even to do the things I have
to do".


Intervening Mechanism: Time on Hands

Variable Name: FFTIME

Description: Mothers rated how often, from 0 ("none of the time") to 10
("all of the time"), they "have time on my hands that I don't know what to
do with".


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Maternal Report of Warmth, mean

Variable Name: MRWRMMN2

Description: On a scale from 0 ("none of the time") to 10 ("all of the
time"), the mother reported how often:

"My child and I have warm, close times together." (PACR -- Easterbrooks &
Goldberg, 1984)

"Most times I feel that my child likes me and wants to be near me." (PSI --
Abidin, 1986)

"Even when I'm in a bad mood, I show my child a lot of love."

This measure is a mean of these three items and, thus, could range from 0
to 10.  Cronbach's alpha for this 3-item scale is .55.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Maternal Report of Aggravation, Mean

Variable Name: MRAGGMN2

Description: On a scale from 0 ("none of the time") to 10 ("all of the
time"), the mother reported how often:

"Being a parent is harder than I thought it would be." (PSI -- Abidin, 1986)
"There are some things my child does that really bother me a lot." (PSI --
Abidin, 1986)

"I find myself giving up more of my life to meet my child's needs than I
ever expected." (PSI -- Abidin, 1986)

"I feel trapped by my responsibilities as a parent." (PSI -- Abidin, 1986)

"I often feel angry with my child." (PSI -- Abidin, 1986)

This measure is a mean of these 5 items and, thus, could range from 0 to 10.
Cronbach's alpha for this 5-item scale is .65.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Maternal Report of Cognitive
Stimulation, Mean

Variable Name: MRCOGMN2

Description: Mothers reported on the frequency with which they engaged
in nine cognitively stimulating activities with the focal child from 0
("never) to 5 ("almost every day").

"Played card games or board games together, like checkers, rummy, or
bingo?" (Descriptive Study, Moore et al., 1995)

"Played with puzzles that have 25 pieces or more?" (Descriptive Study,
Moore et al., 1995)

"Played guessing games or told riddles?" (Descriptive Study, Moore et al.,
1995)

"Practiced reading writing or math at home together, not including homework?"
(Descriptive Study, Moore et al., 1995)

"Gone on a trip an hour or more from home?" (Descriptive Study, Moore et al,
1995)

"How often do you read stories to (CHILD)?" (HOME-SF -- Baker & Mott, 1989)

"How often do you and (CHILD) go to the library?" (Descriptive Study, Moore
et al., 1995)

"Sometimes families like to go to historical places or museums.  How often
have you or any other family members taken or arranged to take (CHILD) to
any type of museum -- a children's museum, scientific, art or historical
museum within the past year?" (HOME-SF -- Baker & Mott, 1989)

"During the past week, how often did you let (CHILD) help you prepare food?"
(Descriptive Study, Moore et al., 1995)

This measure is a mean of these 9 items and, thus, could range from 0 to 5.
Cronbach's alpha for this 9-item scale is .68.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Maternal Report of Controlling
Discipline, Mean

Variable Name: MRDISMN2

Description: Mothers reported on a scale of 0 ("not at all true") to 10
("completely true") the extent to which they endorsed controlling discipline
strategies.

"I teach my child to keep control of his or her feelings at all times".
(PACR-- Easterbrooks & Goldberg, 1984)

"It is sometimes necessary to discipline a child with a good, hard spanking".
(Descriptive Study, Moore et al., 1995)

"If a mother never spanks her child, the child won't learn respect".
(Descriptive Study, Moore et al., 1995)


This measure is a mean of these 3 items and, thus, could range from 0 to 10.
Cronbach's alpha for this 3-item scale is .51.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Interviewer Rating of Harsh Discipline
(Dichotomous Index)

Variable Name: IAHRSHD2

Description: Interviewers noted whether the mothers yelled at the focal
child in a "harsh or hostile manner"; they also rated the mother's behavior
toward the focal child from 0 ("extremely hostile, cold, harsh to child")
to 10 ("extremely warm, loving, and affectionate to child").  A score of 1
on this measure indicates that the mothers screamed or yelled at the focal
child at least once during the visit and/or that the interviewer rated the
mothers at the "hostile" end (i.e., 0-3) of that item.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Interviewer Rating of Maternal Warmth
(Summary Index)

Variable Name: IAMOMWRM

Description: Interviewers reported on five maternal behaviors relating
to mothers' warmth toward the focal child as observed during the course
of the two-year follow-up home interview.  Three items -- mothers' warmth
(versus hostility), pride, and warm tone of voice -- were rated on an
11-point scale and dichotomized into "yes/no", with responses at the ends
of the distribution (i.e., 7-10 or 0-3, depending on the direction of the
wording) coded as "yes".  These items were summed along with affirmative
responses to a dichotomous item ("did mother kiss, caress, or hug focal
child at least once?") and an item recoded to reflect whether the mother
spontaneously praised the focal child at least once, yielding a summary
score ranging from 0-5.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Interviewer Rating of Maternal
Verbalizing -- Summary Index

Variable Name: IAVERBL2

Description: Four interviewer ratings comprise a summary index of the
amount and complexity of mothers' verbal interactions with focal child.
One item using an 11-point scale -- and relating to the degree to which the
mother spoke to the focal child in complex sentences (0) or used single
words or gestures (10)-- was dichotomized, with responses of 0-1 given a 1.
This item was summed along with affirmative responses to three dichotomous
items -- relating to whether the mother introduced the interviewer to the
focal child, explained to the focal child what was going on, or conversed
with the focal child at least twice.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Summary Index of Favorable Parenting

Variable Name: FAVPRSM2

Description: A point was given if (1) mothers' warmth score (maternal
report) was at the higher end of the scale (i.e., MRWRMMN2=7 or greater);
(2) interviewers rated mothers as warm on all five indicators (i.e.,
IAMOMWRM=5); (3) mother's cognitive stimulation scores indicated more
frequent engagement in cognitively stimulating activities (i.e., at least
once a week, MRCOGMN2=3 or greater), or (4) interviewers rated mothers
favorably on each of the four indicators of mothers' verbal interactions
with the focal child (i.e., IAVERBL2=4).  Thus, this summary index could
range from 0 to 4.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Summary Index of Unfavorable Parenting

Variable Name: BADPRSM2

Description: A point was given if:  (1) mothers' aggravation score was
at the higher end of the scale (i.e., MRAGGMN2 = 7 or greater);
(2) mothers' controlling discipline was at the higher end of the scale
(i.e., MRDISMN2 = 7 or greater); (3) mothers' cognitive stimulation
score was 0 (i.e., MRCOGMN2 = 0); or (4) interviewers rated the mother as
acting harsh or hostile toward the focal child (i.e., IAHRSHD2 = 1).  This
summary index could also range from 0 to 4.


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Involvement in School

Variable Name: EESCHL

Description: Mothers reported on how often they attended activities or
events at the focal child's school:

"When there are activities or events at your (children's/child's) school
like a PTA meeting, a class trip, or a special performance, how often do
you go?  Would you say:

1 ALL THE TIME
2 SOMETIMES
3 NOW AND THEN, OR
4 NEVER


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting: Last Doctor Visit Occurred in Past
Year

Variable Name: LASTMED2

Description: Mothers reported on about how long it had been since the
focal child last saw a medical professional for a checkup, shots, or other
routine care.  Response categories were collapsed into 0
("less than a year") or 1 ("a year or more, or never").


Intervening Mechanism: Perceptions of Neighborhood Danger

Variable Name: FFDANGER

Description: Mothers rated how true, from 0 ("not at all true") to 10
("completely true"), was the statement: "I feel I must keep my child inside
our home as much as possible because of dangers in the neighborhood."


Intervening Mechanism: Parenting Support

Variable Name: PSUP7MN2

Description: Mothers rated how true each of the following statements
were, with 0 = "not at all true" and 10 = "completely true":

"If my child were playing outside and got hurt or scared, there are adults
nearby who I trust to help my child."

"When my child is sick, friends or family will call or come by to check on
how things are going."

"When I have troubles or need help, I have someone I can really talk to."
"If I need to do an errand, I can easily find a friend or relative living
nearby to watch my child."

"If I need a ride to get my child to the doctor, there are friends I could
call to help me."

"If I need to buy a pair of shoes for my child but I am short of cash,
there is someone who would lend me the money."

"The mothers in my neighborhood often have children back and forth to play."

This measure is a mean of these 7 items and, thus, could range from 0 to 10.
Cronbach's alpha for this seven-item scale was .75.


Intervening Mechanism: Residential Status (at 2 years) of Focal Child's
Biological Father

Variable Name: DADHOME2

Description: Biological fathers who lived with the focal child and the
child's mother were coded 1; biological fathers NOT living with the focal
child at the time of the 2-year follow-up were coded 0.


Intervening Mechanism: Informal Support from the Non-Residential
Biological Father of the Focal Child

Variable Name: DINFSPT2

Description: This three-item measure sums the number of affirmative
responses to a question asking whether in the previous 12 months the focal
child's biological father had: (1) bought clothes, toys, or presents,
(2) bought groceries, or (3) babysat for the focal child, yielding a score
from 0 to 3.

NOTE: The variable XDINFSP2 codes residential and deceased biological
fathers as 0; XDINFSP2 was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: How Often Focal Child Visits with Non-Residential
Biological Father

Variable Name: DADVIST2

Description: In families without the focal child's biological father
present, mothers reported on how often the focal child had seen his or her
biological father in the past 12 months:

1 ALMOST EVERY DAY
2 2-5 TIMES PER WEEK
3 ABOUT ONCE A WEEK
4 1-3 TIMES PER MONTH
5 2-11 TIMES IN PAST TWELVE MONTHS
6 ONCE IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS
7 0 TIMES IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS

This variable was dichotomized into 0 (no visits in the last 12 months)
and 1 (at least once in the last 12 months).

NOTE: The variable XDADVIS2 codes residential and deceased biological
fathers as 0; XDADVIS2 was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: Married, Living with Husband at 2-year Follow-Up

Variable Name: MARRIED2

Description: Mothers were asked about their marital status in the month
prior to the interview.  This item indicates whether the mother was married
and living with her spouse (coded as 1); separated, divorced, or widowed
respondents were coded as "unmarried" (0).


Intervening Mechanism: Cohabiting with Non-Husband at 2-year Follow-Up

Variable Name: COHABIT2

Description: Mothers reporting that they were unmarried but "living as a
couple" with a boyfriend or girlfriend were coded as "1".  Unmarried
mothers who were not cohabiting were coded as 0.

NOTE: The variable XCOHAB2 codes married mothers as not cohabiting;
XCOHAB2 was used in impacts analyses.


Intervening Mechanism: If Respondent had a Baby Since RAD

Variable Name: XIBABY2

Description: Mothers reporting that they had had a baby since RAD were
coded as "1"; those reporting no births since RAD were coded "0".





SURVEY RESPONSES (RECORDS 4-12)


Responses to the COS interviewer's questions are stored in Sections AA-HH
(Records 4-11).  Record 12 (Section IA) includes the COS interviewer's
assessment of the respondent's home, neighborhood, interaction with the focal
child, appearance, behavior, and speech; also, an assessment of the focal
child's behavior.  Variable names begin with AA, BB...HH, IA for these
measures.


RECORD NUMBER 4: HISTORY OF FOCAL CHILD'S CARE (SECTION AA)

Section AA includes several lead-in questions concerning the focal
child's care at any time in the past, including before random
assignment.

If the respondent answers 1 (YES) to a lead-in question, the respondent
is then asked if the focal child used this type of care regularly (i.e., for a
month or more) since random assignment.

If the respondent answers 2 (NO), the follow-up question is skipped, and
the respondent has a missing value for the measure.


These measures concern focal child's care at any time in the past, including
before random assignment:

[See N2RCCBK.TXT for more information]

AAHDSTRT  "AA1a:  Child Ever Attended Head Start   "
AAKINDER  "AA1b:  Child Ever Attended Kindergarten "
AACCPGM   "AA1c:Child Ever Attend Chld Care Center "
AASUMMER  "AA1d: Child Ever Attended Summer Program"
AASITCC   "AA4:  Regular Babysitter                "
AAANYCC2  "AA7:  Any Child Care Recorded           "
AACCAGEY  "AA8: YY Age Began Regular Child Care    "
AACCAGEM  "AA8: MM Age Began Regular Child Care    "
AASITHRS  "AA9:  When Began, Number of Hours       "
AAELSEWH  "AA10:  Child Ever Live Elsewhere         "
AAELSD1   "Start date when focal child lived elsewhere 1"
AAELSD2   "Start date when focal child lived elsewhere 2"
AAELSD3   "Start date when focal child lived elsewhere 3"
AAELSD4   "Start date when focal child lived elsewhere 4"
AAELED1   "Date when focal child stopped living elsewhere 1"
AAELED2   "Date when focal child stopped living elsewhere 2"
AAELED3   "Date when focal child stopped living elsewhere 3"
AAELED4   "Date when focal child stopped living elsewhere 4"



These measures concern focal child's care since random assignment date (RAD):

[See N2RCCBK.TXT for more information]

AAHDSTR2  "AA2a:Attend Head Start 1mo+ since RAD   "
AAKINDE2  "AA2b:Attend Kgarten 1mo+ since RAD      "
AACCPG2   "AA2c:Attend Child Care 1mo+ since RAD   "
AASUMME2  "AA2d:Attend Summer Prgram 1mo+ since RAD"
AACCNUM   "AA3:  Number of Teachers/Providers 1mo+ since RAD "
AASITNUM  "AA6:  Number of Babysitters 1mo+ since RAD "
AASITCC2  "AA5:  Any Regular Babysitter 1mo+ since RAD since RAD "


In addition:

(1)

AACCAGEY and AACCAGEM are skipped if AAANYCC2=2 (NO: child care or baby
sitting indicated for focal child)

AAELSD1-AAELSD1 and AAELED1-AAELED1 are skipped if AAELSEWH=2 (focal
child never lived outside of respondent's home)


(2)
For AACCAGEY and AACCAGEM (age of focal child when first received care),
most respondents reported the focal child's age in years (AACCAGEY) when
he/she first received care, but often left out his/her age in months
(AACCAGEM=missing).  However, the opposite sometimes occurred, probably
indicating that the focal child first received care when he/she was
less than 1 year old.

Note: Missing values were NOT recoded to 0s for these measures.

(3) The start and end date variables in this section were transformed in
the same way as the dates of participation in employment-related activities
and dates of employment for pay.  (See SVARMEMO.TXT on CD #2: 2-Year Client
Survey for details.)

For example: the end date was set to the date of the interview if the
original MM and YY = 77/77 (still living outside of respondent's home).




RECORD NUMBER 5: CURRENT CHILD CARE FOR FOCAL CHILD (SECTION BB)


In this section, respondents are asked to estimate the total number
of hours that the focal child spent in regular child care arrangements
that lasted at least once a week during the month before interview.


Note: Interviewers could leave fields blank if no hours were
spent in a particular type of care.  Missing values were NOT recoded to
0s for these measures.


If no hours were indicated in any measures:


BBA1OWHR  BB02a1:  In Home, by Father
BBA2OTHR  BB02a2:  Another Home, by Father
BBB1OWHR  BB02b1:  Own Home, by Brother/Sister
BBB2OTHR  BB02b2:  Another Home, by Brother/Sister
BBC1OWHR  BB02c1:  Own Home, by Grandparent
BBC2OTHR  BB02c2:  Another Home, by Grandparent
BBD1OWHR  BB02d1:  Own Home, by Other Relative
BBD2OTHR  BB02d2:  Another Home, by Other Relative
BBE1OWHR  BB02e1:  Own Home, by R's Partner
BBE2OTHR  BB02e2:  Another Home, by R's Partner
BBF1OWHR  BB02f1:  Own Home, by Neighbor
BBF2OTHR  BB02f2:  Another Home, by Neighbor
BBG1OWHR  BB02g1:  Own Home, Other Nonrelative
BBG2OTHR  BB02g2:  Another Home Other Nonrelative
BBHHDSHR  BB02h:   Head Start Program
BBIDCHR   BB02i:   Day Care Center
BBJNUHR   BB02j:   Nursery School/preschool
BBKKNHR   BB02k:   Kindergarten
BBLBEHR   BB02l:   Before-school care
BBMAFHR   BB02m:   After-school care
BBNSUHR   BB02n:   Summer camp
BBOALHR   BB02o:   Cares for Self Alone
BBPOTHR   BB02p:   Other

the rest of the questions in this section are skipped.


The section also includes questions on the cost of care and reimbursements
by the welfare department, the child's father, the respondent's employer, or
someone else.  Researchers will need to construct measures of total cost and
total net cost of care (total cost minus reimbursement), based on
answers to several questions.

Total cost per week=

BBPAYAMT (PAYMENT AMOUNT) * 1, IF BBPAYAMC (IS PAYMENT PER WEEK?)=1 (YES)

ELSE: CHECK VALUE OF  BBPAYUNT (PAYMENT PER...)


BBPAYAMT * SUM OF (BBA1OWHR--BBPOTHR), IF  =1 (PER HOUR)

BBPAYAMT * BBDAYS (DAYS PER WEEK OF CARE), IF BBPAYUNT  =2 (PER DAY)

BBPAYAMT / 2,    IF BBPAYUNT  =3 (EVERY TWO WEEKS)

BBPAYAMT / 4.33, IF BBPAYUNT  =4 (PER MONTH)

BBPAYAMT / 52,   IF BBPAYUNT  =5 (PER YEAR)

ELSE: IMPUTE,    IF BBPAYUNT  =6 (OTHER) OR IS MISSING


The same strategy would be used to calculate reimbursement amount, using

BBREIMAM  (REIMBURSEMENT AMOUNT)

BBREIMWK  (IS THAT PER WEEK?)

BBREIUNT  (REIMBURSEMENT PER...)



NOTE:

1) If the respondent indicated that no one else paid for part of the child care,
BBREIMAM, BBREIMWK, and BBREIUNT are skipped and set to missing.  Researchers
will need to reset values to 0 when subtracting reimbursed costs from total
cost.

2) A follow-up question (BBONLY) checks if the total cost is only for
the focal child or for the focal child and other children in respondent's
family.  IF BBONLY=1 (yes), respondents are asked how many other children
(not counting focal child) were covered by the child care costs.
(BBOTHCH)  Researchers will need to allocate only part of the costs to the focal
child -- possibly by dividing total and net costs by (BBOTHCH + 1), assuming
that costs were equally divided among children, or based on other
assumptions.



RECORD NUMBER 6: CHILD SUPPORT FOR FOCAL CHILD (SECTION CC)

Most questions concern child support (formal or informal) received
for the focal child during the 12 months before interview -- i.e.,
during year 2 of follow-up.  A few questions have other time frames:

At interview:

CCPACUR: current location of focal child's father


Any time in the past INCLUDING BEFORE RANDOM ASSIGNMENT:

CCMARRY: ever married to focal child's father

CCPATER1-CCPATER5: list of ways in which respondent attempted to establish
                   paternity

CCPAGEYY CCPAGEMM: age (in years and months) of focal child when attempts were
                   made to establish paternity

CCPATYES: was paternity established?

CCCSAWD1- CCCSAWD4: list of ways in which child support was awarded

CCCSDMM CCCSDYY: date (MMYY) when respondent last received a child support
                 payment for focal child



Note: CCPAGEYY and CCPAGEMM have the same issues with missing values as
AACCAGEY and AACCAGE (see SECTION AA above).

This section contains the following skips:


1) If respondent indicates that she and the focal child's father have
ever been married, paternity is assumed and questions about establishing
paternity are skipped:

CCPATER1-CCPATER5, CCPAGEYY CCPAGEMM


2) If respondent indicates that she received no child support payments
during the year before interview, additional questions about child
support payments are skipped:

CCCSREG,  CCCSDMM CCCSDYY



Note: No values for CCCSDMM CCCSDYY were changed  (e.g., no DD was added).
Researchers should note that some respondents indicated the year but not
the month when child support for focal child was last received.
(See N2RCCBK.TXT).



RECORD NUMBER 7: FOCAL CHILD'S HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE (SECTION DD)

Nearly all questions in this section concern the child's health and
health care at the time of the 2-year interview.  The exceptions are:

DDLSTMED (How long since last visit to a doctor?)

and

DDLSTDEN (How long since last visit to a dentist?)


This section contains one skip:

If the respondent reports that the focal child has no regular doctor or
clinic where she/he goes to receive medical care, the follow-up
question (DDILLHSP: Is that place a hospital emergency room?) is
skipped.


NOTE: Additional questions concerning the focal child's health are located
in the data file and documentation for the 2-Year Client Survey (CD #2):
N2RS1221.TXT, RECORD 17: CHILD OUTCOMES (ALL CHILDREN), See N2RSCBK.TXT
for details.

For any outcome, information on focal children is indicated by a
1 (yes) on the lead-in question and a 1 (yes: focal child) or
3 (both focal child and another child) on the follow-up question.




RECORD NUMBER 8: PARENTING OF FOCAL CHILD (SECTION EE)

This section consists of a series of "how often" questions.
Researchers should note the differences in the time periods for
questions in this section.

The following measures concern the frequency of the mother and focal
child's involvement in family, community, and cultural activities.  The
time period is not specifically defined but is understood to include
the time of the 2-year interview and the near past.

EESCHL     Mother's involvement in school acitivies
EEVISIT    Visiting relatives
EEOUTING   Family outings
EECHURCH   Church/Sunday School
EEMUSEUM   Museums
EEREAD     Read stories to child
EELIBRAR   Visit the library

The following measures concern the frequency of parent/child leisure-time
activities during "the past year", i.e., year 2 in most cases.

EECARDS    Play card or board games
EEGUESSG   Play guessing games or told riddles
EEPUZZLE   Play with puzzles of 25 or more pieces
EEREADG    Practice reading or math (not including homework)
EETRIP     Gone on trips of 1 or more hours away from home


The following measures concern "the past week" before the 2-year interview

EEFOOD     Let focal child help prepare food


Also:

EEBOOKS    How many books does focal child own


There are no skips in this section.




SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNARE (SAQ): SECTIONS FF-HH

Respondents filled out the SAQ privately, while interviewer administered the
Bracken Basic Concept Scale test to the focal child.

Note: Neither the term "Self Administered Questionnaire" nor the subject
titles for each part was printed on the form used by respondents, so as
not to influence their answers.


RECORD NUMBER 9: SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRE, PARENTING (SECTION FF)

The time period is not specifically defined but is understood to include
the time of the 2-year interview and the near past.

There are no skips in this section.

RECORD NUMBER 10:SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRE, DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS
                 (SECTION GG)

Respondents are asked to report how they felt about themselves during
"the past week" before the 2-year interview:

There are no skips in this section.



RECORD NUMBER 11:SELF-ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRE, CHILD POSITIVE AND PROBLEM
                 BEHAVIOR (SECTION: HH)

Respondents are asked to describe the focal child's personality and behavior
"during the last three months" before the two-year interview.

If the focal child does not attend school or preschool, two questions about
behavioral problems in school are skipped:

HHSCHDIS:  Focal child is disobedient at school

HHSCHTRB:   Focal child has trouble getting along with teachers


NOTE: Additional questions concerning the focal child's health are located
in the data file and documentation for the 2-Year Client Survey (CD #2):
N2RS1221.TXT, RECORD 17: CHILD OUTCOMES (ALL CHILDREN), See N2RSCBK.TXT
for details.


For any outcome, information on focal children is indicated by a
1 (yes) on the lead-in question and a 1 (yes: focal child) or
3 (both focal child and another child) on the follow-up question.



RECORD NUMBER 12: INTERVIEWER ASSESSMENT (SECTION IA)

The section begins with a question (IAOBSERV) concerning whether the COS
interviewer observed the focal child (1) with the respondent, (2) alone,
or (3) not at all:

IF IAOBSERV=1 (observed respondent and focal child together),
IAAFEX...IABEHAV (questions about mother/focal child interaction and focal
child's behavior) are asked. (See N2RCCBK.TXT)

IF IAOBSERV=2 (child observed but not with respondent),
IAAFEX...IAAMTOBS  (questions about mother/focal child interaction) are
skipped (set to missing) and only IACHEMOT...IABEHAV (questions about
focal child's behavior) are asked.

IF IAOBSERV=3 (child not observed) IAAFEX...IABEHAV
(questions about mother/focal child interaction and focal
child's behavior) are skipped (set to missing).


Similarly, interviewers are asked if they conducted the COS interview
and tests in respondent's home.  (IAINTHOM).

If IAINTHOM=1 (YES), interviewers are asked to rate

1) The interior of respondent's home (IAINTCLN...IABOOKS)

2) The exterior and surrounding neighborhood of respondent's home
(IAHOMSTR...IANEIGHB)

3) The conditions under which the interview took place (IAATMOSP, IATV)

4) The respondent's appearance, speech, and behavior
(IASOCIAL...IADRGIN)

See N2RCCBK.TXT for details.



If IAINTHOM=2 (No),  interviewers are asked if they saw both the
interior and exterior of respondent's home.  (IAHOMVW)



IF IAHOMVW=1 (both interior and exterior seen), the same series of
questions are asked [(1)-(4)] as for interviewers who conducted the interview
in respondent's home.

IF IAHOMVW=2 (exterior only seen): IAINTCLN...IABOOKS are skipped (set
to missing) and the remaining questions [(2)-(4)] asked.


IF IAINTHOM=3, (neither interior nor exterior seen): IAINTCLN...IANEIGHB
are skipped (set to missing) and the remaining questions [(3)-(4)].
asked


Researchers should also be aware that this section uses many different
kinds of scales. (See N2RCCBK.TXT)

IMPORTANT: The survey firm frequently changed the meaning of low and
high values: sometimes low scores indicate the worst situation
and high scores indicate the best situation, but other times the
opposite is true. (See N2RCCBK.TXT)





RECORD NUMBER 13: SUBGROUPS




Subgroup Name: Baseline Sibling Configuration Risk

Variable Name: CTSIBRKB

Description: This is a dichotomous risk variable comprised of variables for
number of siblings in the home and amount of time which elapsed between
sibling births.  Higher risk mothers (coded 1) had three or more children
at baseline or had two children born less than two years apart.  Lower risk
mothers (coded 0) had only one child at baseline or two children born two
or more years apart.


Subgroup Name: Baseline Educational Risk

Variable Name: CTCEDRKB

Description: This dichotomous risk variable assessed educational risk
through high school completion, literacy assessment scores, and numeracy
assessment scores.  The higher risk group (coded 1) had at least one of
the following markers at baseline: 1) No diploma or GED; 2) Level 1 or 2
on literacy assessment (low); and 3) Level A or B on numeracy assessment
(low).  The lower risk group (coded 0) had none of these markers.


Subgroup Name: Baseline Work Risk

Variable Name: CTCWKRKB

Description: This dichotomous variable assesses risk in terms of likelihood
of future program participation or employment.  The higher risk group (coded
1) fell into at least one of the following categories: 1) been on welfare
for five or more years; 2) identified four to seven barriers to employment;
and 3) never worked full time for the same employer for six months or more.
The lower risk group (coded 0) were in none of these categories at baseline.


Subgroup Name: Baseline Psychological Risk

Variable Name: CTPSYRKB

Description: This dichotomous risk variable of mother's psychological well-
being is based on 3 items tapping depressive symptoms:

"During the past week...
I felt sad."
I felt depressed." (Double weighted)
I felt that I could not shake off the blues, even with the help of family
and friends."

and 3 items tapping locus of control:

"I have little control over the things that happen to me."

"Sometimes I feel that I'm being pushed around in life."

"There is little that I can do to change many of the important things in
my life."

Higher risk mothers (coded 1) reported "a moderate amount" or " most or all
days" to the depressive symptoms, and "agreed" or "agreed a lot" with the
locus of control items.


Subgroup Name: Cumulative Baseline Risks

Variable Name: CT4RKRKB

Description: Dichotomous cumulative risk variable for four of the risk
composites (Sibling Configuration Risk, Educational Risk, Work Risk, and
Psychological Well-being Risk).  Higher Cumulative Risk respondents (coded 1)
were members of the Higher Risk group in 2 to 4 of these risk composites.
Lower Cumulative Risk respondents were placed in 0 or 1 of the four risk
composites.


Subgroup Name: Focal Child Age

Variable Name: CTAGERKB

Description: This dichotomous risk variable was coded 1 if the focal child
was younger than the median age of focal children at baseline (M=51 months),
and was coded 0 if the focal child was older than the median age.


Subgroup Name: Baseline Reservations About Working

Variable Name: CTATTRKB

Description: Dichotomous risk variable assessing reservations about working.
Higher risk respondents (coded 1) either "agreed" or "agreed a lot" to at
least one of three statements regarding work.  Lower risk mothers "disagreed"
or "disagreed a lot" with each of the statements.

"Right now I'd prefer not to work so I can take care of my family full-time."
"I cannot go to a school or job training program right now because I am
afraid to leave my children in day care or with a baby sitter."
"I do not want a job because I would miss my children too much."


Subgroup Name: Baseline Attitudes Towards School

Variable Name: CTSCHRKB

Description: Dichotomous risk variable that assesses respondents' attitudes
towards school based on 7 items.  Higher Risk mothers (coded 1) indicated
positive attitudes on four or fewer items out of seven items.  Lower Risk
mothers (coded 0) indicated positive attitudes on five to seven of the items.

"If you had a choice, which would you prefer:

Going to school to study basic reading and math OR Staying home to take care
of your family?"

Going to school to study basic reading and math OR Going to a program to get
help looking for a job?"

Going to school to learn a job skill OR Going to school to study basic
reading and math?"

"During the past year, have you told anyone that you wanted to be in a
school or training program?"

"Going to a school that teaches basic reading and math would help me get a
good job."

"I like going to school."

"Right now, I'd really like to be going to school to improve my reading and
math skills."





RECORD NUMBER 14: COVARIATES



Covariate Name: Number of Children

Variable Name: CTNCHTRB

Description: Trichotomous measure of how many children respondent had at
baseline: 1 = one child, 2 = two children, 3 = 3 or more children.


Covariate Name: Focal Child's Gender

Variable Name: FCGENDER

Description: Focal child's gener, from the 5-year follow-up survey.


Covariate Name: Focal Child's Age

Variable Name: CHAGERAD

Description: Respondents identified the age of the focal child (in months)
at baseline.


Covariate Name: High School Diploma or GED

Variable Name: CTHSGRKB

Description: Respondents identified whether they had a high school diploma
or GED at baseline.  This risk indicator was scored 1 if the respondent did
NOT have a high school diploma or GED at baseline, and was scored 0 if they
DID have a high school diploma or GED at baseline.


Covariate Name: Literacy

Variable Name: CTLITRKB

Description: At baseline, respondents were administered the Test of Applied
Literacy Skills (TALS) document literacy subtest developed by Educational
Testing Service (ETS).  This risk indicator was scored 1 if the respondent
scored in the lower two levels (indicating difficulty reading at a
functional level), and was scored 0 if the respondent scored in the higher
three levels.


Covariate Name: Numeracy

Variable Name: CTNUMRKB

Description: At baseline, respondents were administered the GAIN Appraisal
Math Test developed by the Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment System
(CASAS).  Those scoring in the lower two levels were coded 1 on this risk
indicator and are considered to have low numeracy.  Those scoring in the
higher three levels were coded 0.


Covariate Name: Time on Welfare

Variable Name: CTWLFTRB

Description: At baseline, respondents were asked the amount of time they
had spent on welfare.  This trichotomous measure indicates whether the
respondent, as of baseline, had spent less than two years (coded 1), at
least two but less than five years (coded 2), or five or more years (coded 3)
receiving welfare.


Covariate Name: Depressive Symptoms

Variable Name: CTDEPTRB

Description: Respondents were administered, at baseline, 4 items from the
20-item Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale.
The four items are as follows:

"During the past week...
I felt sad."
I felt depressed."
I felt that I could not shake off the blues, even with the help of family
and friends."
I felt lonely."

Possible responses were:  (1) rarely, (2) some/a little, (3) moderate amount,
or (4) most or all days.

A mean score on these four items of less than or equal to 2 (indicating
responses of "rarely" or "some/a little" to each item) were coded 0 ("low
depressive symptoms"); mean scores between 2 and 3 were coded 1 ("medium");
and mean scores greater than or equal to 3 (indicating responses of
"moderate amount" or "most or all days" to each item) were coded 2 ("high
depressive symptoms") on this trichotomous measure.


Covariate Name: Locus of Control

Variable Name: CTLOCTRB

Description: At baseline, respondents answered the following items with:
(1) disagree a lot, (2) disagree, (3) agree, (4) agree a lot.

"I have little control over the things that happen to me."
"I often feel angry that people like me never get a fair chance to succeed."
"Sometimes I feel that I'm being pushed around in life."
"There is little that I can do to change many of the important things in my
life."

Mean scores on these four items of less than or equal to 2 (indicating
responses of "disagree" or "disagree a lot" to each item) were coded 0
("more internal"); mean scores between 2 and 3 were coded 1 ("neutral");
and mean scores greater than or equal to 3 (indicating responses of "agree"
or "agree a lot" to each item) were coded 2 ("more external") on this
trichotomous measure.


Covariate Name: Source of Support

Variable Name: CTSUPRKB

Description: At baseline, respondents identified the extent to which they
had the following sources of support:

"If I got a job, I could find someone I trust to take care of my children."
"When I have an emergency and need cash, friends and family will loan it
to me."
"When I have troubles or need help, I have someone I can really talk to."

Possible responses were:  agree a lot, agree, disagree, disagree a lot.

This dichotomous risk indicator was scored 1 if the respondent disagreed
or disagreed a lot to each of these three items, and was scored 0 if the
respondent agreed or agreed a lot to each of these three items.


Covariate Name: Family Barriers

Variable Name: CTBARTRB

Description: Respondents identified the extent to which they have
experienced up to seven barriers to employment:

"I cannot go to a school or job training program because ...
I have a health or emotional problem."
I have a child or family member with a health or emotional problem."
I already have too much to do during the day."
I have no way to get there every day."
I cannot afford child care."
"My family is having so many problems that I cannot ...
... go to a school or training program right now."
... work at a part-time or full-time job right now."

This trichotomous measure indicates whether the respondent reported no
barriers (coded 0), between one and four barriers (coded 1), or whether
the respondent reported four to seven barriers (coded 2) at baseline.


Covariate Name: No Full-Time Employment for 6 Months with Same Employer

Variable Name: CTWRKRKB

Description: Respondents identified whether they had ever worked full-time
for six months or more with the same employer.  This dichotomous risk
indicator was scored 1 if the respondent reported NO such work experience,
and was scored 0 if the respondent reported having ever worked (as of
baseline) full-time for the same employer for 6 months or more.


Covariate Name: Number of Baseline Risks

Variable Name: CTRSKTRB

Description: This measure is based on a summary of the number of risks at
baseline reported by the respondent.  Risks were assessed based on the
following: number of children, high school diploma or GED, literacy,
numeracy, time on welfare, depressive symptoms, locus of control, social
support, family barriers, no full-time employment for 6 months with same
employer.  This trichotomous measure indicates whether the respondent
reported 0 to 3 risks (coded 0), 4 or 5 risks (coded 1), or 6 to 10 risks
(coded 2) at baseline.



References

Abidin, R.R.  (1986).  Parenting Stress Index Manual, second edition.
Charlottesville, VA:  Pediatric Psychology Press.

Baker, P.C., & Mott, F.L. (1989).  NLSY child handbook 1989: A guide and
resource document for the National Longitudinal Study of Youth 1986 child
data.  Columbus: Center for Human Resource Research, Ohio State University.

Bracken, B.A.  (1984).  Bracken Basic Concept Scale:  Examiner's manual.
The Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

Devins, G. M. and Orme, C. M. (1985).  Center for epidemiological studies
depression scale.  In D. J. Keyser and R. C. Sweetland (Eds.), Test
critiques (pp. 144-160). Kansas City, MO:  Test Corporation of America.

Easterbrooks, M.A., & Goldberg, W.A. (1984).  Toddler development in the
family: Impact of father involvement and parenting characteristics.  Child
Development, 55, 740-752.

Krause, N.M., and Jay, G.M.  (1994).  What do global self-rated health
items measure?  Medical Care, 32(9), 930-942.

Landgraf, J.M., Abetz, L., and Ware, J.E., Jr.  (1996).  The child health
questionnaire: A user’s manual.  Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New
England Medical Center.

Moore, K. A., Zaslow, M. J., Coiro, M. J., Miller, S. M., and Magenheim,
E. B. (1995). How well are they faring?  AFDC families with preschool-aged
children in Atlanta at the outset of the JOBS evaluation. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Pearlin, L. I., Menaghan, E. G., Lieberman, M. A., & Mullan, J. T. (1981).
The stress process.  Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 337-356.

Polit, D.F.  (1996).  Self administered teacher questionnaire in the New
Chance 42-month survey.  New York:  Manpower Demonstration Research
Corporation.

Radloff, L.S. (1977).  The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for
research in the general population.  Applied Psychological Measurement, 1,
385-401.

Zill, N.  (1985).  Behavior Problems Index.  Washington, DC:  Child Trends.