Integrating Dependent Interviewing into a CAPI EHC: Challenges and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
integrating dependent interviewing into a capi ehc
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Integrating Dependent Interviewing into a CAPI EHC: Challenges and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 20, 2023 141 likes •645 views

Integrating Dependent Interviewing into a CAPI EHC: Challenges and Opportunities for the Survey of Income and Program Participation Event History Calendar (SIPP-EHC) Jason Fields Brianne Hillmer US Census Bureau September 22, 2011

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Integrating Dependent Interviewing into a CAPI EHC:

Challenges and Opportunities for the Survey of Income and Program Participation – Event History Calendar (SIPP-EHC)

Jason Fields Brianne Hillmer US Census Bureau

September 22, 2011 Methodology Seminar University of Michigan – Institute for Social Research

1 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Outline

  • Context
  • SIPP History and Design
  • Panel Surveys – Dependent Data & Seams
  • SIPP-EHC
  • Constraints and Cautions
  • Evaluation Plans
  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

2 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Context

  • The Survey of Income and Program Participation - SIPP
  • Sponsor / coordinating subject matter division
  • Multiple Census Bureau areas involved
  • Significant external stakeholder interest
  • This is work in progress

3 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-4
SLIDE 4

The Save the SIPP Campaign

New York Times Editorials Discovering What Happens Next Save our SIPP The Continuing Saga of SIPP NY Representative, Carolyn Maloney stated:

“I want to thank all of the policy groups and economists who worked so hard to help reverse the Administration’s original SIPP

  • decision. Because of their dedication and hard work, the

Administration came to understand how important SIPP is to creating and implementing good public policy.”

4 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-5
SLIDE 5

SIPP-EHC

Implement Improvements to SIPP

  • Reduce costs
  • Reduce respondent burden
  • Improve processing system
  • Modernize instrument
  • Expand/enhance use of administrative records

Key Design Change:

  • Annual interview, 12-month reference period,

Event History Calendar (EHC) methods

5 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Timeline from SIPP to SIPP-EHC

  • December 2005
  • Conversion of the SIPP 2004 Panel Instrument to BLAISE and reprogramming of

the post-data collection processing into SAS stopped.

  • January 2006
  • First meeting with key SIPP stakeholders to discuss future plans for SIPP.
  • March – May 2006
  • “Save the SIPP” letter was circulated in reaction to the potential loss of SIPP and

the alternatives suggested.

  • June – December 2006
  • Several stakeholder meetings held and the basic structure of a new SIPP survey

discussed

  • June – July 2007
  • Senate and House Appropriations propose funding to continue SIPP collection in

2008 and develop a more cost effective alternative.

6 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-7
SLIDE 7

SIPP Re-engineering Field Test Plans

  • EHC Proof of concept test
  • 2008 paper and pencil reinterview test
  • SIPP-EHC CAPI Prototype test
  • 2010 Integrated Blaise and C# instrument prototype
  • SIPP-EHC CAPI Revised
  • 2011 test improvements to the wave 1 instrument, training, and expand sample

to all regional offices.

  • 2012 test wave 2 activities/instrument, Dependent Interviewing (DI), examine

movers and attrition issues, and refine training procedures.

  • 2013 research wave 3 – continue evaluating and refining content and DI.

Continue addressing instrument length and wave 3 issues, like returning household members.

7 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Challenges Faced

Developing new technical capacity

  • Experimentation
  • Limitations
  • Evolution

Crisis planning

  • Limited lead time / preparation
  • Changing goals and required flexibility

New procedures

  • Training and acceptance
  • Development and refinement of procedures

8 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-9
SLIDE 9

SIPP – Sample Design

  • National panel survey – Since 1984 with sample size between about

11,000 and 45,000 interviewed households

  • The duration of each panel varies from 2½ yrs to 4 yrs
  • The SIPP sample is a multistage-stratified sample of the U.S. civilian

non-institutionalized population

  • The survey uses a 4-month recall period – 3 interviews / year
  • The sample is divided into 4 rotation groups for monthly interviewing
  • Interviews are conducted by personal visit and by decentralized

telephone

9 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-10
SLIDE 10

SIPP – Following Rules

  • SIPP is a true longitudinal survey that tracks people over time, with

few exceptions.

  • Original sample members are interviewed every 4 months over the

duration of the panel.

  • Children (under age 15) are followed only if they move with an
  • riginal sample adult (age 15 and over).
  • The SIPP rules call for following original sample members who

move, provided they are not institutionalized, do not live in military barracks, or do not move abroad

10 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-12
SLIDE 12

Panel Surveys – Dependent Data & Seams

  • What are dependent data?
  • Why use dependent interviewing (DI)?

– Bias

  • Seam
  • Recall

– Burden

  • Interview length
  • Cognitive challenge

– Data quality

  • Longitudinal consistency
  • Corrections / improvements

12 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-13
SLIDE 13
  • What are dependent data?

– Substantive responses from previous interviews fed forward into the question design and flow of a subsequent interview for the same respondents.

  • What is dependent interviewing (DI)?

– Making use of prior knowledge (dependent data) to change the context of a question or question flow to assist the interviewer and respondent in recalling high quality and consistent data from

  • ne interview to the next.

See: Jäckle, Annette. (2009) Dependent Interviewing: A Framework and Application to Current

  • Research. In P. Lynn (Ed), Methodology of Longitudinal Surveys (pp.93-112). Chichester, West

Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

13 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

Panel Surveys – Dependent Data & Seams

slide-14
SLIDE 14
  • Why use dependent interviewing (DI)?

– Bias

  • Seam bias is the pattern observed in longitudinal data created by a

tendency for estimates to change across the „seam‟ where successive panel interviews meet. The estimates of change across „seams‟ usually far exceeds the expected pattern of transitions represented in „non-seam‟ time points within a single interview.

  • Recall bias is another source of measurement error which can greatly

benefit from the use of DI.

– Failure to report transitions or statuses – Mistimed reporting – Reporting errors occurring more often early in a retrospective interview reference period than for the time closer to the interview.

14 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

Panel Surveys – Dependent Data & Seams

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Rates computed by dividing the transition by the previous month total in that status. E.g.: Total N of people moving from E to U (month 1 to month 2) / Total E (month 1)

SIPP 1984 labor force transition rates (Martini, 1989)

5 10 15 20 25 EU EO UE EO OE OU % Month 1 to 2 Month 2 to 3 Month 3 to 4 Seam

15 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-16
SLIDE 16

Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC 16

Moore, J. (2007) Seam Bias in the 2004 SIPP Panel: Much Improved, but Much Bias Still Remains. Paper presented at the US Census Bureau / PSID Event History Calendar Research Conference. Suitland, MD.

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-17
SLIDE 17

Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC 17

Moore, J. (2007) Seam Bias in the 2004 SIPP Panel: Much Improved, but Much Bias Still Remains. Paper presented at the US Census Bureau / PSID Event History Calendar Research Conference. Suitland, MD.

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC 18

Moore, J. (2007) Seam Bias in the 2004 SIPP Panel: Much Improved, but Much Bias Still Remains. Paper presented at the US Census Bureau / PSID Event History Calendar Research Conference. Suitland, MD.

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-19
SLIDE 19
  • Why use dependent interviewing (DI)?

– Burden

  • Interview length:

– DI may facilitate shorter interviews by skipping questions for which we „know‟ the answers. – DI should also provide an improvement to the question flow, tailoring question text to the respondent based on their prior wave responses. However it‟s not clear that in all cases the presence of DI will shorten interviews – the examples from SIPP-EHC will be discussed.

  • Cognitive challenge:

– Burden associated with recalling events over an extended reference period should be eased through DI providing prior wave data. – In the EHC context the memory task is changed, providing both the interviewer and respondent with additional tools.

19 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

Panel Surveys – Dependent Data & Seams

slide-20
SLIDE 20
  • Why use dependent interviewing (DI)?

– Data quality

  • Longitudinal consistency

– Remind of previous response either

» Reactively – to probe differences from current response or non-response » Proactively – to remind and facilitate data continuity

– Changing respondents – Carry forward of static characteristics where possible

  • Corrections / improvements

– Proactively provide prior response, but allow for updating and change – Re-ask prior non-response items

20 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

Panel Surveys – Dependent Data & Seams

slide-21
SLIDE 21
  • DI – Isn‟t new to SIPP

– In addition to the Roster – Employers – Business – Interview status record – Income sources – Assets

21 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

Panel Surveys – Dependent Data & Seams

slide-22
SLIDE 22

SIPP calendar aided intvw 1989 to 1991 The Kominski DI-EHC

22 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-23
SLIDE 23

Dependent Interviewing in CAPI SIPP

  • 2001 Some basic DI items included – approximately 350

items fed in.

  • 2004 Instrument revision to include fully dependent

interviewing for much more of the instrument.

  • Prompts based on last wave reporting
  • Question flow changes
  • Database structure changed to store both dependent data and field

alternate questions based on DI responses

  • Over 3100 dependent items included in 2004 SIPP
  • Processing used a „mapping‟ process to move new DI database

structure into the processing system based on the old database structure

23 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-24
SLIDE 24

EHC Interviewing

  • Human Memory

– Structured/organized – Links and associations

  • EHC Exploits Memory Structure

– Links between the occurrence and timing of events

  • EHC Encourages Active Assistance from Interviewers for Rs

– Flexible approach to help elicit an autobiographical “story” – Accuracy in placement of events by respondents – Improvements in ability for respondents to recall details and timing – Facilitate the interviewer‟s ability to recognize inconsistencies and probe

  • SIPP-EHC: A „hybrid‟ Event History Calendar.

24 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-25
SLIDE 25

SIPP–EHC Contents

25 25 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-26
SLIDE 26

Screenshot – 2010 SIPP-EHC Instrument

26 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-27
SLIDE 27

Screenshot – 2011 SIPP-EHC Instrument

27 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-28
SLIDE 28

Screenshot – 2012 SIPP-EHC Instrument

28 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-29
SLIDE 29

Since the 2011 SIPP-EHC

  • Develop dependent data for SIPP-EHC
  • Re-design several sections.

– Health Insurance Summary – Child Care and Child Well-being – Fertility

  • Include ability to follow movers

29 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-30
SLIDE 30

2011 SIPP-EHC Completed Calendar

30 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-31
SLIDE 31

EHC Dependent Data

31 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-32
SLIDE 32

2012 SIPP-EHC Calendar w/ Dependent Data

32 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-33
SLIDE 33
  • Feedback will both utilize existing question

structure and alternative fills to script questions based on the presence or absence of returning data.

33 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

2012 SIPP-EHC Dependent Data Q Flow

slide-34
SLIDE 34

34 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-35
SLIDE 35

Let‟s talk about Food Stamps/SNAP benefits. Are you currently receiving Food Stamps? No Yes

Wave 1 flow

Did you receive Food Stamps/SNAP benefits at any time since January 1st of 2011? When did you start? Yes When did you start? When did you stop?

35 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-36
SLIDE 36

Let‟s talk about Food Stamps/SNAP benefits. Are you currently receiving Food Stamps? No Yes When we talked to you April you were not receiving Food Stamp/SNAP benefits.

Wave 2 - No feedback flow

Did you receive Food Stamps/SNAP benefits at any time since January 1st of 2011? Yes When did you start?

36 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-37
SLIDE 37

I‟m showing when we talked in April 2011 you had been receiving Food Stamps/SNAP benefits. Are you currently receiving Food Stamps? No Yes

Wave 2 - Complete spell flow

Did you receive Food Stamps/SNAP benefits at any other time since January 1st of 2011? When did you start?

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-38
SLIDE 38

I‟m showing when we talked in April 2011 you were receiving Food Stamps/SNAP benefits. Are you currently receiving Food Stamps? Did you receive Food Stamps/SNAP benefits continuously since April 2011? No Yes When did you stop?

Wave 2 - Provisional spell flow

38 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-39
SLIDE 39

Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC 39

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

SIPP-EHC Dependent Interviewing

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC 40

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

SIPP-EHC Dependent Interviewing

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC 41

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS

SIPP-EHC Dependent Interviewing

slide-42
SLIDE 42

SIPP-EHC Dependent Interviewing

  • Differentiates Spells expected to continue from closed

spells that the interviewer should use as memory cues.

  • Utilizes DI to provide bounding to the Interviewer /

Respondent timeline resolution.

  • CQ sections utilize DI to remind and continue with

resolving current year‟s monthly receipt.

  • Focus on minimizing the impact to processing and

assisting data handling tasks.

42 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-43
SLIDE 43

DI Constraints and Considerations

  • 2004 SIPP DI success but processing challenge
  • Formatting necessary bring data from instrument output

to instrument input.

  • SIPP-EHC

– Provisional = 197 (limited data plus processing created longitudinal Job and Residence ID‟s) – Complete = 339 (passes full data back in addition to processing created longitudinal Job and Residence ID‟s)

43 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-44
SLIDE 44

DI Constraints and Considerations

  • Including DI has many sources for error in implementation

– Reformatting data from the instrument to the processing system – Translating months 13 through the interview into months 1 to n during the subsequent wave reference period. (Months, changes in hours/earnings, and weeks for transitions) – Preparing ascii input file for the Blaise instrument – Translating input file into proper fields and Blaise function – Testing and verifying proper feedback functions – Field verification

44 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-45
SLIDE 45

Evaluation Plans

45 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
  • Issues related to successful use of dependent data
  • Flexibility for Interviewer/Respondent interaction
  • False transitions and mis-timed transitions – recall or

seams.

  • Changing respondents
  • Respondent Identification Policy
slide-46
SLIDE 46

Evaluation Plans

46 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
  • Interviewer focus groups
  • Interview observations
  • Comparing SIPP-EHC seam with CQ SIPP seam and

non-seam data for the two years of monthly transitions covered by both surveys.

  • Utilize administrative records to validate transitions and

statuses reported in the surveys

  • Recordings and behavior coding – not for 2012
slide-47
SLIDE 47

URL: http://www.census.gov/sipp

47 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

  • 1. CONTEXT
  • 2. SIPP HISTORY AND DESIGN
  • 3. PANEL SURVEY DESIGN – DEPENDENT DATA & SEAMS
  • 4. SIPP-EHC
  • 5. CONSTRAINTS
  • 6. EVALUATION PLANS
slide-48
SLIDE 48

February 2007 April/May 2007

48 Dependent data - 2012 SIPP-EHC

SIPP-EHC 2012 Contacts: Jason.M.Fields@Census.Gov Brianne.M.Hillmer@Census.Gov