The Presence of Non-Parent Adults and Economic Realities for Children in Low-income Neighborhoods Kate Bachtell, Ph.D. Nola du Toit, Ph.D. Catherine Haggerty.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Income and Child Development Lawrence Berger, University of Wisconsin Christina Paxson, Princeton University Jane Waldfogel, Columbia Univerity.
Advertisements

Catherine Haggerty Kate Bachtell Nola du Toit Ned English Housing Composition and Child Wellbeing: Constructing Narratives to Inform a Research Agenda.
METHODOLOGY PART 1PART 2 HOUSEHOLD STRUCTURE Relationship of adults (over age 18) to focal child. Includes parents (biological /foster), grandparents,
Carl E. Bentelspacher, Ph.D., Department of Social Work Lori Ann Campbell, Ph.D., Department of Sociology Michael Leber Department of Sociology Southern.
Planning for Transition from Pediatric to Adult Health Care for Youth with Mobility Limitation Todd C. Edwards, PhD, Janice F. Bell, PhD, MPH, Donald L.
BACKGROUND RESEARCH QUESTIONS  Does the time parents spend with children differ according to parents’ occupation?  Do occupational differences remain.
The Characteristics of Employed Female Caregivers and their Work Experience History Sheri Sharareh Craig Alfred O. Gottschalck U.S. Census Bureau Housing.
Income Mobility February 14, What is income mobility and why is it important? Income mobility refers to the amount of movement across income ranks.
1 Transitions to Adulthood: Comparing TANF and Foster care Youth Pamela C. Ovwigho, PhD Valerie Head, MPP Catherine E. Born, PhD Paper presented at the.
Advantages and Disadvantages
LORI CURTIS AND KATE RYBCZYNSKI DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO OCTOBER 24, 2012 ACKNOWLEDGE SSHRC FOR FUNDING. No Exit: Women in Poverty.
1 Health Status and The Retirement Decision Among the Early-Retirement-Age Population Shailesh Bhandari Economist Labor Force Statistics Branch Housing.
Nola du Toit Jennifer Brown Cathy Haggerty Who Really Lives here and does it Matter? Household Structure Trajectories for Children Living with Other Adults.
This work examines the methodological challenges associated with tracking mobility at the household level. We describe a retroactive approach for linking.
The effects of persistent poverty on children’s outcomes Dr Jung-Sook Lee University of New South Wales.
Lecture 2 : Inequality. Today’s Topic’s Schiller’s major points Introduction to Census data.
Father Involvement and Child Well-Being: 2006 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) Child Well-Being Topical Module 1 By Jane Lawler Dye Fertility.
Household food insecurity among low-income Toronto families: Implications for social policy Sharon Kirkpatrick & Valerie Tarasuk Department of Nutritional.
The U.S. Census Bureau has reported a significant increase in the number of doubled-up households following the 2007 economic recession, including a 2%
Nola du Toit Kate Bachtell Cathy Haggerty Coming and Going: The Effect of Household Composition on the Economic Wellbeing of Families and Children.
Longitudinal Links between Neighborhood Problems, Collective Efficacy, and Adolescents’ Academic and Socioemotional Outcomes Shay M. Galto, Danielle M.
Grandmothers’ Involvement among Adolescents Growing Up in Poverty Laura D. Pittman Northern Illinois University Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting.
Felicia Yang DeLeone, Institute for Children, Poverty and Homelessness Dona Anderson, Homes for the Homeless November 7, 2011 Child Care Use in Homeless.
Nola du Toit Cathy Haggerty Instability Overlooked: Evidence of the Importance of Household Roster Data Collection and Matching Over Time.
Utility of an overlapping panel design in the MEPS Steven B. Cohen, Ph.D.
Man-Yee Kan, University of Oxford Heather Laurie, University of Essex Who is doing the housework in multicultural.
James R. Elliott & Junia Howell
Senior Consultant, The Annie E. Casey Foundation
Lorna Alvarez-Rivera, Ph.D., & R. Neal McIntyre, Jr., DPA
A college education significantly boosts a student’s annual and lifetime earnings.
SOL Downward Mobility and Psychological Well-Being
Mesfin S. Mulatu, Ph.D., M.P.H. The MayaTech Corporation
Disparities in process and outcome measures among adults with persistent asthma David M. Mosen, PhD, MPH; Michael Schatz, MD, MS; Rachel Gold, PhD; Winston.
Rabia Khalaila, RN, MPH, PHD Director, Department of Nursing
3 Research Design Formulation
Ana Progovac, PhD1,2,3 Benjamin Lê Cook, PhD MPH 1,2
Mobility Rates in Making Connections Survey Communities, Five Years Later Kate Bachtell, Ph.D. Catherine Haggerty Becki Curtis.
Florida State University College of Nursing Tallahassee, Florida
Erin Green, RD;  Alisha Gaines, PhD; Jamie S Dollahite, PhD
Trena M. Ezzati-Rice, Frederick Rohde, Robert Baskin
H azardous Drinking, Drinking Expectancies And Risky Sexual Behaviors In A Community Sample Of Adult Sexual Minority Women 33rd Annual Research.
University of California, Los Angeles and NBER
Adding an evidence-based family strengthening program
NEADA National Energy Assistance Survey
Improving the Lives of Callers: Call Outcomes and Unmet Needs
Tim Slack Louisiana State University Brian C. Thiede Leif Jensen
3 Doing Sociological Research
Haksoon Ahn, PhD Associate Professor
Extreme Poverty, Poverty, and Near Poverty Rates for Children Under Age 5, by Living Arrangement: 2011 The data for Extreme Poverty, Poverty, and Near.
The European Statistical Training Programme (ESTP)
Cross Sectional Designs
1.
Haksoon Ahn, PhD Associate Professor
Determinants of Household Allocation of Income in Iceland
Family Structures.
China: The Effect of the Gender of First Born Child to the Parents’ Retirement Age. Allen Hardiman. Overseeing Faculty Member: Dr. Rebecca Thornton.
Reynolds Farley The University of Michigan Population Studies Center
An Update on Family Trends in the U.S. and Ohio
Education Policy Leadership Conference March 14, 2008
Setting the Scene: Precarious Employment in London
Parental background and young adults’ homeownership,
Vice President, Health Care Coverage and Access
CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS
How the Affordable Care Act Has Improved Americans’ Ability to Buy Health Insurance on Their Own Findings from the Commonwealth Fund Biennial Health Insurance.
A college education significantly boosts a student’s annual and lifetime earnings.
Andrew Jenkins and Rosalind Levačić
Chapter 9 Dummy Variables Undergraduated Econometrics Page 1
Who’s cooking? Analysis of food preparation time in the 2003 ATUS
Chapter 5: The analysis of nonresponse
Anti-Poverty Effect of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
Presentation transcript:

The Presence of Non-Parent Adults and Economic Realities for Children in Low-income Neighborhoods Kate Bachtell, Ph.D. Nola du Toit, Ph.D. Catherine Haggerty .

http://www.norc.org/NewsEventsPublications/Pages/working-paper-series.aspx

Background Twenty-five years of extensive and rigorous research has shown that children raised in stable, secure families have a better chance to flourish. Family structure is an important factor in reducing poverty, too: children raised in single-parent families are nearly five times as likely to be poor as those in married-couple families. In part, this is the result of simple math: two parents, on average, have far greater resources to devote to raising children than does one parent attempting to raise children alone. _______________________________________________________________________ Original citations: 57 See Sara McLanahan, Laura Tach, and Daniel Schneider, “The causal effects of father absence,” Annual Review of Sociology 39 (2013): 399- 427; and Waldfogel, Craigie, and Brooks-Gunn (2010) for a survey of the literature. 58 U.S. Census Bureau, Detailed Poverty Tables, POV03: People in families with related children under 18 by family structure, age, and sex, Iterated by Income-to-Poverty Ratio and Race: 2013, https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032014/pov/pov03_100.htm. Aber, L., Butler, S., Danziger, S., Doar, R., Ellwood, D.T., Gueron, J., Haidt, J., Haskins, R., Hymowitz, R., Mincy, R., Reeves, R., Strain, M.R., & Waldfogel, J. (2015). Opportunity, responsibility, and security: A consensus plan for reducing poverty and restoring the American dream. AEI/Brookings Working Group on Poverty and Opportunity. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and the Brookings Institution.

The Problem(s) For many children, especially the most economically vulnerable, their primary social setting—the household—includes adults other than their parents Prevailing framing of family “instability” elicits a fictional dichotomy of secure versus insecure families among the poor Insert Presentation Title and Any Confidentiality Information

Our Contribution Define household structure based on the relationship of each adult to a focal child Include non-parent adults such as grandparents, aunts, uncles, unrelated others, etc. Define instability based on any change in the adult composition of the household

Data Title Making Connections Survey Funding agency Annie E. Casey Foundation Summary Longitudinal study of families in low-income neighborhoods in ten U.S. cities Access Restricted use within NORC's Data Enclave Sample type AP and list of focal children Key advantages Representation of very poor and racial/ethnic minority households Detailed household roster information (relationship of each person to the R and FC) and linked personal identifiers

Current Objectives Quantify the prominence of grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. in low-income households Determine whether the presence of these non- parent adults is associated with any benefit or detriment to economic wellbeing Examine the impact of losing and/or gaining non-parent adults on economic wellbeing

Analytic Sample Panel of 1,619 households with children that participated in waves 2 and 3 of the Making Connections Survey Inclusion criteria: Same focal child selected in both waves Valid relationship codes n = 1,212

Dependent Variables Square root of household income per capita: continuous measure of the household's total income from all sources in the year prior to the wave 3 interview Economic hardship: 6-point continuous measure indicating how many of the following the household experienced in the past year: (1) did not fill or postponed filling a prescription for drugs; were not able to pay the (2) mortgage, (3) phone, or (4) utility bills; or (5) were without enough money to buy food.

Independent Variables Focus variables: Ever had a non-parent present in the household: Dummy variable indicating whether, across two waves, the focal child EVER lived with a non-parent adult (e.g. grandparent, aunt or uncle, other extended relative, unrelated adult, etc.) in the home Ever had a change in non-parent adult in the household: three dummy variables indicating whether the household experienced a numeric change in the number of non-parent adults living in the home between waves (gained, lost, no change)

Independent Variables Family Disruption variables: Ever a change in parents Moved since prior wave Controls: Respondent characteristics: foreign-born, race/ethnicity, sex, age, highest level of education, married, cohabiting Household characteristics: number of people, number of parents, relationships to the focal child, employment status across all adults

Analysis Descriptive statistics OLS regression models Weighted to represent households with children in MC neighborhoods as of wave 2 (2005-2007)

Current Study: RQ1 R1: What are the characteristics of families that include one or more non- parent adults?

Never included non-parent adult Ever included non-parent adult Table 1. Household and Respondent Characteristics: Select Controls (unweighted) Never included non-parent adult Ever included non-parent adult (NNP) (ENP) Figure SD Household Characteristics Number of people in the HH (mean) 3.87 1.32 4.17 1.47 Number of parents (%) None 0.00 16.09 One 49.60 51.50 Two 50.40 32.40 Relationships to focal child (adults, %) Aunt/uncle 18.03 Grandparent 39.70 Other relative 5.36 Boarder/roommate/unrelated 12.66 Employment status (adults, mean) Employed 1.11 0.82 1.20 0.96 Disabled 0.08 0.29 0.23 0.49 Retired 0.01 0.17 0.45 Unemployed 0.20 0.44 0.25 0.53 Family Disruption Moved since prior wave (%) 48.53 55.58 Ever a change in parents (%) 15.15 31.76

Current Study: RQ2 R2: What impact, if any, does the presence of one or more non-parent adult have on household economic wellbeing?

Household income per capita (sq root) Table 2. Regression Models Predicting Economic Outcomes, Isolating Presence of Non-Parent Adult Household income per capita (sq root) Economic hardship Estimate   Std Error Intercept 64.02 *** 6.92 2.12 0.31 Focus Variables Ever with non-parent adult in the home -3.49 2.08 -0.08 0.09 Household Characteristics Number of parents in household 3.15 1.81 -0.12 0.08 Number of employed adults 5.80 1.28 -0.10 0.06 Number of disabled adults -7.82 ** 2.60 0.25 * 0.11 Number of retired adults -4.89 3.60 -0.25 0.16 Number of unemployed adults -8.83 0.20 -4.39 0.65 Square root of income per capita -0.01 0.00 Family Disruption Moved since prior wave -6.14 1.88 0.03 N 1,212 R-Squared 0.34 0.10 F 41.55 9.24 Degrees of Freedom 15 *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001

Current Study: RQ3 R3: What impact, if any, does change in the presence of one or more non-parent adult have on household economic wellbeing?

Household income per capita (sq root) Table 3. Regression Models Predicting Economic Outcomes, Isolating Change in Presence of Non-Parent Adult Household income per capita (sq root) Economic hardship Estimate   Std Error Intercept 67.55 *** 11.05 1.84 0.45 Focus Variables Added a non-parent adult 6.76 4.20 0.33 0.17 Lost a non-parent adult 9.25 * 3.94 0.21 0.16 Household Characteristics Number of parents in household -0.26 2.81 -0.02 0.11 Number of employed adults 5.28 2.07 -0.10 0.08 Number of disabled adults -6.90 3.51 0.42 ** 0.14 Number of retired adults -6.16 4.32 -0.22 Number of unemployed adults -9.29 3.30 -0.09 0.13 -4.95 1.15 Square root of income per capita -0.01 0.00 Family Disruption Change in number of parents 0.63 3.23 -0.42 Moved since prior wave -8.02 3.55 -0.07 N 466 R-Squared F 12.69 4.27 Degrees of Freedom 17 *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001

Recap of Objectives Economic hardship: results are less conclusive Quantify the prominence of grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc. in low-income households  38% at one or both waves Determine whether the presence of these non-parent adults is associated with any benefit or detriment to economic wellbeing  No significant impact for income nor hardship Examine the impact of losing and/or gaining non-parent adults on economic wellbeing Adding a non-parent=no impact Losing a non-parent=more HH income per capita No impact on economic hardship Economic hardship: results are less conclusive

Next Steps Quantitative: Use personal identifiers to capture substitutions of adults Try fixed effects regression? Qualitative: Gather additional data? Insert Presentation Title and Any Confidentiality Information

Contact me: bachtell-kate@norc.org Download the Working Paper: http://www.norc.org/NewsEventsPublications/Pages /working-paper-series.aspx