     GUIDE TO USING THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

           NATIONAL EVALUATION OF WELFARE-TO-WORK STRATEGIES

    TWO-YEAR IMPACTS PUBLIC USE FILES (NCHS RESTRICTED-ACCESS VERSION)

This memo briefly describes the public use analysis files and accompanying
documentation for research on the two-year effects of 11 welfare-to-work
programs that were operated during the early- to mid-1990s
in seven sites: Atlanta, Georgia; Columbus, Ohio; Detroit and Grand Rapids,
Michigan; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; Portland, Oregon; and Riverside, California.

The files contain the sample and outcome measures analyzed for three reports
published in 2000 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office
of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation and Administration
for Children and Families; and U.S. Department of Education, Office of the
Under Secretary and Office of Vocational and Adult Education:

Evaluating Alternative Welfare-to-Work Approaches: Two-Year
Impacts for Eleven Programs.

Impacts on Young Children and Their Families Two Years After Enrollment:
Findings from the Child Outcomes Study.

Do Mandatory Welfare-to-Work Programs Affect the Well-Being of Children?
A Synthesis of Child Research Conducted as Part of the National Evaluation of
Welfare-to-Work Strategies.


The reports and public use files were prepared by the Manpower
Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC) and Child Trends as part of
the National Evaluation of Welfare-to-Work Strategies (formerly
known as the JOBS Evaluation).  MDRC is conducting the NEWWS Evaluation
under a contract with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS), funded by HHS under a competitive award, Contract No.
HHS-100-89-0030.  HHS is also receiving funding for the evaluation from
the U.S. Department of Education.  The study of one of the sites in the
evaluation, Riverside County (California), is also conducted under a
contract from the California Department of Social Services (CDSS).
CDSS, in turn, is receiving funding from the California State Job
Training Coordinating Council, the California Department of Education,
HHS, and the Ford Foundation.

As part of the NEWWS Evaluation, Child Trends is conducting the Child
Outcomes Study under subcontract to MDRC.


The data are stored in 3 ASCII files, corresponding to the three
main research samples:

N2RI1213.TXT  is the Full Sample Impact file.  It contains background
characteristics data  and outcomes calculated with administrative
records for all members of the impact sample in 7 sites (N=44,569).
It is organized into 9 records:

RECORD 1: DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

RECORD 2: SAMPLES

RECORD 3: PRIVATE OPINION SURVEY

RECORD 4: BASELINE TEST SCORES

RECORD 5: WELFARE PAYMENTS

RECORD 6: FOOD STAMPS

RECORD 7: INCOME

RECORD 8: EARNINGS

RECORD 9: COVARIATES

Note: some data on this file are only available for subsamples.
See codebooks and other documentation for details.  Nonetheless, all 9
records are included for all sample members, even if data were not
collected for them.  These records will have blanks in fields when
data were not recorded.

N2RS1221.TXT contains outcome measures from the 2-Year Client Survey in 7
sites  (N=9,675).  It is organized into 18 records:

RECORD 1:  INTERVIEW DATE, LENGTH, MODE

RECORD 2:  PARTICIPATION: JOB SEARCH, BASIC EDUCATION, AND HIGH SCHOOL

RECORD 3:  PARTICIPATION: POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION, VOCATIONAL TRAINING,
           WORK EXPERIENCE, OJT, ANY ACTIVITY

RECORD 4:  PARTICIPATION: DATE AND HOURS MISSING DATA FLAGS

RECORD 5:  ADDITIONAL BASIC EDUCATION VARIABLES

RECORD 6:  DEGREE RECEIPT

RECORD 7:  EMPLOYMENT: SOURCE VARIABLES

RECORD 8:  EMPLOYMENT: CREATED VARIABLES

RECORD 9:  EMPLOYMENT: DATA PROBLEM FLAGS

RECORD 10: CHILD CARE FOR EMPLOYMENT

RECORD 11: HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION

RECORD 12: INCOME FOR HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS 1-9 Y/N VARIABLES

RECORD 13: INCOME AMOUNTS FOR HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS 1-9 $ VARIABLES

RECORD 14: INCOME SUMMARY VARIABLES

RECORD 15: INCOME PROBLEM FLAGS

RECORD 16: TRANSITIONAL AND NON-CASH BENEFITS AND HEALTH CARE COVERAGE

RECORD 17: CHILD OUTCOMES (ALL CHILDREN)

RECORD 18: ATTITUDES TOWARD WORK AND WELFARE AND INFORMATION ON SANCTIONS

Note: the Client Survey sample is nested within the Full Impact sample.



N2RC1326.TXT contains outcome measures from the 2-Year Child Outcomes Study
(COS) Survey in 3 sites (N=3,018).  It is organized into 14 records:

RECORD 1 OUTCOMES

RECORD 2 TARGETED INTERVENING MECHANISMS

RECORD 3 NON-TARGETED INTERVENING MECHANISMS

RECORD 4 HISTORY OF CHILD CARE ARRANGMENTS FOR FOCAL CHILD (SECTION AA)

RECORD 5 CURRENT CHILD CARE ARRANGEMENTS FOR FOCAL CHILD (SECTION BB)

RECORD 6 CHILD SUPPORT FOR FOCAL CHILD (SECTION CC)

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

RECORD 8 PARENTING OF FOCAL CHILD (SECTION EE)

RECORD 9 SELF-ADMINISTRED QUESTIONAIRE, PARTS 1 AND 2, PARENTING (SECTION FF)

RECORD 10 SELF-ADMINISTRED QUESTIONAIRE, PART 3 DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS (SECTION GG)

RECORD 11 SELF-ADMINISTRED QUESTIONAIRE, PART 4, CHILD POSITIVE AND
          PROBLEM BEHAVIOR (SECTION: HH)

RECORD 12 INTERVIEWER ASSESSMENT

RECORD 13 SUBGROUPS

RECORD 14 COVARIATES

Note: the Child Outcomes Study sample is nested within the Client Survey
and Full Impact samples.


Codebooks, file layouts, and other key documentation are stored with the
data files.  See

F2README.TXT (Full Sample 2-Year Impact File)

S2README.TXT (2-Year Client Survey File)

C2README.TXT (2-Year Child Outcomes Study Survey File)


for details.

As noted above, the two survey samples are nested within the full impact
sample.  All sample members who responded to the 2-Year Client survey
and Child Outcomes Study surveys have background characteristics and
administrative records data on the Full Sample Impact file.  Likewise,
all sample members who responded to the Child Outcomes Study Survey
have additional survey data on the 2-Year Client Survey file.

Each record of each file contains a unique sample member IDNUMBER,
which varies from 1 to 44569.  For any sample member, the same IDNUMBER
is used on each file.   Researchers may build one or several analysis files,
depending on their research interests, by identifying the samples (and
records) they wish to study and then merging files BY IDNUMBER.

The key subsamples are identified on the Full Sample Impact file SAMPLES
record.  They having a value of 1 on the following variables:

FULLSAMP:  Full impact sample

SRV2RESP:   2-Year Survey respondent

COS2RESP:   2-Year Client Outcomes Study respondent

POS:   Completed Private Opinion Survey at baseline

TESTSAMP:  Competed literacy and/or math test at baseline


The research design for the NEWWS Evaluation is complicated.  So are
the sample selection strategies for the 2-Year Client and Child Outcomes
Study surveys.  We strongly suggest that users of these files do the
following before conducting any further analyses:

1. Read the _README files which give a brief description of all files
included in this set.

2. Read the reports, including chapters which describe the research designs,
samples, and data sources.

3. Review the codebooks, file layouts, output, annotated tables, and memos.

4. After reading the data into SAS or another statistical or econometric
software package, replicate the sample sizes and means.



IMPORTANT:

It is also suggested that researchers estimate program impacts using the
same dependent variables, independent variables, and procedures as MDRC used for
the Full Impact sample (see IMP_MEMO.TXT on CD #1) and 2-Year Client Survey
sample (see SIMPMEMO.TXT on CD #2) and Child Trends used for the Child Outcomes
Study sample (See C2COVER.TXT on CD #3).

But with the following caveat:


The annotated tables included with the file documentation are from the
published two-year reports and are based on calculations from a data file
created in 1997. However, the restricted access file was created in 2001,
using the most recent files at MDRC.  In a small number of cases, data
updates (from statewide UI systems and state and county welfare and Food Stamp
payment systems) were received after the two-year report impacts were
calculated. These updates, which represent the most accurate data, are included
in the two-year restricted access files.  As a result, there are small
discrepancies between the two-year impacts calculated with data from the
two-year restricted access files and those published in the two-year reports.

The following table shows the differences in impacts for four key economic
outcomes:



                       National Evaluation of Welfare-to-Work Strategies

                Differences in Impacts Calculated for Two-Year Impact Report

                        and Calculated with Restricted Access File Data

                                                           Impact
                                                 Impact    from          Differ-
                                                 from      Restricted    ence
                                                 2-Year    Access        in
                                                 Report    File          Impacts

Site and Program                              Ever employed in years 1 and 2 (%)

Atlanta Labor Force Attachment                   4.5         4.5            0.0
Atlanta Human Capital Development                2.8         2.7            0.1

Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment              7.6         7.7           -0.1
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development           5.3         5.4           -0.1

Riverside Labor Force Attachment                15.1        15.1            0.0
  Lacked high school diploma or basic           16.6        16.5            0.1
Riverside Human Capital Development              9.3         9.4           -0.1

Columbus Integrated                              1.7         1.7            0.0
Columbus Traditional                             1.3         1.3            0.0

Detroit                                          4.1         4.1            0.0

Oklahoma City                                   -0.9        -0.7           -0.1

Portland                                        11.2        11.2            0.0

                                             Total earnings in years 1 and 2 ($)

Atlanta Labor Force Attachment                   813         805              9
Atlanta Human Capital Development                496         482             14

Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment            1,035       1,041             -7
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development           580         589             -9

Riverside Labor Force Attachment               1,276       1,276              0
  Lacked high school diploma or basic            992       1,001             -9
Riverside Human Capital Development              317         336            -19

Columbus Integrated                              673         676             -3
Columbus Traditional                             677         675              2

Detroit                                          367         370             -2

Oklahoma City                                      5          11             -6

Portland                                       1,842        1,829            12


                                               Total months of welfare receipt

Atlanta Labor Force Attachment                 -1.15       -1.14          -0.01
Atlanta Human Capital Development              -0.57       -0.56           0.00

Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment            -2.21       -2.21           0.00
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development         -1.22       -1.22           0.00

Riverside Labor Force Attachment               -1.46       -1.46           0.00
  Lacked high school diploma or basic          -1.37       -1.37           0.00
Riverside Human Capital Development            -0.96       -0.97           0.01

Columbus Integrated                            -1.58       -1.58           0.00
Columbus Traditional                           -1.03       -1.03           0.00

Detroit                                        -0.48       -0.48           0.00

Oklahoma City                                  -0.78       -0.78           0.00

Portland                                       -2.41       -2.48           0.06

                                                Total welfare payments ($)

Atlanta Labor Force Attachment                  -369        -367             -1
Atlanta Human Capital Development               -288        -286             -1

Grand Rapids Labor Force Attachment           -1,404      -1,404              0
Grand Rapids Human Capital Development          -835        -835              0

Riverside Labor Force Attachment              -1,308      -1,305             -3
  Lacked high school diploma or basic         -1,408      -1,407             -1
Riverside Human Capital Development           -1,049      -1,055              7

Columbus Integrated                             -694        -694              0
Columbus Traditional                            -530        -529              0

Detroit                                         -158        -158              0

Oklahoma City                                   -233        -233              0

Portland                                      -1,196      -1,224             28


As may be seen, the impact estimates are very close.  Impacts on total earnings
varied by less than $20 for all programs.  In addition, impacts on total welfare
payments varied by less than $10, except for Portland ($28).

It should be noted that impacts on survey outcomes estimated with data from the
restricted access files will also vary slightly from impacts published in the
two-year reports.  That is because the regression model used to estimate program
impacts includes, as covariates, measures of pre-random assignment employment
and earnings and pre-random assignment welfare and Food Stamp receipt and
payments that were calculated with administrative records. These covariates
were updated for some sample members after the tables for the reports were
completed.  These updates can change the value of the impact estimates slightly,
even when the outcome measure was created from survey responses and was not
updated.

