Preparing to Study Welfare

Reform Using the Longitudinal

Survey of Program Dynamics

The Personal Responsibility and Work

Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996,

more commonly known as the 1996

Welfare Reform Act, replaced the Aid to

Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)

program with the Temporary Assistance

for Needy Families (TANF) program. The

AFDC and TANF programs differ in two

distinct ways. First, AFDC was a federalstate matching program with low-income

states contributing a smaller share of

their welfare payments than high-income

states (U.S. Committee on Ways and

Means, 1998). TANF is a federal-to-state

block grant program in which states

receive a fixed amount of money from the

federal government each year (U.S.

Committee on Ways and Means, 1996).

Second, AFDC is an entitlement program;

that is, individuals who applied and were

eligible for benefits received them. TANF

is not an entitlement program; eligible

applicants are not guaranteed assistance

unless a state decides to adopt such a

guarantee. 

The Welfare Reform Act directed the U.S.

Census Bureau to collect data to measure

the effects of welfare reform. To carry out

this task, the Census Bureau is conducting

the Survey of Program Dynamics (SPD), a

nationally representative, longitudinal survey that, in conjunction with the Survey

of Income and Program Participation

(SIPP), cover the period from 1992

through 2001. The SPD’s primary goals

are:

• To provide information on spells of

actual and potential program participation over a period of 10 years 

• To examine the factors related to program participation and the long-term

well-being of recipients, their families,

and their children

• To monitor the long-term changes for

individuals associated with welfare

reform

The SPD tracks individuals from households that were in the 1992 and 1993

panels of the Census Bureau’s SIPP. Data

from these panels are for 3 years

(1992-94 or 1993-95) and thus provide

3 years of prewelfare reform information

on demographic characteristics, family

composition, employment, earnings,

income, program eligibility, and program

participation. The SPD is collecting data

for 1996-2001, and this information, along

with the earlier SIPP data, will measure

participants’ status before, during, and

after welfare reform.

The first phase of the SPD was the 1997

SPD Bridge Survey, which reestablished

contact with households from the 1992

and 1993 SIPP panels and collected

employment, earnings, income, and

program participation data for 1996 using

a modified version of the Annual (March)

Demographic Supplement to the Current

Population Survey. The second SPD phase

began in 1998 with a new, annually

administered “core” questionnaire that

captured employment, income, and

program participation data for the previous

year. In addition, the SPD core questionnaire collects information on:

U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Helping You Make Informed Decisions

U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Preparing to Measure Welfare Reform

Using the Longitudinal Survey of

Program Dynamics: 2001

Demographic Programs

by Jennifer Hess

SPD Analytic Reports

SPD-2001-1

Issued August 2001 
• Noncash benefits such as transportation and child care assistance

• Other welfare-to-work activities

such as job training and school

enrollment, and whether participation in training activities is

required to receive public assistance or other benefits 

• Family well-being measures,

including disability status, health

care use, health insurance coverage, child support and custody

agreements, and food security

• Additional child well-being measures including school enrollment,

enrichment activities, child care

arrangements, and contact with

parents who live outside the

home

In addition to the annual core items,

the SPD includes three modules to

measure child well-being: 

• The Adolescent Self-Administered

Questionnaire (SAQ), administered

to children ages 12 to 17 in

1998 and 2001

• The extended measures of

children’s well-being module,

administered to parents about

their children ages 0 to 17 in

1999 and 2002

• The Children’s Residential History

Calendar (RHC), which collects

retrospective data about children’s

living arrangements and was

administered in 2000 

Appendix A lists variables available

in the first longitudinal SPD file for

calendar years 1992-97. Users can

also match data about the auxiliary

topics shown in Appendix B to the

longitudinal SPD file.

Preliminary Results From

the Survey of Program

Dynamics

This section presents some preliminary results to give readers a hint

of what will be available from the

Survey of Program Dynamics. The

data cover the years 1993, 1994,

and 1996 and are from the 1992

and 1993 SIPP panels (for 1993 and

1994) and the 1997 SPD (for 1996).

Only people who were interviewed

in all 3 years are included in this

analysis. The percentages contained

in the figures and tables should not

be interpreted as estimates that are

representative of the general population. Rather, they are cautiously

generalizable to the special universe

that the SPD represents; that is, the

1992-93 noninstitutionalized resident

population that continues to live in

the United States in 1997. Careful

analysis and more years of data are

needed before any conclusions

might be drawn about effects of

welfare reform, since the effective

date for the Welfare Reform Act was

October 1996.

The estimates in this report are

based on responses from a sample

of the population. As with all surveys, estimates may vary from the

actual values for the entire population because of sampling variation

or other factors. All statements

made in this report have undergone

statistical testing and pass the

Census Bureau’s standards for statistical accuracy.

Figure 1A shows the percentage of

people age 15 or older who

2 U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 1A.

1993

1996

Other family households

without children

Other family households

with children

Married-couple households

without children

Married-couple households

with children

All household types

Percent of People in the SPD Universe Age 15 or Older Who Received Means-Tested 

Cash Benefits by Household Type: 1993 and 1996

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1992 and 1993 Panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the 1997 Survey of Program Dynamics.

4.9

2.3

2.0

19.5

8.9

5.9

3.1

2.2

9.3

26.8
U.S. Census Bureau 3

received means-tested cash benefits

by household type. Means-tested

cash benefits include AFDC/TANF

payments; Supplemental Security

Income (SSI), a federal cash assistance program for low-income disabled and low-income elderly individuals; and other government cash

assistance payments to meet the

needs of low-income individuals.

More detailed data are provided in

Table 1. 

The percentage of individuals age

15 or older receiving means-tested

cash benefits declined between

1993 and 1996 from 5.9 to 4.9 percent. Individuals in other family

households with children — primarily

single-parent families — had the

highest rate of participation and

experienced the largest percentagepoint decline, from 26.8 percent in

1993 to 19.5 percent 1996.

Although individuals in marriedcouple households were much less

likely to receive cash benefits than

other family households with children, the relative decline between

1993 and 1996 was similar for both

groups.

Figure 1B shows participation of

individuals age 15 or over in specific cash transfer programs for selected household types. Receipt of

AFDC/TANF declined between 1993

and 1996 among all eligible household types from 2.5 percent in

1993 to 1.6 percent in 1996. Other

family households with children had

Table 1.

Percent of People in the Survey of Program Dynamics Universe Age 15 or Over Who

Received Means-Tested Cash Benefits in 1993, 1994, and 1996 by Household Type1

All households types

SIPP SPD

1993 1994 1996

Percent

Standard

error Percent

Standard

error Percent

Standard

error

Means-tested cash benefits, total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.9 0.18 5.8 0.18 4.9 0.16

AFDC/TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 0.12 2.4 0.12 1.6 0.09

Supplemental Security Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.9 0.13 2.9 0.13 2.8 0.12

Other assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 0.08 1.0 0.08 0.8 0.07

Married-Couple Households With Children

Means-tested cash benefits, total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 0.22 3.1 0.22 2.3 0.19

AFDC/TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.7 0.17 1.6 0.16 0.9 0.12

Supplemental Security Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 0.13 1.2 0.14 1.1 0.13

Other assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 0.10 0.6 0.10 0.4 0.08

Married-Couple Households Without Children

Means-tested cash benefits, total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 0.19 2.2 0.19 2.0 0.18

AFDC/TANF2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1 0.04 0.1 0.04 0.0 0.00

Supplemental Security Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.7 0.17 1.7 0.17 1.5 0.16

Other assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.5 0.09 0.4 0.08 0.4 0.08

Other Family Households With Children

Means-tested cash benefits, total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26.8 1.19 25.9 1.15 19.5 1.02

AFDC/TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.5 1.11 20.8 1.06 13.9 0.89

Supplemental Security Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0 0.64 6.4 0.64 5.6 0.59

Other assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 0.47 2.6 0.42 2.2 0.38

Other Family Households Without Children

Means-tested cash benefits, total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3 0.89 9.2 0.87 8.9 0.78

AFDC/TANF2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.7 0.25 0.5 0.21 0.8 0.24

Supplemental Security Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4 0.80 7.1 0.77 7.1 0.70

Other assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 0.41 2.2 0.44 1.3 0.31

1

The sample includes people who completed the first and last interview for the 1992 or 1993 Survey of Income and Program Participation panel and completed the SPD Bridge Survey. The results are cautiously generalizable to the 1992-93 noninstitutionalized resident population that continued to live in the United States in 1997. 2

Some households without children show participation in the cash assistance programs Aid to Families With Dependent Children (AFDC)

and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) because household designation (e.g. married couples without children) is measured

as of December of the calendar year for SIPP and as of the time of interview for SPD, but program participation refers to any time during

the previous year.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1992 and 1993 Panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation and 1997 Survey of Program

Dynamics.
4 U.S. Census Bureau

the highest rate of participation and

experienced the largest percentagepoint decline during this period,

from 21.5 percent in 1993 to 13.9

percent in 1996. Although marriedcouple households with children

were much less likely to receive

AFDC/TANF than their counterparts

in other family households, the relative percentage decline between

1993 and 1996 was similar for both

groups. 

Receipt of “other” assistance, which

includes cash payments from several smaller federal or state programs

such as general assistance, emergency assistance, and refugee cash

and medical, also declined during

this period, from 1.1 percent of all

households in 1993 to 0.8 percent

in 1996. The significant decline in

participation among other family

households — from 3.2 percent in

1993 to 2.2 percent in 1996 — was

the primary reason. 

In contrast to AFDC/TANF and other

assistance, receipt of Supplemental

Security Income remained essentially constant during this period for all

three household types. Thus, the

decline in receipt of means-tested

cash benefits between 1993 and

1996 largely resulted from fewer

public assistance payments. 

Figure 2A shows the percentage of

people (children and adults) by

household type receiving meanstested noncash benefits such as

housing subsidies, energy subsidies, child care assistance, food

stamps, and free or reduced-price

school lunches. More detailed data

are provided in Table 2. Although

receipt of noncash benefits remains

more common than receipt of cash

benefits, participation in these programs also declined between 1993

and 1996 — from 24.7 percent to

18.9 percent among individuals in

all household types. Individuals in

other family households with children again had the highest rate of

participation and experienced the

largest percentage-point decline,

from 69.0 percent in 1993 to 59.8

percent in 1996. Although marriedFigure 1B.

1993

1996

 Other assistance

 SSI

 AFDC/TANF

 Other assistance

 SSI

 AFDC/TANF

 Other assistance

 SSI

 AFDC/TANF

Percent of People in the SPD Universe Age 15 or Older Who Received Means-Tested 

Cash Benefits by Program and Household Type: 1993 and 1996

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1992 and 1993 Panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the 1997 Survey of Program Dynamics.

Notes: AFDC = Aid to Families with Dependent Children

TANF = Temporary Assistance for Needy Families

SSI = Supplemental Security Income

"Other assistance" includes cash payments from general assistance, emergency assistance, refugee cash and medical assistance, general assistance from 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Tribal-administered general assistance. 

2.9

2.8

0.8

0.9

1.1

1.1

0.6

0.4

21.5

13.9

5.6

2.5

1.6

1.1

1.7

6.0

2.2

3.2

All household types

Married-couple households with children

Other family households with children
U.S. Census Bureau 5

couple families were less likely to

receive noncash benefits than other

family households with children,

their relative percentage decline

between 1993 and 1996 was actually greater.

Figure 2B shows participation in

noncash benefits by program for

selected household types.

Participation in the four programs

shown — food stamps, housing

assistance, energy assistance, and

free or reduced-price school

lunches — declined significantly

between 1993 and 1996 for all

household types, for married-couple

households with children, and for

other family households with children. Individuals in other family

households with children were

more likely to participate in these

noncash benefit programs than

their married-couple counterparts in

1996 — approximately one-third

received food stamps, one-sixth

received housing assistance, and

Table 2.

Percent of People in the Survey of Program Dynamics Universe Receiving Government

Means-Tested Noncash Benefits in 1993, 1994, and 1996, by Household Type1

All Households Types

SIPP SPD

1993 1994 1996

Percent

Standard

error Percent

Standard

error Percent

Standard

error

Means-tested noncash benefits, total . . . . . . . . . . . 24.7 0.29 24.4 0.29 18.9 0.27

Food stamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3 0.23 12.7 0.23 8.6 0.19

Housing assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 0.15 5.2 0.15 4.1 0.14

Energy assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 0.15 4.9 0.15 3.2 0.12

Free or reduced-price school lunch . . . . . . . . . . . 17.4 0.63 17.6 0.64 13.4 0.57

Married-Couple Households With Children

Means-tested noncash benefits, total . . . . . . . . . . . 26.9 0.48 26.9 0.48 20.7 0.44

Food stamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.4 0.34 10.8 0.34 6.7 0.27

Housing assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 0.20 3.0 0.18 2.0 0.15

Energy assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.7 0.20 3.5 0.20 2.0 0.15

Free or reduced-price school lunch . . . . . . . . . . . 22.3 0.83 23.0 0.84 18.5 0.77

Married-Couple Households Without Children

Means-tested Noncash benefits, total . . . . . . . . . . . 5.7 0.29 5.2 0.28 3.1 0.22

Food stamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 0.21 2.5 0.19 1.8 0.17

Housing assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 0.15 1.4 0.15 0.7 0.10

Energy assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 0.14 1.3 0.14 1.0 0.12

Free or reduced-price school lunch2 . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 1.16 1.1 1.03 0.3 0.54

Other Family Households With Children

Means-tested Noncash benefits, total . . . . . . . . . . . 69.0 0.98 68.7 0.99 59.8 1.04

Food stamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48.3 1.06 47.3 1.06 33.9 1.01

Housing assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.0 0.83 19.3 0.84 15.9 0.78

Energy assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.7 0.81 16.8 0.80 10.7 0.66

Free or reduced-price school lunch . . . . . . . . . . . 57.8 1.76 58.7 1.76 50.6 1.79

Other Family Households Without Children

Means-tested noncash benefits, total . . . . . . . . . . . 22.1 1.07 20.4 1.04 17.2 0.97

Food stamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.2 0.90 13.1 0.87 10.4 0.79

Housing assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3 0.63 5.7 0.60 5.4 0.58

Energy assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1 0.70 5.7 0.60 4.9 0.56

Free or reduced-price school lunch2 . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 1.76 3.0 1.45 3.7 1.60

1

The sample includes people who completed the first and last interview of the 1992 or 1993 Survey of Income and Program Participation

panel and completed the Survey of Program Dynamics Bridge Survey. The results are cautiously generalizable to the 1992-93 noninstitutionalized resident population that continued to live in the United States in 1997.

The percentages shown for food stamps, housing assistance, and energy assistance are based on the total number of people in households receiving each type of assistance divided by the total population. The percentages shown for free or reduced-price school lunches

represent the number of children ages 5 to 18 receivng free or reduced-price school lunches divided by the total number of children ages

5 to 18. 2

Some households without children show participation in the school lunch program because household designation (e.g. married couples

without children) is measured as of December of the calendar year for SIPP and as of the time of the interview for SPD, but program participation refers to any time during the previous year.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1992 and 1993 Panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the 1997 Survey of Program Dynamics.
6 U.S. Census Bureau

one-tenth received energy assistance; about one-half of the children

ages 5 to 18 in these households

received free or reduced-price

school lunches. Although individuals in married-couple households

with children were less likely to participate in these programs than

those in other family households

with children, their relative decline

in receipt of food stamps and housing assistance between 1993 and

1996 was greater. The two groups

experienced similar declines in

receipt of energy assistance and

free or reduced-price lunches

between 1993 and 1996. 

Comparing the 1997 SPD

Bridge Survey and the 1997

Annual Demographic

Supplement to the Current

Population Survey 

The SPD Bridge Survey attempted to

interview all the people who had

completed the first and the last

wave of the 1992 or 1993 SIPP panels. As in any longitudinal survey,

members of the original sample

may decide not to participate during the cycle of the panel. The

cumulative response rate from the

first SIPP interview through the SPD

Bridge Survey was 59 percent.

Survey nonresponse is a concern

since it may undermine the quality

of the estimates, if nonrespondents

differ from respondents. The SPD

has suffered differential attrition

since its inception — low-income

households are more likely to

become nonrespondents than higher-income households (Sae-Ung and

Winters, 1998). 

To assess the extent to which the

SPD sample may have become nonrepresentative, Appendix C compares selected data from the 1997

SPD Bridge Survey and the 1997

Annual Demographic Supplement to

the Current Population Survey (CPS)

for all households and for households participating in one or more

means-tested government programs. Although both surveys

used basically the same instrument

for data collection, the March CPS is

cross-sectional and is not subject to

the long-term attrition of the longitudinal SPD. Comparability is also

affected by how the two surveys

are weighted to reflect the total

population. The CPS is designed to

provide national estimates of

income and labor force characteristics at a single point in time — in

this case, the 1996 calendar year.

In contrast, the SPD Bridge Survey is

designed to provide longitudinal

information. Because it was developed using the 1992 and 1993 SIPP,

the SPD Bridge Survey reflects the

characteristics of the population in

March 1993. 

Average household income is similar in the two surveys. The average

income from the SPD Bridge of

$47,381 is not statistically different

from the CPS estimate of $47,123,

where both figures are measured in

1996 dollars. The average age of

the householder for all households

is significantly, although not substantively, lower in the March CPS

than in the SPD (48.4 years compared with 50.0 years). Overall

means-tested program participation

rates between the two surveys are

similar, although statistical differFigure 2A.

1993

1996

Other family households

without children

Other family households

with children

Married-couple households

without children

Married-couple households

with children

All household types

Percent of People in the SPD Universe Who Received Means-Tested Noncash Benefits 

by Household Type: 1993 and 1996

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1992 and 1993 Panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the 1997 Survey of Program Dynamics.

18.9

20.7

3.1

59.8

17.2

24.7

26.9

5.7

22.1

69.0
U.S. Census Bureau 7

ences between estimates from the

SPD and the March CPS are evident

for four of the six programs shown.

The percentages of households

receiving TANF and food stamps are

significantly lower in the SPD than

the March CPS (2.1 percent compared with 2.5 percent for TANF;

7.6 percent compared with 8.2 percent for food stamps), but receipt of

Supplemental Security Income and

receipt of energy assistance are significantly higher in the SPD (4.7 percent compared with 4.4 percent for

SSI, 3.3 percent compared with

2.6 percent for energy assistance).

The two surveys did not differ in

terms of the percentage of households receiving housing assistance

or the percentage of children receiving free or reduced-price school

lunches.

Among households receiving one or

more means-tested government

benefits, the SPD average household income estimate of $20,110 is

significantly higher than the March

CPS estimate of $19,119, as is the

average age of householder (46.8

compared with 44.2 years). The

average number of children per

household is not statistically different between the two surveys, but

the SPD households that received

means-tested benefits were less

likely to have children under the

age of 18 in the household than

comparable households in the

March CPS (65.7 percent compared

with 67.9 percent). 

Among households receiving

means-tested benefits, however,

estimates from the SPD show a

population that is wealthier, older,

and less likely to have children

under 18 living in the household

than the March CPS. These differences likely reflect attrition among

low-income households in the SPD

sample (Huggins and King, 1998).

To reduce the bias from differential

attrition, the Census Bureau is

recontacting nonrespondents from

the SPD in 2000 through 2002 and

nonrespondents from the 1992 and

Figure 2B.

1993

1996

 Food stamps

 Housing assistance

 Energy assistance

 Free or reduced-price school lunch

 Food stamps

 Housing assistance

 Energy assistance

 Free or reduced-price school lunch

 Food stamps

 Housing assistance

 Energy assistance

 Free or reduced-price school lunch

Percent of People in the SPD Universe Who Received Noncash Benefits by Program 

and Household Type: 1993 and 1996

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1992 and 1993 Panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the 1997 Survey of Program Dynamics.

5.4

4.1

8.6

18.5

3.7

2.0

3.5

2

15.9

33.9

11.4

17.7

5.1

3.2

17.4

13.4

13.3

22.3

6.7

19

48.3

57.8

50.6

10.7

All household types

Married-couple households with children

Other family households with children
8 U.S. Census Bureau

1993 SIPP panels in 2001 and 2002.

Monetary incentives are being used

to encourage them to respond to

the SPD (Creighton, King, and

Martin, 2000). Early evidence shows

an increase in the response rate.

SPD Public-Use File

The first SPD longitudinal public-use

file, containing data for 1992

through 1997, is scheduled for

release in Summer 2001. For further

information, contact the Census

Bureau at 301-457-3185 or by e-mail

at hhes-info@census.gov. Or visit

the SPD Web page at

www.sipp.census.gov/spd/. 

Accuracy of the Estimates

Statistics from surveys are subject

to sampling and nonsampling error.

All comparisons presented in this

report have taken sampling error

into account and meet the U.S.

Census Bureau’s standards for

statistical significance. Nonsampling

errors in surveys may be attributed

to a variety of sources, such as how

the survey was designed, how

much nonresponse occurs, how

respondents interpret questions,

how able and willing respondents

are to provide correct answers, and

how accurately the answers are

coded and classified. The Census

Bureau employs quality control

procedures throughout the production process including the overall

design of surveys, the wording of

questions, review of the work of

interviewers and coders, and statistical review of reports. 

The Survey of Program Dynamics

employs ratio estimation, whereby

estimates are adjusted to independent measures of the national population by age, race, sex, and

Hispanic origin. This weighting partially corrects for bias due to undercoverage, but how it affects different variables in the survey is not

precisely known. Moreover, biases

may also be present when people

who are missed in the survey differ

from those interviewed in ways

other than the categories used in

weighting (age, race, sex, and

Hispanic origin). All of these considerations affect comparisons across

different surveys or data sources. 

Users of the Survey of Program

Dynamics (SPD) data should be

aware of some special concerns

regarding the accuracy of its estimates and take these into consideration when interpreting the survey

results. These concerns are:

• The cumulative response rates

from the first SIPP interview

through the SPD Bridge interview

was 59 percent. The SPD data

may contain unidentified biases

due to its overall low rate of

response. 

• One bias identified in SPD is differential attrition associated with

income — low-income households are more likely to become

nonrespondents than higherincome households.

• Due to SPD’s longitudinal nature,

data users can generalize SPD

results to the 1992-93 noninstitutionalized resident population

that continues to live in the

United States in 1997. The SPD

sample does not reflect changes

in the U.S. population between

1992-93 and 1997 due to immigration or emigration.

For further information on statistical

standards and the computation and

use of standard errors, contact

Karen King at 301-457-4192.

References

Creighton, Kathleen P., Karen E. King,

Elizabeth A. Martin. 2000.

“Monetary Incentive Usage in the

U.S. Census Bureau’s Demographic

Longitudinal Surveys.” Paper presented at the Federal Committee on

Statistical Methodology Statistical

Policy Seminar hosted by the

Council of Professional Associations

on Federal Statistics (COPAFS),

November 8-9, 2000, Bethesda,

Maryland.

Huggins, Vicki and Karen King.

1998. “The Survey of Program

Dynamics: Sample Design,

Weighting, and Attrition Issues.”

Presented at the Joint Statistical

Meetings, Dallas, Texas.

Sae-Ung, Smanchai and Franklin

Winters. 1998. “Analysis of

Nonresponse Effects on Income and

Poverty Time Series Data from SIPP,”

in the 1998 Proceedings of the

Section on Survey Research

Methods, American Statistical

Association, Alexandria, Virginia.

U.S. Committee on Ways and

Means, U.S. House of

Representatives. 1998. 1998 Green

Book. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office,

page 425.

U.S. Committee on Ways and

Means, U.S. House of

Representatives. 1996. 1996 Green

Book. Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office,

page 1,333.
U.S. Census Bureau 9

Geographic and housing variables

Type of household

State code

Region

Living quarters type

Rent or own home

Number of units in this structure

Public housing project

Reduced rent, federal, state, or local government paid

part of cost

Section 8 (housing) assistance received

Demographic characteristics (person-level variables)

Age

Sex

Veteran status (adults)

Expanded relationship code

Marital status (adults)

Spouse’s line number (adults)

Race

Hispanic origin

Country of birth

U.S. citizen

Parent identifier (child)

Demographic characteristics (household and

family variables)

Number of persons in household

Persons in household under age 15

Persons in household age 5 to 18

Persons in household under age 18

Household respondent person number

Subfamily number

Family relationship

Family type

Education (adults age 15 or older)

Educational attainment

Enrolled in high school, college, or vocational school

Labor force and earnings (adults age 15 or older)

Work at job or business during year

Temporary, part-time, or seasonal work

Looking for work

Weeks looking for work or on layoff

Reason for not working

Weeks worked

Weeks lost from work

Reason not looking for work

Number of employers

Hours worked per week

Class of worker

Industry of longest job

Occupation of longest job

Full-time/part-time working status recode

Number of persons who work for employer

Earnings amount before deductions

Pension plan provided by employer or union

Pension plan participant

Total wage and salary earnings

Self-employed in own business

Self-employment earnings from own business

Farm self-employment

Farm self-employment earnings

Earnings, total value

Income sources (adults age 15 or older; same

variables available for families and households)

Unemployment compensation received

Unemployment compensation annual amount

Retire or leave a job for health reasons

Health problem or a disability that prevents person from

working

Disability income received

Disability income annual amount

Worker’s compensation received

Worker’s compensation annual amount

Social Security received

Social Security annual amount

Supplemental Security Income received

Supplemental Security Income annual amount

Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) or

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) received

AFDC or TANF annual amount

AFDC or TANF, number of months received

Appendix A. 

Variables Available in the First Longitudinal

Survey of Program Dynamics Public-Use File, 1992-97
10 U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix A. — Con.

Income sources (adults age 15 or older; same variables

available for families and households) — Con.

General assistance received

General assistance annual amount

General assistance, number of months received

Other assistance received

Other assistance annual amount

Other assistance, number of months received

Veterans payments received

Veterans Affairs annual income questionnaire requirement

Veterans payments annual amount

Survivor’s benefits received

Survivor’s benefits annual amount

Pension or retirement income received

Retirement income annual amount

Interest received

Interest income annual amount

Dividends received

Dividends annual amount

Rent income received

Rent income annual amount

Alimony payments received

Alimony income annual amount

Child support payments received

Child support annual amount

Financial assistance from friends/relatives received

Financial assistance from friends/relatives annual amount

Other income received

Other income annual amount

Person income, total

Educational assistance received

Food stamps received

Food stamps, months covered

Food stamps annual amount

Food stamps, children covered

Children receiving free or reduced-price lunches

Health insurance coverage (children and adults)

Medicare coverage

Medicaid coverage

Months covered by medicaid

Covered by TRICARE, CHAMPUS, CHAMPVA, or military

health care

Covered by Indian health

Other state plan health coverage

Covered by employer or union health plan

Employer or union pay for all, part, or none of premium

Direct purchase policyholder

Covered by private plan not related to employment

Coverage by someone not in the household

Child covered by health insurance

Current health insurance coverage

Type of current health insurance coverage

Poverty status (family-level variables unless otherwise stated)

Ratio of family income to low-income level

Ratio of related subfamily income to low-income level

Low-income cutoff dollar amount of related subfamily

Income percentile rank (household)

Assets and program eligibility (will be available

in the second longitudinal file only)

Average held in interest-bearing accounts

Average held in mutual funds or stocks

Monthly mortgage/rent payment

Amount spent on utilities

Value of other real estate owned

Number of cars owned

Make, model, and year of cars owned

Amount paid for child support

Amount paid for alimony

Amount paid to support someone not living in the

household
U.S. Census Bureau 11

Labor force

Work-related variables listed in Appendix A will be

available for up to three additional jobs from the

previous calendar year.

Income sources and amounts

Reasons someone started or stopped receiving benefits

(SSI; Food Stamps; TANF; Women, Infant and Children’s

nutrition program (WIC); other welfare) and coping

mechanisms used when benefits were cut off. Also

asks whether someone applied for benefits, but was

denied them and the reason for denial.

Expenses

Work-related transportation expenses, out-of-pocket

medical expenses, food expenses, and school-related

expenses.

Educational enrollment

Current enrollment and financial assistance received and

whether welfare benefits were contingent on school

enrollment.

Work training

Type and length of training activities and whether

welfare benefits were contingent on participation in

training activities or work in an unpaid job.

Substance abuse

Use of alcohol and drugs during previous year and

whether they interfered with ability to function at

school, work or home. 

Functional limitations and disability

Difficulty seeing, hearing, lifting and carrying objects,

walking, or needing the assistance of another person to

do daily activities.

Health care utilization

Number of and reason for hospital stays, number of

visits to a doctor’s office.

Health insurance coverage

Type of health insurance coverage, months covered,

and whether employer/union paid for coverage.

Health care utilization while uninsured

Received medical care while uninsured, type of care

received while uninsured, and whether payment for

services was subsidized.

Food security

A limited number of items from the Food Security

Supplement to the Current Population Survey to measure

whether household members had trouble getting

enough food to eat in the last 12 months because of

inadequate income.

Children-related topics (conducted annually from

the 1998 SPD through 2002 SPD)

Current school enrollment, enrichment activities,

disability status, health care utilization, child care

arrangements, child support agreements, child support

paid, and contact with absent parent.

Extended measures of children’s well-being

(available in the 1999 and 2002 SPD)

Positive interactions between parents and children,

cognitive stimulation, school engagement, family routines, mental health, positive behaviors and social competence, and conflict between parents.

Children’s residential history (available in the

2000 SPD)

Number and timing of residential moves made by a

child from birth through age 17; number and timing of

separations of 3 or more months from either of the

child’s biological parents; and number and timing of

periods lasting 3 or more months when other adults lived

with the child.

Appendix B. 

Additional Topic Areas for Which Data Can Be Matched to the Longitudinal File
U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Washington, DC 20233

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use $300

FIRST-CLASS MAIL

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

U.S. Census Bureau

Permit No. G-58

Appendix C.

Selected Data from the 1997 Survey of Program Dynamics and the 1997 Annual (March)

Demographic Supplement to the Current Population Survey for Households

Variable

1997 SPD 1997 March CPS

Difference:

SPD less

Estimate CPS

Standard

error Estimate

Standard

error

All Households

Average household income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $47,381 473 $47,123 374 258

Average age of householder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50.0 0.16 48.4 0.12 *1.6

Average number of children per household . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.7 0.01 0.7 0.01 0.0

Percent of households with children under age 18. . . . . . . . . . . . 36.7 0.32 37.6 0.23 *-0.9

Percent of households receiving means-tested government

benefits

Total programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.2 0.24 16.6 0.18 -0.4

TANF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 0.09 2.5 0.07 *-0.4

SSI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.7 0.14 4.4 0.10 *0.3

Food stamps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.6 0.17 8.2 0.13 *-0.6

Energy assistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 0.12 2.6 0.07 *0.7

Housing assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.7 0.14 4.9 0.10 -0.2

Free school lunch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.7 0.18 8.8 0.13 -0.1

Households Receiving Selected Means-Tested Benefits1

Average household income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20,110 421 $19,119 334 *991

Average age of householder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46.8 0.42 44.2 0.27 *2.6

Average number of children per household . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 0.03 1.5 0.02 0.0

Percent of households with children under age 18 . . . . . . . . . . . 65.7 0.31 67.9 0.22 *-2.2

* Denotes significantly different from zero at the 90-percent confidence level.

1

Households that reported receiving one or more of the following income sources are included in this group: public assistance, also

known as general assistance, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF);

Supplemental Security Income; food stamps; housing assistance, through Section 8 or if the household was located in public housing;

energy assistance; or if any children reported receiving free or reduced-price lunches through the federal government’s school lunch

program.

Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1997 Annual Demographic Supplement to the Current Population Survey and the 1997 Survey of

Program Dynamics.