Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

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

 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.