1. NC1030 Meeting Panel Data & Codebook Considerations Sharon Danes & Katie Brewton October 18, 2009

3. Outline 1. Overview of 2007 Data Collection
Data and Codebook Dated
Filters for Various Subsamples
Tool for Longitudinal Analysis

4. Overview

5. Overview
The 2007 study was designed to obtain updated information about the status of businesses and owning families and also to learn about the impact of natural disasters and disaster relief on business viability

6. ---------------------------
1997
HM & BM = 414
Combination=259
BM only = 35
Total = 708
Road Map
*NFBS Wave 3
The population for the 2007 survey consisted of the 708 households with business data in 1997
339 cases were screened in 2007
193 Businesses were open/owned/managed
177 Main interview completed
16 Verified status only
Businesses open but have no other info.
116 Businesses were closed
97 Screener A, B, or C completed
19 Verified status only
Businesses were open but change in
ownership or management
13 Screener A, B, or C completed
3 Main interview completed
3 Verified status only
369 cases were not screened in 2007
Refused (approx. 22%)
285 Couldn’t be reached (approx. 77%)
77 Maximum calls
208 Unlocatable
Health Problems (approx. 1%)
Shows that in 1997 we had 708 cases.
We had 414 cases in which HM and BM questionnaires were completed
259 cases in which combination questionnaires were completed
And 35 cases in which business questionnaires only were completed.
In 2007, we sampled from that same 708 cases. Doing that resulted in the screening of 339 cases in 2007.
Multiple screeners were developed to accommodate the variety of dispositions from the 2000 study.
Screener A = open businesses in 2000 that had a combo interview completed
Screener B = open businesses in 2000 that had both business and household interviews completed
Screener C = closed businesses in 2000

7. Overview cont. Methodology Tree (see handout)
This methodology tree flushes out in more detail the figure we just talked about.
It shows that we started with an N of 708 in 1997.
In 2000, we screened 553 cases and could not screen 155 cases.
Of the 553 that were screened, 421 businesses were still open, owned, and managed by the same person. And the 155 cases that were not screened were not screened because they were unlocatable, refused participation, maximum calls were placed to the household with no response, or a manager had died.
We then tracked the 708 cases through to 2007 and show you dispositions in the last row. What is interesting about this figure is that it shows we were able to collect data for 39 cases in 2007 that we were not able to collect data for in So, there was a benefit to us sampling from the original 708 cases instead of the 553 screened cases in 2000.

8. Overview cont. *See handout NEW table based on discussions with ISU*
OLD table from p.7 of ISU Methodology Report*
Final Dispositions 2007
Total Sample
708
Cases not screened
369
Unlocatable
208
Refused 80
Health problems 4
Maximum calls 77
Cases screened
339
Business closed
116
Screener A, B, or C completed 97
Verified status only 19
Business open (no other information) 11
Business open/owned/managed
193
Main interview completed
177 16
Business open but change in
ownership/management 13 3
Final Dispositions 2007
Total Sample
708
Cases not screened
369
Unlocatable
208
Refused 80
Health problems 4
Maximum calls 77
Cases not eligible (deceased) 5
Cases screened
334
Business closed/not owned
127
Screener A, B, or C completed
110
Verified status only 17
Business open (no other information) 11
Business open/owned/managed
196
Main interview completed
180 16
This is in table format what I’ve been talking about for the last few slides. It might look familiar to you because there is a similar table in the ISU Methodology Report. However, there are some differences between the two tables, and the table on the left will end up replacing the one on the right that is currently in the report. I’ll explain the need for this change in a moment.
Introduce group activity, which is to pair up with another person and note the differences between the two tables.
Wrap-up by explaining why differences exist and who moved where.
*See handout

9. Overview cont. Explanation of differences between the tables
13 cases were taken from business closed/not owned, screener A, B, or C completed and added to business open but change in ownership/management, screener A, B, or C completed
5 cases not eligible (deceased) were taken from cases not eligible and added to business closed, verified status only
3 cases were taken from business closed/not owned, verified status only and added to business open but change in ownership/management, verified status only
3 cases were taken from business open/owned/managed, main interview completed and added to business open but change in ownership management, main interview completed

10. Data and Codebook August 25, 2009 Version
Move on to talk about the data and codebook because there are some differences between the most recent data and codebook dated August 25, 2009 and older versions.

11. Data and Codebook
268 variables in the panel data set are 2007 variables, and they are located on pp of the codebook
But first just to give an introduction…

12. Data and Codebook cont. Screener (pp. 154-160) Interview (pp. 161-178)
Business Survival and Ownership/Management Status, Success
Disaster Questions
Worldview Questions
Interview (pp )
Business Demographics
Business Finances
Conflict and Tension
Imputed Variables (p. 178)
Computed Variables (pp )
Imputed variables are financial

13. Data and Codebook cont.
Computed 2007 variables have been added to the data set and codebook
Dispo07 (p.179)
Open07 (p.179)
Combination (interview + screener) disaster variables (pp )
Want to bring to your attention some of the computed variables in the data and codebook.

14. This is a frequency of dispo07
This is a frequency of dispo07. It was created from the two figures (roadmap & methodology tree) and one table (that will replace the table in the ISU report) you saw earlier in the presentation, so it should be look familiar to you by now.
We asked you to print a copy of this frequency and to tell us how many businesses were open in What did you get? Answer: 223.

15. This is a frequency of the open07 variable
This is a frequency of the open07 variable. We know open/closed status for 339 businesses because they were screened and we were able to gather at least this information from them but oftentimes more. And you already know that 223 businesses are open because you ran a frequency of dispo07 and determined this. 116 businesses were closed in 2007.

16. Combination Variable p.184
Screener Variable
p.157
Interview Variable
p.166
Here are three frequencies of variables that assess whether or not businesses incurred losses as a result of a natural disaster. The first includes the responses of those who completed a screener, the second includes the responses of those who completed an interview, and their third is a combination variable created from the screener and interview responses.
Have them find in their codebooks
Combination Variable
p.184

17. Filters

18. Many filters can be created using the dispo07 variable
If you are interested in focusing on the businesses

19. Filters *Filter to get 339 businesses screened in 2007. USE ALL.
COMPUTE filter_$=(dispo07=5 or dispo07=6 or dispo07=7 or dispo07=8 or
dispo07=9 or dispo07=10 or dispo07=11 or dispo07=12).
VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ 'dispo07=5 or dispo07=6 or dispo07=7 or dispo07=8
or dispo07=9 or dispo07=10 or dispo07=11 or dispo07=12 (FILTER)'.
VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'.
FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0).
FILTER BY filter_$.
EXECUTE .
Useful if interested in business survival as a DV
It’s the one thing we know about all 339 businesses.

20. Filters cont.
*Filter to get the 282 businesses for which a screener or
interview was completed by a business or combo manager in
2007 – Note that we removed the 8 household managers in
compty07 (see next slide).
USE ALL.
COMPUTE filter_$=((dispo07=5) or (dispo07=10) or (dispo07=8 and compty07
ne 6) or (dispo07=11 and compty07 ne 6)).
VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ '(dispo07=5) or (dispo07=10) or (dispo07=8 and
compty07 ne 6) or (dispo07=11 and compty07 ne 6) (FILTER)'.
VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'.
FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0).
FILTER BY filter_$.
EXECUTE.
May be of interest if you want to focus on business success – for example, gross revenue increase. We also know whether 282 businesses had a disaster or not.
The 8 HH managers who completed the interview did not answer this question.

21. Filters cont.

22. Filters cont.
Disaster Tree (see handout)

23. Filters cont.
*Filter to get the 172 businesses for which an interview was
completed by a business or combo manager in 2007 – Note that
we removed the 8 household managers in compty07 (see next
slide).
USE ALL.
COMPUTE filter_$=((dispo07=8 or dispo07=11) and (compty07 ne 6)).
VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ '(dispo07=8 or dispo07=11) and (compty07 ne
6) (FILTER)'.
VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'.
FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0).
FILTER BY filter_$.
EXECUTE.
Could use if interested in more specific business success dependent variables such as gross income, profit, total assets of the business, total liabilities of the business. Perceived success of the business is also an option.

24. Filters cont.

25. Filters cont. *Filter to get the 144 businesses in which the
business was open, the business had the same
owner/manger, and where there was complete
information provided in 1997, 2000, and 2007.
USE ALL.
COMPUTE filter_$=((finals00=1 and dispo07=8)).
VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ ' (finals00=1 and dispo07=8) (FILTER)'.
VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'.
FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0).
FILTER BY filter_$.
EXECUTE.

26. Others of you will be specifically interested in individuals or couples.

27. Filters cont. *Filter to get the 77 combination manager
households from the 180 businesses that were
open and had complete information in 2007.
USE ALL.
COMPUTE filter_$=((compty07=1 or compty07=2 or compty07=3)).
VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ '(compty07=1 or compty07=2 or compty07=3)
(FILTER)'.
VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'.
FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0).
FILTER BY filter_$.
EXECUTE.
Diane Masuo contacted us interested in determining which households were combination manager households (meaning the BM and HM were the same person), and which were single manager households (meaning the BM and HM were separate people). And she said she was interested in the 180 cases with an interview completed.

28. Filters cont. *Filter to get the 103 single manager
households from the 180 businesses that were
open and had complete information in 2007.
USE ALL.
COMPUTE filter_$=((compty07=4 or compty07=5 or compty07=6)).
VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ '(compty07=4 or compty07=5 or compty07=6)
(FILTER)'.
VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'.
FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0).
FILTER BY filter_$.
EXECUTE.

29. Filters cont. *Filter to get the 86 couples with complete
information in 2007.
USE ALL.
COMPUTE filter_$=(compls97=1 and h2bre297=2 and h2cse197=1 and h2cse297=0 and id1
ne 2165 and id1 ne and compty07=4).
VARIABLE LABEL filter_$ 'compls97=1 and h2bre297=2 and h2cse197=1 and h2cse297=0
and id1 ne and id1 ne and compty07=4 (FILTER)'.
VALUE LABELS filter_$ 0 'Not Selected' 1 'Selected'.
FORMAT filter_$ (f1.0).
FILTER BY filter_$.
EXECUTE.

30. Tool for Longitudinal Analysis
Map of Variables

31. Additional Data and Codebook Information
SHELDUS (p.186)
PERI (p.190)
County Business Patterns (p.192)
Socioeconomic Vulnerability Index (p.192)

32. Questions?